#they probably were more questioning of the bubble bazooka

[knowerofuselessfacts]

Dreams are wild.

I took a nap today because chronic fatigue and had a dream about being some random ass vigilante in Gotham.

I'm running off for some other mission when I spot the Joker in the middle of setting up some Nonsense™ so I, of course, stop him in his tracks.

I, a few minutes later, find out, this was not, in fact, the Joker but some guy in a comicon level costume. My reaction to this was: "Why the hELL would someone dress up as THE JOKER in GOTHAM?!"

Oh, and I didn't take him out with, like, normal weaponry. I had a bubble bazooka, with some sort of paralytic in it.

What a headline that would be "Randomass Vigilante Attacks Dude in Really Accurate Joker Costume with Bubble Bazooka"

[ectolights]

Haunting Questions

Happy Holiday Truce @rebel-skull! Sorry I’m skating right up against the deadline. This holiday season got busier than I expected.

Thank you for letting me change the prompt a little! This is a DP/Buzzfeed Unsolved crossover fic with a side of Demon Shane. (Read it on AO3 | FFN)

Thanks also to the ever wonderful @oboenotclarinet for your help when I got stuck. I’d be a mess with out you <3

~~~

Maddie attacked the living room with the rare intention of making it look somewhat presentable, for the equally rare occasion of guests coming over. The scorch marks on the wall from the ectopus incident last month she could, unfortunately, do nothing about, but maybe the lime green stains on the couch could still be scrubbed out.

“Danny! Come help me clean up! Our guests will be here soon!”

“Why can’t Jazz do it?” Danny’s automatic response to housework rang out from upstairs, in the direction of his room. Maddie eyed the stain on the couch critically. It’d probably take more than Incredible and elbow grease to get this one out.

“Also, what guests? We literally never have anyone over. Are you actually cleaning?” Danny plodded down the stairs, stopping on the bottom step with his arms draped over the railing. He quirked his eyebrow at his mother in inquiry.

Maddie walked over to the closet with the cleaning supplies, responding over her shoulder, “Jazz is out with her friends, she’ll be back just before the guests arrive—yes, she does have friends, don’t give me that, young man—and I need you to help me tidy up because we were contacted by a team of professional ghost hunters, to be interviewed for their show. Isn’t that exciting! We’ll have the opportunity to share our knowledge about ghosts and ghost hunting with viewers all across the country!” She rifled through the haphazard piles in the closet, searching for the Fenton Foaming Cleaner that would surely (hopefully) remove the sickly splotch on the couch.

Danny moved from the base of the stairs to flop down on the armchair, helpful as ever. The raised eyebrow never faltered as Maddie made her way back to the offending couch, spray bottle prize in hand. “They don’t sound all that professional if they have a tv show. Most of those shows are just a bunch of fancy tricks, you know. Are you sure these guys are for real?”

Maddie spared a glance in her son’s direction, to where he lay sprawled across the chair, one leg carelessly thrown over an arm. She turned back to the stain and spritzed it with the cleaner. “They’re from a company in Los Angeles, called Buzzfeed. They were nothing but professional when I spoke to the representative on the phone.” The stain began to bubble green, an acrid aroma piercing the air. She hummed in concern. It wasn’t supposed to do that. Hopefully that meant it was working.

“Oh wow, that’s a real vote of confidence. Mom, Buzzfeed is like, ‘what pizza you are based on your favorite color,’ or ‘we tried being hipsters for a day,’ they’re an entertainment company. The last thing they are is professional ghost hunters.” Of course, this would probably work in Danny’s favor more than if they were actual ghost hunters, but, well. No one needed to know that.

Maddie paused from her observation of the science experiment that was the couch and met Danny’s raised eyebrow with one of her own. “Even so, sweetie, they’ve offered to pay for this interview and they’re already on their way here. Besides, even if they are a little… new, to the ghost hunting world, then it’s just an even better opportunity to get the word out there! We can outfit them with proper ghost hunting equipment and make sure they’re equipped to handle all the standard ghostly threats. Your father will certainly be excited to show them all his latest inventions!” Her trademark optimism could rival even Pamela Manson’s, and at times Danny questioned how anyone could have that positive of an outlook, even about things like phony ghost hunters coming for a flipping tv show. Still, there was clearly nothing to be done about it now, so Danny figured he might as well brace himself for the inevitable catastrophe.

As Maddie returned her attention to the couch, concerned frown deepening at what she finally decided was a lost cause, she opted to wipe away what was left of the “cleaner” and cover the whole couch with a long, wide throw blanket. That would at least hide the hole that the Fenton Foaming Cleaner had eaten into the cushion. Better than nothing, she supposed. “Now then, Danny, if you’re done griping about people sharing our passion, then you can get your dirty shoes off the arm of the chair and help me dust the living room. They’ll be here soon, and I want the house to be somewhat presentable. Once Jazz comes home we’ll get your father out of the lab and we can all be here for the interview. It’ll be so exciting!”

Danny huffed and reluctantly got to work. “Still think this is a dumb idea,” he mumbled under his breath. His mother rolled her eyes and didn’t comment.

When Jazz came home a little while later she revealed to Danny she had known about this interview for a few days, but after having looked up the show she’d deemed it a non-threat. She explained she was under the assumption Danny knew about the upcoming interview as well, so she didn’t think to tell him. They both supposed their parents had simply had it slip their minds—not an unusual occurrence. Besides, it was a moot point now; the tv people would be here any minute.

“Alright, kids, I’ll make sure your father has kept the lab in one piece and get him to join us before they arrive. Danny, you’re on door duty. Don’t let your father get close enough to threaten them with the Fenton Bazooka. We don’t need a repeat of last time,” this last part was said under Maddie’s breath as she headed to the lab door in the kitchen. Jazz and Danny exchanged a knowing look.

When the doorbell finally did ring, Jazz perched neatly on the chair, Jack and Maddie came running into the room (“Ghost!” “No, Jack, ghosts don’t use the front door, we’ve talked about this Sweetie.”) and Danny opened the front door, pained smile already in place. He was met by two young-ish guys—or, more accurately, a guy and a tree with legs—who both looked very out of place in a town where ghost attacks came on the news as often as the weather. The shorter, more average looking of the two had a bright smile on his face, and the guy with trees for legs (Seriously, how was he so tall?) had his hands in his pockets and a laidback grin.

As soon as Danny laid eyes on the taller one, his smile fell from his face.

There was no way this guy was human.

“Hi! I’m Ryan Bergara, and this is my co-host, Shane Madej. Our cameraman Mark is grabbing the equipment out of the car. We’re the guys from Buzzfeed Unsolved; we’re supposed to interview the local ghost hunters. This is the Fenton residence, correct?” The shorter guy—Ryan, apparently—bounced a little on his toes.

“Well I should hope so Ryan, they have a giant neon sign,” Shane grinned, earning him a lighthearted jab to the ribs from Ryan. Danny narrowed his eyes.

“Yes, of course, welcome!” Maddie came up behind Danny, and he stepped to the side grudgingly as his mother continued, “Please come in and sit down, we’re very excited to have you here. I’m Maddie, and this is my husband Jack and our kids Jazz and Danny. We’ve been looking forward to this ever since you contacted us! It’s a thrilling opportunity.” She led them into the living room, not noticing Danny’s sudden change in attitude. As soon as Shane stepped over the threshold, the electric ice that usually accompanied Danny’s ghost sense washed down his spine—but his ghost sense hadn’t actually gone off. He’d know if it had. This guy was giving him major danger vibes, but he clearly wasn’t a ghost. Danny swallowed the growl that was building in his chest.

Maddie continued welcoming them, unperturbed.

“I always love meeting fellow ghost hunters!” Jack announced in his usual booming fashion. “Always good to see more folks interested in this perilous profession! You can never have too many people fighting back against the threat of those putrid ectoplasmic post-human manifestations.”

Ryan faltered, his smile wavering. “What? I don’t… Fighting? What do you mean, fighting?”

Maddie’s brows creased. “Well, you’re ghost hunters, right? Surely you know that all ghosts are the evil incarnations of human imprints, driven by obsessions to violence and chaos. They have to be dealt with to protect people.”

Based on the gobsmacked expressions on the two purported ghost hunter’s faces, they hadn’t exactly expected this answer.

“So I take it you definitely believe in ghosts, then.”

A brief moment of stunned silence followed Shane’s statement, even Jack temporarily lost for words. “Well of course ghosts are real, that’s ridiculous!” Jack exclaimed once he recovered. “They attack the city practically every week! We Fentons have developed the most advanced ecto-technology capable of harming and containing ghosts. We’ve been studying ghosts for years!”

In what to Danny was a clear effort to ward off one of their father’s ghost rants, Jazz asked, “You’ve been doing this show for a while, correct? You must have fought a ghost before, or at least encountered one?”

