Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (160364)	7/20/2020 5:07:27 PM
From: TobagoJack	1 Recommendation Recommended By Secret_Agent_Man Respond to of 219831

Earlier in the afternoon went to the coin shop and bought some commemorative gold coins featuring Mandela, and a single 1985-vintage proof gold Krugerrand coin. Accounted for 50% of the stuff the Reserve Bank’s retain shop had in shop. I had to order 2020 Krugerrands on-line from HK distributor. None are available in S Africa (Reserve Bank has a dozen retail shops, and no new coin stock, everything on back-order). No idea when the coins would be available. I wanted the Krugerrands for the kids to remember 2020 by. Busy night, this night, besides watching Star Trek in the background did below, essentially ... Am convinced TSLA shall crater, but am agnostic on when the cratering shall happen, whether due to market-wide action or TSLA-specifics. In the meantime am good to, and am short / long / short / long / ... TSLA, and I hope TSLA stays healthy for as long as possible. Am also convicted that gold shall rise, and with gold’s rise, DRD shall do okay. This day went long as well as short TSLA, by shorting puts and shorting calls, was net net profitable and progressively closed positions, and ended up long TSLA until tomorrow, but by shorted puts, two series, both expiring before the end of July Also went long as well as short on Nikola, long HMY, added to DRD by buying DRD as well as shorting DRD puts ...

To: carranza2 who wrote (160364)	7/20/2020 9:49:29 PM
From: arun gera	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 219831

