Jump to content

Immaculate Vibes

banned
  • Posts

    1648
  • Joined

Posts posted by Immaculate Vibes

  1. From yesterday. Gottlieb calls for rollback of mask and vaccine mandates. Here, here. Love to hear this from him since he’s plugged into both the science of the pandemic and the bureaucracy of the response.
     

    Look out PW. More NYC kids soon allowed in public?  😬 
     

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
    • Fuck You 1
  2. https://www.ft.com/content/6bed7dff-f5e2-4105-a948-449f2d80ad32
     

    Bold policy response needed to restore Fed credibility on inflation

     

    Spoiler

    Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found here. 
    https://www.ft.com/content/6bed7dff-f5e2-4105-a948-449f2d80ad32

    Suggesting that the US Federal Reserve needs to stop lagging behind inflationary developments on the ground is the polite way of describing what the world’s most powerful central bank must do when its policy committee meets this week. More bluntly, the Fed needs immediately to stop its asset-purchase programme, guide markets towards expecting three and possibly more interest rises this year and bring forward to March the announcement of plans to reduce its balance sheet. It also needs to explain how it has managed to get its inflation call so wrong and why it is so late in reacting properly. Without that, it will struggle to regain the policy narrative and restore its credibility. Since the policy-setting Federal Open Market Committee last met on December 14-15, the US headline consumer price index breached 7 per cent. The core measure of rising prices has gone above 5 per cent with broadening drivers. Unemployment has fallen below 4 per cent while labour force participation has remained unchanged, stuck below pre-pandemic levels. Moreover, the Fed’s estimate for its preferred measure of inflation — the core personal consumption expenditure index — for 2021 is 4.4 per cent, more than double what it projected a year ago, and the 2022 forecast has been raised to 2.7 per cent. Further upward revisions in 2022 are surely on the cards. All these data points speak directly to the Fed’s mandate. They suggest that monetary policy should no longer be accommodating. Yet it is still uber stimulative, and on track to remain so for a while. Rather than tapping on the brakes, the Fed still has its foot on the accelerator: real interest rates after taking into account inflation are extremely negative. While it is on course to stop its quantitative easing stimulus programme at the end of this quarter, it continues to inject funds into a marketplace sloshing with liquidity. No wonder financial conditions have remained historically loose despite a dramatic shift in analysts’ policy calls since Fed chair Jay Powell belatedly “retired” the “transitory” characterisation of inflation at the end of November. Forward-looking inflationary pressures continue to be fuelled not just by producer price increases still to make it through the system but also by persistent labour shortages, more supply-side disruptions and a further 10 per cent leg up in oil prices in January. Having grossly mischaracterised inflation for most of 2021 and missed one policy window after another, the persistently late Fed policy reaction risks what Powell himself warned is a “severe threat” to livelihoods. Accordingly, at its meeting this week, it should send a clear message that it is serious in addressing inflationary pressures. This should be done via an immediate ending of QE, forward guidance on three interest rate rises and signalling that the balance of risks has tilted to tighter policies. The Fed should schedule for March the announcement of its “quantitative tightening” plan. To make all this credible, officials must also come clean on why they so badly misread inflation for so long (as noted before, I believe this will go down in history as one of the central bank’s worst inflation calls), and explain how they are now better at incorporating a broader set of bottom-up indicators into its macro modelling and forecasts. This is what I believe the Fed should do. I worry that it won’t, however. Marked by the experience three years ago when market volatility forced it into a U-turn (that is, reverting to more accommodative monetary policy even though the economy did not warrant it), the Fed may well favour a more gradual approach. Indeed, there is a window for such an approach to deliver an orderly adjustment in policy that avoids some combination of prolonged hot inflation, a slowdown in economic growth and unsettling financial volatility. But that window is very small and highly risky. Judged in terms of risk scenarios, the threat to society is one of a persistently slow Fed being forced later this year into an even bigger bunching of contractionary monetary measures. The result would be otherwise avoidable harm to livelihoods, greater financial instability, a higher risk of domestic stagflation and a greater threat to global economic and financial wellbeing. The Fed has an opportunity this week to catch up to realities on the ground and regain some of its lost credibility. To do so, it will need to be bold. Continuing on its current path risks another, significantly more disruptive policy error later this year.