“Well, no, we’ve never seen a ghost, or any paranormal creature. We always look for evidence, but we almost never find anything that counts as compelling.”

Ryan, still stunned, held up his hands. “O-okay. Hold on. This is… this is a lot. Why don’t we uh, why don’t we set up for the interview, and then we can continue this conversation while we’re recording, so we don’t have to repeat anything? It’ll be more genuine that way.”

While the Buzzfeed guys, now including their cameraman, set up for the interview, the Fenton parents whispered to each other in heated sounding tones, presumably still baffled by the lack of proper hunting knowledge. Jazz came over to stand by Danny, who (despite the strange turn the afternoon had already taken) hadn’t taken his eyes off Shane. The longer he was in his house the more Danny felt the urge to fight. Jazz didn’t seem to notice her brother’s weird mood, instead commenting, “Well I guess they’re just yet more phonies, huh?”

“No.”

“What?” She sounded taken aback.

“The taller one. Shane. He’s not human. I don’t think he’s a ghost either, he didn’t set my ghost sense of properly, but he’s definitely something. And he’s powerful, too. He gives me a really bad feeling.”

Okay, Jazz was definitely worried now. “Well what are we going to do about it? Is he a threat? Should I call Sam and Tucker?”

“No, I don’t think they’ll be able to help. I don’t think I could take him. I don’t know how to explain it, but I can just sense that he’s too much for me, even with help. I don’t like it.” His hands curled into fists at his sides. “Besides, he hasn’t actively made any threats yet. For now, we just keep an eye out. If it goes bad, I’ll deal with it while you get Mom and Dad out. Hopefully it won’t come to that.”

Jazz glanced between Shane and Danny, pensive. “Okay, but… please be careful.”

Danny spared his sister a brief look. “I’ll try.”

There wasn’t much they could do but act normal and hope for the best, so once everything was set up and the cameras were ready to roll, Shane and Ryan sat on the recently-blanket-covered couch across from Jack and Maddie, who were each in an armchair. Jazz and Danny perched on the loveseat, out of frame and on edge.

Ryan worked quickly through his usual introduction and explanation, eager to get to the meat of the situation.

“So Drs. Fenton, what can you tell us about Amity Park as a haunted location?”

“Well,” Maddie began, “The ghosts started appearing frequently about a year and a half ago, coming from the Ghost Zone into our world and attacking people. They generally cause havoc a couple times a week, destroying property and attempting to injure people. They fight amongst themselves as often as they terrorize average citizens, being the violence-driven creatures they are.”

“Wow, there’s… a lot to unpack there. What is the Ghost Zone?”

“That’s where the ghosts come from!” Jack chimed in. “They need ectoplasm to survive, since that’s what they’re made up of, so they go back to the Ghost Zone when they get weak.”

“So I take it ghosts can be seen to the average eye, then?” Ryan asked.

“Well of course they can! All ghosts can make themselves invisible, but their default state is in the human field of vision. All ghosts are typically tangible, unless actively using their powers of intangibility, and they seem to stay hovering or flying unless deliberately doing otherwise. Most ghosts have offensive powers as well, such as ectoplasmic blasts and elemental attacks, but the weakest ones don’t maintain a consistent form and don’t display anything beyond the basic capabilities,” Maddie explained.

“Wow,” Ryan said, “I had no idea ghosts were so… present. I thought they were, like, barely able to move pencils or turn on flashlights.”

“Nonsense,” Jack declared, “Ghosts are a very serious threat and can cause a lot more harm than turning on the lights!”

Shane leaned forward, hands clasped over his knees. “So ghosts can hurt people? And they do it actively? So much for Casper the Friendly Ghost.”

Maddie waved a hand, nonchalant. “Oh yes, all ghosts are driven by malice; their base instinct is to turn to violence. They’ll just as soon attack each other as they will a human. That’s why it’s crucial to make sure you always have the proper weaponry to defend yourself.”

“What kind of weapons? Like salt and holy water?” Ryan asked, hopeful to at least have gotten one thing right about ghosts.

“Of course not! A little saltwater isn’t going to do anything against a grisly ghoul! That’s why we have these bad boys,” Jack sprung up from his seat, pulling out an ectogun from seemingly nowhere and brandishing it in front of the two guests. They leaned back quickly in response, startled. Mark, from behind the camera, watched nervously, and Jazz put her head in her palm. Danny grimaced.

“This here is a state-of-the-art Fenton brand ectogun, designed and built by yours truly. It uses ecto energy to fight ghost fire with ghost fire. Nothing on Earth is more effective at takin’ down those scary spooks!”

“Alright, Dear, let’s maybe put the gun down; I think it’s making our guests just a little uncomfortable. I’m sure they can admire it just fine from the coffee table.” Maddie stood and placed her hand gently on Jack’s arm, lowering it and deftly taking the gun from his hands. She set it on the table and smiled apologetically at the men on the couch. “I’m sorry, Jack can get a little… enthusiastic. But it’s not to worry, ectoguns can’t hurt humans. They’re designed specifically to target the unique energy that constitutes ghosts; the most even our larger guns would do to humans is knock the wind out briefly.” She encouraged Jack to sit back down, and returned to her own seat.

It may have been Danny’s imagination, but he could have sworn Shane slid further away from where the gun rested innocently between them.

“…Okay, so you use actual weapons to fight ghosts. Cool. Uh… where do you find ghosts? You said something about them going to and from the—Ghost Zone, correct?—so I assume they aren’t bound to one place like in most tales about them,” Ryan said, attempting to brush off any lingering awkwardness from Jack’s well-meaning outburst.

At this, Jack brightened up considerably and said, “We use the Fenton Finder! Ghosts all have an ectosignature, so we use those to detect when they’re nearby, like radar! Even if they’re invisible, this puppy can find a ghost on the other side of the city.” He beamed proudly, and Maddie gave her husband an endearing smile.

Shane perked up once again, absently picking at the threads on the edge of the hole Maddie had attempted to conceal. “So you’re saying this finder-thing makes it impossible for ghosts to hide?”

Danny had a bad feeling about this.

“That’s right! We’d know a ghost was near long before it had the chance to get the drop on us.”

Ryan asked, “Does it work on other creatures, too? Like demons, for instance?”

Maddie laughed, “Don’t be silly! Demons don’t exist. Everything that people think they see is usually some form of ghost. There’s a vast spectrum of forms a ghost can take.”

Shane nudged Ryan. “See Ry, I told you demons weren’t real! You’ve been getting so worked up about nothing. Annabelle’s got nothing on these ghosts we’re learning about.”

Danny tuned out Ryan’s spluttered denials and defenses as he came to a worrying suspicion. Shane wasn’t a ghost—even if he had been a half-ghost, Danny would have been able to tell. But he wasn’t human either; the moment he first saw him he just knew. But if he wasn’t a ghost and he wasn’t human… then he had to be something else entirely. Danny had never encountered anything else, but if his own existence proved anything, it was that he couldn’t jump to conclusions about what did and did not exist.

Shane didn’t seem to believe in any of this stuff, even if he was currently going along with the ghost thing (Danny felt pretty sure that was just out of politeness to his parents, based on the faces Shane had been making and the near-constant laughter he appeared to be fighting). But Danny knew from experience how helpful putting on a persona could be. He couldn’t assume anything about this guy.

(Ryan seemed pretty safe. He didn’t seem to share any hidden glances or take any second meaning from his friend’s actions. He was probably in the dark.)

So if Shane was something else…

Danny was suddenly very worried he perhaps knew what that ‘else’ might truly be.

“…so ghosts have different power levels,” His mother was saying as Danny brought himself back to the events at hand, “and that determines how difficult it is to defeat.”

“So you can’t purposefully antagonize anything while we’re here, Shane,” Ryan said, giving his friend a stern eye. “I am not going to be the one to tell Sara you got yourself murked by the undead.”

“I don’t know,” Shane replied, “Could be fun to fistfight a ghost. A good old-fashioned brawl.” He turned with a Cheshire grin and stared straight at Danny, too-dark eyes glittering.

Yeah, this definitely wasn’t good.

[sataniccapitalist]

By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: June 18, 2020 ~

Sven Hendrich of Northman Trader

As corporate-friendly Republican members of the Senate Banking Committee and House Financial Services Committee engaged in effusive praise at hearings this week over the efforts of Fed Chairman Jerome Powell to quickly establish a plethora of corporate bailout facilities, the voices of Wall Street veterans have struck a different chord. These long-term market watchers are warning that the Fed has created an unprecedented stock market bubble that is destined to end badly.

Earlier this week, CNBC anchor Melissa Lee interviewed Sven Henrich, the Lead Market Strategist at Northman Trader. Henrich savaged the Fed’s recent interventions in the market, stating the following:

“The Fed really has created a massive asset bubble here in the last few months. The lender of last resort has become the lender of the entire resort. And no red line shall remain uncrossed.