<Makes me think disgruntled lawyer probably was indeed off the rails> Certainly had wierd agendas for a while. And a Russia connection? Otherwise, the resume seems reasonable. roydenhollander.com RESUME Anti-Feminist litigation, investigations, and advice on general corporate matters. M.B.A. Columbia University Business School with Honors, J.D. George Washington University Law School with High Honors. WORK EXPERIENCE Attorney and Business Consultant, New York, N.Y., 2000-Present Litigate civil cases, including men's rights, immigration fraud, insurance subrogation, and RICO. Advise businesses on corporate governance, contracts and litigation. Kroll Associates Russia, Moscow, Russia, 1999-2000 Managed and upgraded Kroll’s delivery of intelligence and security in the former Soviet Union. Attorney, New York, N.Y., Russia, Ecuador, 1990-1999 Counseled companies, individuals, and nonprofit organizations in America, Russia, and Ecuador on legal and business issues, including international financing and marketing. Cravath, Swaine & Moore, New York, N.Y., 1986-1989 As an associate wrote briefs, took and defended depositions, and prepared expert witnesses in a variety of Fortune 500 company cases. U.S. Department of the Treasury-Honors Program, Washington, D.C., 1985-1986 Attorney in the Office of Chief Counsel of the Internal Revenue Service: Interpretative Division. WABC TV News, New York, N.Y., 1980-1981 Political Producer, Writer, and Assignment Editor. EDUCATION Columbia Business School, New York, N.Y., 1995-1997 MBA 1997. Coursework focused on Finance. Beta Gamma Sigma Honor Society. George Washington University Law School, 1983-1985 J.D. 1985. Order of the Coif Honor Society. Brooklyn Law School, 1981-1983 Moot Court Honor Society. American Jurisprudence Awards in Property, Torts, and Criminal. BAR ADMISSIONS New York State Supreme Court-First Department No. 2168805, U.S. District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of N.Y., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court. (Complete Resume) OTHER Published: Business World Weekly 'A Fair Market Is Not a Free-For-All Market', June 9, 1992, 'Doing Business with Americans', September 22, 1992, 'More Nomenklatura Privatization', November 17, 1992, 'A Fairer Form of Privatization', December 8, 1992, 'The Need for a Constitutional Convention', April 23, 1993. Law Gazette 'To Each According To His Ambition', No. 7-8 (120-121), 1994, 'Russians Caught By the Throat', No. 25-26 (138-139), 1994, ' What It Was?', No. 35 (148), 1994. Papers Presented: 'Key Regulations for a Fair Economy', May 18-24, 1992, Intertraining’s Second International Forum on the Economy of Russia, 'A More Effective Privatization', November 16-20, 1992, Intertraining’s International Congress on Privatization and Finance, 5.24.93.pdf]'The Problems with Foreign Assistance', May 24-29, 1993, Intertraining’s Third International Forum on the Economy of Russia (paper also published by the Russian Academy of Sciences). Media Coverage: 2017 Feb. 9, 2017 Femmes, je vous hais, Zoe DeBussierre, France TV 2 2014 June 18, 2014 Men's rights campaigner Roy Den Hollander attacks The Advertiser's Tory Shepherd in bizarre legal writ filed in New York County, Tory Shepherd, The Advertiser Jan. 16, 2014 Male studies course ‘not endorsed’ by the University of South Australia, Bridget Conway, lipmag.com Jan. 15, 2014 Anti-feminist lawyer sparks furore over male studies course, Andrew Trounson, The Australian Jan. 14, 2914 Pathetic bid for victimhood by portraying women as villains, Tory Shepherd, The Advertiser Jan. 14, 2014 University of South Australia gives controversial Male Studies course the snip, Tory Shepherd, Herald Sun Jan. 14, 2014 University of South Australia distances itself from males studies proposals, Amy McNeilage, Sydney Morning Herald Jan. 12, 2014 Lecturers in world-first male studies course at University of South Australia under scrutiny, Tory Shepherd, The Advertiser 2013 Nov. 25, 2013 MTA, N.Y. Post Aug. 2, 2013 Amnesia, Daily News, Steve Brown Curtis Sliwa Show, New York AM 970 Gil & Rota Gross, Talk 910, San Francisco 2011 April 2, 2011 The Times, Tim Teeman Mar. 31, 2011 The Colbert Report, Comedy Central, If you can make them laugh at you, they won't expect something serious. Jan. 14, 2011 One Man's Losing Fight Against Ladies' Nights, New York Times 2010 Oct. 15, 2010 Ladies’ Nights, Hungarian Radio Sept. 10, 2010 Ladies' Nights, John Brown's Mindset, KTRS-AM, St. Louis Sept. 3, 2010 Ladies' Nights, Part 1, Part 2, Alan Colmes Radio Show Sept. 3, 2010 Ladies' Nights, The Daily Rundown, MSNBC, Savannah Guthrie Sept. 3, 2010 Ladies' Nights, Jamie Allman Show, KFTK-FM, St. Louis Sept. 3, 2010 Men's Rights Advocate, Will Not Stop Fighting Against Ladies' Nights, Village Voice Sept. 3, 2010 Ladies’ Nights, The Apple, Curtis Sliwa, WNYM-AM Sept. 3, 2010 Ladies’ Nights, Agence France-Presse New York Sept. 2, 2010 Ladies’ Nights, The Morning Mix, Hot AC, WMYX-FM, Milwaukee Sept. 1, 2010 Ladies Nights aren't sexist to men, N.Y. Daily News Sept. 1, 2010 Ladies' Night is legal: fed judges, N.Y. Post Sept. 1, 2010 Ladies’ Nights, Lawyer Wants To Take Ladies' Nights to Supreme Court DNAinfo.com