The House has the impeachment right, the Senate has trial mandate

Former Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz wrote on Thursday that he thinks it's "difficult to imagine anything more unconstitutional" than House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., withholding the articles of impeachment against President Trump from a Senate trial.
Dershowitz's comments came in response to Laurence Tribe, another Harvard Law Professor who called for Democrats to delay sending the articles to the Senate -- something Pelosi has already indicated she's willing to do.
"[Tribe] would withhold the trial until the Senate agreed to change its rules, or presumably until a new election put many more Democrats in the Senate. Under his proposal, there might never be a Senate trial, but the impeachment would stand as a final and permanent condemnation of President Trump," Dershowitz wrote in a Newsmax op-ed.
"It is difficult to imagine anything more unconstitutional, more violative of the intention of the Framers, more of a denial of basic due process and civil liberties, more unfair to the president and more likely to increase the current divisiveness among the American people. Put bluntly, it is hard to imagine a worse idea put forward by good people," he added.

Clearly written, the House impeaches, the Senate tries in that order.  The House cannot unvote the impeachment as long as Trump is in office. The Senate is now bound to try the president. There can be no parliamentary protocol that delays the Senate's duty to follow an accurate vote for impeachment, Tribe is wrong on this.

Dershowitz need to sue the Senate on behalf of the citizen's, make  it a class action lawsuit. This makes Robert's squirm because he has no constitutional provision that over rides the House vote to impeach. He is the presiding judge at the impeachment. The Robert's court would rule the Senate out of order and force a trial.

Tax avoidance

Excess reserves finally popped after the Fed began buying treasuries again. The depository institutions are collecting IOER that otherwise would return to Treasury as seigniorage.

It responds suddenly, like it has inertia. It does, it is set along the longer route, from primary dealers back into the regulated banking side. There is a loop, and the sudden spike is a classic sloshing effect.

The Fed raised taxes on the repo market, in the greedy monpsony model. Under the model the delay is explainable, the loop discovered. The tax model should be as valid as any other model in snooping out the loop. The deja vu effect is Fed bankers discover the central banks are not a monopoly. They should drive that seigniorage fee to the long term share of a dominant monopsony, maybe a quarter to half point, close the loop.

It happens after you exit the trade

"Our investment strategy, which is cyclical in nature, has been challenged by the unprecedented 10-year economic expansion, decreased liquidity and dramatic changes in the hedge-fund industry."

I have learned to bet against myself over the years. Like I have a couple of hard assets I want to dump. My plan to do so is likely to go awry, it always does.

Hence, I am prepared already to sell at lower than expected prices. The cascade of events will be triggered by the cost of a long term tenant exiting, and I want to skip that cost and cover some tax bills which also cascade, greasing the collapse of my property empire. And my worst of fears, this is all happening in California in the year of the property tax battle, and rent control threatening. If I do not get it done, the unions will be after my ass something fierce.

And I am not the only one.

Like encoding the SP500

When I did it last time, and printed the encoding tree. 

There were two downturns in the series, and the encoding tree was unbalanced ass a result. That would be skew, and a tail risk.  There were a small number of large events predicted, down turns. These events spread out one tail of a probability distribution.

Leads directly to shut down

Pay Workers to Leave Depressed Towns 

Bloomberg opinion column starts ff with the right problem:

Here’s an unsettling fact: Economic inequality between U.S. states can be greater than inequality between the U.S. and other countries. For example, GDP per person in the state of New York is about twice as high as in Mississippi. The gap between the U.S. as a whole and the nation of Slovakia is smaller.

Then makes the fatal error:

Having said that, one promising place-based policy is relocation assistance. The idea is simple: Offer long-term unemployed workers — those who have been unsuccessfully looking for a job for at least six months — in lagging economic areas a federal subsidy to offset the costs of moving to a better-performing region.
Moving is a major investment. Even workers who want to move to a city with improved economic prospects may be deterred by the need for so much up-front cash. The subsidy could help overcome this constraint.
It is attractive because it directly addresses the problem: If you’re worried about regions being permanently left behind, and if a key driver of regional disparities is too little worker mobility, then subsidize mobility so that you get more of it.