“The Fed has basically created a gambling casino at this point. And all the gamblers have moved in. From my perspective, the danger here is that the Fed is overdoing it and zombifying the economy. They’re in the process of inserting itself ever deeper into markets. And that makes the Fed itself too big to fail. And the Fed losing control over the asset bubble is now the biggest risk factor to the economy. Remember Alan Greenspan mentioned if markets drop 10 percent that impacts GDP growth by 1 percent.

“So now we’ve had this massive rally, which still could be a bear market rally by the way, and after prices have reached levels that we’ve rarely ever seen. Let me give you two examples here. Specifically, one is market cap to GDP and I know Guy has mentioned this on the show before. There’ve only been two periods in history where the markets have disconnected so far from the economy that it’s reached levels of 150 percent and higher. One of those eras was the Nasdaq bubble in 2000 and the other one, ironically, was the February 2020 top – because, obviously, the Fed had already printed significant amounts of money in 2019 with their repo operations.”

Let’s pause here for a moment and talk a little about that February top. The huge rally in the market that occurred between October 8 of last year and February 19 of this year was solely built on Fed money. There was a liquidity crisis occurring in the market which would have resulted in a stock market crash, not a rally. When short-term interest rates on loans to financial firms want to skyrocket from 2 percent to 10 percent, as occurred on September 17, you’ve got a financial crisis on your hands, not the making of a new bull market. The Fed changed history by jumping with both feet into the overnight lending market, known as the repo market or repurchase agreement market, and started pumping hundreds of billions of dollars a week into the trading houses of Wall Street. According to the Fed’s December 10-11 meeting minutes, its emergency repo loans amounted to “roughly $215 billion per day” flowing at super cheap interest rates to the trading houses on Wall Street. That tallied up to approximately $6.23 trillion cumulatively in loans in a matter of a few months. By March 14, the Fed had pumped more than $9 trillion cumulatively into the trading houses of Wall Street, which it calls its “primary dealers.”

Typically, secular bear markets following a stock market bubble erase at least 50 percent of the prior bull market from peak to trough. At Wall Street On Parade, we don’t think the starting point for that retracement should be February 19 – because that rally was an artificially engineered rally by the Fed. We think the measure for a 50 percent retracement in the S&P 500 should be October 8, 2019 when the S&P 500 closed at 2893. That would put a 50 percent retracement at 1446.5 or 58 percent from where the S&P closed yesterday.

This assessment, of course, is based on a free-functioning market, which we clearly do not have today with the Fed now buying hundreds of billions of dollars of junk bonds, Exchanged Traded Funds, commercial paper, money market paper, asset-backed paper, mortgage-backed paper, Treasuries and on and on. With that as background, let’s return to the interview with Sven Henrich.

Henrich continues:

“So we ran into this COVID crisis massively extended from an economic perspective. So we’re here now and this is really fascinating: last week, June 8, we actually hit 152 percent market cap to GDP. And just to put this into perspective, typically what you see inside of a recession is that there’s a discounting process for assets. And, actually, in 2000 to 2007, we dropped to 50 percent to 75 percent market cap to GDP. So to be inside of a recession and at these extreme market valuations we’ve never seen before, congratulations, I guess the Fed just managed to do something unprecedented: manufactured the first asset bubble inside of a recession.”

You can watch the full video here.

Jeremy Grantham, Long-Term Investment Strategist, Co-Founder, GMO

On Wednesday, CNBC’s Wilfred Frost interviewed the legendary investor Jeremy Grantham, co-founder and Chief Investment Strategist at money manager Grantham, Mayo, Van Otterloo & Co., which goes by the unfortunate acronym of GMO. Grantham had correctly called out the market as being overvalued in both 2000 and 2007. On the current rapid runup in the market, Grantham had this to say:

“It is a rally without precedent. The fastest in this [amount of] time ever and the only one in the history books that takes place against a background of undeniable economic problems. All of the other ones took place at a time when the market at least believed that things were great. They may have been wrong, on occasion, but they believed at the time that everything economic and financial was terrific. And this time everyone agrees that the economics have a major problem.”

Grantham is then asked by Frost for his opinion on what has caused this giant rally. Grantham answers:

“Clearly the Fed scattering money around has created a favorable environment as it often does and with this amount of money slopping around and with the economy depressed it would be fairly traditional for some of the money to find its way into the market.”

The next question for Grantham is if the market deserves a higher price-to-earnings ratio as a result of both the Fed and other central banks’ interventions in markets. Grantham answered this way:

“No, I think the last five or ten years received pretty intense loving care from the Fed. And I don’t think it can do much better than that.”

Grantham also compared this bubble to those in past history, stating this:

“This is the really the real McCoy. This is crazy stuff. And I’m talking about not the last three or four months but the last few weeks. We’ve now reached a level where you buy bankrupt companies; you issue stock in bankrupt companies that will probably be used to pay off the bondholders; and you bid up favorite companies to ludicrous levels. This is really the real McCoy. And in that kind of event like 1929 or 2000, you want to see as much participation by screaming leaders of wild investors as you can possibly see. And that should make any bear feel better.”

As for how long this bubble can last, Grantham offered this:

“The great bubbles can go on a long time and inflict a lot of pain but at least I think we know now that we’re in one.”

Frost then asked Grantham if investors should have zero money in stocks. Grantham likely shocked a lot of viewers with this assessment:

“I think a good number in the U.S. would be zero. And less than zero might not be a bad idea if you can stand that [meaning to go short].”

Scott Minerd, Global Chief Investment Officer, Guggenheim Partners

On Tuesday, CNN interviewed Scott Minerd, Global Chief Investment Officer at Guggenheim Partners. Minerd said that the market is trading at price-to-earnings multiples reminiscent of the internet (dot.com) bubble. He said he expects the S&P 500 to drop to the 1600s level over the next month. If the market traded back to 1600, that would be a 49 percent drop from where it closed yesterday.

Minerd also said that “there’s a point where the Federal Reserve is going to have to pull out a bazooka in order to maintain credit spreads and I think the option of buying stocks on the part of the Fed is on the table.”

With so many sage market veterans warning about the Fed’s folly of trying to become the markets, should the Fed have the temerity to start buying stocks, that might actually look like the last gasp of a desperate Fed and scare sophisticated money out of the market.

In the U.S., approximately 85 percent of stocks are owned by the wealthiest 10 percent. At a time when the Fed is under pressure from Democrats in Congress to create a more level playing field in the U.S. in terms of wealth and income equality, a Fed move to buy stocks could bring out the pitchforks – something that is increasingly furrowing the brows of America’s billionaire class.

[fortheloveofcringe]

June 19, 2020 12:12 a.m.

“Bazooka Gum”

 In  2011, Lady Gaga did an hour-long interview at Google. She was 24 at that time and was promoting Born This Way, her 2nd Studio LP, and discussed about her life as an artist as most of these interviews goes about. I’ve been a fan since I saw her bangs and beauty in Beautiful, Dirty, Rich, a promotional song for the TV series Dirty, Sexy, Money in 2009. Remembering so vividly I was up all night watching some comedy show, alone, and the commercial came along and I was intrigued and asked myself “why haven’t I heard this song before?”

“Who is Lady Gaga?” Never did I realize back then that she was gonna be my guardian angel. 

It’s 2020, and I’m in the darkness of our living room, watching the same interview. Things have change since 2009. I’ve recently been diagnosed with Major Depression Disorder, I almost died of dengue back in February, been taking anti-psychotics/depressants to remain socially functional, pummeling through the fists of poverty and social injustice while dealing with this historical animosity of a pandemic and most of all, I have more scars than the kid who was up all night singing “Poker Face” in his mom’s shoes.

 But the thing is I am not writing this in memory of the child Hambert. I am writing this to honor my journey with my mother monster, a journey that I am still in voyage at, now with the Chromatica chapter. You see, I have not “just danced” to her songs, I am molded into the man that I am today because of her music and creative display of humanity in the compact of her ever-changing canvass. I am not by any realistic stretch, a perfect squeaky-clean person, but I must say, I am more galvanized to my truth. But the question still hangs above every one’s head, what is a person’s “truth?”

 To answer such existential question, I will refer you back to my introduction with Gaga’s interview in 2011. At the last part of the conference, she mentioned the process of creating one of the scenes for the music video of the title track for her album and her collaboration with Rick Genest or Zombie Boy. She asked Rick as to why he tattooed himself that way to which he accordingly, responded “Bazooka Gum.”

 Not many would have understood what it meant, not even Gaga herself in the beginning of their conversation perhaps but her explanation as to why Zombie Boy is Zombie Boy, brought a thunder of nostalgia in my heart and mind. In my country, it might not be the same brand perhaps, but I remember I was a kid and I used to chew these bubble gum packs that had free sticker tattoos with it that you have to wet in order to apply the art to our skin. It was varied. I liked seeing my skin covered in Android 18 or perhaps a punk-rock style tattoo. To me, this was one of the simple joys of my childhood and to have the same shared experience despite not knowing who Rick Genest was as a kid brought me a sense of clarity as to how we figure out the truths in our lives. In my own twisted sense at least.