Aug. 28-29, 2010 Alvin Ailey N.Y. Hip Hop Dance, Kat Wildish Showcase: Drama, OMG Videos! July 28, 2010 Minnesota Ladies' Nights Illegal, Fox and Friends, Gretchen Carlson July 3, 2010 VAWA, Part 1, Part 2, Eagle Forum Radio, St. Louis June 15, 2010 VAWA, The Morning Zone, Dave Chaffin, KGAB-AM, Cheyenne, WO June 11, 2010 Minnesota Ladies’ Nights, Star Tribune June 9, 2010 Minnesota Ladies’ Nights, Minnesota Daily June 8, 2010 VAWA, Christopher Sanders Show, KFKA-AM, Greeley, Colorado May 26, 2010 VAWA, Chuck Wilder Show, KSPA-AM, Orange County, California at 1:58 min. May 24, 2010 VAWA, Larry Whitler Show, WOCA-AM, Gainesville, Florida May 24, 2010 VAWA, Reill Truth, Howard Reill, KHNC-AM, Las Vegas at 49:00 min. May 20, 2010 VAWA, Andy Caldwell Show, KUHL/KSMA, Lompoc, California May 18, 2010 VAWA, Kevin Doran Show, WLEA-AM, Hornell, N.Y. May 17, 2010 VAWA, William Bence Show, WCRA-AM, Effingham, Illinois May 16, 2010 VAWA, Don Russell Show, WBT-AM, Charlotte, N.C. May 14, 2010 VAWA, KFOR-AM News, Lincoln, Nebraska at 22:25 min. April 21, 2010 Lawsuit against CU women's studies dept. dismissed, Columbia Spectator 2009 Nov. 28-29, 2009 Alvin Ailey N.Y. Hip-Hop Dance, Kat Wildish Showcase: Trust A Try, Trust A Try Close UP, Give It To You July 15, 2009 N.J. Ladies' Nights, Alan Colmes Radio Show July 10, 2009 Fighting the Discrimination of Men, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Men's Net TV Show Apr. 27, 2009 Court Rejects Men's Studies Lawsuit, New York Times, City Room Feb. 13, 2009 VAWA YouTube Roberto Regalado, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5 2008 Oct. 26, 2008 Women’s Studies, “Motion Filed to Dismiss Hollander Suit,” Columbia Spectator Oct. 25, 2008 Women’s Studies, “Columbia blasts hostile lawyer,” Daily News Sept. 30, 2008 Ladies' Nights decision, Tom Leykis Radio Show, Los Angeles Sept. 30, 2008 Ladies’ Nights, Emory and Henry College Va. Radio WEHC, fast forward to 28 minutes Sept. 30, 2008 “Ladies Night OKd by judge,” Daily News Sept. 29, 2008 “Judge to anti-feminist: Ladies' night alright,” AP Aug. 28, 2008 Columbia University Speech, sponsored by Women in Science, Part 1, Part 2 Aug. 23, 2008 Roy Den Hollander's war on feminism, Los Angeles Times, Meghan Dunn Aug. 22, 2008 Middle-Aged White Guy Sues Columbia for Discrimination, Ivy Gate, Maureen O'Connor Aug. 22, 2008 Women's Studies lawsuit, Mancow Radio Show Aug. 21, 2008 Women's Studies lawsuit, Ireland's National Independent Talk Radio - NewsTalk Aug. 20, 2008 Columbia University Women's Studies lawsuit, Your World with Neil Cavuto, Fox News Aug. 20, 2008 Women's Studies lawsuit, Big John and Cisco, WIND Chicago Aug. 20, 2008 Women's Studies lawsuit, Brian and the Judge, Fox News Radio Aug. 19, 2008 “Suit: Columbia Discriminates Against Men,” The New York Sun Aug. 19, 2008 “Lawyer Roy Den Hollander plans ‘jihad’ against university feminism” The Times of London Aug. 19, 2008 “Columbia "bigoted" vs. men: suit,” N.Y. Post Aug. 19, 2008 Women’s Studies lawsuit, WCBS-AM News Aug. 18, 2008 Women Studies lawsuit, Tom Leykis Show, Los Angeles Aug. 18, 2008 "Feminist Columbia demonizes men-lawsuit,” Daily News Aug. 18, 2008 “Anti-Feminist Lawyer Sues Columbia Over Women's Studies,” Wall Street Journal, Law Blog Aug. 18, 2008 “Lawyer Files Antifeminist Suit Against Columbia,” New York Times April 3, 2008 Ladies' Nights and the VAWA lawsuits, starts at 14:14 min. Part 1, Part 2, The Marc Rudov Show, wsRadio.com Jan. 7, 2008 “Persons’ Night at the pub,” Chicago Tribune.com 2007 Dec. 14, 2007 “NYC nightclubs say Ladies Night is not unfair,” AP Oct. 16, 2007 “Bid to get lady judge off case,” N.Y. Post Aug. 30, 2007 Ladies' Nights, Drew and Mike Show, WRIF Radio Detroit Aug. 28, 2007 Ladies' Nights, Your World with Neil Cavuto, Fox News Aug. 20, 2007 Ladies' Nights, ABC News Nightline, Sign of the Times Aug. 9, 2007 Ladies' Nights lawsuit, ABC News, Law and Justice Video Podcast Aug. 6, 2007 "Hey, La-A-ADies!" , The New Yorker: Talk Of The Town, On The Docket July 26, 2007 “I’m tired of having my rights violated and being treated as a second-class citizen.” –Roy Den Hollander, Time's Quotes of the Day July 26, 2007 “Lawyer in litigation with club because of discrimination against men,” InMix.ru July 25, 2007 “Ladies' Night Lawsuits on the Rocks?” Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, ABC News.com: Law and Justice July 16, 2007 “Ladies’ Nights Lawsuit,” Barlett and Hanover WOR Morning Show July 13, 2007 “Suit vs ladies’ nights,” N.Y. Post July 13, 2007 “Ladies’ Nights Lawsuit,” The Alan Colmes Radio Show, Fox News July 13, 2007 “Lawsuit Against Ladies Night,” My 9 TV News July 13, 2007 “Manhattan Lawyer Sues Clubs For Ladies Night’” NY1 News July 12, 2007 “N.Y. Lawsuit Calls Ladies’ Nights Discriminatory,” National Law Journal 1994 March 1994 Time of Business People, Produced by Telecompany BK TV KT: “The Need for Securities Regulations” Feb 1994 Time of Business People, Produced by Telecompany BK TV KT: “An American Lawyer in Russia” EARLY YEARS Proficient with Excel, Word, Lexis-Nexis, Westlaw, Bloomberg, and the Internet. Take hip-hop classes and martial arts for those who give me a hard time about hip-hop

