Tag Archives: January

This Could Explain A Lot If It Happens

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The U.K. Daily Mail reported that a Judge has ruled that documents connected to Jeffrey Epstein will be unsealed in early January.

The article reports:

  • A judge has ruled to unseal documents that would name 177 Does who are Epstein’s friends, recruiters and victims within the coming weeks
  • The material is related to a defamation case brought by Prince Andrew’s accuser Virginia Roberts in New York against Epstein’s madam Ghislaine Maxwell 
  • The hundreds of files will shed new light on the late financier’s sex trafficking operation and his network of influence

The article notes:

Judge Loretta Preska wrote ‘unsealed in full’ next to the names of 177 Does who are Epstein’s friends, recruiters, victims and others whose names will be revealed when the material is released within the coming weeks.

The material is related to a defamation case brought by Prince Andrew’s accuser Virginia Roberts in New York against Epstein’s madam Ghislaine Maxwell.

Roberts sued Maxwell for defamation in 2016 and while the case was settled, media outlets filed in order to have the documents made public.

Some of the Does are identified in the ruling through links to interviews they have given to the media, which the judge cited as a reason why they should not stay private.

They include the housekeepers on Epstein’s private island in the Caribbean where some of the worst abuse that he perpetrated was carried out.

In her ruling Judge Preska gave 14 days for any Does who objected to their documents being made public to object, after which they would be unsealed.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. I will believe that the full documents will be released when I see them. It makes sense to redact the names of the underage victims. The question is whether other names will be redacted. I suspect there are some American politicians that are going to have a very uncomfortable holiday season.

Today’s Economic Numbers

Posted on by

Investors.com posted an article today analyzing the jobs report that was released today. It is a mixed picture.

In chart form:

The chart shows a decreasing official unemployment rate, but it also shows what the unemployment rate would be if the labor participation rate used to calculate the unemployment rate were constant. The number of people who are not currently in the labor force is extremely high.

The article reports:

To further muddle the picture, January’s employment report showed a gain of 21,000 manufacturing jobs. Construction added 48,000 workers, the most since the recession, after a sharp weather-related drop in December. Meanwhile, retailers shed 12,900 jobs and cut the average workweek to 29.7 hours.

“We shouldn’t be surprised that the job gains are not at the level that they were in October and November,” said Keith Hembre, chief economist with Nuveen Asset Management. “But I am surprised we didn’t get more of a bounceback.”

Other unexpectedly weak data in the past few weeks include sharp drops in durable goods orders as well as new- and pending home sales.

Federal Reserve policymakers noted the housing pause at their January meeting, but decided other improvements in the economy were enough to justify continuing to taper asset purchases.

Hembre said the latest data shouldn’t change that outlook.

At some point the Federal Reserve policymakers are going to have to taper their asset purchases. The longer they postpone that, the more of a shock it is going to be. Unfortunately, the Federal Reserve has propped up the dollar and the stock market to the point where there will not be a soft landing. Because of the financial policies of the Federal Reserve for the past ten or twelve years, we will probably experience a very bumpy landing some time in the next six months. I believe we will come through it, but I also believe it will be very bumpy.

Enhanced by Zemanta

There Were Some Things Left Out In The Unemployment Numbers

Posted on by

Yesterday Breitbart posted some of the facts the media seems to have missed in reporting on the jobless numbers this week. The article quotes James Pethokoukis at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI):

The labor force participation rate fell again as potential workers stopped looking for work.  … [I]f the LFP rate was where it was in January 2009, the unemployment rate would be 10.8%. …

The share of the unemployed out of work for 27 weeks or longer increased to 40.2% from 38.1% in January.

The employment-population ratio is exactly where it was a year ago, at an almost rock-bottom 58.6%.

This really doesn’t look like much of an economic recovery to me.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Both Sets Of Jobs Numbers For January 2013

Posted on by

Yesterday CNS News reported that the number of Americans not in the labor force grew by 169,000 in January. Meanwhile, aol.com reports that 157,000 new jobs were added in January 2013.

The article at aol.com reported:

Federal Reserve officials said on Wednesday that economic activity had “paused,” but they signaled optimism the recovery would regain speed with continued monetary policy support. The Fed left in place a monthly $85 billion bond-buying stimulus plan. Economists polled by Reuters had expected employers to add 160,000 jobs and the unemployment rate to hold steady at 7.8 percent last month.

…Job growth in 2012 averaged 181,000 a month, but not enough to significantly reduce unemployment. Economists say employment gains in excess of 250,000 a month over a sustained period are needed.

We are losing jobs as fast as we are gaining them. This really does not look like a strong economic recovery.