Chelsea boss Lampard tells Pulisic to fight for placeby Paul Vegas19 days agoSend to a friendShare the loveChelsea boss Frank Lampard has told Christian Pulisic to fight for his place.Some in the USA have accused the Chelsea boss of favouritism because he is picking young English players ahead of the big-money signing from Pennsylvania.But Lampard said: “This is one of my difficult problems in this job, that I have good players and everyone has a story.“Christian Pulisic has a price-tag, Ross Barkley is an international player, Mason Mount is an international player.“Callum Hudson-Odoi has just signed a new contract, Bayern Munich wanted to buy him last summer, he is an international player.“Ruben Loftus-Cheek will come back and be an international player — and I can’t pick them all in the game, unfortunately.“All I have to demand of them is that they show me in training or show me in the game when they get the chances to play that they are worthy of their place.“That’s not to make me sound like a hard taskmaster, that’s just a brutal reality of my job. Next week I might be asked about two other names.”Lampard gave the USA international a chance against Grimsby in the Carabao Cup — and the implication is that he did not take it.Boss Lamps said: “I spoke to him two days before the Grimsby game and was very clear about the standards.“And we have to give him the fact he has moved country, moved leagues and is as young as all the young players we keep talking about. He has just turned 21.“What he needs to do is work daily and work to show within the group that he deserves to play.” TagsTransfersAbout the authorPaul VegasShare the loveHave your say
Mustafi annoyed by Arsenal legend Petit: He should know betterby Ansser Sadiq16 days agoSend to a friendShare the loveArsenal defender Shkodran Mustafi is not happy with club legend Emmanuel Petit.The German defender spoke at length about how he felt that he was blamed for defeats, even when they were not his fault.And among those who spoke negatively about him in public, he singled out French World Cup winner Petit for particular criticism.”That annoyed me a lot [Petit calling him the king of blunders],” he told Der Spiegel. “It’s the one thing when fans or media criticise you. But it’s a different story when an ex-player who knows how hard it is on the field sometimes says so.”I expect such players to be more sensitive and realise what this sharply worded critique can trigger. In the past, that might have been in the paper one day, and then people would have forgotten it. Today it’s on the Internet and will haunt me for the rest of my career.”Former players like Petit should not have to make a name for themselves by making condescending comments about current players.” About the authorAnsser SadiqShare the loveHave your say
Login/Register With: Advertisement Advertisement Facebook What’s shooting in Ontario – as of Nov-18-16DGC (Director’s Guild of Canada) Hotlist – 64 Page PDF – CLICK HEREOMDC (Ontario Media Development Corporation) MEDIA LIST – CLICK HERE ACTRA – CLICK HERE LEAVE A REPLY Cancel replyLog in to leave a comment Advertisement Twitter
The 90th birth anniversary of the legendary queen of sarod, late Guru Sharan Rani is being commemorated with an event in the Capital. As the foremost woman practitioner of the sarod, a handpicked and personally trained disciple of late Baba Allauddin Khan, Guru Sharan Rani pioneered a revolution by making sarod a woman-friendly classical instrument. Her personal contribution to the art of playing sarod, by introducing the instrument to hundreds of music lovers worldwide through innumerable concerts held at prestigious platforms in India and abroad, remains legendary. Also Read – An income drop can harm brainIn keeping with her pristine status and appeal, a commemorative evening is being organised by her daughter Radhika Backliwal Narain, wherein a Lifetime Achievement Award will be conferred on Pandit Vishwa Mohan Bhatt, the country’s ace Mohan Veena Vadak. The event will be held on April 7, at India International Centre. The event will also see a live concert recital by the maestro, where he will be accompanied by his son and disciple Salil Bhatt, on the Satvik Veena. Tabla accompaniment for the same will be provided by Ram Kumar Mishra. For connoisseurs and music aficionados, there will be an opportunity to relive the Sharan Rani era through a short film of 29 minutes, featuring snippets from the musical journey of the Sharan Rani. The film has been directed by Radhika Backliwal Narain and deftly takes into account the personal, musical and international makeover along with the professional excellence of this performer.
Marshall basketball coach Dan D’Antoni was angry. His team had been down 20 points at halftime during a late December non-conference game against Pittsburgh (“We looked like we were running in mud,” he said), had exploded in the second half, scoring 1.45 points per possession on a variety of back-breaking 3-pointers and half-court cuts that led to easy layups, and still lost. Any team that can drop 68 points in 20 minutes should win the game, but the final score was 112-106 in favor of Pittsburgh. “We booted it,” he said. When a reporter questioned whether the team’s high number of 3-point attempts might explain the loss, he got testy.Decked out in his customary Marshall basketball t-shirt and a dark blazer, D’Antoni unspooled what he referred to as his “daggone analytics story”: “The last two championships have been Cleveland and Golden State,” he said, talking about the NBA. “What did they do? You don’t see anybody post up. They just spread that thing out and go.”D’Antoni became an overnight exemplar of analytics. But can an NBA blueprint remake a mid-major team with subpar talent in the NCAA?When I asked D’Antoni about his quote, he said that he didn’t mean to embarrass the reporter but, “I could’ve said, ‘Of all those five players on the floor, how many of them do you think we had rated higher for college play than [Pittsburgh] had?’ And we’re within a few points of them. That’s like going to the playground and giving the other team the first five picks, saying, ‘Let’s play,’ and then when they win, saying they outcoached us. Give me a break.”This is D’Antoni’s third season at Marshall, after roughly a decade as an NBA assistant, where he coached alongside his younger brother, Mike, in Phoenix, New York and Los Angeles. Thus far, his tenure has mostly been a success. Before he arrived in Huntington, Marshall had been known more as a stepping stone for rising coaches, such as Billy Donovan and Donnie Jones, than for any on-court successes: the team had finished under .500 nine times since 2001-02. The Herd won 17 games in 2016 (the record marked Marshall’s fifth-highest win total in the 2000s) and quickly notched 14 wins this season before a three-game losing streak the past two weeks sapped some of the squad’s momentum. Now tied for fifth in Conference USA, the Herd have an uphill climb to make it to the NCAA tournament. They face arguably the conference’s toughest February slate — UAB, Old Dominion, and Middle Tennessee all loom during this next week; they’ll likely need a run through the CUSA tournament to make it to the dance.D’Antoni isn’t your usual coach. As I prepped for our interview, I read an article about D’Antoni that mentioned he once said he hugged a tree in his front yard each morning. When I asked D’Antoni about it, he said, “I believe there is a connection between here and somewhere else, and since the tree is a living thing, I connect through it and thank it for everything I have been fortunate to have.” But perhaps even more compelling is his attempt to transform Marshall, a team composed of borderline DI players, a walk-on, and an ex-DII player, into one of the nation’s most analytically efficient offenses.“If you do just the ordinary, you’ll lose, so you have to do something unusual to beat people more athletically gifted than you,” D’Antoni said.For the Marshall coach, that means streamlining an offense so that his players are executing each possession with the intent of taking the most efficient shot possible. And D’Antoni knows all of the percentages. “I’ve told our players the numbers forever,” D’Antoni said. “When you look at offense, it’s not about the overall scheme — it’s about the actions within an offense, and you have to know the best odds for scoring.” Using data culled from the NBA, which D’Antoni contended still applies to the college game, a corner 3, which is worth 1.27 points per shot, is the best shot in basketball. The next best shot? “Any other three,” he said. A lay-up — “a clean lay-up,” D’Antoni stresses — is even better: 1.8 points per shot.1According to the NBA’s most recent data, a shot in the restricted area is worth 1.21 points per shot, while a 3-pointer above the break — that is, an attempt either atop the perimeter or on the wing — is 1.06 points and a corner 3 is 1.21 points.Which is why Marshall never stops shooting. Roughly 43 percent of the team’s attempts are from beyond the arc, squaring Marshall within Division I’s top 50 (per Ken Pomeroy), and according to Synergy Sports, Marshall scores 1.08 points per spot up (1.17 points per catch and shoot), which is bested by only 23 other DI squads. “I don’t know if there is another team in the country that does as many shooting drills as we do,” said Austin Loop, a junior guard with the third-best overall offensive rating in Division I and who has converted 49 percent of his 3’s. Perhaps not coincidentally, Marshall scores at one of the country’s most efficient clips, dropping 1.11 points per possession, which is the highest ever for a D’Antoni-coached team (and good for the top 60 nationally).“We go over every stat that the coaches keep,” Ryan Taylor, Marshall’s senior stretch-4, said. That includes game-by-game plus/minus reports, which are presented to the Herd via a white board in their locker room, as well as intensive film sessions and Synergy analysis (provided by D’Antoni and the rest of the coaching staff). “Coach D’Antoni wants us to make at least 36 percent of our 3’s, which equates to 52 percent on 2’s,” Taylor elaborated.2If Marshall were to connect on 36 percent from deep, it would actually equate to 54 percent of their 2’s. “Taking 3’s is easier for us — since it is farther away from the basket, it isn’t contested, and then it opens up our offense even more.”D’Antoni didn’t naturally warm to this style of play. During his initial years as a high school coach in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, he coached conservatively: “My teams were constantly posting up and taking contested 2’s, which are essentially worthless. Those shots only count for .78 points and are the worst shot in basketball.”His thinking didn’t change until a late-1980s conversation with Mike, then playing in Europe, who relayed the revolutionary impact of the 3-point shot overseas. Dan began to eliminate post ups and mid-range jumpers, and he emphasized 3-point attempts and pick-and-rolls. He continued to fine-tune his offensive approach after he ditched the high school ranks and followed his brother to Phoenix as an assistant, where the two coined the phrase “athletic ball,” a concept D’Antoni brought with him to Marshall: “Instead of a player creating a scoring opportunity, you move the ball quickly so that the ball creates the opportunity. That way, a player who isn’t as athletic but is skilled can play against anybody. As long as the ball is free flowing, it’ll get to the place where that guy is capable of making that shot.”As Mike explains, “Something has to be athletic enough on the floor if your players aren’t, and the ball zipping around accomplishes that.”That’s being put to the test at Marshall. D’Antoni arrived at the college game at a fitting moment. Since 2002, DI’s 3-point field goal attempts rate — the percentage of shots taken beyond the arc — has jumped from 32.1 to 36.2 percent, the highest it has ever been. What works for Cleveland, Golden State and the majority of the NBA — spacing the floor through the 3-pointer — has finally begun to saturate the DI level, and thanks to the years D’Antoni spent on the NBA sidelines, Marshall has been a leader in this strategic shift (the Herd’s 3-point attempts rate jumped from 34 to 42 percent in his first season).As the team’s 14-11 record makes clear, though, change takes time. What D’Antoni is preaching clearly works at the NBA level, but his players are not of that caliber, and the learning curve — even 90 games into his tenure — is still much steeper.During Marshall’s recent losing streak, the Herd made just 30 percent of its 3’s and scored an anemic 1 point per possession. D’Antoni spends each practice teaching his players what constitutes a good shot from a bad shot in his free-flowing and fast-paced offense, but the line separating the two is still very much open for interpretation when the players take the court.“If you watch us play, we still take a lot of bad shots,” said former assistant coach Chris Duhon, who spoke with FiveThirtyEight before he resigned in January after an arrest for driving with a license revoked stemming from a DUI. “We haven’t mastered that process yet.”“Obviously they take some bad 3’s, but heck, if I coached any other way, they’d take some bad 2’s,” D’Antoni said. “But I don’t want players looking over their shoulders to see what is a good shot or not. Our offense gives them a freedom to play the game and use their own smarts to create good shots. Let them choose.”This is the only way D’Antoni knows how to coach, and as a self-described “gunslinger,” the only way he believes Marshall will succeed is through what he calls his ‘organized chaos’ offense. “There is more to it than just saying, ‘Here’s an analytic game plan, let’s do it,’” he said. “I may have opened up how the game is played, but I never want to stand pat.”He continued, “I am a big believer in risk. You have to know how to bet, know the odds, and have a feel for everything. How far along I am with my coaching and whether it’ll work, I don’t know. I tried to figure out the odds, and I just know what I’m coaching at Marshall presents us the best odds for winning.”