To: carranza2 who wrote (160364)

7/20/2020 9:53:54 PM

From: arun gera

Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 219831

Lawyer was disgruntled with the Ladies
From his webpage cache

This is most relevant to recent happening:

"Need I say the courts are prejudiced, need I say they are useless, need I say it’s time for men to take the law into their hands?"

Now is the time for all good men to fight for their rights before they have no rights left.

Contact Roy to help battle the infringement of Men's Rights by the Feminists and their fellow sisters the PCers.

TRILOGY of ANTI-FEMINIST CASES

Lady Judge ruled that under the U.S. Constitution nightclubs can charge men more for admission than females, but in reaching her decision, she had to find that nightclubs cannot charge guys more for a drink. So if you can make it to the bar, you're home-free. September 29, 2008.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the lower court's decision. It's half a victory, since the case can be used as authority to challenge Ladies' Nights that charge guys more for drinks anywhere in the country because of the prestige of the Second Circuit. September 1, 2010

So why are these girls laughing?

The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case, so their glasses are half full and most likely paid for by a guy. Since the Second Circuit's decision stands, nightclubs can let girls in for less, but the clubs cannot charge guys more for drinks, assuming the clubs follow the law which they don't. January 10, 2011.

A Clinton District Court Judge ruled that the Violence Against Women's Act doesn't injure American men. Judge William H. Pauley III's decision ignored the democratic and legal standard of fairness, applied the wrong legal test for injury on a dismissal motion, and invented a fact not before the Court. VAWA allows alien females to acquire citizenship by falsely accusing their American husbands or ex-husbands or even boyfriends of mistreating them. Homeland Security uses proceedings kept secret from U.S. citizens to find that they committed "battery," "extreme cruelty," or an "overall pattern of violence," even when no violence has occurred. December 4, 2008.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied the appeal by stating any injuries were "speculative." VAWA prevented the plaintiffs from finding out what happened in the Homeland Security proceedings or how the secret fact-findings were being used against them, so naturally they were unable to detail the injuries to their rights. As in Kafka's The Trial, citizens are guilty--but they don't know of exactly what. The powerful often use such Catch-22s on their road to tyranny. December 3, 2009.