 Zombie Boy is tattooed that way because he knew what he loved as a child, irregardless of what society has placed upon the table of social beauty standards. He lived his truth by honoring what the child in him has to say, no matter how much he saw with what the world unfolded to him, as far as I understood. To me the moment when they we’re chewing gum in the music video made more sense as opposed to Gaga just being gaga and thinking she just wanted gum in the video for an effect but truly the meaning of such matters, no matter how small they are or probably insignificant to the universe, that is our truth. Our truth has been encoded to us since we were children, and we just manifest it in our adulthood in different forms. Some of us may deny it, but we are just children in adult costumes and slightly bigger bodies, and have more tendencies to mistrust and be carefree.

 I love how that little piece of information made me wrote this journal entry (this is Gaga’s effect to me, it’s some deep level shit) because truly, now, as I look back, I understand what kind of person I am as opposed to this claim that I have against myself that I am lost and hopeless. My compass is the child me and with it is the spirit of a musician who made this world a better place by being herself and she has been a friend when no one was really beside me.

 The truth of my childhood was I was a child comfortable with silence and solace. Who endlessly created things that pops into his mind without boundaries and he never ever truly cared about what the world wanted him to be. Hambert was a child that just wanted to swing his hips while he paints notebooks in crayon dreams. I know him and in my mind right now he is smiling back at me and I feel like I might cry any moment now.

 I feel like the answers to my truth, was hidden by the lies of anger and refusal to believe that I do not have to rely on what the world wants me to become. I know what I will become. That is my truth. I am the only one who truly knows it and can honor it; and this is the beauty of the Bazooka Gum. ONLY I, CAN DEFINE MY IDENTITY. ONLY I, CAN DEFINE MY TRUE VALUE.

I would like to take this space and write the truthfulness of my divine adoration for the woman who raised me beyond her knowledge who taught me to stand and be myself when I didn’t want to be me. Who taught me to dance through all the pain and remain true to my artistry even if the world would deny it.

Lady Gaga, an angel of the ethereal musical realm. I am freed because of you.

Thank you.

Love,

Hamby

[pingo1387]

in one piece, the women are always limited to side fights and being lesser villains. very rarely are they allowed to fight in close-range combat, instead using weapons that work from a distance. this is especially true of the women considered “beautiful,” making the writing and art lend themselves to sexist principles. in this essay i will 

demonstrate how the potentially strong female characters being pushed to one side detracts from the story and weakens the writing and characterization overall. 

We’ll start with discussing women in media as a whole. Writing women in media has always had some layer of sexism to it, whether it was punishing a woman for wanting the same thing as her male peers by belittling her, reducing her to the trope of being nothing more than a motivation to the main male character (often by “fridging” her), or inserting her into a romantic relationship that had nothing to do with the plot (furthering the idea that women in a fictional sphere must exist in some kind of romantic relationship, or at the very least be confined to a role like The Sister or The Mother). When female characters appear in cartoons, they are more often than not drawn and written as extremely feminine, while their male counterparts are allowed to be “neutral,” with no particularly masculine traits. More recently the idea of the “empowered” woman has come into play---the female heroine wears revealing clothing with feminine accessories, because she is a Strong Independent Woman who can dress how she wants, and her femininity is now her tool with which she attacks, all while being eye candy for a male audience. There is also the common trope (yet unnamed) where a female character is shown to be far more accomplished at a job or task than the main male character, but because he is the Chosen One, he overtakes her skills after a single training montage or with no training at all (see The Matrix and the Percy Jackson movie). 

Another important facet of this “modern sexism” is that women are not allowed to fight, and when they are, they are limited to side battles and ranged combat (see the trope “Guys Smash, Girls Shoot”). This is a sharp turnaround in public taste from the equally sexist gratuitous violence against women, which not too long ago was everywhere (and more covertly still exists today on the set but off the cameras). This unnecessary hitting, threatening, and beating of women was more or less for men’s (vindictive) pleasure and somewhat reflected a society that accepted wives as property and thus allowed husbands to beat their wives, often backed up by laws. While I would argue that this current climate of a taboo against hitting women both in real life and on screen is much better than a climate of beating women, it is a different story when there is a legitimate fight happening. I’ll stick to fiction for this essay and keep real life discussions for another post. 

The long and short of it is that if a woman (in fiction) is shown to be at least as strong and skilled as her male colleagues or opponents, there is no reason why she should be relegated to minor battles or no battles at all. This would not be a problem in and of itself if it did not happen so frequently, in all forms of media, to all women. Of course there are examples of media where women are allowed to have major battles, but because the majority of media does not let their female characters (if there are female characters at all) do this, I’m focusing on the problem at hand. 

Let’s narrow our focus even more and zoom in on the main topic: One Piece. Oda is notorious for drawing all of his women he deems beautiful with the same body which he describes as “three circles and an X.” He also says in the same question that he gets complaints from his female audience and just ignores them. (I would be willing to bet that if you switched the heads around on the women in this colorspread, not counting Big Mom (who we’ll get to later), you wouldn’t be able to tell at first glance what was wrong). Oda, however, also refuses to let his female characters fight properly, much like other major stories out there. 

All of these “beautiful” women in One Piece who get to fight use ranged weapons. Nami uses her Clima Tact, which allows her to create mirages and send weather-based attacks at others from a distance. Boa Hancock, touted as one of the strongest women in the world by virtue of being the only female Warlord, has been shown to kick her enemies, but more often uses her devil fruit to turn others to stone. Kalifa, a member of an elite force of the Government and likely trained since childhood, primarily uses her devil fruit (a soap/bubble ability) to disarm her opponents when she is shown fighting. Vivi used Peacock Slashers, a string of small blades, to lash out at opponents after disarming them with a distracting dance. Laki, from Shandora, used a bazooka-like weapon, and Perona wasn’t even physically present for her battle with Usopp, instead using a spiritual projection to intimidate him while planting bombs in his path. Even Robin, who technically uses her hands and feet to fight (when she gets to), attacks from a safe distance thanks to her ability. All of these women are either part of a team of villains who are set up to be some of the strongest foes yet, a powerful force in the world, and/or are main characters, yet all of them end up forced into minor battles, none of them are the leaders, and all use some kind of ranged weapon to fight. 

There are rare exceptions to this, but the exceptions mostly apply to women considered “ugly”---in other words, not depicted with the “hot” hourglass figure standard of the women. When Alvida was introduced, she was considered so ugly it was laughable she would think of herself as the most beautiful woman in the world, and she was shown to be merciless with her spiked club. However, ever since she slimmed down into a standard One Piece beauty, she was never shown using her club again despite carrying it, and has not even been shown fighting, instead using her new ability to deflect all attacks. Miss Merry Christmas, a wrinkled middle-aged woman, was depicted as shrill, annoying, and mole-like, and she attacked Usopp and Chopper more directly by surprising them from under the ground and even dragging Usopp through crumbling walls to hurt him. Big Mom is probably the most prominent exception at the moment, as she uses her incredible size and strength to pummel entire cities to the ground, but even she has rarely been shown in actual combat, and the fight with her was abandoned altogether near the end of Whole Cake. Nami fought in more close combat when she had a baton, but has fought from a distance ever since Usopp gave her the Clima Tact. Tashigi, who uses a sword, has been shown attempting to fight, but was easily defeated in Loguetown, and was shot down verbally in Punk Hazard by nearly everyone she came across for being a weak woman (which in my opinion was entirely undeserved, but I digress). Finally, Koala was shown to be skilled at Fishman Karate, but has only been shown using it once, and hasn’t fought since then (to be fair, we haven’t seen her much at all since Dressrosa). 

The only prominent situations where the beautiful women are allowed to participate in close range combat are in slapstick moments. Nami frequently slaps around her crewmates with punches and kicks, especially Brook and Luffy, and Hancock has often been shown throwing her grandmother out the window. However, the normal laws of anime fights don’t apply to slapstick---the wounds are never permanent and often disappear in the next scene, and no one brings it up again. The women who do end up in serious fights come out unscathed or at least never as damaged as the men do, preserving their unmarked beauty. This is shown even outside of battle; the women rarely have scars, for example, and even when Nami was sometimes shown to have a scar from trying to remove her tattoo, Oda has stopped drawing the scar since at least Skypiea. The rare moments where a woman can participate in a serious fight, close-range combat or not, are few and far between, especially in more recent chapters. 