For every step taken, there’s been a step back — no matter who has been the coach. The team made a breakthrough in 1994 when it reached the knockout stage for the first time in the expanded World Cup era.1It was expanded to 24 teams in 1982 and to 32 teams in 1998. It followed that by crashing out in 1998. The Americans stunned Portugal in the group stage in 2002 and made its first modern-era quarterfinals with a win over Mexico in the round of 16. It followed that by being a complete also-ran in 2006. So if the heroics in 2010 and 2014 — when the team fought through tough groups to survive and advance in dramatic fashion — gave the U.S. any confidence, it has just been completely wiped out. 7/23/00Qualifier1799Costa Rica157167.6 DATESTAGEU.S. ELOOPPONENTOPP. ELOHOME?WIN PROB. 10/10/17Qualifier1761Trinidad & Tobago138982.7% 5/31/85Qualifier1558Costa Rica1505✓70.7 Only includes matches that were at the World Cup or World Cup qualifying level (i.e., excludes continental championships, friendlies and minor tournaments). Games played in neutral locations denoted with a dash.Source: eloratings.net A chart of the U.S. team’s Elo rating over the past two decades shows not so much steady growth but a series of peaks and valleys with, at the moment, no overall progress to speak of. This is not to say that money and size are everything in international soccer. The two biggest countries in the world by population — China and India — have made the World Cup just once (China in 2002), whereas Iceland, a country of just 340,000, will play in its first next summer. But the U.S is different. It has spent the last decade talking about long-term plans for soccer development. The U.S. Soccer Federation increased its staffing and pay for national team coaches and introduced new youth initiatives to build a better team from the ground up. It is hard to see the results of these ambitions on the field. We’re launching a sports newsletter. 🏆 Join the squad. Subscribe 3/25/16Qualifier1749Guatemala146074.8 9/1/17Qualifier1789Costa Rica1741✓70.1 All newsletters 5/11/69Qualifier1455Haiti1453✓64.3 6/14/02World Cup1832Poland1653—73.7 9/1/01Qualifier1791Honduras1734✓71.2 Before coach Bruce Arena gets too much of the blame, it’s important to remember that it was the failures of the team under his predecessor, Jurgen Klinsmann, that put the Americans in this position in the first place. The team lost to Mexico and Costa Rica last November in this qualifying cycle, which led to Klinsmann’s ouster. And, ultimately, losing those points made what should have been a meaningless game against Trinidad a must-win. Earlier last year, the same Klinsmann team also inexplicably dropped a game to Guatemala in the group stage of qualifying, the second-worst loss by Elo.The advantages the U.S. squandered are many. America finally has a legitimate men’s soccer superstar in Christian Pulisic, but he alone could not score two goals for the team. (He got one.) And it’s not just a question of talent: The U.S. towers over these CONCACAF opponents when it comes to resources. Trinidad and Tobago, after all, has a population of 1.2 million — or roughly the size of the greater Hartford metro area. Here is how the 12 countries that made the group stage of the 2018 CONCACAF World Cup qualifying compare in gross domestic product and population — it probably won’t be hard to spot the U.S. 10/15/08Qualifier1813Trinidad & Tobago153373.8 6/22/06World Cup1797Ghana1682—66.0 The worst USMNT World Cup losses everMatches for which the U.S. men’s soccer team had the highest probability of winning (according to Elo ratings) but ultimately lost, 1885-2017 No one still believes that we will win.On Tuesday night, it all fell apart for the U.S. men’s national soccer team. A seven tournament, 24-year streak of consecutive World Cup berths was snapped in cartoonishly heartbreaking fashion.Coming into the match, American fans were rightfully confident. All it would take to qualify for the World Cup was a win or a tie against Trinidad and Tobago, a team that had nothing to play for but pride and only one win in nine matches in the final qualifying group. And even if somehow the U.S. lost, Honduras and Panama would both need victories over the top two teams in the group, Mexico and Costa Rica, to complete the elimination. If the USMNT lost and only one of Honduras or Panama won, the US would be headed for a playoff against Australia. By ESPN’s Soccer Power Index, the United States had a 93 percent chance of reaching its eighth consecutive World Cup.Then the U.S. conceded two goals in the first half — first an own goal and then a blistering 35-yard strike — despite giving up little in the way of high-quality chances. And despite a halftime switch to bring on Clint Dempsey and line up two attackers behind strikers Bobby Wood and Jozy Altidore, the U.S. could not create the chances to level the score. USMNT fans could only watch in horror, and Panama and Honduras both clawed back first-half deficits to knock the U.S. out of World Cup qualification.U.S. men’s soccer is obviously no stranger to embarrassment and heartbreak on the international stage. In the 1998 World Cup and the 2006 World Cup — the last two on European soil — it combined for one tie and five losses. In 2015, the team was stunned at home in the Gold Cup semifinal by Jamaica, which at the time was ranked 76th in the world by FIFA. But what happened Tuesday night may stand alone.Looking only at World Cup matches and qualifiers, it was the worst loss in USMNT’s history based on the Elo rating system. Going into the game, Elo gave the U.S. an 83 percent chance of beating Trinidad and Tobago, making the Americans huge favorites even after accounting for the fact that they were playing on the road. Going back to 1885, the American men had never lost a match at that level when they had such a high probability of winning. And it came with all the chips on the table. You cannot blame U.S. soccer fans for being a little woozy this morning.
Ohio State sophomore guard C.J. Jackson (3) and junior forward Jae’Sean Tate walk down the floor in the second half against Northwestern on Jan. 22 at the Schottenstein Center. Credit: Jacob Myers | Assistant Sports EditorWhen Ohio State (13-8, 3-5 Big Ten) began conference play 0-4, it appeared the Buckeyes would be left in the dust as the rest of the conference would separate themselves from the pack. However, for some, it’s more difficult to leave the nest than it is for others.The current state of the Big Ten has nine teams separated by just one game from fifth place to 13th. OSU is one of six teams at 3-5 and a game behind three teams at 4-4. Coach Thad Matta said he hasn’t been paying close attention.“I’m more just like, ‘let’s just keep winning basketball games,’” he said. “In the end, I am aware of this, that (Saturday’s) game turns the halfway point. I think that there’s still so much that has to be done, but I guess that there is a log jam or whatever. But we’ll see how it plays out.”Whether he realizes the traffic in the heart of the Big Ten standings or not, Matta is well aware the Buckeyes can’t afford a stumble on the road against the Iowa Hawkeyes (11-10, 3-5 Big Ten) who are also fighting for relevance in the arduous Big Ten. The Buckeyes have done themselves a favor by beating Michigan State and, most recently, Minnesota at home — two teams currently projected in the NCAA tournament according to ESPN’s Joe Lunardi. Three weeks ago, OSU looked totally overmatched against conference competition, giving reason to believe that the season could be the worst finish in the Big Ten in Matta’s tenure. Since then, OSU has gone 3-1 against three teams who are in strong consideration for at-large bids come March.But what was absent in all of that talk was the fact that two of OSU’s five conference losses have come by a combined total of three points and the team has played through the third-toughest Big Ten schedule to date. That’s just a couple reasons why Matta has been telling the players that the season isn’t over and there’s still plenty to play for after what was a bleak beginning.“You know, we’re not out of this yet,” junior forward Jae’Sean Tate said. “It’s a tight race. Anything can happen. We just got to go out there every game we play and try to win and the rest will take care of itself.”Iowa is eerily similar to OSU thus far. The Hawkeyes have the second toughest conference strength of schedule, behind Illinois, and have performed well at home, but poorly on the road. All three conference wins for coach Fran McCaffery have come at Carver-Hawkeye Arena, including a victory over then-No. 17 Purdue. Like Iowa, the Buckeyes haven’t performed well away from home. OSU is shooting roughly 44 percent from the field on the road compared to better than 47 percent on its home floor. Likewise, Iowa is six percent worse shooting away from home. The Buckeyes and Hawkeyes also have both been blown out on the road to two teams at the top of the conference — Wisconsin and Northwestern, respectively.The Buckeyes have struggled with performing well from the tip on the road. Against Minnesota, OSU led by as much as 17 in the first half, which is the opposite of what usually happens away from Columbus. OSU has seen first-half deficits of 18 at Minnesota, 18 at Wisconsin and 12 at Nebraska.“I don’t know why that is,” freshman forward Andre Wesson said. “We definitely got to fix that because that definitely can’t happen again. We got to continue to do what we did, just build on what we did against Minnesota.”Regardless of the trend so far this season, OSU has to break its spell and find a way to capture a win at Iowa to avoid falling behind the ball in the Big Ten.“Where we’re at right now, our room for error is very tight,” Tate said. “Going in there and we’re going to give it the best we got and build on this last game.”
Ohio State then-junior forward Mason Jobst (26) attempts to evade a Badger defender in the first period of the game against Wisconsin on Feb. 23 in the Schottenstein Center. Credit: Jack Westerheide | Managing Editor for DesignNo. 1 Ohio State men’s hockey scored in the final minutes of the game against UMass to win their first home game of the season by a score of 3-1.Coming off a 6-3 Friday night loss to the Minutemen in their home opener, head coach Steve Rohlik said the Buckeyes were looking to respond to the loss and play like the No. 1 team in the nation to earn their first home win of the season.“I like our group and our room. We’ve got a great culture,” Rohlik said. “It was a good response. You don’t like losing, and certainly don’t want to lose two in a row, so it was a good response for our guys tonight.”The teams traded goals early, with a goal by UMass sophomore forward Mitchell Chaffee being followed up only 13 seconds later by Ohio State junior forward Tanner Laczynski’s first goal of the season. Laczynski’s goal was assisted by junior forward Ronnie Hein and sophomore defenseman Grant Gabriele, his first point of the season.After these goals, however, a scoring drought developed, as neither team scored for the next 51 minutes of game time. Both teams had two power play opportunities during the game that were killed, and had multiple open shots that went off the post or wide of the net.Ohio State sophomore goalie Tommy Nappier allowed one goal and had 35 saves, tied for a career-high, and has only allowed one goal through two games this season.UMass freshman goaltender Filip Lindberg contributed to the Buckeyes woes on offense for most of the game, only allowing two goals and saving 36 shots for the Minutemen.The tie was finally broken with Lacyznski’s second goal of the game, assisted by redshirt junior defenseman Wyatt Ege with less than two minutes remaining in the game. “Last night we came out, we played hard first couple shifts, but then, you know, we were just flat the rest of the game it felt like,” junior forward Tanner Laczynski said. “It was good today, I thought we came out hard, put the pressure on them, and I thought we were consistent the whole night.”Ohio State outshot the Minutemen 39-36 on the night. Senior forward Mason Jobst added an additional goal in the empty UMass net with less than a minute left to make the final score 3-1.The Buckeyes will remain home for their series-opening game against Bowling Green next Friday at 7:00 p.m. and will travel to Bowling Green for their game Saturday at 7:07 p.m.