The U.S. Supreme Court denied the Petition for Certiorari. The case is over, and it's clear that to the courts men just don't count. April 19, 2010.

Federal lawsuit to find that Columbia University violated Title IX and the Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution by offering a Women's Studies program, but not a Men's Studies program, and that N.Y. State and the federal government aided Columbia's preaching of the religious belief system "Feminism." Judge Lewis A. Kaplan dismissed the case saying "Feminism is no more a religion than physics," basically ignored the Title IX and Equal Protection claims and called the case "absurd." April 23, 2009.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied the appeal. The Court ruled that any harm caused by the lack of a Men's Studies Program was "speculative." Strange that the federal courts don't say the same about the lack of a girls' sports team when a college only has a guys' team. Apparently, the law is adjudicated one way for girls and another way for guys. April 16, 2010.

Graduate of Women's Studies

In the first Women's Studies case, the Second Circuit also dismissed the claim that New York and the U.S. aided the religion Feminism because I did not state the obvious—that I was a taxpayer. So in the second Women's Studies case, I stated it four times in the Complaint.

The Complaint in Women's Studies II also provided an over abundance of detail to show that Feminism is a religion and is promoted and financed by the state and federal governments at Columbia in violation of the Establishment Clause. N.Y. actually requires all college programs and studies in the state to conform to Feminist precepts.

On All Hallows' Eve 2011, a federal female judge conjured up nonexistent facts to throw the case out on the technicality of collateral estoppel. The Judge claimed that in Women's Studies I the Establishment Clause issues of taxpayer and non-economic standing were fully litigated and decided as they applied to me, the only plaintiff in both cases. That's factually wrong, but try telling that to a lady judge if you're a man.

Two other men then came forward to join the case as plaintiffs. I made a motion to the same judge to throw out her decision and allow amending of the Complaint to include the two new plaintiffs. Since the two new plaintiffs were not involved in Women Studies I, the judge couldn't possibly divine facts that the prior case had fully litigated and decided Establishment Clause standing with respect to them--or could she?

She used a different tack by saying the law didn't allow for an amendment to add new plaintiffs after the original complaint was dismissed for lack of standing. Strange that in the Women's Studies I case, a Court of Appeals Judge admonished me for not trying to amend the complaint in that case after the district court judge dismissed for lack of standing. Guess what the law is depends on whether it will rid the federal courts of men fighting for their rights.

The Women’s Studies II case was appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The three judge panel upheld the district court by saying that the issues of non-economic and taxpayer standing had been “fully litigated and decided” in Women’s Studies I, when they hadn’t, and the complaint could not be amended because the two “new plaintiffs are not new evidence,” even though the two new plaintiffs would have testified to new facts concerning them. Sounded like new evidence to me.

The kicker, however, of the judges’ decision was their blatant abuse of power by threatening me with Rule 11 sanctions. They forever banned me from representing the two new plaintiffs, or in effect anyone, in any case raising the issue of whether Feminism is a religion. That’s no different than a Jim Crow court in the 1800s threatening the attorney for the New Orleans Comité des Citoyens with fines, license suspension, or disbarment for bringing another Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896), suit with a different plaintiff on the same issue—separate but equal. And no different than at the end of every year sanctioning the American Civil Liberties Union for bringing another action with new plaintiffs against Christmas displays.

So I asked the U.S. Supreme Court to not only reverse the Second Circuit’s decision, but to tell it to rescind its threat of sanctions and to stop acting like King John of England by relying on their divine right of life long tenure to arbitrarily rule in accordance with their personal beliefs instead of the Constitution: “In the four men’s rights cases, the Second Circuit has acted beyond its authority by deciding in accordance with the current popular ideology Feminism; even though it is the imperative duty of the courts to support the Constitution. ‘[The] constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law.’ Alexander Hamilton, Federalist Paper No. 78. Supplanting it with the tenets of Feminism is ideologically corrupt and an act beyond a court’s authority and its duty to obey the rule of law—not the rule of the ‘politically correct.’”