This pattern of pushing women into the sidelines when it comes to fights, even when they’re introduced as strong and smart, perpetuates sexist stereotyping that women are inherently weaker than men and are physically unable to deal with close-range combat, letting them fight without damaging their perfect beauty. While I am certainly not asking to bring back gratuitous violence against women, female characters who through their actions demonstrate time and time again they are strong and can be self-reliant are done a disservice when they are only ever allowed to fight other women (which in the narrative means the weaker members fight the weaker enemies) or male characters who are obviously meant to be the weak links of the group. Showing women coming out unscathed 90-100% of the time adds to the proof that their battles were against weaker enemies than the men’s, and sexualizes women further. “See? This woman can fight and come out still stunningly beautiful.” 

Women using close-range weapons is not a bad thing by itself, just like a female character wearing makeup and being very feminine is not an inherently bad thing. However, when these things become a consistent pattern of all women across all media (or all female characters in a piece of media), they must be considered part of the whole problem of sexism instead of a stand-alone issue. And in this case, the whole problem of sexism in One Piece is that women are almost always treated as inherently weaker than men, even by the characters whose characterization shouldn’t allow for such sexism, such as Luffy or Zoro. 

To summarize, women in One Piece, especially beautiful women, always being forced to fight the minor battles or no battles at all contributes to the problem of sexism in the story. It shows the viewer that the women in the world may be smarter than the men, but are never stronger, and if they are stronger, they will never stay stronger. 

[wineanddinosaur]

Harnessing the Power of TikTok’s Almighty Algorithm

For more stories on TikTok, check out our whole series here.

Within my first few hours spent on the popular social media app TikTok in early 2021, I thought I had cracked the code. That is to say, I thought I understood the formula content creators were using to make their cocktail videos go viral. Based on what I was seeing, I wasn’t impressed.

All the drinks that landed on my “For You” feed — the scrolling homepage where the app serves videos from strangers it deems the user will enjoy — were neon-colored, usually vodka-based, and invariably topped with anything from Prosecco to soda. TikTok, it seemed, had a thirst for the bright, boozy, and bubbly. These conclusions only sparked more questions: Why, in 2021, was blue Curaçao so prolific on the platform? And when did Skittles-infused vodka become a bar cart staple?

When I presented my findings to the VinePair team, those with more experience on the platform laughed at my naivete. There was and is a whole world of complex cocktails to explore, I was told, with drinks assembled by proficient home and professional bartenders. To encounter them, I simply had to spend more time on TikTok and allow the algorithm to learn more about me.

An algorithm is defined as “a step-by-step procedure for solving a problem or accomplishing some end.” With the rise of search engines and social media, the term has become commonplace in our day-to-day lingo. Most of us probably don’t have a deep understanding of exactly what an algorithm is and how they work, but might be familiar with the fact that they influence everything from the search results when we Google something to the posts that appear most prominently on our Facebook or Instagram feeds. To paraphrase that above definition for these purposes, social media algorithms solve the “problem” of figuring out what we users most want to see, with the end accomplishment of keeping us engaged on the platforms for the longest possible time.

Within the realm of social media platforms, TikTok’s algorithm garners more attention than any other. By all accounts it is the app’s major selling point — the reason TikTok broke the record for most downloads of a social media app in a single quarter with 315 million installs in Q1 of 2020, and the reason TikTok attracts close to 1 billion monthly active users just four years after it launched. TikTok’s all-powerful algorithm performs so well in recommending content that users stay glued to it for an average of between 45 and 52 minutes per day. The program not only impacts everything that users view on their For You feeds, but is simultaneously influenced by everything they do on the app. The more time you spend on TikTok, the more the invisible, ever-present force learns about you — and in turn the better curated its selection of videos becomes for you.

As a fledgling user learning these facts, I realized I could dedicate my time on the app to testing how long it would take for TikTok to learn that, among other things, I enjoy classic cocktails and fine spirits. Less blue Curaçao; more Buffalo Trace, please. Given the apparent power of the algorithm, TikTok should eventually serve me the “best” (read: most serious) drinks content. In turn, I would discover the actual state of drinks culture on the platform, and find out if there was more to “#DrinkTok” than Giggle Juice and Blue Lagoons.

@bartendaa

Try out this cocktail on New Years- “Giggle Juice” #foryou #newyear #cocktail #drunk #pink

♬ Snowman – Sia

Despite the mythical status of its algorithm, TikTok has published some fairly extensive literature on how it works, including a June 18, 2020 article titled “How TikTok recommends videos #ForYou.” For those looking to actively improve and train their feeds, it provides the blueprint.

According to the article, TokTok first recommends videos based on the interests users input when they sign up for the app. It then fine-tunes recommendations based on how users interact with the content featured on their For You page (FYP).

These interactions range from the videos a user likes, shares, or comments on; the accounts they follow; and the content they create. TikTok also gauges users’ interest in specific topics — such as cocktails — based on whether they watch entire videos related to that topic, and how long those videos are. The user’s language preference, location, and even device type also factor into the equation, though they carry less weight than the user’s behavior.

Interestingly, the algorithm cares little for the amount of followers or likes a creator has when recommending them to users it thinks will enjoy their clips. “While a video is likely to receive more views if posted by an account that has more followers, by virtue of that account having built up a larger follower base,” the article states, “neither follower count nor whether the account has had previous high-performing videos are direct factors in the recommendation system.”

Armed with this set of guidelines, it was time to improve my FYP. I discovered new accounts by searching simple hashtags like #cocktail, #bartender, and #mixology. Adding the word “tok” onto topics I was interested in also helped (“bourbontok” and “bartok”). When I found someone whose content I enjoyed, I made sure to follow, comment, and watch multiple videos, always through to the end. Searching through the accounts they followed allowed me to discover related accounts. And when I spent time randomly scrolling through my FYP, I made as much of an effort to show TikTok what I didn’t like by holding down on a video and clicking “Not Interested.” (TikTok states this is also important for feed curation.)

Before long, it was bye-bye, blue Curaçao. After creating my first and only video — a rudimentary shot of me pouring a Martini in front of a stacked whisky shelf — the work really started to bear fruit. I discovered the online community I was looking for and found that, within what I would dub the more “serious” subsection of DrinkTok, there are multiple styles of content focusing on different topics. All will appeal to cocktail and drinks aficionados in their own unique way.

There’s @drinksbyevie, for example, who mixes classy cocktails in front of a flashy New York skyline. @SpiritedLA blends recipes and mixology techniques, while @cointricktwitch shares industry anecdotes and advice on how not to piss off your bartender.

@drinksbyevie

Treat yourself to a Clover Club this #valentinesday bc who doesn’t love an edible flower moment? #nyc #cocktail #TrulyGlowingSelfieLove #selflove

♬ This Magic Moment – Drifters

There’s no shortage of quality content on bourbontok either, whether you’re looking for quick, lighthearted reviews (@60SecondBourbonReview) or the latest TikTok trends interpreted through the scope of America’s native spirit (@bourbonpursuit).

I had no doubt the Bazooka Joe shots and tutorials for making the aforementioned Skittles-infused vodka remained out there in abundance, but I was no longer being served them. The apparent success of my FYP experiment sparked a thought I hadn’t considered in the beginning: Were creators thinking about the algorithm as much as I had been, and were they trying to reach me as hard as I was searching for them?

Nico Desreumaux, who runs the industry-anecdote-sharing account @cointricktwitch, says understanding how the algorithm works is incredibly important to creators, but less so for viewers.

While he now shares stories about his bartending and barista career, Desreumaux has a background in film studies and has spent years creating content for social media platforms such as Twitch and YouTube. When Desreumaux first started using TikTok in October 2019, he studied the FYP to learn about the different hashtags creators were using and noting the style of videos that went viral.

This understanding of film composition and experience with algorithms helped him quickly take off on TikTok and grow his following to 1.4 million, Desreumaux says. One of his first posts, a video about “the dumbest thing he’d heard from a guest,” hit 250,000 views within 24 hours. When subsequent posts using a similar template received just as much interest, he realized he was on to something. “I realized that I’d hit the algorithm lottery,” he says.

Contrary to his advice, Desreumaux now worries more about the algorithm as a viewer than creator. There becomes a point where creators no longer need to “chase the algorithm,” he says, given the size of the following they’ve built up. But as a user, he’s judicious with what he likes and who he follows, because he knows the algorithm is always tracking. “If it’s just a video that’s an easy chuckle, I don’t want to see 15 more of those right afterwards,” he says.

Hannah Chamberlain, the home bartender behind @SpiritedLA, sees the algorithm as more of a friend than foe from a user perspective, but tries not to think about it as a creator.

Having posted cocktails on Instagram for a few years, she says it got to the point where the process felt like a job, and that she had to create content in the same curated style as everyone else to gain likes and followers. So Chamberlain started her TikTok as an escape — to have fun with cocktails again and share them in her own unique style.

Chamberlain doesn’t follow TikTok trends and isn’t worried about likes or views. Despite this, her account boasts more than 200,000 followers and 4.5 million likes. “I think the content really finds its audience,” she says. “I trust in the magic of the algorithm.”