England boss Gareth Southgate has attributed the injury crisis and suspension in his squad to the early kick-off of the Premier League shortly after their World Cup exploits.England are set to confront Spain in Seville but are decimated by suspensions and injuries.An injury crisis coming into this international double-header has been exacerbated by suspensions to John Stones and Jordan Henderson, and Southgate revealed to the Express: “Maybe they were expecting us to be back by the end of June.“Of course it’s always easy to make a comment like that and not know the complex scenario decision-makers had to go through.Crouch: Liverpool could beat Man United to Jadon Sancho Andrew Smyth – September 14, 2019 Peter Crouch wouldn’t be surprised to see Jadon Sancho end up at Liverpool one day instead of his long-term pursuers Manchester United.“But everybody knew when the final was and the semi-final, and that they would be away for a period of time. It’s a bit like our clubs in the Champions League. Some of the rest of the leagues in Europe help them and adjust the fixture list.“And I’m sure our clubs would appreciate that because in the end they’re representing English football and we want them all to do well.”“When you see the league, a lot of teams haven’t started yet at the level when they are at their maximum,” said Southgate.“And there are a lot of injuries across our league. I think it’s psychological rather than physical.”
Tony Khan attacked a fan on Twitter after the supporter asked him to step down from his position as Fulham lost against Burnley.Fulham FC was defeated 2-1 by Burnley in yesterday’s English Premier League fixture.And fans are angry as their team lay in the 19th position in the table, just three points ahead of the last place.One Fulham supporter took his frustration to Twitter, where he asked the team’s vice-chairman Tony Khan to step down from his position.Official: Tottenham sign Fulham youngster Ryan Sessegnon Andrew Smyth – August 8, 2019 Tottenham have sealed another transfer deadline day deal to sign the highly-rated Ryan Sessegnon from Fulham.“Never. I’ll die at this club. Go to hell,” replied Khan.“To squad, staff, and supporters, some people are waving the white flag and saying we should surrender, people said the same when we were 6 & 4 points behind the past 2 seasons; we closed the gap both times,” he was quoted as saying by The Independent.“Our squad has great moments, but they’ve shown their abilities more often than they’ve gotten the points we need. But we can close this gap.”“As with last January we’ll make multiple signings to improve the squad, but it’s on our players now to fight, finish & win. Come on Fulham!” he concluded.
WILMINGTON, MA — Below are 5 things to do in Wilmington on Saturday, January 5, 2019:#1) Massachusetts Bridal & Wedding ExpoThe Massachusetts Bridal & Wedding Expo is coming to Wilmington on Saturday and Sunday, 11am to 5pm both days, at the Shriners Auditorium (99 Fordham Road). The event features more than 100 exhibitors, covering all aspects of a wedding — gowns, florists, hair & makeup, honeymoon destinations, wedding and event planners, guest accommodations & hotels, photographers, videographers, DJs, bands, photo booths, decor & lighting, reception & wedding venues, tuxedos, jewelry and more. The event also includes live music, demonstrations, fashion shows, and giveaways. See the schedule HERE. Admission costs $15 at the door. You can, however, register online and pay just a $3 admission HERE. Children under 16 are free. Parking is free.#2) Fiction Critique Group At LibraryThe Wilmington Memorial Library (175 Middlesex Avenue) is holding its monthly Fiction Critique Group from 9:15am to 11:30am. Love writing fiction? Whether you are drafting a short story or a novel, joining our Critique Group is a great opportunity to meet other writers and get constructive feedback in a supportive environment. When registering, please provide your email address so you can receive an agenda and any prep materials before the meeting. Open to all experience levels writing in all genres. Led by local writing enthusiast, Barbara Alevras. Register HERE.#3) Kids Kraft: Polar Bear Masks At LibraryThe Wilmington Memorial Library (175 Middlesex Avenue) is holding a Kids Kraft ta 2pm. Turn yourself into a polar bear and make your own mask! This craft is led by 3 Wilmington High School students. Grades 1-5. Register HERE.#4) Book Store Next Door OpenThe Friends of the Wilmington Memorial Library’s Book Store Next Door (183 Middlesex Avenue) is open from 10am to 4pm. All books are $2 or less! Every penny of every sale benefits the Wilmington Memorial Library. Learn more HERE.#5) WHS Boys & Girls Hockey, Wrestling, Wrestling In ActionThe WHS Girls Varsity Hockey Team hosts Burlington at noon at Ristuccia. The WHS Boys Varsity Hockey Team hosts Burlington at 2:20pm at Ristuccia. The WHS Boys & Girls Track Teams are in action in multi-school meet at 10am at Boston University. The WHS Boys Wrestling Team is competing in a tournament at Cohasset High School.Like Wilmington Apple on Facebook. Follow Wilmington Apple on Twitter. Follow Wilmington Apple on Instagram. Subscribe to Wilmington Apple’s daily email newsletter HERE. Got a comment, question, photo, press release, or news tip? Email firstname.lastname@example.org.Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:Like Loading… Related5 Things To Do In Wilmington On Saturday, August 10, 2019In “5 Things To Do Today”5 Things To Do In Wilmington On Saturday, August 3, 2019In “5 Things To Do Today”5 Things To Do In Wilmington On Saturday, July 20, 2019In “5 Things To Do Today”
Foreign minister AK Abdul Momen. File photoBangladesh has come up with a new proposal for India regarding the Rohingya crisis.The proposal states that a safe haven can be created in Myanmar’s Rakhine state where the driven-out Rohingyas can be rehabilitated.And countries who are friends of Myanmar can take responsibility of ensuring that the Rohingyas can live there free of fear, in safety, with a sustainable livelihood. These countries can include India, China and ASEAN members.Bangladesh’s foreign minister AK Abdul Momen placed this proposal before the Indian prime minister Narendra Modi and foreign minister Sushma Swaraj during his recent visit to India, adding that India should include this in talks with Myanmar.Abdul Momen was speaking to the media after a dinner hosted in his honour by the Bangladesh High Commission in Delhi on Friday.The foreign minister said, Myanmar may agree to its friendly states taking responsibility of overseeing the Rohingya and monitoring their welfare upon their return. He said Modi responded by saying it was an ‘innovative proposal.’Abdul Momen chose India for his first overseas visit after becoming foreign minister. During the three-day trip, he attended that Bangladesh-India Joint Consultant Commission (JCC) meeting.Speaking to the media, he said that he had also placed the proposal before Sushma Swaraj. She wanted to know if he had given the proposal to prime minister Modi and he assured her he had, albeit in brief.Sushma then asked that why he hadn’t proposed this to the Myanmar foreign minister who was his friend. He said that Myanmar would given the proposal more importance if it came from India.During the JCC meet, Abdul Momen stressed the need for sharing the waters of common rivers including Teesta. Some of these flow in from China. He said that the experts of the Bangladesh-India Joint Rivers Commission (JRC) would decide whether the issue of water sharing would be sorted out bilaterally or multilaterally.* This report, originally published in Prothom Alo print edition, has been rewritten in English by Ayesha Kabir
The American Red Cross is asking that summer revelers set aside one hour of fun to donate blood, 7:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., July 15-17, in the Francis X. Knott Conference Center of Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center.Every participant will receive a meal coupon, parking pass and special gift from the Medical Center. More important, participants will take pride in knowing they saved up to three lives!You can make twice the difference by scheduling a double red cell blood donation. During a double red cell donation, a machine separates the red blood cells from other blood components and returns the remaining components back to the donor. By doing this, the machine is able to double the amount of red cells it would normally collect in a standard blood donation. Donors are actually donating two units of blood, instead of one, and saving twice the number of lives!For more information or to schedule a life-saving donation, call 410-550-0289.
However, Mansuripur’s bold claim of a paradox with the Lorentz law has generated some intense criticism. One critic, Daniel Vanzella, a physics professor at the University of Sao Paulo in Sao Carlos, Brazil, has submitted a comment to Physical Review Letters arguing that the Lorentz law is perfectly compatible with special relativity, and that Mansuripur has misunderstood relativistic mechanics. The only paradox, Vanzella says, is why the high-ranking journal accepted the paper in the first place.Charge-magnet paradoxThe basis of Mansuripur’s argument is that the Lorentz law violates special relativity by producing different results in different reference frames. According to special relativity, the laws of physics – including electromagnetism – must be the same in all non-accelerating reference frames. He describes a scenario in which a magnetic dipole and a nearby electric charge are located a certain distance apart. When the magnet and the electric charge are at rest, no net force is exchanged between the two. This is because static electric charges only produce electric fields (to which the magnet is oblivious), and static magnets only produce magnetic fields (to which the static electric charge is oblivious). Both the Lorentz law and the Einstein-Laub version give the same result: the magnet experiences neither a force nor a torque from the electric charge.However, the Lorentz law gives a different result when a stationary observer watches the magnet and electric charge in a moving reference frame. Here, the observer sees the moving electric charge exert a torque on the moving magnet, causing the magnet to rotate as it tries to align itself with the electric field. The presence of this torque differs from the observation in the stationary reference frame where there is no torque.On the other hand, the Einstein-Laub formula, when combined with a corresponding torque formula, gives zero torque value for observers in both reference frames, complying with special relativity.The Lorentz law’s incompatibility with special relativity is not its only shortcoming, according to Mansuripur. Another equally important issue is the long-standing problem of “hidden momentum,” in which he shows that the Lorentz law fails to conserve momentum in certain situations involving magnetic media. In contrast, the Einstein-Laub equations show complete consistency with the conservation laws. For Mansuripur, this evidence indicates that the Einstein-Laub formula should be considered as a better way to understand classical electrodynamics. (Phys.org) — The laws of classical electromagnetism that were developed in the 19th century are the same laws that scientists use today. They include Maxwell’s four equations along with the Lorentz law, which describes the force exerted by electric and magnetic fields on charged particles. But Masud Mansuripur, a professor of Optical Sciences at The University of Arizona in Tucson, is now arguing that the Lorentz law of force is incompatible with special relativity and momentum conservation, and should be abandoned. In a recent issue of Physical Review Letters, he has suggested replacing the Lorentz law with a more general expression of electromagnetic force density, such as one developed by Albert Einstein and Jakob Laub in 1908. Best yet test of Lorentz invariance “This work provides a firm basis for all calculations of force, torque, momentum and angular momentum whenever electromagnetic fields (microwave, light, etc.) interact with material media,” Mansuripur told Phys.org. “The electromagnetic momentum and angular momentum become well-defined universal entities (i.e., the Abraham momentum), the need for ‘hidden momentum’ disappears, and satisfaction of conservation laws as well as conformity with special relativity are guaranteed.He explains that, during the past century, there has been a proliferation of equations for force and torque in the scientific literature, with scientists using several different formulas for the electromagnetic momentum. “My paper fixes the foundational equations and allows researchers to compare their experimental results against a single, well-defined theory,” he said.Quantum natureAccording to Mansuripur, the underlying reason for the difference between the Lorentz law and Einstein-Laub formula involves how each equation mathematically describes the quantum nature of electromagnetic fields and media. For its part, the Lorentz law depicts electric and magnetic dipoles as pairs of positive and negative charges or stable loops of current that interact with electromagnetic fields in terms of free and bound charges and currents. In contrast, the Einstein-Laub formula describes material media as spatio-temporal distributions of charge, current, polarization, and magnetization. Mansuripur explains why this distinction is important.