Many Feminist organizations receive preferential treatment and much of their funding from all levels of government. If this case, claiming Feminism is a religion, had succeeded, then all that help would have stopped, which would then allow the Feminists to show that they really are "strong and independent persons." The Supremes, not surprisingly, chose to deny the Petitions for Certiorari and Mandamus. The cost just to knock on the Supreme Court's door was over $10,000. I should have spent the money in a strip club instead--it would have been more rewarding.

******

This trilogy of lawsuits for men's rights makes clear that there are now two classes of people in America: one of princesses--females, and the other of servants--males. Governments, from local to state to federal, treat men as second class citizens whose rights can be violated with impunity when it benefits females. Need I say the courts are prejudiced, need I say they are useless, need I say it’s time for men to take the law into their hands?

"[H]istory shows that people have a way of not being willing to bear oppressive grievances without protest. Such protests, when bottomed upon facts, lead almost inevitably to an irresistible popular demand for either a redress of those grievances or a change in the Government." Communist Party v. Subversive Activities Control Bd., 367 U.S. 1, 167 (Justice Black dissenting).

More detailed summary of the three anti- Feminist cases

Case against Obamite Bigots

In a corollary proceeding against the N.Y.C. Commission on Human Rights, or HR, middle-aged Euro-American guys fair no better before government agencies that are suppose to protect human rights. Even though all our ancestors originated in Africa and none of us have control over the passage of time, PC ideology deems those whose ancestors spent more time in a temperate climate than a tropical climate and any middle-aged guy chasing a pretty young skirt as nonhuman and lacking in rights.

Bimbo Book Burners from Down Under

An episode in Australia demonstrates the loss of freedoms for which so many men and very few females have sacrificed. The University of South Australia was going to offer a men’s studies course taught by a few professors and myself online. My section was on men and the law. As soon as a couple of Feminist reporters heard about the course, they jumped on their broomsticks and scared the administrators of the University into canceling the course’s development by ranting we had been “published on radical men’s rights websites” and “linked to extreme views on men’s rights.”

In 1933 at a university book burning, Joseph Goebbels said, “The era of extreme Jewish intellectualism is now at an end.” As this episode illustrates, Western culture is now saying the same about any intellectualism that is not pro-Feminist—assuming there’s anything intellectual about Feminism.

Conclusion

In all these cases, I tried to use the courts to fight the malignant ideology that has mutated half of the American population into automatons of the PC/Feminist collective. But it was no use--the courts were already infected.

Roy Den Hollander is available for interviews, debates, speaking engagements, litigation, and civil disobedience. Attorney Advertising.

For more information on protecting your rights, go to

Voice of American Immigration Fraud Victims, immigrationfraudvictims.org.

Copyrighted 2019

To: carranza2 who wrote (160364)	7/21/2020 1:11:25 AM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 219831