He forgets, the depressed towns carry two senate votes with them.  This proposal pays the wrong group, it needs to pay the state capitals to work the problem themselves. Then it needs to manage the federal programs much better.

The senators of these small states will pry whatever earmark from where ever they can get it to keep their small populations viable. Hard bound means they cannot subdivide and reagglomerate. The trading  pit starts there, a House to state capitals with a Senate swap.

That is a tidy business

CalWatch:

A survey of 2,800 U.S. colleges prepared by the Institute of International Education and the U.S. State Department underscores once again how much the budget of the University of California relies on high tuition and fees paid by foreign students.The survey showed California had far and away the most international students with 161,693. Some 42 percent of the students are from China and 13 percent are from India. Five UC campuses had at least 8,000 international students: UCLA (11,942), UC San Diego (10,652), UC Berkeley (10,063), UC Irvine (8,064) and UC Davis (8,048).The numbers illustrate that for all the criticism leveled at UC President Janet Napolitano in a 2016 report by state Auditor Elaine Howle, the UC system’s most important fiscal strategy relies on attracting foreign students. They pay about $44,000 annually, triple what in-state students pay.

I will talk to the Redneck U board about grabbing some of that market.

Boeing missed the show

They fired their replacement CEO after three years.  They missed the bot when the crisis happened, I been there, this was my business for a while.  They needed a top down restructuring of their run time flight software development.

The main issue was distributed software which all had the most up to date flight characteristics so no distributed module can take a decision without fully, shared knowledge. On the PC it is right button click and it gives you options and causes for a sudden dive a few minutes after take off. Right button click, select 'disable' might work here.

Pilots and modules all tuned into the central AI brain,or its duplicate. The AI brain, in turn, reporting its best knowledge. No part is misinformed.

Tail risk is skew

If we could construct he monte carlo generator for the Treasury curve, it would have skew. And that is observable in the front end of the curve, it is flat.  The tail risk is likely increasing with the rebellions, and decreasing s the rebellions subside. Wealth is betting the generational MMT.

But there is a greater skewing event due, the state adjustment, the new deal between House and Senate. This includes the tax battle being waged by New York and California, and the fear of liquidity shortages in these large states.

Add in the potential for large federal bailouts of pensions. And a potential Trump blunder in the middle east All of this is a 'been there, done that'. We have a repeatable history here. The predicted case is a long period of mild deflation and the sidecase is half the Nixon shock.

Mayor Pete got the center and Liz is stuck

Buttigieg Campaign Accused of 'Brazen' Influence Peddling

Obama gone to donors to boost her luck
Trump has he brains of a hockey puck
With a little bit of work this song won't suck

The simplest sandbox banker

The simplest two color liquidity allocator. I suppose one color could derive from a  commodity banker, assume it trades against a finite, known resource. But I digress..

But their is no profit taker, in the two color. The  pit boss account is provably bounded. Traders are risk equalized with free entry and exit. OK, there is a variation of congestion priced entry and exit, here I assume absolutely free, and congestion is naturally controlled by pit boss delays in bet processing.  Like bitcoin, computer limits are a feed back loop yielding a single fixed point. This is the timeless banker.

In central banking traders will have to bet the government cycles.   There is a loop, we give government a monetary power, but we expect government to be a bit unstable for it. We accept the instability, we have quantized the side lobes, gone quarking. Out pit boss has become a gluon. The cost of central banking becomes higher, we have ;legalized the cycle. But we like it a bit, it has a rhythm, time has more meaning.

And we can see that, given trivial transaction costs, the two color system spends the least resources on the pit boss account.  If transaction costs become noticeable, traders want government guarantees for money and we end up with central banker, we have to jump the Markov tree. But we do it. It is a mix.