“The fact that the electron orbits inside atoms and molecules are stable is a quantum-mechanical phenomenon,” he said. “Neither Maxwell’s equations nor the Lorentz law of force (and nor, for that matter, the Einstein-Laub force/torque equations) can account for the stability of the electron orbit. The fact that electrons, protons and neutrons have a magnetic moment associated with their spin angular momentum is also a relativistic quantum effect that has no explanation within classical physics. What Maxwell’s equations and the Lorentz law (or the Einstein-Laub law) do is provide formulas that describe the behavior of fields and material media as they are, without attempting to justify that behavior. The Lorentz law, however, simplifies the underlying physics by assuming that electric and magnetic dipoles can be treated as distributions of ordinary electrical charge and current. In contrast, the Einstein-Laub equation and the accompanying torque equation treat free charge, free current, electric dipoles, and magnetic dipoles as four distinct constituents of material media.“So, for example, the fact that a magnetic dipole is associated with something resembling a loop of current is a quantum mechanical effect. The Lorentz law does not ignore this fact, but it takes the resemblance to a current loop too far, treating the magnetic dipole as if it were actually a loop of ordinary current. In contrast, the Einstein-Laub formula acknowledges that magnetic dipoles exist as distinct entities – what makes them distinct is quantum mechanics, of course, but Einstein-Laub does not attempt to justify the existence of these dipoles or their nature. The Einstein-Laub formulas then provide a ‘recipe’ for calculating the force and torque on these dipoles, which turns out to be different from the ‘recipe’ provided by the Lorentz law.”No paradox?One critic of Mansuripur’s ideas, Vanzella, thinks that the paper is so flawed that it should not have been published at all. In his comment submitted to the journal, Vanzella points out that the Lorentz force can be put in a covariant form. In special relativity, a covariant law cannot lead to incompatible descriptions of the same phenomenon in different inertial reference frames. He explains that Mansuripur has incorrectly used relativistic mechanics and ignored a hidden momentum that makes the Lorentz formula predict a torque in one reference frame but not another. “This has blown way out of proportion,” Vanzella said. “Let me begin by stating the most important point: there is no incompatibility between the Lorentz force and special relativity. This is not a matter of opinion: any relativist knows that this is impossible for any specially-covariant law (as is the Lorentz force). By construction, a specially-covariant law is compatible with special relativity. This means that if it leads to a satisfactory description of a phenomenon in one inertial frame, then it leads to consistent descriptions in any inertial frame; there are no paradoxes.”He added that apparent paradoxes appear frequently when dealing with special relativity, but these paradoxes are actually due to simply missing or overlooking part of the relativistic argument. He says that a very similar “paradox” to the charge-magnet paradox, called the Trouton-Noble paradox, was presented and resolved more than 100 years ago. “In this particular case, using a current loop in a perfectly-conducting ring to model the magnet’s magnetic moment, one has to use special relativity to show that, even when the ring is at rest, the total momentum of the system is not zero (when subject to an external electric field),” he explained. “This momentum has been termed ‘hidden’ in the literature and this has led to some confusion, but let me stress that it is real momentum. Mansuripur is missing the point that this momentum is not an ad hoc invention only to solve paradoxes; its existence is forced upon us (upon Nature, actually) due to the principles of special relativity alone. In my comment I do not postulate the existence of this momentum. I simply use special relativity to calculate it; no additional hypothesis other than special relativity and the Lorentz force. Therefore, when Mansuripur dismisses this ‘hidden’ momentum he is doing exactly what I said is needed to arrive at a paradox: missing or overlooking part of the relativistic argument.”Despite his strong disagreement with Mansuripur, he emphasized that his criticism does not suggest anything against Mansuripur’s scientific credibility.“Please note that I don’t think that Mansuripur not knowing the solution of the ‘charge-magnet paradox’ (or not understanding the given solution) is that bad,” Vanzella said. “Special relativity is certainly not his expertise and confuses a lot of people, even physicists.”He also added that he’s not necessarily arguing that the Lorentz law must be the correct law of force, either, but just that special relativity cannot be used to testify against it. The question of which law is correct is an experimental issue. Still, he’s adamant that there is no paradox in this situation.“I wouldn’t even call Mansuripur’s idea ‘controversial,’” he said. “Would you call ‘controversial’ the idea that the Earth is flat? It is simply and provably wrong (I mean the claim that the Lorentz force is incompatible with special relativity).”In a response to Vanzella’s comment, also submitted to Physical Review Letters, Mansuripur has stuck to his original argument, explaining that there is no need to introduce hidden momentum, and that the Trouton-Noble paradox was subtly but significantly different than the charge-magnet paradox.Future of Einstein-LaubDespite the advantages of Einstein-Laub formula, Mansuripur acknowledges that it is not without its own problems. In 1979, physicist Iver Brevik performed an extensive review of the Einstein-Laub formula and other possible candidates for an energy-momentum tensor for the electromagnetic field. In some of the experiments, the Einstein-Laub formula did not match actual observations as closely as another formula, the Helmholtz force equation. However, Mansuripur argues that, due to the potential significance of this idea, the contrary evidence deserves a closer examination.“My colleagues and I are currently trying to identify situations where the distinction between the Lorentz law and the Einstein-Laub formulation is unambiguous, then try to conduct experiments to determine which law is operative in such situations,” he said. “Personally, I don’t attach much significance to the historical evidence against the Einstein-Laub formulation as reviewed in the paper by Brevik. The experiments were all electrostatic experiments, involving the flow of some dielectric fluid into a capacitor. The theoretical methods used to analyze the problem were extremely confusing; many approximations were made, and the Einstein-Laub formula itself was never used directly; instead they used a stress tensor associated with Einstein-Laub, which I have shown elsewhere to be incorrect.Mansuripur also plans to further investigate what he thinks has been a much overlooked distinction between the two formulas: a term that describes the force density of an electric field acting on the polarization density of a material medium. Whereas the Lorentz law uses –(del.P)E, the Einstein-Laub formula uses (P.del)E. Although the two formulations give exactly the same total force and total torque on any solid object, differences emerge when dealing with soft objects.“If applied to soft objects such as biological cells under intense illumination or droplets of oil or water in optical tweezers, the two formulas give different force and torque ‘distributions’ throughout the object,” he said. “This difference in force/torque distribution will then manifest itself in different deformations of the object under intense illumination. Our near-term goal, therefore, is to look for deformations of soft objects in optical tweezers experiments. A long-term goal is to look for observable differences between Lorentz and Einstein-Laub in magnetic materials.” This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only. Charge-magnet paradox: the point electric charge q and the point magnetic dipole to its right are separated by distance d in the x’y’z’ frame. An observer in the x’y’z’ frame sees no torque, but a stationary observer in the xyz frame watching the x’y’z’ system move with constant velocity along the z axis sees the moving electric charge exert a torque on the moving magnet. Image credit: Mansuripur. ©2012 American Physical Society More information: Masud Mansuripur, “Trouble with the Lorentz Law of Force: Incompatibility with Special Relativity and Momentum Conservation.” Physical Review Letters 108, 193901 (2012). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.193901 Explore further Copyright 2012 Phys.org All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or part without the express written permission of PhysOrg.com. Citation: Is a classical electrodynamics law incompatible with special relativity? (2012, May 24) retrieved 18 August 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2012-05-classical-electrodynamics-law-incompatible-special.html Journal information: Physical Review Letters
Nevada officials reach out to D-backs on potential relocation In terms of Phoenix/Arizona Cardinal history, you have noidea just how rare Peterson’s prowess is.Since the Cardinals moved to the Valley in 1988, onlytwice had a punt returner taken one back to the house.Steve Breaston returned a punt 73 yards for a touchdown ina 21-14 win over Pittsburgh in 2007 and Johnny Bailey hada 58-yard punt return for a score in a 17-10 win over theRedskins in 1993.That’s it.Think about that…23 seasons, 368 regular season games,768 punt returns and the Cardinals had collectivelyreturned two for scores. Peterson’s taken three back in 19 returns. Peterson has spent more time in the end zone this seasonthan Hines Ward, Anquan Boldin, Antonio Gates, ReggieBush, DeSean Jackson, Chris Johnson or Reggie Wayne. Kind of makes you wonder when teams are going to stoppunting the ball to him.Or when the Cardinals will increase the number of times hecan get the ball in his hands. Don’t be surprised to seemore of Peterson on the offensive side of the ball. Inthe past head coach Ken Whisenhunt has used safety AntrelRolle and cornerback Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie inoffensive sets. D-backs president Derrick Hall: Franchise ‘still focused on Arizona’ Top Stories Comments Share What an MLB source said about the D-backs’ trade haul for Greinke Patrick Peterson’s 99-yard punt return in overtime thatlifted the Cardinals to a 19-13 win took the footballworld by storm. It was the 2nd-longest punt return inleague history, the 2nd overtime punt return for atouchdown in NFL annals, and Peterson became the firstplayer in team history with three punt return scores in asingle season.It’s obvious that Peterson is a very rare weapon; one thatis drawing comparisons to Devin Hester and Deion Sandersjust eight games into his pro career. Cardinals expect improving Murphy to contribute right away
“Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurances and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.” George Washington I can’t think of any reason I need to own my AR-15 assault rifle. I don’t pretend to need it for self defense. I also own several handguns. Any one of my handguns would be adequate to allow me an opportunity to defend myself, or another person, from virtually any act of aggression by another individual. Indeed, I could have easily halted any of the recent gun based rampages, by any of those deranged lunatics, with just one of my handguns. I wish I had been there. I have needlessly and peacefully owned my AR-15 for many years. I keep my AR-15 securely locked in a gun safe in the very same home where my young children live. My children are aware of my AR-15. Like many other things in life, I have taught my children about guns. Recently, some of my kids attended a private gun safety class given by a highly experienced gun expert. I enjoyed watching my kids learn about my AR-15. I admit being a bit nostalgic about my AR-15. I spent lots of time learning about every aspect of the AR-15 when I was in Marine Corps boot camp at Parris Island, South Carolina. I also carried an AR-15 when I served my country in Operation Desert Storm in Saudi Arabia. I had it with me when I lived in a dirt hole on the border of Kuwait. It is the weapon I know better than any other. I own lots of dangerous things I don’t need. I don’t need my highly modified 600+ hp Z06 Corvette, or my Harley Davidson motorcycle, or that crazy looking knife I sometimes jokingly say was imported directly from the Klingon Empire. All of these things can be used, intentionally or accidentally, to hurt others. Because I have always been careful, peaceful and responsible, none of the things I own have ever been used to hurt another person. I am an American. As such, none of my rights depend on a showing of need. I am a free man who has the right to define and pursue my happiness in any peaceful way I see fit. The government does not grant me rights. I was born free. The legitimate role of government is to act as my agent to protect my rights, which exist independent of government. Americans do not beg the government for rights nor are they required to demonstrate a “need” for rights. I cherish lots of my rights for which I can’t demonstrate any need. I don’t need the right to say highly offensive things to another person. Although I generally don’t try to offend other people, I cherish my right to do so. I also cherish, and would aggressively defend, your right to say highly offensive things to me. Defending the rights of people to say things most people agree with is entirely unimpressive. Liberty must always be defended at the edge. As a criminal defense attorney, I seek out unpopular clients. When I represented Elizabeth Johnson in what is sometimes referred to as the “Baby Gabriel” case, one of the things that attracted me to the idea of representing her was the fact that she was hugely unpopular. Defending the right to a fair trial starts with the unpopular client. Although I never have anything to hide, I cherish my 4th Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. I would never consent to a warrantless government search. Opportunities to defend the 4th Amendment usually arise in cases