     

    • Like 1
    • Fuck You 1
  3. Interesting piece here. The cultural difference in conflict resolution is pretty telling. 
     

    https://unherd.com/2022/01/what-the-west-gets-wrong-about-putin/


     

    Spoiler

    In 1999, Vladimir Putin suddenly sprang from bureaucratic obscurity to the office of Prime Minister. When, a few months later, Yeltsin unexpectedly resigned and Putin was voted in as President, governments around the world were taken by surprise yet again. How could this unknown figure have amassed national voter support with so little media attention?

    I had first met Putin seven years before and was not surprised by his rapid domination of the new Russia. We were introduced by Yevgeny Primakov, widely known as “Russia’s Kissinger”, who I had met in Moscow multiple times during the Cold War years when I advised Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Ford. Primakov was a no-nonsense thinker and writer. He was also a special emissary for the Kremlin in conducting secret discussions with national leaders around the world.

    When Yeltsin tasked his advisor Anatoly Sobchak with identifying and recruiting Russia’s best and brightest, Putin, then a local politician in his hometown of St Petersburg, was top of his list — so Primakov took Putin under his wing to tutor him in global power and security issues. Eventually, Primakov introduced Kissinger to Putin, and they became close. That both Primakov and Kissinger took time to coach Putin on geopolitics and geosecurity was a clear demonstration that they saw in him the characteristics of a powerful leader. It also showed Putin’s capacity for listening to lengthy lessons on geopolitics — as I was soon to learn.

     

    In 1992, I received a call from a meeting organiser at the CSIS think tank inviting me to join a US-Russia St Petersburg Commission to be chaired by Kissinger and Sobchak. The purpose would be to help the new Russian leadership in opening channels of business and banking with the West. Most of the Western members would be CEOs of major US and European companies, as well as key officials of the new Russian government. I would attend as an expert. I was told that a “Mr Primakov” had personally asked if I could make time to participate. I could hardly refuse such a request, and I was intensely curious about the emerging Russian leadership, especially about Putin.

    Arriving at the first meeting, I saw several people gathered around Kissinger and a man I was told was Putin. An official identified himself to me and said he had been asked by Primakov to introduce me to Putin. He interrupted the conversation with Kissinger to announce my arrival; Putin warmly responded that he was looking forward to chatting with me about how I see the world from inside Washington.
     

    We spoke on several occasions between meetings, and he arranged to sit next to me at a dinner, accompanied by his interpreter. At that dinner, he asked me: “What is the single most important obstacle between your Western businessmen and my fellow Russians in starting up business connections?”

    Off the top of my head, I responded: “The absence of legally defined property rights — without those there is no basis for resolving disputes.”

    “Ah yes,” he said, “in your system a dispute between businesses is resolved by attorneys paid by the hour representing each side, sometimes taking the dispute to the courts which normally takes months and accumulation of hourly attorney fees.”

    “In Russia,” he continued, “disputes are usually resolved by common sense. If a dispute is about very significant money or property, then the two sides would typically send representatives to a dinner. Everyone attending arriving would be armed. Facing the possibility of a bloody, fatal outcome both sides always find a mutually agreeable solution. Fear provides the catalyst for common sense.”

    He used his argument in the context of disputes between sovereign nations. Solutions often require an element of fear of disproportionate responses if no deal is struck. The idea of forcing adversaries to face horrific alternatives seemed to excite him. In essence, he was describing to me the current Ukraine impasse between the US and Russia. Putin knows Russia cannot afford a prolonged ground war with Ukraine. He also can see Biden is facing crucial midterm elections with a domestic congressional impasse, and cannot afford a major foreign crisis distraction. The two sides have no choice but to strike a deal.
     

    On a different occasion, Putin asked me how decisions are really made in Washington, with its complex division of Presidential and Congressional powers. He said Kissinger could explain the broad parameters of a Presidential policy decision, but could not clarify how political consensus was achieved between the House, Senate, and the Executive Branch.

    It was evident he had been given a deep intelligence brief on my career. He said Kissinger enjoys the public theatre of powerful people meeting in elaborate dinners or meetings with many aides ready to guide them. And he told me he had been informed that I preferred backroom meetings to shape consensus and provide room for negotiating details.