Gold porn ... bloomberg.com Financial Repression Will Be a Liberator for Gold Stocks might offer a haven, but the most obvious shelter is the yellow metal. John Authers July 21, 2020, 6:02 AM GMT+2 Even a portfolio of Fangs may need protection from decay. Photographer: Dana Mixer/Bloomberg John Authers is a senior editor for markets. Before Bloomberg, he spent 29 years with the Financial Times, where he was head of the Lex Column and chief markets commentator. He is the author of “The Fearful Rise of Markets” and other books. Read more opinion Follow @johnauthers on Twitter To get John Authers' newsletter delivered directly to your inbox, sign up here. Gold Fillings for the FangsMaybe it hasn't been such a bad year after all. Following promising news on Oxford University’s search for a Covid-19 vaccine (and even though the news wasn’t totally positive), the S&P 500 rose Monday, and at last closed in positive territory for the year. This was the first time this had happened since the spread of the coronavirus became apparent in February. Meanwhile, the dominant internet groups in the NYSE Fang+ index reversed recent declines to hit a new all-time high: As has been said many times, it seems extraordinary for the world's largest stock market to be showing a profit for a year in which so many bad things have happened, and remain unresolved. More specifically, this latest bout of strength has been fueled by a return to an alarming narrowness, which has seen the biggest “mega-caps” rise while small companies languish, and value stocks look ever cheaper compared to growth companies. It had appeared as though the rally was broadening, as we would expect if an economic recovery were taking shape. Not anymore: To rehearse another point made many times, the stock market as a whole is doing so well because the world is awash with liquidity. With rates virtually zero and central banks ready to buy, debt issuance in developed markets during the second quarter was at previously undreamed-of record levels, as shown by a new report from the Institute of International Finance. This isn’t just an American phenomenon. As the IIF shows, there was a sharp rise in all forms of debt, measured as a share of GDP, across the world in the first quarter. China took the lead, despite the apparently more conservative approach of the People's Bank of China. Such increases haven’t been costless. Globally, the face value of corporate defaults in the second quarter was the highest on record (although as a proportion of all bond issues it remained slightly below the worst default rate from the Great Recession). So the rise in indebtedness has plainly been accompanied by rising risk. Corporate dividend yields may indeed be more generous than the yields on government bonds these days — but there is a still a risk that companies won't be able to pay those dividends (or even repay the principal on debt): Overall, and most sobering, the IIF’s count shows debt hit an all-time high by the end of the first quarter, before the splurge of corporate issuance and government spending to cushion the impact of the pandemic. This is true globally, whether debt is counted in dollar terms, or as a percentage of GDP: What relevance does this have for stocks? The low rates on debt are a (valid) argument for paying more for equities, all else equal. But the amounts being issued imply that supply of bonds could soon swamp demand and push up yields. At least unless central banks intervene. In another landmark Monday, real 10-year yields dropped to a fresh low for this cycle. They are now lower than at any time since December 2012. The way real yields reached this place is interesting. Extending a market trend that has persisted since March, the 10-year yield on conventional bonds remains almost ironing-board flat at a little over 0.6%. The fall in real yields is driven entirely by rising inflation expectations, as shown by the rate needed for fixed and inflation-adjusted bonds to break even: This looks like “financial repression.” Yields will be held steady, and we will have no choice but to lend to the government at ever worse real rates. Stocks might offer some kind of a haven from such repression, but perhaps the most obvious shelter is gold — which has also, entirely uncoincidentally, hit its highest in almost a decade. Gold’s chief problem as an asset is that it pays no yield. It therefore becomes far more attractive when the real yield on alternative investments becomes negative — and as this chart, with an inverted gold price, shows, lower real yields lead inexorably to higher gold prices: There are other ways to show that gold should benefit from the current extraordinary monetary conditions. In this chart from CrossBorder Capital Ltd., the gold price’s deviation from its trend is plotted against the combined liquidity of the U.S. and China. Over the last 20 years there has been a clear relationship. If the Fed and other central banks are determined to stick with financial repression, and this great piece by Bloomberg Opinion colleague Tim Duysuggests that they are, then real yields should fall further, liquidity should continue to bubble, and gold should continue to be a good bet. How much further could this go? CrossBorder Capital does some calculations comparing total U.S. debt with the gold price, going back a century. The average total value of debt outstanding in gold terms turns out to be about 30 billion ounces. To get back to that level from where we are now would require an increase in the gold price of about 40%. More debt would mean a higher gold price. The stock rally at present still doesn’t show great confidence in an economic recovery, but the bond market does suggest high confidence in financial repression for a long time into the future. To benefit from that repression, it