where people are engaging in some type of criminal activity. The cost of defending our rights in this area sometimes results in dangerous criminals going free. I frequently advocate for our right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures on behalf of people who think nothing of trespassing on others. Indeed, I always advocate for the right to refuse searches in cases where there is nothing to hide. Protecting liberty in hard cases requires the work of the most committed liberty-minded Americans. Government never has a more tempting opportunity to increase its size, power and scope, and to curtail the liberties of free people, than during or immediately after a crisis. Indeed, crisis is so tempting an opportunity for government that governments invent crisis whenever possible. This is why “emergency acts” and “wars” on anyone and anything are so popular for governments. Nothing entices people to stop thinking, act impulsively, and to relinquish liberties so easily as a “crisis” or a “tragedy” or an “emergency.” We need to be smarter if liberty is to survive. Our world is unfortunately filled with real tragedies. The recent school shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary in Connecticut, orchestrated by a deranged lunatic with several guns, was one of the worst tragedies I have seen in my life. However, because of the magnitude of this tragedy, much like the September 11 tragedy, it presents an almost unprecedented opportunity for government to curtail liberty. Don’t be fooled! Banning Guns Is Un-American and Immoral “And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; …” Samuel Adams The right to peacefully own a gun is such an important and fundamental American concept that it was enshrined in the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution. Millions of peaceful Americans own guns for various reasons, none of which need to be justified to the government or anyone else. Peaceful people owning guns is not a problem needing a solution. Countless Americans will peacefully own and even use their AR-15 weapons today without incident. Ignoring the obvious Constitutional problems with simply banning guns, such action would require immorally initiating force against peaceful people. People who abhor guns have no right to impose their will on peaceful gun owners. So long as peaceful gun ownership poses no harm or substantial risk of harm to others, it ought to be a protected activity like all other peaceful activities conducted by competent adults. Attempting to punish everyone for the acts of one or several deranged lunatics is immoral. Like most AR-15 owners, my AR-15 ownership has always been peaceful. Seeking to deprive me of my AR-15 because others have irresponsibly used theirs is akin to revoking my driver’s license because others have irresponsibly driven drunk, resulting in tragedy. People need to be held accountable for their own actions, but not for the actions of others. The Idea of Banning Guns Is Foolishness “They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Ben Franklin It is estimated there are approximately 300 million guns in the United States. I suspect that estimate is conservative. The nature of criminals is such that they do not comply with the law. As such, we can predict, with absolute certainty, that the violent criminals who currently possess guns will not comply with any law requiring them to relinquish their guns. Additionally, I suspect many peaceful gun owners would similarly never comply with any law requiring them to relinquish their guns. As such, any law banning guns would be entirely ineffective and would actually make matters worse. All peaceful law-abiding gun owners would be disarmed and more vulnerable to violent criminals. We already have laws absolutely prohibiting convicted felons from possessing guns. As a criminal defense attorney, I regularly represent such people deemed “prohibited possessors” for the crime of simply possessing guns. Nobody working in the criminal justice system could seriously assert that laws banning guns for felons have been successful. A deranged lunatic named William Spengler ambushed and murdered two firemen in upstate New York on December 24, 2012. He was a “prohibited possessor” who previously served 17 years in prison. The law absolutely banned him from having guns. He had several. Thankfully, Mr. Spengler terminated his killing spree by shooting himself after being confronted and engaged by an off duty armed police officer who happened to be present. There is no doubt many more would have been murdered had an armed man not been present. Even if we strained our imaginations to think banning guns could result in abolishing all guns currently in existence, a gun ban would still be futile. If the failed war on drugs has taught us anything, it is that making something illegal, when there still exists a demand for the illegal item, absolutely results in a lucrative black market. There is no doubt a lucrative, vibrant, and violent black market in guns will immediately grow to whatever size is necessary to manufacture and supply violent criminals with guns. Such violent criminals would be enticed to engage in even more criminal endeavors knowing their law-abiding victims are entirely unable to defend themselves against such aggressions. Whether we like the conclusion or not, like marijuana, guns are here to stay. The facts of reality are such that bad guys with guns are an unfortunate fact of life. Our focus should be on how we deal with this fact rather than wishing the fact was otherwise. Gun Regulations Never Reduce Gun Violence and Usually Increase Violent Crime “The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that … it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; … ” Thomas Jefferson I realize it seems counterintuitive, but it is true. The same unintended results occur in many other contexts as well. Just like minimum wage and rent control laws hurt the poor, banning alcohol results in more alcohol-related problems, raising taxes sometimes results in less revenue for the government, government spending results in fewer jobs, banning guns usually increases gun violence and never reduces it. The examples of gun control resulting in increased gun violence are easy to find. In 1976, after Washington D.C. instituted the toughest gun control laws in our nation, its murder rate increased dramatically during a time when the nation’s overall gun related murder rate decreased by 2%. Washington D.C., the nation’s leader in gun control, became known as the nation’s murder capital. A comparison of states which allow legally concealed guns to states which outlaw concealed carrying of firearms reveals no difference in overall gun-related violence. In 1982, when Kennesaw, Georgia passed a law requiring a firearm in every home, not only did crime not escalate, but violent crime sharply decreased and has remained that way for decades. Indeed, Kennesaw, Georgia claims to have the lowest crime rate of any comparable city its size in the nation. These counterintuitive results are not limited to examples within the United States. Australia boldly banned all semi-automatic firearms, including many rifles and shotguns, in 1997. Indeed, it was a gun grabber’s dream; approximately 640,000 firearms were confiscated and destroyed. This misguided Australian policy resulted in an armed robbery increase of 69%, an assault involving firearms increase of 28%, a gun-related murder increase of 19%, and a home invasion increase of 21%. Violent criminals love gun bans. I realize the proponents of gun control also offer statistics. However, when our most respected, unbiased and professional scientific and research organizations analyze the issue, their conclusions do not support the gun control advocates. In 2004, the National Academy of Sciences reviewed 253 journal articles, 99 books and 43 government publications evaluating 80 gun-control measures. Researchers could not identify a single regulation that reduced violent crime, suicide or accidents. In 2003, the Centers for Disease Control analyzed ammunition bans, restrictions on acquisition of firearms, waiting periods, registration, licensing, child access prevention and zero tolerance laws. After their analysis, the Centers for Disease Control concluded there was no conclusive evidence that any gun control laws reduced gun violence. Foreign researchers have also come to the same conclusion. In Australia in 2008, a peer reviewed study at the University of Sydney reached virtually the same conclusions as both the National Academy of Sciences and the Centers for Disease Control. Gun control measures simply do not reduce gun violence. Although President Obama appears excited about the notion of banning guns, I have not heard him order a ban on the very guns used to protect him. Apparently, when it comes to his protection, President Obama prefers to be protected by people armed with guns. Indeed, I suspect none of these gun ban advocates would hesitate to call 911 and request help from people armed with guns if they were faced with an intruder in their homes in the middle of the night. I fail to understand why we can’t all agree that guns save lives. Our Culture of Violence “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!” Benjamin Franklin Unfortunately, we do have a culture of violence in America. It did not spontaneously arise. It is entirely our fault. There are several contributing factors. The single biggest contributing factor to our culture of violence is that our society no longer adheres to the once basic notion that initiating force against non-aggressors is wrong. We no longer recognize the sovereignty of the individual. Our laws are replete with instances of legal trespass against peaceful people. Rather than living in a democratic republic where most decisions are left to the property owner, we now have an unfettered democracy where anything goes so long as the majority of voters agree. This is not what was intended by the founders of our country, and it has no connection to freedom. Without freedom, there simply is no opportunity for peace. Democracy and freedom are not the same. To some extent, they are incompatible. Freedom requires that the owner retains jurisdiction over his or her own body, time, money and other property. Democracy puts the voting majority in charge of whatever is up for a vote. Said another way, democracy is akin to mob rule. At the infancy of our country, few things were subject to majority vote via democracy. Today, virtually anything and everything can be put to a vote. The jurisdiction of government has far exceeded anything envisioned by our founding fathers. The drug war is a fundamental example of government, or the voting majority, immorally exercising its jurisdiction over the bodies of competent adults. Despite the laws, many competent adults insist on controlling their own bodies. This has dramatically increased the amount of violence and conflict in our society. Indeed, until the drug war ends and we once again start respecting the sovereignty of the individual, there is nothing that can be done to effectively end the culture of violence destroying our society. The good news is that by simply ending the drug war, we can immediately and dramatically reduce the culture of violence. To be sure, few countries have such an intense war on drugs as we have in the United States. Indeed, our drug laws are entirely draconian, and we imprison far more people than any other country in the world. Our spending on the drug war will soon be approaching 100 billion dollars per year. As a result of all this drug war generated violence, we have a very high corresponding rate of gun violence. I have personally represented many clients charged with violent gun related crimes resulting from drug war related issues. Indeed, much of the gun related violence I see, as a criminal defense attorney working in the justice system for the past two decades, stems from the drug war. The United States does not have the highest rate of gun violence in the world. It should not be a surprise that several countries at the forefront of the drug war have an even higher rate of gun related homicide than the United States. The firearm related homicide rate, as a percentage of population, is higher in Mexico, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala and Paraguay. The United States spends millions of dollars ramping up the drug war in these countries. There is no doubt that several other drug war involved countries have even higher firearm related homicide rates than the United States as well. I would be remiss if I failed to point out that these awful homicide rates in other countries persist despite much stricter gun control laws than in the United States. Indeed, Mexico has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world. Its laws effectively prohibit gun ownership. Not only do guns remain widely available in Mexico, but their gun related homicide rate outpaces ours. The same can be said of all these drug war countries. Attempting to blame our culture of violence on the availability of guns is entirely erroneous. Canada has a gun culture similar to the United States. Indeed, their ratio of gun ownership as compared to the United States is roughly equivalent. However, Canada enjoys a firearm related homicide rate dramatically lower than in the United States. It is noteworthy to point out that people who live in countries like Switzerland and Israel have greater access to even fully automatic weapons and have higher rates of gun ownership than in the United States, but enjoy much lower firearm related homicide rates. The number of guns simply isn’t the problem. Our culture of violence is more directly attributable to anti-freedom government policies which diminish and disrespect the rights of the individual. Guns, like other tools, can be used for both good and bad purposes. Demonizing the tool, while piling on more anti-freedom regulations and