    I tried to explain the elaborate process of balancing the interests of the many players in Washington, including Congress, the major agencies, and the intricate business arrangements that might be affected by any decision. I told him of my first personal meeting with Nixon, who had said he was impressed that I had strong personal support from leaders of both major parties. However, he added, this raised worries among his staff in the White House — so he really needed to know whether I was a Republican or a Democrat. To which I replied: “Yes.”

    When Nixon asked what that meant, I explained that I was not a partisan warrior, but rather a problem solver. To get a solution I would always be ready to work with key players of both parties depending upon the specific problem. This seemed to amuse Putin.

    The impression of Putin that I was left with was of a man who was more intelligent than most of the politicians I had met in Washington and in other capitals around the world. I was reminded of my childhood: I grew up in a predominantly Sicilian neighbourhood, with a mafia maintaining order. No disorganised crime allowed. Putin did seem to have the instincts of a Sicilian mafia boss: quick to reward but quick to pose mortal risk in the event of non-conformity to the family rules.
     

    On a different occasion, Putin asked me how decisions are really made in Washington, with its complex division of Presidential and Congressional powers. He said Kissinger could explain the broad parameters of a Presidential policy decision, but could not clarify how political consensus was achieved between the House, Senate, and the Executive Branch.

    It was evident he had been given a deep intelligence brief on my career. He said Kissinger enjoys the public theatre of powerful people meeting in elaborate dinners or meetings with many aides ready to guide them. And he told me he had been informed that I preferred backroom meetings to shape consensus and provide room for negotiating details.

    I tried to explain the elaborate process of balancing the interests of the many players in Washington, including Congress, the major agencies, and the intricate business arrangements that might be affected by any decision. I told him of my first personal meeting with Nixon, who had said he was impressed that I had strong personal support from leaders of both major parties. However, he added, this raised worries among his staff in the White House — so he really needed to know whether I was a Republican or a Democrat. To which I replied: “Yes.”

    When Nixon asked what that meant, I explained that I was not a partisan warrior, but rather a problem solver. To get a solution I would always be ready to work with key players of both parties depending upon the specific problem. This seemed to amuse Putin.

    The impression of Putin that I was left with was of a man who was more intelligent than most of the politicians I had met in Washington and in other capitals around the world. I was reminded of my childhood: I grew up in a predominantly Sicilian neighbourhood, with a mafia maintaining order. No disorganised crime allowed. Putin did seem to have the instincts of a Sicilian mafia boss: quick to reward but quick to pose mortal risk in the event of non-conformity to the family rules.

    Looking back to those times of growing disarray in Russia’s leadership, I can recall the prolonged, multi-year paralysis of the Brezhnev Presidency, which was followed by the brief Presidencies of Andropov and Chernenko. Gorbachev was not strong enough to impose his will. Yeltsin had good ideas but was easily distracted and lacked follow through. Russia was in urgent need of a strong leader — and so Putin stepped in.

    As for how Putin sees himself, he did bring up several times his admiration for Peter the Great, so much so I was convinced he sees himself as his incarnation. I have not been a guest of the Kremlin since 1988, but I am told Putin had portraits of Peter the Great hung in several important meeting rooms there — rather than portraits of himself, as would be more customary. What this means for Biden, Nato and Ukraine is slowly becoming clear. There is more to Putin than meets the eye.

     

     

     

    • Hook 'Em 9
    • Fuck You 1
  4. 4 hours ago, BabaYaga said:

    Are you a spy?  You sound like a spy....

    I feel like he’s isn’t a spy, he’s an asset. 
     

    5 hours ago, InkaUtexas said:

    We support OSCE as a client. Was just told to prepare plans to withdraw people in Eastern Ukraine and plans to increase the number of monitors. Going to be a few busy days. OSCE is scared of their personnel (all contract if US) being stuck in the east. Glad I have a damn good logistics planner. If OSCE is scared well shit. Worked with them in Bosnia and they never had a problem sending monitors into conflict areas. 

    Here is their mandate. They sometimes have good stuff on Twitter

    The OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine (SMM) was deployed on 21 March 2014, following a request to the OSCE by Ukraine’s government and a consensus decision by all 57 OSCE participating States. The SMM is an unarmed, civilian mission, present on the ground 24/7 in all regions of Ukraine. Its main tasks are to observe and report in an impartial and objective way on the situation in Ukraine; and to facilitate dialogue among all parties to the crisis.