might be worth taking on some gold. After all, the Fangs may yet need some fillings. Word-Crunching CoronaWhich companies were best prepared for remote operations when Covid-19 hit? This knowledge would have been valuable indeed at the time, and could still be useful. And to find out, the quants at MSCI Inc., the indexing group, show in new research that it was necessary to crunch words rather than numbers. Their idea, using machine learning, is to look for words most associated with being able to operate remotely. Here is the word cloud they developed: Next, they scraped through companies’ 10-K statements using a series of different techniques to see how often the words recurred. One was a simple word count directly from the 10-Ks. A follow-up was a semantic search, which identified the companies’ core services and products, and then looked at how many times the keywords appeared in their documentation. Finally, and most esoterically, they searched for “concept exposure,” which involves looking for concepts with which a company is most often associated, and then finding out how many of the keywords are related to these. The result was the following. Over the year to date, all the portfolios built using the exercise did significantly better than the MSCI USA index. A simple word count did best of the three methods, although MSCI’s index of the top remote-operating companies that used all three measures was better still. Not surprisingly, it turns out that the companies identified this way tended to be in line with the investment factors that have performed best over the last year, such as growth and momentum, and not to show much in the way of value. Whether they realized that these companies were well suited to working remotely or not, markets did pick up the notion that they were doing well: The greatest problem with this survey, I fear, is revealed by the sectoral breakdown, which shows that technology companies dominated. This might be because they are naturally full of people who are au fait with working remotely. But it is also quite possible that such companies will need to use words like “website,” “digital” and “technologies” much more often than other companies. The real prize would be a sector-neutral list of the more traditional companies that are particularly well-equipped to deal with a pandemic. This chart shows the extent to which technology companies are overweighted: None of this should take away, however, from the fact that this exercise was based on evidence available before the coronavirus struck. Few of us were able to sit down and think calmly through all the possibilities and implications during those hectic weeks in February and March. But if we had, and we had set our machine learning tools to go looking for companies that might do well when working remotely, we could have beaten the market handily. It is certainly worthwhile for the quants to carry on with this work. European Summit UpdateThe summit of European heads of state in Brussels, which is trying to thrash out a jointly funded “recovery fund” to aid countries worst hit by Covid-19, was originally scheduled as a two-day meeting to end Saturday. At the time of writing (early Tuesday morning in Brussels), it is into its fifth day, and there is still no agreement. The key points appear to be: There will be a deal: some kind of recovery fund is going to happenIt is nothing like as ambitious as France, Germany, the European Commission and the main likely recipients had hopedThe “Frugal 4” (the Netherlands, Austria, Denmark and Sweden) have ensured a much greater weight toward loans, rather than grantsThe Frugal 4 have also won a lot of rebates for themselves, along with a lot of abuse and possibly lasting grievanceThe “Illiberal 2” (Hungary and Poland) have avoided any conditions relating to the “rule of law,” or in other words their backsliding from democracyThe lasting impressions will be that anyone can hold up the EU, that the commission can be blackmailed, and that the EU is powerless to stop the descent into authoritarianism that is under way in Hungary and could easily spread. As far as the future of the European project is concerned, the first point is just about enough to avoid being outweighed by all the others. This is a step toward fiscal coherence. If the European project is to survive at all (and there are plenty who think that it shouldn’t) it must become more fiscally coherent. So that is good. Markets certainly seemed to enjoy the impasse. The spread of Italian over German bond yields tightened and the euro strengthened against the dollar, in both cases to levels not seen since before the Covid-19 outbreak reached Europe: The actual terms matter greatly. But at this point, rather than hang around to see a final communique, I am inclined to point you to this excellent production of Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot. As to who will arrive first out of Godot or a common European fiscal policy, it’s anyone’s guess. Survival TipsAs some people find Waiting for Godot and Amadeus a tad heavy, I will recommend a cartoon to view on YouTube. The only catch is that it’s about the Spanish flu of 1918. As strongly recommended by my son Jamie, and watched by me, Extra History — The 1918 Flu Pandemic is as good a history of the greatest pandemic of modern times as I have seen. As it was made well before the advent of Covid-19, it’s also prescient. The rest of the Extra History franchise is well worth exploring too. Enjoy. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners. To contact the author of this story: John Authers at jauthers@bloomberg.net To contact the editor responsible for this story: Matthew Brooker at mbrooker1@bloomberg.net Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal. LEARN MORE Sent from my iPad