laws, without getting to the root cause of the violence, is exactly the wrong approach. We will never achieve a more peaceful society until we recognize that competent adults own themselves and the drug war is reduced to an awful historical mistake. How to Stop a Bad Guy with a Gun “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.” Richard Henry Lee Dangerous, violent people should not have guns. Additionally, people should not shoplift. We already have laws against both. Notwithstanding our laws, dangerous, violent people continue to, and always will be able to, obtain guns. Likewise, people continue to shoplift. Regarding the shoplifting problem, major retailers have accepted that shoplifting remains a fact of life and they have endeavored to combat the problem with private security guards, cameras, RFID chips, etc. As I often represent such people accused of shoplifting, I know these rational combative measures against shoplifting are reasonably successful. As a society, we need to accept the reality that bad guys will continue to get guns notwithstanding our laws. We need to devise appropriate, rational and effective measures to combat this foreseeable reality. Well-intentioned and famous Hollywood actors simply saying, “Never Again!” or simply passing more gun regulation laws will not combat the problem. As the tragic shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut proves, the passing of more laws is entirely the wrong approach. Federal law prohibits the presence of guns in schools. It is clear the deranged Mr. Adam Lanza was entirely undeterred by this federal law. Indeed, this law may have encouraged Mr. Lanza to work his horrific violence at the Sandy Hook Elementary School knowing federal law provides that nobody could have the capacity to stop him. One unintended consequence of this federal law has been to create a guaranteed victim zone, comprised of children who are unprotected sitting ducks for any deranged lunatic such as Mr. Lanza. Additionally, Connecticut’s gun control laws also proved to be entirely ineffective. By stealing his mother’s gun, Mr. Lanza exempted himself from any laws regarding background checks, waiting periods, permits, licenses, etc. Neither unarmed security at the front door nor the presence of heroic yet unarmed adults at the school had any chance of stopping Mr. Lanza’s murderous rampage. Even the courageous school principal, who dashed toward Mr. Lanza in a heroic effort to protect her innocent students, had absolutely no chance and was therefore also tragically murdered. There can be no legitimate criticism of the local police. Their trained and armed police officers arrived as quickly as one could reasonably expect upon learning of the tragedy. However, by the time they arrived, the incident was completely over. They were not able to save even one life. The only thing that stopped the deranged Mr. Lanza was the deranged Mr. Lanza himself. One can only wonder how many more lives would have been needlessly taken had Mr. Lanza decided to continue shooting others rather than shoot himself. I wish I could have been there that day with my AR-15 rifle or even my .40 caliber handgun. This story would have had a different ending. What a shame that not even one peaceful, responsible, trained and armed teacher or parent could have been present, when Mr. Lanza arrived, to do the one thing that actually could have avoided this tragedy: shoot him. I can say, with absolute certainty, that one well-placed round from a gun could have saved the lives of everyone at the Sandy Hook Elementary that day. I don’t know if that well-placed round would have been the first shot fired, but I do know at least there would have been a chance to stop Mr. Lanza before he decided to stop himself. As a parent of five children in school, I prefer that my children are no longer unprotected sitting ducks at a federally mandated gun-free zone in school. The only way to stop these types of gun related tragedies is by force. I recognize that some parents feel differently than I do. For reasons I do not understand, they prefer to have their children at school totally unprotected in federally mandated gun-free zones. I respect their rights to have their children at schools which comply with whatever rules they deem appropriate. However, the current state of federal law prohibits parents from choosing schools which could actually protect their children against the horrendous acts of deranged bad guys like Mr. Lanza. Just like at my home, I would prefer to have my kids in schools where responsible adults, with adequate training, have immediate and safe access to firearms. I, like many parents, don’t want my kids to be unprotected sitting ducks while they are at school. I fail to understand why the anti-gun people find it appropriate to thwart my choice as a responsible parent. As I have stated, I respect the rights of the anti-gun parents to send their kids to schools without guns. I have heard their protestations that my plan to have armed people at school would not work. I don’t know why their judgment should be substituted for mine regarding the safety of my kids. Some of those parents claim that armed people at the school could make no difference if such a shooting was to occur. They are entirely wrong. There are many examples of occasions where armed people successfully terminated some deranged person’s gun rampage. Here is a short list of some notable examples compiled by the Libertarian Party: A 1997 high school shooting in Pearl, Mississippi was halted by the school’s vice principal after he retrieved the Colt .45 he kept in his truck. A 1998 middle school shooting ended when a man living next door heard gunfire and apprehended the shooter with his shotgun. A 2002 terrorist attack at an Israeli school was quickly stopped by an armed teacher and a school guard. A 2002 law school shooting in Grundy, Virginia came to an abrupt conclusion when students carrying firearms confronted the shooter. A 2007 mall shooting in Ogden, Utah ended when an armed off-duty police officer intervened. A 2009 workplace shooting in Houston, Texas was halted by two coworkers who carried concealed handguns. A 2012 church shooting in Aurora, Colorado was stopped by a member of the congregation carrying a gun. At the recent mall shooting in Portland, Oregon the gunman took his own life minutes after being confronted by a shopper carrying a concealed weapon. Moreover, the Internet is full of videos documenting peaceful armed people thwarting a violent criminal’s attempt to victimize others. I fail to understand why the anti-gun crowd refuses to acknowledge guns save lives. It is estimated, and there are several scholarly studies to support, that guns are used to prevent crimes between 700,000 and 2.5 million times each year. While I agree there are examples of bad guys doing bad things with guns, we should also agree there are millions of armed good guys who successfully and frequently stop bad guys with guns as well. Three Reasons Americans Have a Right to Own Guns “Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?” Patrick Henry There are three main reasons why Americans, or any free people, should have a right to keep and bear firearms. First, free people have a right to self defense. This is the most basic of all rights. Although government can legitimately act as one’s agent to assist in protecting against another’s aggression, the individual need not delegate or rely upon another person or entity for the exercise of that right. To deny a free and competent adult the right of self defense is to deny such a person their sovereignty. No society can be considered a free society, or even a civilized society, without the basic right to individual defense of one’s self. The second reason for a right to keep and bear arms is to deter possible foreign invasions. I acknowledge we live in a world where mass destruction is an option for many foreign governments. However, history has shown that foreign governments generally like to advance on territory they seek to make their own. As such, a radioactive wasteland is not the preferred trophy of most hostile governments. During World War II, Hitler’s Germany advanced against much of Europe. However, Switzerland, despite its vast gold resources making it an extraordinary prize, was not one of those places advanced upon by Hitler. One rational explanation for this lack of aggression by Hitler was the reasonable conclusion that Switzerland, with its exceptionally high proportion of civilian gun ownership, would have been an unusually difficult target. During the same time period, it is speculated that Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto reached a similar conclusion regarding a possible invasion of the United States. Some have attributed the comment, “You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass” to the Japanese Admiral. Given our high proportion of civilian gun ownership, it also seems a reasonable conclusion. Indeed, it gives me a sense of pride, as I know it does many other veterans and other proud Americans, to know that in the unlikely event our country ever was invaded, we would not need to sit idly by, helpless, to assist in defending our country. Rather, much like the other civilian militia that was so instrumental in assisting to win our independence from King George III, we may also be able to assist in some way. The third reason for a right to keep and bear arms is, as Thomas Jefferson stated, “The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” Citizens have a right to keep and bear arms as a defense against their own government. Further, Mr. Jefferson also stated, “When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty.” The founders of our nation believed people must always preserve their right to resistance and revolution against their own government. “And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms….The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” Thomas Jefferson. The founding fathers of our nation were keenly aware of the potential for governments to ban guns, then curtail liberty, enslave, torture or even murder their own naïve and trusting citizens. One can only wonder what the founding fathers would say had they been aware of the human slaughter suffered in the 20th century by unarmed people at the hands of their own gun grabbing governments. In the 20th century alone, the death toll resulting from governments murdering their own disarmed citizens after guns were legally banned is estimated at 56 million. Our founding fathers knew any government, including ours, has the potential to become tyrannical and even deadly towards its own citizens. I suspect many or even most of those 56 million murdered by their own governments believed their government could always be trusted. Let’s learn from history. “If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” Samuel Adams. As an aside, Marc Victor has agreed to join the faculty for the 2013 Casey Research Summit, being held October 4-6 in Tucson, Arizona. As this will be the only Casey Research summit held this year, we’re going all out to make it spectacular. On that front, next week we’ll have big news on the faculty. Watch your email for more.  Rifles don’t “assault” people. People assault people. Calling the AR-15 an “assault” rifle is inflammatory. I have been known to sometimes choose inflammatory titles for my articles. Like any other weapon, the AR-15 should be used solely for defensive purposes. I suspect the vast majority of people who own them, intend to use them only defensively.  See Star Trek.  I realize there are some things I could own which, by their very nature, cannot be owned by me in a community without posing a substantial risk of harm to others. Reasonable people can disagree about what things truly and honestly fit into this category.  See http://cameroneconomics.com/Books/unintendedconsequences.pdf  See http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa157.pdf  See the Laffer curve. Higher taxes inhibit economic growth and encourage people to conduct business in the black market. I am never in favor of higher taxes, and I always favor less revenue for the government.  For a short video on this point, see http://www.cato.org/multimedia/cato-video/government-spending-doesnt-create-jobs  See http://gunowners.org/sk0601.htm for an interesting but informal investigation into the efficacy of Washington D.C.’s gun control efforts.  Kennesaw City officials claim an 89% drop in the overall crime rate.  We have too many absentee parents. A cradle-to-grave government does not replace a set of involved parents. Our society is too desensitized to violence and wars and not interested enough in fostering peace. We have strayed from the old-school values of hard work, individual responsibility, honesty, integrity, discipline, tolerance, patience and respect. The government can’t fix this problem.  I refer to “property” in its most general sense to include one’s body, money, possessions and time.  For one example that occurred on July 13, 2012, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpBXkvigads I enjoyed watching how fast the two armed bad guys scrambled to leave when the senior citizen with the handgun emerged to protect everyone present. I bet the other people were glad this peaceful and heroic man thought to bring his loaded firearm. We can only wonder what tragedy was avoided that day.  See Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control, New York: Prometheus Books (2001) Kleck and Kates.  There is some controversy regarding the legitimacy of this quotation. However, the fact remains that a high proportion of civilian gun ownership may have discouraged the Japanese and would certainly act as a deterrent to any potential invading force.  The Soviets murdered 20 million from 1929-1953; the Chinese murdered 20 million from 1948-1952; the Germans murdered 13 million from 1939-1945; the Turkish murdered 1.5 million from 1915-1915.