    I guess this tweet before you received that correspondence. 
     

    With the US and Germany pulling out, it seems like the intel is there that things are about to happen. 
     

    I guess all kinds of things could happen, the one that I think concerns us most directly is the threat of some cyber actions. I don’t really think they’re a threat, but my tinfoil hat self says that anything that happens will be blown up in media etc and then actions could be taken here that affect us. There’s been a lot of signaling that something cyber related could happen. Gives authorities reason to take aggressive measures. Is there a tin foil hat forum here? 😂 

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Fuck You 1
  5. Just now, Willfully Horn said:

    Thanks for helping prove my point. This study amplifies the importance of relative risk reduction vs absolute risk reduction, which is also relevant to vaccines.

    60% more!

    Reality 

    went from 45 cases/100,000 to 73 cases/100,000

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Fuck You 3
  6. 19 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

    Sixty percent difference isn’t infinitesimal.

    At least, it was that much of a difference. Still looking for Omicron data. The POV you support was wrong for two years, it is smart to wait and learn more before giving you any benefit of the doubt.

    Where do you get 60%?

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Fuck You 2
  7. 1 minute ago, Captainant said:

    You're right, there's a flaw in the policy so we should throw the baby out with the bathwater and lick doorknobs to get herd immunity faster. How foolish of us!

    Flaw in the policy? How about a wrong policy. We’re the only country in the whole recommending something so ridiculous. Stupid. Anyone with kids reads that and immediately knows that fucking stupid. I’m sure there’s Penelope’s of the world that say, “It’s about fucking time”.  Gotta keep those kids masked so there’s an infinitesimally smaller chancr she gets Covid after being triple vaxxed 

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
    • Fuck You 6
  8. 26 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

    So what's funny is I generally agree with the criticism of the CDC that they've damaged themselves by trying to mix politics and science. From their early white lies about the effectiveness of masking (to protect the mask supply for docs and nurses) to initially opposing boosters (because they thought those doses should go to countries that had shitty vaccine supply), the CDC has significantly damaged its reputation. You can understand and sympathize with their reasons and still recognize that. They're scientists and should stick to talking about only the science and leave the policy shit to the politicians. 

     

    Don’t forget their school recs. I’d like to see the science behind recommending universal indoor masking of 2 year olds. Spoiler alert-there isn’t any. 
     

    https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/schools-childcare/k-12-guidance.html

     
    CDC recommends universal indoor masking by all* students (ages 2 years and older), staff, teachers, and visitors to K-12 schools, regardless of vaccination status.

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Fuck You 4
  9. 6 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

    It is like you do not read things that do not support your idiotic views.  Long covid and complications after recovery.  Have you not been paying attention?!?

    How about you stop posting bad info.

    Do you have any valid long Covid rates? I must be missing all the kids with chronic fatigue walking around with nasal cannulas?

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
    • Fuck You 3
  10. 22 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

    Not worth it anymore.  He is trying to say COVID doesn't impact kids since only 1k have died in the last year.  Of course, that doesn't take into account any long term issues with those kids.  Those metrics are not out there.  He is a troll.  I am just going to neg and ignore.

    It’s the last 2 years, but ok. 

    Tell you what PW, you put me on ignore and I’ll do likewise.  
     

    13 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

    I don't like kids.  I purposefully avoid places where kids are going to be, but sometimes, parents don't practice common courtesy and allow their snot nosed kids to act like complete shits in places where they honestly shouldn't be (think movie theaters, Broadway theaters, Museums, the ballet, and nice restaurants).  And don't get me started on kids on flights (I have long complained about that, so much so that I would be happy to pay a premium to be on a kid free flight because they have also shown up in both business and first with too much regularity).  So if some of those entitled parents aren't able to bring their precious with them because they refuse to get them vaccinated, then that is no fucking skin off my nose.  

    And actually, I do not think there should be middle ground. If you choose to remain unvaccinated, you are a fucking asshole.  You should be shunned.  

    hahahahahahha. 

    • Hook 'Em 3
    • Fuck You 4
  11. 3 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

    Thanks for upping my pay grade. Still, I don’t know of any government mandates. I do know of some state governments that try to prohibit mandates. 