The more time spent on TikTok, the more it seems that there are two types of creators: those who work on their personal “brand” and ignore the algorithm, and those who follow the trends and “chase” it, as Desreumaux puts it.

Kenny Coleman, who runs the Bourbon Pursuit podcast and its affiliated social media accounts, falls into the latter camp. When making TikTok content, he searches the app’s trending hashtags, music, and challenges, and figures out how he can tie them back to bourbon.

He lip syncs to songs and posts text-based videos with robotic narration — it’s a TikTok thing — but always relating to topics like annual bourbon releases and Pappy-mania. It appears to be a smart move for growing a following because it allows him to speak to two audiences: Those who are more interested in TikTok trends and those who care more for bourbon. “I just look at it as another creative outlet,” Coleman says.

Given his creation style, it’s somewhat ironic that @bourbonpursuit’s biggest video to date didn’t follow a TikTok trend. But it did start one.

On Oct. 21, 2020, Coleman posted a 30-second clip with the caption: “What does an $800 ice press look like?” The short video sees him transform a large cube of cloudy ice into a perfect sphere using a Meltdown copper ice press. He then places the ice in a rocks glass, tops it with a pour of Elijah Craig Barrel Proof, and raises his drink to the camera.

The video racked up 1.5 million views overnight and celebrity imitators soon emerged, including Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson and YouTube superstar Dave Dobrik. Coleman’s original now has over 10 million views and accounts for more than half of his profile’s likes.

“After it did go viral, Meltdown’s website had a literal meltdown,” Coleman says. “It couldn’t keep up with the orders.”

@bourbonpursuit

A perfect sphere every time. #FallDIY #gucciice #bourbon #meltdown

♬ goosebumps – Travis Scott

That a simple video on frozen water could create such waves displays the power of TikTok’s algorithm. From a marketing and sales perspective, it must have been a huge boon for Meltdown. As for the bourbon featured in the video — not so much.

So far, Elijah Craig and its parent distillery Heaven Hill are not on TikTok. Even if they were, they wouldn’t be able to use the platform for advertising purposes or to directly drive sales. The handful of spirits brands that are on TikTok, such as Pennsylvania’s Bluecoat Gin and Kentucky’s Rabbit Hole Distillery, use it exclusively to share cocktail tutorials and educational videos on the distilling process.

When I spoke with Rabbit Hole chief marketing officer Michael Motamedi about TikTok, he seemed just as fascinated with the algorithm as I was. He described the platform as a “real opportunity” for brands like Rabbit Hole, noting that it allows them to engage with consumers “in a real way.”

Motamedi shares Chamberlain’s view that quality content on TikTok will always find an audience. “If you build it, they will come,” he says, and adds that he respects that about the platform. “You see individuals that have 2 or 3 thousand followers and [yet] they have millions of views or millions of likes,” he says. “What that tells me is the algorithm is doing its job.”

For now, and hopefully for the long run, TikTok delivers on its promise of serving the right content for you. Besides its influencers and the odd $800 ice press manufacturer, the real beneficiaries of its algorithm remain its users.

In teaching viewers how to make the perfect Martini or how to not tip like a jerk — perhaps before they’ve ever set foot in a bar — TikTok is succeeding in democratizing drinks culture. As its user base grows, there will be those who join the platform not knowing they’re interested in cocktails but soon find themselves 10 videos into DrinkTok. Others, like me, who’ve questioned whether the right content is out there, should have no doubts: Powered by the might of the algorithm, it’s only a matter of time before it finds you.

The article Harnessing the Power of TikTok’s Almighty Algorithm appeared first on VinePair.

source https://vinepair.com/articles/tiktok-algorithm-drinks/

[cryptodictation]

Against catastrophism (but the EU will come out slower) | Economy

Spain's President Pedro Sánchez talks to German Chancellor Angela Merkel before a meeting of European leaders in Brussels in October.Nicolas Economou / EL PAÍS

The 20th century achieved the feat of being the most prosperous and at the same time the most barbarous of the centuries. The XXI does not start badly. In 2001 we saw the Twin Towers fall in a terrorist attack directly into the heart of the United States; never seen before. In 2008, a super bubble exploded, turning capitalism and the European project upside down; a black swan, something very rare. 2020 is the darkest of all swans and never: One and a half million people have been infected with coronavirus in 180 countries, 100,000 have lost their lives and the global economy is on the road to disaster. 2001 forced the world to choose between freedom and security and 2008 questioned the foundations of the system: 2020 is a compendium of all nightmares. The world is closing in on itself to try to contain the pandemic, and only glimpses the tip of the iceberg of the coming economic titanic. The IMF and OECD predict a depression like the one in 1929, and analysts sketch apocalyptic scenarios. Excessive pessimism is already the hallmark of these times, as excessive optimism was the norm until recently: how long has it been since an American political scientist raged with that absurdity? end of story?

That funeral fashion has its logic: the world seems doomed to choose between the bad and the worst. In Madrid and Lombardy, doctors have to choose who they give a respirator to; there is not for everyone. And in the same way, governments make decisions that influence the lives and deaths of citizens, and also the life and death of the economic fabric. “These are times full of uncertainty, fear, and darkness animal spirits“Summarizes the historian Luuk Van Middelaar.

The virus strain comes from Asia, but the tectonic fault has

its epicenter in Europe and it moves to the USA. The global economy has entered an induced coma. Because there is no instruction manual for this. And because the positive numbers are fuzzy: without reliable data, the models don't work. We are groping, and groping, economic responses can only be intuitive, experimental, stammering.

Economic indicators have experienced a drop in auger. Stock markets rise one day and fall the next day. But the worst is the unemployment data, dark as a Goya picture: to the thousands of lives harvested by the virus, those cut by the crisis will have to be added. Unprecedented measures of confinement have been imposed in peacetime: China came to cover the streets, Russia threatens seven years in prison if the closure is not complied with and the North Atlantic pulls a mixture of fear and awareness of society to maintain a closure To the point that he would need another Dickens to count it well. With very few exceptions, and Spain is not counted among them, the governments have underestimated this crisis until it was too late. And then they have imposed severe measures to tame the contagion curve, “which inevitably leads to an economic hole of a caliber yet to be determined,” says Ken Rogoff of Harvard. Oil consumption in Europe has fallen 88%; 73% of American families lost income in March; German car sales are at a low point, and Spanish hotels are closed to the brim. The crisis is systemic and quite symmetrical: it affects two thirds of the planet. And it works as a kind of perverse domino.

Domino effect

The mechanism is more or less as follows. The virus sneaks into a country and begins to spread at full speed until it saturates the health system and forces states to order confinement. As contagion is controlled, the induced hibernation of the economy is the start of the recession: we are at that point. If that break is relatively brief, we will have a devil's quarter followed by some recovery in the fall, and a possible relapse in the winter depending on what happens with the vaccines. The profile of the economy thus draws a kind of lame W, in which the initial levels are hardly recovered.

Nothing guarantees, yes, that the critical phase lasts a single quarter. If the virus becomes entrenched and forces confinement to extend to six months, the risks will skyrocket and the domino effect will be reactivated. Fear inhibits entrepreneurs and consumers; disruptions in the supply chain spoil the economy and with it the resilience; the fall in demand and the dislocation of supply destroy the most vulnerable jobs first, but the crisis would spread in that scenario like an oil slick, would send more people to unemployment and force them to close businesses: the animal spirits Negatives – mistrust – are pure poison for the economy. With unemployment and bankruptcies, delinquencies would infect banks, and at some point in that chain a morrocotudo mess would start in the markets.

But that is the apocalyptic scenario, and the apocalypse almost always disappoints its prophets. “This crisis is never seen before. It is logical that a pessimistic pessimism is now being imposed, but the health and economic responses are being correct: we must throw away the economic policy manuals, and the plain policy manuals, and trust that we are doing the right thing, “he explains. historian Adam Tooze. Right now we are at the bottom of the hole and, what is worse, we have truly discovered the true face of “radical uncertainty”. Normality will not return in years, and there will hardly be anything like a recovery in V: the crisis will leave a deep scar. “But there is a way out,” says political scientist Mark Lilla. We must prevent fear from settling in societies and leaders; “We must flee from national-populist withdrawals and short-sighted responses such as austerity,” adds Tooze. The greatest risk today is not taking risks.

To get the economy out of the induced coma, you have to spend as if there were no tomorrow. But there is always a tomorrow: if the confinement lasts forever, the debt will end up rising rapidly and investors will begin to ask themselves questions about its sustainability. Markets always attack the weakest gazelle: the one whose debt is too heavy and seems unsustainable. Among the emerging ones there are several candidates for gazelle, but among the developed ones it is worth mentioning Italy, Portugal and Spain, sheltered, for the moment, from the bazooka of the ECB.