In This Issue. * Another flower counted on the wall. * Moves in currencies & Metals are small. * RBA minutes solidify no rate move in 2014. * SNB to keep cap on franc for 2 more years? And Now. Today’s A Pfennig For Your Thoughts. U.K. Inflation drops, Along With Sterling!. Good Day! . And a Tom Terrific Tuesday to you! A nice 10th inning win for my beloved Cardinals, even if they blew the lead in the 9th inning.. UGH! Of course, I was not up at that hour to see it, but the replay will be on while I eat my lunch today, so I’ll see it then, and know not to start throwing things around the room when the lead gets blown in the 9th! Well, the Mo. Gov. called in the National Guard in an effort to protect the businesses and citizens of Ferguson, Mo, only to be met with more violence last night. So. How was your day yesterday? Mine was good, that is after I slept through almost half of it! The currencies and metals remained stuck in the mud, as they slept through the entire day! This morning, it appears that we have more of the same-o, same-o, with a mixed bag-o-results, but none of the moves are large. Yesterday, I referred to watching the currencies as being like counting flowers on the wall, that don’t bother me at all, playing solitaire till dawn with a deck of 51. I don’t think I can come up with anything else that reminds me of this trading pattern, day, after day here in the middle of August, the Dog Days of Summer. Yesterday, I kidded about how the markets must be getting all gussied up for today’s July print of CPI (consumer inflation). You know I’m being facetious here, because what in the world would anyone find in the CPI print? Nothing, absolutely nothing! The experts are thinking that CPI in July rose .1%… But, I’m going to go out a big fat limb here and say it will be .2% HAHAHAHAHA! Now, that’s really being bold, Chuck! The BLS is not going to show “real inflation” folks. just get used to it. Instead, go to www.shadowstats.com to see what the “real inflation” rate is. And while you’re there, I’m sure John Williams wouldn’t mind if you subscribed to his information, that is critical if you really want to know the “truth”. And like my old fave TV show, The X-Files, used to say. The Truth Is Out There. The problem with most of us in the U.S. is that we don’t care! We don’t care if the BLS makes up the CPI number to keep rates down, so housing can continue to be affordable. We don’t care if the U.S. National Debt is now $17, 657,260,800,000 (it changes by the minute, so by the time I finish this letter we will be 10 Billion or more higher) We don’t care that the Unfunded liabilities, according to Professor Lawrence Kotlikoff are now greater than $200, 000,000,000,000 (for those of you not wanting to count the zeroes, that’s $200 Trillion, with a Capital “T”!) It just doesn’t register with most Americans, so therefore they don’t care. But when they go to the store and see that their dollars don’t buy as much as they used to, they think, “It’s those darn greedy Corporations gouging us” But the truth is that it’s their Gov’t that has caused a weak dollar, which causes a loss of purchasing power with their deficit spending. I have no idea I was going there today, but there you have it. The story of the dollar in one lesson by Chuck Butler. Oh, there are other chapters to this book, but in the end it all comes down to debt. I was re-reading, (probably for the 3rd or 4th time now) Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt this past weekend and yesterday, and Henry highlights something that I’ve highlighted before and that is, that it has become trendy to call debt, “credit”. Like when they talk about Consumer Credit rising, it’s really debt rising. But it sure sounds better to say “credit” than “debt”. Easy on the ears, right? For those of you who promise to put away the sharp objects first, and want to see more “real numbers”, you can visit the U.S. Debt Clock here: http://www.usdebtclock.org/index.html The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) printed their meeting minutes last night, and there was nothing new for the markets to see and if anything solidified the markets’ thought that the RBA is on hold with interest rates the rest of this year. And one would think that hearing that, the Aussie dollar (A$) would sink. But, as I’ve explained for many years now, with currencies, the “unknown” is more risky to currencies than knowing what to expect. And so the A$ has pushed higher overnight, although, like I said at above, the move is small. This morning, we saw the U.K. July CPI, printed considerably lower than expected at 1.6% VS 1.8% expected. This drop in consumer inflation flashed “no rate hike” in bright lights to the markets (sometimes they need bright lights to catch their attention!) and the pound sterling got sold. The downward move in pound sterling is probably the largest move in the currencies this morning with pound sterling down 3/4’s of a cent. I don’t like being right about things like the pound sterling, as it rose earlier this year, and everyone thought it would just keep going. But I kept telling you that I couldn’t get my arms around the pound’s rise, mainly because of what I knew what Bank of England Gov. Carney was doing, and two.. The U.K. still had a mountain of debt to deal with. The Charts people say that pound sterling is oversold, and it will bounce back. You know, the routine. The pound loses 1% this month, and 3.2% since 7/15, bringing it below its 200-day moving avg. (DMA) and therefore it is set to rise. But if the pound does bounce back, ever so briefly, it will more of a direct result of the markets getting snookered again. You see, the Sunday Times had an article where Carney mentioned that interest could be lifted before Officials see a recovery in wages.. Memo to markets, don’t take that bait, it stinks! In New Zealand overnight, a drop in dairy prices pushed the N.Z. dollar / kiwi down overnight. Remember what I always tell you about New Zealand’s commodities: Dairy, Wool, and Lumber, so when of the triumvirate has some problems, kiwi gets sent to the woodshed. Given the markets’ reaction to the drop in dairy prices, one would think that today’s Global Dairy Trade Price Index would be a key report to watch. There was also some political furniture rearranging going on in N.Z. overnight. An official report downgraded GDP, and growth forecasts. But this is not the end all here, and probably had more to do with the fact that the N.Z. elections are only a month away. The N.Z. Treasury saw fit to counter this report and say that, “the outlook for the N.Z. economy has not changed significantly in the relatively short time since the Budget Update.” Recall the Budget Update was in June, and looked favorably toward growth. So, some “point-counter point” discussions going on in N.Z. The markets aren’t sure who to believe, and this puts the whole discussion in the “unknown” territory, which as I just explained is not good for the currency. It appears to me that this is an opportunity to buy at cheaper levels here, and pick up an interest rate differential. I’m just saying. There was news from Russian overnight that didn’t concern Ukraine! The Russian Central Bank (RCB) widened the trading band that the ruble trades in, that has existed for the last 15 years! The naysayers to the ruble will point to this and say, “What the heck is she thinking here? The ruble is the 2nd worst performing currency this year, and now she’s (RCB Gov. Elvira Nabiullina) going to take away the Governor? Yes, she is. But I like this! Let the currency be valued by the markets, not a Central Bank! The Swiss franc is weaker today. I did cause a couple of heart attacks yesterday with my reporting of the franc’s price in the currency roundup. Sorry about that! My fat fingers typed the franc price as $1.0160. When it should have been $1.1060! Nothing like a 10% drop to start your day, eh? The franc’s weakness today is coming from a weaker euro, but also from a recent Bloomberg survey that showed three quarters of the 23 economists surveyed saying that the Swiss National Bank (SNB) will keep the floor VS the euro in place for another two years. The floor, basically puts a cap on how strong the franc can get VS the euro. 1.20 was the level the SNB placed on the franc a couple of years ago now, and at that time there was talk that the SNB wanted to move the level to 1.35, thus causing a depreciation in the franc, like they did when they placed the 1.20 level. At least that “talk” has diminished for now. The Japanese yen continues to trade around 102.50.. On any given day it might be a bit stronger, or a bit weaker, but nothing to speak of in the way of movement. Even when the “safe havens” get bought, yen rises, but not like it used to. My friend, and writer / publisher extraordinaire, Bill Bonner said a couple of things about Japan yesterday that I thought you should hear, but should you want to read Bill every day, go to: http://bonnerandpartners.com/category/parent/dre/ and you can subscribe! “We are amazed because we have seen the international test results. On IQ tests, the Japanese score 10 points higher than the world average. And yet there they are… doing the stupidest things we can imagine. We are grateful, because Japan has been leading the world in economic absurdity – bubbles in stocks and real estate… bailouts… ZIRP… and QE. And there is no economic policy so ridiculous that US policymakers won’t give it a whirl. Whither thou goest, O, Nippon, we’re right behind you.” Chuck again. Yes, like I’ve said for more than 10 years now. I think I’m turning Japanese, yes, I really think so! So, the U.S. Data Cupboard has the stupid CPI for July print today.. But more importantly will be the Housing Starts and Building Permits for July.. No bad weather, so these two should be show that they were better than in June. And Gold is up a couple of bucks this morning, again, no movement worth talking about. So I won’t spend a whole lot of time here, besides, I’ve got a real treat for you in the FWIW section today, that’s on Gold.. Palladium got to a multi-year high yesterday, and could almost reach out and touch $900 before it fell back on the day. Today, it’s up $3, and still within spittin’ distance of $900 at $896.. For What It’s Worth. Every two weeks I tell you how my latest “Things that make you go Hmmmm” is in my email box, and that I’m excited to get to read it, for the writer, Grant Williams is one of the best writers and minds in the markets today. Well, I found an interview with Grant Williams on kingworld.com so, I thought I would let you see what I’m talking about! Here are some snippets of the interview. Hope you like it! “The German gold repatriation situation has been fascinating from Day 1 and continues to be. I think the motives behind making that announcement have probably been overtaken by events. From the moment Hugo Chavez repatriated the Venezuelan gold, I said this is the start of a game of musical chairs that is going to end very, very badly…. I think the Germans felt as though they had to say something about repatriating their gold, and we’ve seen a bunch of other countries in much smaller amounts do this as well. I think the Bundesbank felt that with the focus the Germans have on monetary prudence, they felt they had to say something. So they made the statement that they were going to get a portion of their gold back from the United States. But since that time their repatriation has been overrun by a series of events, especially the fact that the gold that is supposed to be on deposit in the United States just isn’t there. It’s not in the U.S. vaults because it’s gone. So now there is this attempt to put the genie back in the bottle. Well, it’s one thing to attempt to put the genie back in the bottle, but it’s another thing to do that. So they have resorted to Play No. 1 of central banks, which is just to be quiet about the situation. But there are now too many guys looking at this German situation and the announcement that they have gotten back only 5 tons of gold has left them with egg all over their faces. But the problem the United States has is that with the gold the central banks and the agent bullion banks who have leased out that gold over the years, they all have a vested interest in not scaring foreign holders of gold that is supposed to be safely stored in the United States. So if we do get to the point where gold can’t be delivered, as long as everybody keeps quiet about it, maybe nobody will panic. But ultimately entities who are not in the ‘club’ will want their gold back and they are going to start making some noise about it. At that point they will have to find the gold somewhere. And if all that gold is in places where it’s tightly held, it will be an interesting situation to play out.” – Grant Williams Chuck again. I think it would behoove everyone to hear out a guy like Grant Williams, and although he doesn’t say it here, he obviously believes that buying physical Gold is the thing to do. not paper Gold. physical Gold. Again, that’s his opinion, and mine and we both could be wrong! To recap. Another day, another flower counted on the wall, as the currencies are once again stuck in the mud trading mixed and in small moves. RBA meeting minutes solidified the thought that rates are not moving anywhere this year. N.Z. dairy prices moved downward, and other things led to kiwi dropping on the night. The SNB will keep the floor to the euro in place for another two years according to a Bloomberg survey, and Palladium remains within spittin’ distance of $900. Currencies today 8/19/14. American Style: A$ .9340, kiwi .8460, C$ .9170, euro 1.3350, sterling 1.6640, Swiss $1.1030, . European Style: rand 10.6195, krone 6.1380, SEK 6.8540, forint 234.80, zloty 3.1390, koruna 20.9785, RUB 36.19, yen 102.70, sing 1.2450, HKD 7.7505, INR 60.68, China 6.1548, pesos 13.05, BRL 2.2565, Dollar Index 81.69, Oil $96.64, 10-year 2.37%, Silver $19.71, Platinum $1,448.13, Palladium $895.83, and Gold.. $1,302.08 That’s it for today. You know, I learned a long time ago, that when you are writing, and giving your opinions, which I used to be able to do more freely, you’re not going to make everyone happy. And I understand that. You should too, before you send off responses to me that are not nice. Neil Young is playing his song: The Needle and the Damage Done on the IPod this morning. I used to play that song on my guitar and sing it for people. I saw my fave guitar leaning up against the wall yesterday, and for a second I thought I would get it out and play it, and then the thought passed. If you’re an Oxford Club member, you should look into going to their meeting at Sea Island GA next month, for I’ll be there to speak! My beloved Cardinals have an opportunity to bury the Reds for this year in the next two games. I sure hope they can do it! Well, tomorrow will be my little girl’s birthday. I won’t spill the beans on how old she will be, I’ll just say when I say how old she is, it makes me feel really OLD! And with that I’ll get out of your hair for today. Go out and make this a Tom Terrific Tuesday! — Please! Chuck Butler President EverBank World Markets