    Healthcare workers, federal contractors (on hold). Federal employees. The attempted OSHA one obviously. 
     

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Fuck You 2
  12. 1 hour ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

    Except this diesease IS affecting them, especially Delta and Omicron.  You are an absolute moron if you keep touting the line of this disease doesn't affect them.

    You have been anti-vax, anti-mandate from minute one, and have been crowdsourced for it MULTIPLE times.  

     

    1 hour ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

    This is all fear mongering. Higher hospitalizations than ever? Remember we have the whole for or with Covid distinction to be made with omicron. But deaths the same.
     

    1,000 deaths in the entire us of A in two years. The vast majority with significant comorbidities, not just obesity. We’re talking neurologic disorders, chronic pulmonary issues. Besides, you don’t actually care about the kids. You just enjoy having less of them around you. And you want the ones you have to be around to be vaccinated so you’re safer. A grown adult. Please. 
     

    16 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

    I’m case @Skipper wants to read more on the subject, here is what John’s Hopkins published regardling vaccines and natural immunity.

     

    Lisa Maragakis, M.D., M.P.H., senior director of infection prevention, and Gabor Kelen, M.D., director of the Johns Hopkins Office of Critical Event Preparedness and Response, help you understand natural immunity and why getting a coronavirus vaccine is recommended, even if you’ve already had COVID-19.
     

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/covid-natural-immunity-what-you-need-to-know%3famp=true
     

    The authors probably don’t do podcasts, or videos on YouTube, but have an open mind.

    You’ve cited this a couple times and that’s great but new shit has come to light. CDC, last week. 
     

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Fuck You 7
  13. 9 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

    https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/counseltothemayor/downloads/Key-to-NYC-FAQ.pdf

    I absolutely support this.  Kids are, at the best of times, germ factories.  I like my friend's kids in small doses, but on the whole, I am not a fan of children.  So if fewer of them are out and impacting my life, that is all a net positive to me.  

    Wow this is quite a post. I appreciate your candor, but that’s about it. 
     

    Children in public bother and/or inconvenience you therefore a policy that limits their presence is a positive. Even if it requires vaccination for a disease that doesn’t affect them. Because “they’re germ factories”.  Then we can better protect old people like you. You have such a narrow, warped set of priorities and worldview. 


    The fact that a poster like yourself drives so much of the conversation here around Covid says a lot about this forum. And it ain’t good.

    • Hook 'Em 5
    • Like 1
    • Fuck You 6
  14. 13 minutes ago, Paper_jam said:

    I still don't understand why the markets did so well over the pandemic when everything was obviously shitty and I don't understand why they are in a tailspin now. But I'm just trying to get myself in a position for retirement soon, and this isn't helping. In the immortal words of Oscar Rogers,

     

     

    Liquidity is coming out. That’s it. 

  15. 23 minutes ago, Skipper said:

    Did you read the article at all?  Please explain to me how anything in that article, where he speaks convincingly about the benefits of the vaccine, is "feeding the anti-vaccine fire". Assuming you can't, thanks for proving my point that many on the left are just as anti-science as the right.  Or maybe you are just completely incapable of critical analysis.

    I’m assuming Willfully Horn is just operating under the new paradigm whereby opposing Covid vaccine mandates in and of itself makes you an anti-vaxxer. That’s been a recent change. By labeling people with reasonable stances anti-vaxxers they actually cheapen the term. 
     

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anti-vaxxer

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Fuck You 4
  16. 11 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

    I mean that vaccine mandates have caused more vaccine uptake which has allowed NYC to not get back to the dire days of March/April 2020 from a hospitalization or death perspective even though The case counts are at 400% of any other time during the pandemic.  It has allowed NYC to largely get back to normal.

    I meant to ask you, how broad do you want the mandates/passports? Do you approve of the NY law requiring proof of Covid vaccination for kids to access public places? 

    • Fuck You 2
  17. 7 hours ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

    I really don't care what Russia does in Ukraine. I don't think it's appeasement to let Putin have his way there. If he then moved on the Baltics or back into MittelEuropa that's another thing, but Ukraine is not worth a drop of American blood.

     

     

     

    6 hours ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

    Don’t fucking do it.

    💯 

    This just seems like a recipe for disaster. We seem to care more about all this than the Europeans even do. 

×
×
  • Create New...