“This is like playing football in fog: if the fog is still there in the fall it will be almost impossible to continue, but if the data improves and the fog dissipates, and if in that time the governments have done everything necessary to prevent growth potential collapses and the equilibrium unemployment rate goes through the roof, there is a party, ”says economist Ángel Ubide. Barry Eichengreen, from Berkeley, stresses that the EU is giving the right health response, but the ambition of its economic policy remains to be seen: “The risk is a solidarity deficit like the one we saw with the euro crisis: if that returns to happen, Europe is lost. ” Olivier Blanchard, a former chief economist at the IMF, says that the worst that can be expected from Brussels, Frankfurt and Berlin “is to do too little, like 10 years ago.”

That is the fear shared by a dozen experts consulted. “There will be brutal increases in debt, but that's what states are there for, to help the economy adjust when they are badly given. And that's what the EU and the ECB are for: to help states when curves come, “summarizes economic historian Kevin O’Rourke of Trinity College.

The risk is to be shy about the United States, which has built an impressive monetary and fiscal firewall (in an election year, that is). If that happens, some experts predict fuss in the markets despite the crutches of central banks. And not only in Europe. Global debt has doubled in the last 15 years, to some 240 trillion, 320% of global GDP. It may not be, but that looks a lot like a bubble. The first signs of stress in March were contained with hoses from central banks. But from now on, the most probable thing is that it will always happen: part of the private debt will be assumed by the public sector, as Mario Draghi himself has suggested and as it already happened during the Great Recession; and the need to stimulate economies will also fatten public debt. When the emergency passes, the markets could put some country in their sights.

There are four ways to deal with debt relief. One is to grow at full speed: discarded. Another is with inflation: ruled out with an ECB created in the image of a Bundesbank terrified, rightly so, by hyperinflation a century ago. The third is monetize —Forgiveness— the debt: print money as if money were short of going out of style. In some way the ECB already does, although less than the US Fed, which has come to directly buy the bonds issued by its states. The last option would be to restructure, forgive part the debt. It has been impossible to do it with Greece, and Europe would only allow it if it saw the ears of the mother of all wolves; the alternative could be some eurobonds that are beginning to be on the table. With the great crises certainties disappear and taboos are violated, red lines are crossed and the rules are rewritten: that makes the European debate fundamental.

In the eurozone, whatever happens, it will be difficult to see a strong recovery like the one expected in the US. That has tremendous implications for debt, especially if the ECB is ever reluctant to take risks. Spain has weaknesses out there, although less than Italy and Portugal. Debt is at 100% of GDP. But tourism – 12% of GDP – has volatilized, it is not clear when the 80 million tourists of yesteryear will return. The automotive is at a standstill. Not even the export dynamism, the jewel in the crown after an internal devaluation of aúpa, is the shield that was promised to us by the collapse of global trade. With these wigs, it is very possible that the profile of the Spanish recovery is that of a long U, with an almost inevitable fiscal adjustment unless the ECB and Brussels do everything necessary, including Eurobonds without conditionality, something very improbable. That is the great battle of the coming times.

A half trillion patch

And that battle has already begun. The Eurogroup took a first step in the right direction on Thursday, although with the usual shyness: “The pandemic is at its highest; solidarity at a minimum ”, sums up Paul de Grauwe of the London School. There will be 200 billion in guarantees from the European Investment Bank. There will be $ 100 billion in credits to pay unemployment benefits. There will be 250,000 million of the rescue mechanism (Mede), conditional loans Light. The total figure works like a rattle: half a trillion euros, which in reality are, almost entirely, credits and guarantees. So far solidarity has come for now, waiting for a future Recovery Fund that could borrow in the markets with the support of all countries. But that will only come if things get complicated and Angela Merkel “decides to save the role of leader who took the European project,” attacks Charles Kupchan, former adviser to Barack Obama.

Politics is the art of the possible. But if you don't try, there are things that will never see the light of day: risk-sharing and ECB activism are, in short, Europe's window of last resort, but they need a political consensus that does not exist today. In the great debates, and this is it, timing is essential: although everyone knows that the solution is to communitarise the debt, the countries of the North cannot now afford that anathema with their contrary public opinions; its leaders fear the rise of the extreme right. For Italy and Spain, however, the emergency is now; without impact measures, the lack of love for Europe will permeate the South. The Union cannot afford to be late again. That is almost the EU motto: find answers only when you are on the brink of the abyss. “And beware, because the abyss is back there close,” closes the economist Charles Wyplosz.

Information about the coronavirus

– Here you can follow the last hour on the evolution of the pandemic

– The coronavirus map: this is how cases grow day by day and country by country

– Questions and answers about coronavirus

– Guide to action against the disease

– In case of symptoms, these are the phones that have been enabled in each community

– Click here to subscribe to the daily newsletter on the pandemic

The post Against catastrophism (but the EU will come out slower) | Economy appeared first on Cryptodictation.

from WordPress https://cryptodictation.com/2020/04/12/against-catastrophism-but-the-eu-will-come-out-slower-economy/

[itsiotrecords-blog]

http://ift.tt/2sxGmOG

The United States of America has always been known as a country full of democracy, freedom of speech, and a land where anything is possible. Throughout history, the U.S. has always done things differently and marched to the beat of their own drum. Whether for better, or worse, the U.S. has become a land full of opportunities because of the freedom associated with it. While the U.S. is full of opportunity, it is also full of views and opinions many might not agree with. These varying views and opinions can be found within serious, government affairs including politics and public policy but have also included varying views on food and ordinary daily items. With varying views and opinions, this has caused items that are praised in the U.S. to be banned in other countries. While countries under the European Union, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada have made a stance to ban items that prove to be detrimental to the well being of their citizens, the United States and the FDA still seem to be behind the times and have not made an effort to ban items that have been linked to popular illness including cancer. From common foods found in most households to a haircut that mixes business with fun, here’s a list of common American items banned in other countries.

#1 Baby Walkers – Banned In Canada If you’re a parent of a small child, then you might want to rethink moving to Canada. In 2004, Canada banned baby walkers because of the inconvenience the item causes, which is pretty ironic since the item was created to help parents teach small children how to walk and maintain their balance. Baby walkers were banned because they are said to put babies in danger and delay motor and mental development. If these reasons aren’t enough to stop someone from using a baby walker, maybe the fine of up to $100,000 or possible jail time of up to six months might make you reconsider. While parents might gripe about teaching their young children how to walk the old fashioned way, hopefully they’ll see the sacrifice to keep their children out of harm’s way and their mental well being as a way to cope with the lack of baby walkers.

#2 Incandescent Light Bulbs – Banned In Cuba, Argentina, And More… If you live in America, you probably never paid attention to what light bulbs you use because using incandescent light bulbs is so common, but if you live in another country, then these light bulbs cease to exist for you. While Thomas Edison is one of the biggest, well-known American inventors and has been credited with the creation of incandescent light bulbs, although there have been various refutes and debate about who created the first light bulb, these light bulbs have been called inefficient and ineffective when compared to other light bulbs that convert more of its energy into light opposed to heat. Among the countries that have banned the common American light bulb is Cuba, Argentina, and some countries of EU. Cuba was the first to ban incandescent light bulbs when it transitioned to CFLs with Argentina following in 2010 and EU countries completing the final stages of this process in 2012. For America to be viewed as a progressive country, it doesn’t hold a torch in this fight.

#3 Plastics Bags – Banned In Bangladesh, France, Tanzania, And Mexico City Paper or plastic has been one of the most common questions to be asked when at a supermarket in America. While it may be among American culture of have your choice of paper or plastic, or sometimes a combination of both depending on where you’re shopping the weight of the items in your bag, plastic bags have been banned in other countries. In 2002, Bangladesh became one of the first countries to ban the item. Other countries that later followed are France, Tanzania and Mexico City. What’s more surprising about the banning of this common American item is that cities within the U.S. have also begun to ban plastic bags. In 2007, San Francisco became the first city in the U.S. to ban plastic bags, and Los Angeles was the next city to hop on the bandwagon of banning this item in 2013. It was said that Proposition 67 would ban plastic bags within the entire state of California, and the proposition has been approved and put into effect as of November 2016. Plastic bags have been banned among all retailers including grocery stores and supermarkets and clothing stores. Customers now have to pay 10 cents for a reusable paper bag or an alternative. If this trend continues, plastic bags might become obsolete throughout the U.S.

#4 Ketchup – Banned In France (Except When Used With French Fries) Ketchup is probably one of the most famous condiments worldwide along with its counterpart mustard. From putting it on hot dogs and hamburgers to using the item as a base for sauce or even for the more simple use of dipping French fries, ketchup is renowned for the role it plays in the dining experience. While ketchup can be found at any stadium during game day, in 2011 France banned ketchup from school cafeterias. The reason behind this? According to France, ketchup was banned in an effort to preserve the quality and authenticity of French cuisine. Although the item is banned, it is only acceptable when using with French fries; pretty ironic, but also understandable because what’s a good side of French fries without a cool, refreshing condiment like ketchup?