Europe’s banking system is collapsing. Over the past year, shares of Deutsche Bank (DB), Germany’s biggest bank, have plunged 56%. Swiss banking giant Credit Suisse (CS) is down 62% over the same period. Yesterday, both stocks hit record lows. Dozens of other European bank stocks have also crashed. The Euro STOXX Banks, which tracks 48 of Europe’s largest banks, is down 48% over the past year. This is a major issue… That’s because banks are the cornerstone of the financial system. They keep money flowing through the economy. If they’re struggling, it often means the economy is having major problems. Right now, European banks are flashing bright warning signs. That’s not just bad news for Europe—it’s also a serious threat to the rest of the world. In today’s Dispatch, we’ll show you why Europe’s banking crisis could turn into a global banking crisis. You’ll also learn how to transform this threat into a chance to make big gains. • European banks are struggling to make money… Spanish banking giant BBVA’s (BBVA) profits fell 54% last quarter. First-quarter profits at Deutsche Bank were down 58%. Swiss bank UBS’s (UBS) profits plunged 64%. European banks are hurting for a couple reasons. One, Europe is growing at the slowest pace in decades. Banks are making fewer loans as a result. Two, negative interest rates are eating European banks alive. If you’ve been reading the Dispatch, you know negative rates are the latest radical government policy. They basically flip your bank account upside down. Instead of earning interest for keeping money in the bank, you pay the bank to hold your money. Negative rates are clearly bad for savers. They’re also hurting Europe’s biggest banks. That’s because these huge institutions have to pay their “bank,” the European Central Bank (ECB). Today, European banks pay £4 for every £1,000 they store at the ECB for a year. That might not sound like a lot. But it adds up quick when you manage trillions of euros like these banks do. • Last week, investors got another reason to avoid European banks… On Thursday, Great Britain voted to leave the European Union (EU), which it’s been in since 1973. The “Brexit,” as the media is calling it, blindsided investors. As we explained yesterday, the market was expecting Great Britain to stay in EU. The unexpected outcome triggered a global stock market crash. U.S. stocks had their worst day since August. Japanese stocks had their worst day in five years. European stocks had their biggest decline since the 2008 financial crisis. Friday’s global selloff erased $2.1 trillion in value from global stocks. It was the global stock market’s worst day in history. The panic didn’t die down much over the weekend. By the end of Monday, another $930 billion had disappeared from the global stock market. • European bank stocks were hit the hardest… Deutsche Bank plunged 22% between Friday and Monday. Credit Suisse fell 23%. UBS fell 20%. Barclays (BCS) and Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) each plunged 37%. Both stocks are down more than 57% over the past year. These are gigantic moves in a matter of days. Remember, we’re not talking about small biotech stocks. These are some of the most important financial institutions on the planet. • Government officials are scrambling to contain the crisis… Today, the Bank of England (BoE) injected £3.1 billion into Britain’s banking system. It’s pledged to inject as much as £250 billion to stabilize its financial system. The BoE made its cash injection hours after the Bank of Japan (BOJ) pumped $1.5 billion into its banking system. As we’ll show you in a second, we don’t believe this will end well. That’s because this excessive money printing (sometimes called “quantitative easing”) doesn’t stimulate the economy like governments intend it to. Credit Suisse says other central banks could soon print more money too. Bloomberg Business reported on Friday: “Market liquidity and overall liquidity in the U.K. is drying up as we speak in a very rapid way,” said John Woods, chief investment officer for Asia-Pacific at Credit Suisse Private Banking, told Bloomberg TV in Hong Kong. “It’s highly likely that we see monetary easing in a coordinated response” from central banks across the world, he said. • Great Britain is headed for a recession… A recession is when an economy shrinks two quarters in a row. Goldman Sachs (GS) says Britain could be in a recession by early 2017. But here’s the thing. We don’t think the BoE will let this happen. That’s because central bankers will do anything—including using reckless, unproven monetary policies—to avoid a recession these days. Credit rating agency Standard & Poor’s agrees with us. Reuters reported today: “Brexit is likely to represent a drag of about 1.2 percent of GDP for the UK in 2017,” Jean-Michel Six, S&P’s chief economist for Europe, the Middle East and Africa told a conference call for investors on Tuesday. “We have a significant slowdown but growth remains positive although obviously in a much more disappointing way. That is because we anticipate a very strong monetary response on the part of the Bank of England, in the form of additional quantitative easing, in the form of a further cut in interest rates,” he added. Bank of America (BAC) and Deutsche Bank also expect the BoE to fire up the printing press again. Bank of America says it could happen as soon as August. • QE won’t help Great Britain’s economy… As we told you above, QE doesn’t work. As regular readers know, the Federal Reserve pumped $3.5 trillion into the U.S financial system after the 2008 financial crisis. This massive money printing effort was supposed to juice the economy. But the U.S. is growing at its slowest pace since World War II. QE also failed to jumpstart Japan’s economy, which hasn’t grown in two decades. There’s no reason to think it will work this time. Regards, Justin Spittler Delray Beach, Florida June 28, 2016 We want to hear from you. If you have a question or comment, please send it to email@example.com. We read every email that comes in, and we’ll publish comments, questions, and answers that we think other readers will find useful. • If you’re nervous about the global financial system, we encourage you to take action today… The first thing you should do is own physical gold. Gold is real money. It’s held its value for thousands of years because it has a unique set of attributes: It’s easy to transport, easily divisible, and durable. You can take a gold coin anywhere in the world and folks will immediately recognize its value. Unlike paper money, central bankers cannot create gold from nothing. It’s the ultimate antidote to crumbling paper currencies. That’s why the price of gold often soars when governments print money. This year, gold is up 24%. It’s trading at the highest price in two years. But it could go much higher as governments continue to run reckless monetary experiments. • If you want big profits from rising gold prices, own gold stocks… Dispatch readers know gold miners are leveraged to the price of gold. A small jump in the price of gold can cause gold stocks to surge. Gold’s 24% jump this year has caused GDX, a fund that tracks large gold stocks, to soar 96%. We believe this gold stock rally is just getting started… During the 2000 and 2003 gold bull market, the average gold stock gained 602%. The best ones soared 1,000% or more. • Nick Giambruno, editor of Crisis Investing, has recommended two gold stocks since the start of 2015… He already closed out one of them for a quick double. It surged 103% in 14 months. Nick’s other gold stock is up 30% since March and is still dirt-cheap at today’s levels. Nick currently rates this stock a “Buy”…and says it could soon start paying a double-digit dividend yield if gold keeps rising. You can learn more about Nick’s gold stock by taking advantage of our special 60%-off sale for Crisis Investing. If you sign up today, you’ll be enrolled in a trial membership, which gives you 90 days risk-free to decide if the service is for you. But we encourage you to act soon. This special offer ends soon, and we likely won’t open this offer again for a long time. You can learn more about this incredible offer by watching this video presentation. You’ll also learn about an even bigger threat to your wealth than Europe’s banking crisis. As you’ll see, almost no one is talking about this coming crisis. Yet, it could cause millions of Americans to lose their entire life savings. By the end of this video, you’ll know how to protect yourself. And just as importantly, you’ll know how to profit from this coming crisis. Click here to watch this free video. Chart of the Day U.S. bank stocks are also headed lower. Today’s chart shows the performance of the Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) over the past year. XLF holds 94 major U.S. financial companies including behemoths JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Wells Fargo (WFC), and Bank of America (BAC). You can see XLF is down 11% since last June. While that’s not as severe as the near-50% drop in European banks over the same period, it’s still a clear sign to stay away. U.S. banks have many of the same problems as European banks. Like Europe, the U.S. economy is growing at the slowest pace in decades. And while the U.S. economy doesn’t have negative rates yet, Fed Chair Janet Yellen has said they aren’t “off the table” if the U.S. economy runs into trouble. The arrival of negative rates to the U.S. could tip bank stocks into a crisis, just like they have in Europe. Prediction: Next Huge Financial Disaster for America 22-year Congressman explains a huge problem few Americans know about—and how you should prepare. FULL STORY… Recommended Links — [Video Tutorial] How Doug Casey Turned $1,875 Into $1.2 Million, With One Bold Move Back in ’93, Doug Casey took a $1,875 stake of money, then made one bold move. Exactly two and a half years later, his stake was worth $1.2 million. A rare and extraordinary 64,000% return. Click here to see how he did it. –
Nearly All Small Businesses Claim to Protect Their App Users’ Data, but Most Fail to Meet Adequate Security Standards Such as Requiring Strong Passwords or Encrypting Data. the Majority of Small Businesses (84%) Invest in Social Media or Messaging Features for Their Mobile Apps, While One-Third (33%) Invest in AI FeaturesThe majority of small businesses (98%) claim to protect their app users’ data, but most companies do not implement the basic measures required for online security.Less than half of small businesses (41%) require a strong user password for their mobile app, while only 40% of small businesses encrypt their user data or implement two-factor authentication. These actions leave users’ data vulnerable.This data comes from a survey published by Clutch, the leading B2B ratings and reviews company. The report analyzes the app features and security measures developers prioritize in 2019.Features such as encryption are vital to mobile app security.“It’s very important to protect your app code with encryption; you want the code to be hard to read and secret,” said Clare Bittourna, a marketing designer at Codal, a mobile app development company based in Chicago.Marketing Technology News: SetSail Introduces Machine Learning-Powered Incentives to Enhance Sales Behavior and Accelerate PerformanceSmall Businesses Prioritize Social Media and Messaging Integration in Mobile AppsSmall businesses prioritize mobile app features that encourage community engagement. Nearly all small businesses (84%) use social media integration or messaging features.Broken down, almost half of small businesses (44%) incorporate social media into their mobile apps while 40% use messaging features.“Businesses prefer to integrate…social sharing because it motivates new users to download the app and use it,” said Joana Kelly, chief operating officer of Small Planet, a mobile app design and development company.Small businesses can easily integrate social media into their app using a software development kit (SDK), which streamlines users’ login process. By incorporating an SDK, small businesses allow people to use their mobile app by simply connecting to their social media account.Marketing Technology News: IAB Tech Lab Announces Two New Technologies to Build More Transparency & Trust in the Programmatic Supply ChainSmall Businesses Recognize Value of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for Mobile AppsSmall businesses invest in AI and augmented reality (AR) to create more personalized and automated services for their mobile apps.One-third of small businesses (33%) integrate AI into their mobile apps. Small businesses can use AI to analyze data and personalize users’ experiences.AI powers machine learning, which allows applications to learn and grow as users interact with them. “[Machine learning] always leads to better and stickier experiences for our customers, which is the name of the game at the end of the day,” said Dary Merckens, chief operating officer of Gunner Tech.Approximately the same number of small businesses (30%) incorporate AR in their mobile apps.AR features can increase an app’s marketing capabilities. For example, the IKEA Place app allows user to see how a product would look in their own home before purchasing it.Clutch’s 2019 Small Business Mobile App Survey included 529 small businesses across the USMarketing Technology News: Claritas Unveils Next-Generation Consumer Segmentation Tool for the Financial Services Industry: P$YCLE Premier AIAugmented RealityClutchMarketing TechnologyMobile App DevelopmentNewsSoftware Development Kit Previous ArticleTrustpilot Partners with Promo.com to Integrate Customer Reviews Into VideosNext ArticleUrban Airship Streamlines Name And Unveils New Brand To Reflect Dramatic Growth Of Its Customer Engagement Solutions 98% of Small Businesses Claim to Protect App Users’ Data, But Most Lack Significant Security Measures PRNewswireApril 17, 2019, 8:58 pmApril 17, 2019