#5 Spankings – Banned In Sweden If you were a child that got into a lot of trouble when you were young, you probably received various forms of disciplinary action. From rules and guidelines at home to having items taken away from you for a probationary period, there are various ways to being disciplined. One way in particular has lead to this form of disciplinary action to be banned in Sweden: spanking. While parents are free to discipline as they see fit, spanking and physical discipline have received scrutiny from many especially when done in public. Even celebrities and notable figures have found themselves at the center of debate when it comes disciplining their children. In 1979, Sweden banned the belt and paddle, making it the first country to ban spanking and physical punishment. In the U.S., however, spanking is still permitted and is even allowed within schools in some states: School corporal punishment is still allowed in 19 U.S. states.

#6 BHA And BHT Preservatives – Banned In Over 160 Countries While you may have never heard of Butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) and butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT), it’s certain you have heard of or seen the foods that these preservatives are included in. Food additives aren’t a new concept and have been used within the food industry to add taste, add color, or preserve the shelf life of packaged food. BHA and BHT have also been used across various industries and can be found in items used daily including cosmetics, petroleum products, and medicine. While the preservatives are found in packaged food in the U.S., the preservatives have been found to be carcinogenic and harmful to the well being of humans. Although BHA and BHT are common in U.S. foods, they have been banned in more than 160 countries. BHT has been linked to various health issues including risk of cancer, asthma, and behavioral issues among children. Some known American food brands to use BHA and BHT are General Mills and Kellogg’s cereal, though both companies have agreed to phase out the use of the additives.

#7 Chewing Gum – Banned In Singapore If you thought chewing gum was an innocent act and didn’t come with any consequences, then you’re wrong. While the chewy candy comes in various shapes, sizes, and flavors, this item has been banned in Singapore. The act of chewing gum was not banned per se, but importing and selling Bazooka Joe bubble gum was put into effect in 1992. Although Singapore did slightly change the law in 2004, there are still rules in effect to regulate the consumption and use of chewing gum. Pro to the law: any Singaporean interested in the health benefits of sugar-free gum can now get a prescription, which would allow them consumption of chewing gum. While Singaporeans can get a prescription, they’re still not off the hook. They can still face penalties and fines if they’re caught littering with chewing gum. Must be nice to have streets not filled with chewing gum to ruin your new pair of shoes.

#8 Mullets – Banned In Iran Referred to as “business in the front and a party in the back” the mullet has become a staple in American lifestyle. While the hairstyle is only popular in particular regions of the country, mainly the southern states and areas known for the country, rural life, mullets have always been associated as an American item. Mullets have been seen in movies like Joe Dirt, have been featured in internationally known television series like The Simpsons, and have even been incorporated into the fashion world though it never really made a big splash— the mullet is as American as it gets. In 2010, the Islamic Republic of Iran banned mullets and labeled them as decadent. Other hairstyles banned are spikes and ponytails. Want to rebel and get one of these banned hairstyles as a way to stand out? Then prepare for a fine as well as having to change your hairstyle.

#9 Tobacco – Banned In Bhutan While the U.S. is split with some fighting for the right to free will and freedom to smoke while others are advocating for strict rules to enforce on the act of smoking harmful tobacco products in public, Tobacco still happens to be a legal item in America. In the U.S. Tobacco sale and consumption is as common, and frequently found in stores, as large food chains including McDonald’s, Dublin Donuts, and Starbucks, its popularity has not stopped other countries from banning it and enforcing strict laws. In 2010, Bhutan, which was named the happiest country in Asia, enforced its Tobacco Control Act to help increase the country’s overall happiness among citizens. The act was established by what was once ranked the eighth happiest country in the world set to ban the cultivation, harvesting, production and sale of harmless tobacco products. Even though strict laws have been enforced to regulate the growing and distribution of tobacco in the country, smoking tobacco is legal and citizens are more than free to smoke if they would like, although the regulations set in place might make one reconsider.

#10 Artificial Food Coloring – Banned In Norway And Sweden What makes cooking and culinary arts so fun, besides the deliciousness of the dishes, is the array of colors and vibrant hues served on a plate. Fruits and vegetables come in an assortment of colors naturally, but it’s been known that artificial colors have been used in food to give a brighter, more potent color. While a little food coloring doesn’t sound harmful, especially when you think about how fun it is to use food dye during Easter, artificial coloring does have its hiccups, which is why it has been banned in places outside of the U.S.. Artificial colors Yellow 5 and Yellow 6 are found in a number of common foods in the U.S., which includes mac and cheese, potato chips, and soft drinks. Norway and Sweden have banned foods that contain these artificial colors noting the dyes may have a harmful effect on children and could actually hinder their activity and attention.

#11 Farm-Raised Salmon – Banned In Australia, New Zealand, And Russia Salmon is one of the more popular seafood dishes worldwide. From the taste to its nutritional value, salmon has become a staple in the culinary world. While salmon is popular, its popularity and high demand has led to farmers raising Salmon as opposed to relying on freshwater fish. Farm-raised salmon sounds innocent enough, but it actually has raised red flags and has led to some countries banning the act. The argument states that farm-raised seafood is friendly, and better for consumption, because of pollution and dumping in the ocean and fresh bodies of water. However, wild caught salmon has many more health benefits: farm-raised salmon contains more fat than wild caught although it contains less helpful, healthy omega fats and protein. Farm-raised salmon also contains toxins that can be stored in your body and passed down to children through the form of breast milk for women. Countries like Australia, New Zealand, and Russia have moved to ban farm-raised salmon.

#12 Bread With Potassium Bromate – Banned In Canada, China, And The EU Potassium Bromate is popular within bread. The name might not be too familiar among many, but if you’ve been told bleached white flour is not good for you, it’s possibly because of Potassium Bromate. Potassium Bromate has been used to add elasticity to bread and to make bread rise more. Potassium Bromate can be found in rolls, wraps, bagels, and bread crumbs just to name a few items. While Potassium Bromate sounds harmless, it has been linked to various health issues including kidney and nervous system damage, thyroid issues, and cancer. Countries that have been proactive about banning Potassium Bromate because of its harmful nature are Canada, China, and the European Union. The U.S. has yet to ban or put restrictions on the use of Potassium Bromate, but a more cautious approach has been taken by companies who now offer various types of bread including whole wheat, grain-based breads, and even gluten-free options.

#13 Olestra/Olean – Banned In Canada And United Kingdom Chips and french fries have become a staple and a major side dish for meals in the U.S.. If you order a sandwich, burger, soup, etc., it’s possible that chips or french fries might accompany your meal. While chips and french fries are delicious and make it very hard to eat just one, some do contain ingredients that are damaging and can cause health issues. Of these ingredients are Olestra/Olean. Olestra/Olean, which was approved by the FDA in 1996, was created to be a calorie and cholesterol free substitute used in fat-free snacks. The fat substitute has been linked to various digestive issues including cramps and bowel problems. Olestra/Olean has also been linked to depletion of vitamins including Vitamin A, D, E, and K. Countries that have banned Olestra/Olean are the United Kingdom and Canada. As delicious and tasty chips and french fries are, hearing about the harmful nature of Olestra/Olean would make anyone reconsider how much they eat them and how frequently you eat them.

#14 Milk And Dairy Products With rBGH – Banned In Australia, Canada, Israel, And More… Growth hormones have become a growing concern when it comes to food cultivation and processing in the U.S.. Growth hormones are known to increase the size and appearance of food, but they have also been tied to alarming health issues and concerns. From injecting animals with growth hormones to consume their meat to injecting animals that produce dairy products, growth hormones are used extremely frequently. rBGH is one of the many growth hormones used in animals to increase their milk production. rBGH has been connected to various forms of cancer including breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer. rBGH has been linked to serious health issues, which is why milk and dairy products containing the growth hormone was banned in other countries. Countries that have banned milk and dairy products containing rBGH are Australia, New Zealand, Israel, the European Union, and Canada. In 1999, the UN Safety Agency agreed to not set safety standards for rBGH, which resulted in an international ban of U.S. milk.

#15 Nail Polish Ingredients – Banned In The EU Nail polish and nail art continues to grow in the U.S. as a part of the fashion and beauty industry. The various brands and endless colors allow any consumer to have their fair pick of nail polishes and color combinations. While nail polish is fun and playful, some do contain chemicals that can be harmful. The European Union banned dibutyl phthalate, a plasticizer used in nail polish, because of potential health effects. Banning dibutyl phthalate has caused international companies to change the ingredients used in their nail polishes. Despite the health concerns and precautionary methods taken by the European Union, the U.S. and the FDA has not banned the use of the chemical. Dibutyl phthalate is not found only in nail polishes in the U.S. Dibutyl phthalate has been added to the California Proposition 65 list of suspected teratogens in 2006 and large companies began eliminating its use in nail polishes in 2006. Dibutyl phthalate has also been permanently banned in children’s toys in the U.S. although the chemical can still be found in other products.

Source: TheRichest