kscarbel2

Unaccompanied children crossing southern border in greater numbers again, raising fears of new migrant crisis The Washington Post / December 16, 2015 Unaccompanied minors are crossing the U.S. Southwest border in growing numbers again, sparking concerns that the new influx of children could eventually approach the levels that last year prompted the Obama administration to declare a humanitarian crisis. In October and November, more than 10,500 children crossed the U.S.-Mexico border by themselves, the vast majority from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, according to U.S. government data analyzed by the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan think tank. That’s a 106 percent increase over the same period last year, reflecting a steady increase that began in March. The numbers are still far below the peak period last year, when more than 10,600 unaccompanied minors crossed the border just in the month of June, swamping federal resources. And the administration, widely believed to have missed the warning signs before the previous surge, “is certainly a lot more concerned and on top of it than they were two years ago,” said Marc Rosenblum, deputy director of the U.S. immigration policy program at the policy institute. [Influx of minors across border driven by belief that they will be allowed to stay in U.S.] Still, the administration and immigrant advocates are growing increasingly worried, especially because some of the same conditions that drove last year’s surge, including gang and drug-related violence in Central America, have grown even worse. The Department of Health and Human Services, which is required to shelter and care for the children after they are apprehended by the Department of Homeland Security, last week opened a new, 700-bed shelter in Texas and is planning to open another 300-bed facility in Texas as early as Friday. A third, 400-bed facility in California may also be needed, officials said. “This sharp increase in children entering this country is a result of many factors,” HHS Secretary Sylvia Burwell wrote in a letter last week to the House appropriations committee. “While it is impossible to know if these trends will continue for the duration of the fiscal year, we are very concerned about having adequate resources to meet the needs of the unaccompanied children.” The letter urged lawmakers, who are negotiating final details of a year-end spending deal, to grant President Obama’s request for a contingency fund of up to $400 million if the numbers of children continue to grow, beyond the nearly $950 million already requested for the unaccompanied minors program. The concern also extends to the state level, where Texas Gov. Greg Abbott ® 0n Tuesday ordered Texas National Guard troops to remain at the Mexico border, extending a mission that began last year at the height of the surge. It is unclear how many troops will remain. In a joint statement, HHS and DHS said the entire administration “has been closely monitoring these current trends and coordinating across the whole of government to ensure an effective response to any changes in migration flows.” The statement added, “We continue to aggressively work to secure our borders, address underlying causes and deter future increases in unauthorized migration, while ensuring that those with legitimate humanitarian claims are afforded the opportunity to seek protection.” A DHS official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the official was not an authorized spokesman, added that the government “is definitely concerned, but it’s really, really hard to predict what’s going to happen.” “We don’t want a repeat of 2014,” the official added. “Nobody likes to see young children and others sitting in Border Patrol stations because we have nowhere to release them to. Nobody wants to see that situation again.” Before the last surge, the administration did too little to heed warning signs that extended back several years, according to interviews with former government officials, outside experts and immigrant advocates. The result was an inadequate response that contributed to a rapidly escalating crisis in the summer of 2014. [Obama aides were warned of brewing border crisis] But a series of steps by DHS and other federal agencies — including opening new processing centers across the Southwest, reassigning hundreds of Border Patrol agents to the Rio Grande Valley in Texas and amping up a public awareness campaign in Central America about the dangers of border crossing — helped dramatically reduce the numbers through the second half of last year and the first few months of this year. A key factor in the decline was Mexico’s decision to launch a new policy called the Southern Border Program, intended to shore up that country’s porous frontiers with Guatemala and Belize by deploying more police officers and increasing operations and checkpoints. Since then, the number of Central American migrants captured in Mexico and deported has increased substantially. The United States has also provided equipment such as scanners and vehicles to Mexican migration officials working on the southern border. U.S. officials have said they plan to spend about $150 million on two major programs, including a biometric system for Mexico to keep track of the migrants it detains and a series of cellphone towers along the rural border to help government agencies communicate. But the violence that was a key factor in driving people to leave has surged again. El Salvador’s homicide rate, for example, is now at its highest since the country’s civil war ended in 1992, after a truce between two prominent gangs broke down last year. A drought across the region has also helped spur departures, but experts point to violence as the primary cause. “These children are especially vulnerable. They are not fleeing because they can’t find a good-paying job. They are fleeing because of violence,” said Carmen Chavez, executive director of the Casa Cornelia Law Center in San Diego, which has provided legal services to more than 800 unaccompanied minors this year. “It’s a humanitarian crisis that has been building. It blew up last year, and the situation hasn’t changed.” The children still fleeing have been aided by smugglers forced by the heightened enforcement in Mexico to find new routes into the United States. During last year’s migrant surge, the vast majority of children crossed the U.S. border through the Rio Grande Valley region near the southern tip of Texas. But the latest U.S. Customs and Border Protection data shows rapid increases of children and families crossing farther west, such as in the El Paso, Tex., and Yuma, Ariz., areas. Immigration experts say migrants are increasingly traveling in small boats from Central America north along the Pacific and Gulf coasts of Mexico to evade immigration authorities, while also hiding more in tractor-trailers and in secret compartments of vehicles to avoid detection. Wendy Young, president of Kids in Need of Defense, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit that represents unaccompanied minors in deportation proceedings, said smuggling “is a big business, it’s an illicit business, and it’s connected to the same narco-traffickers driving people out of their countries. We do understand that smugglers have adjusted their routes across Mexico.” “For us, it’s kind of deja vu all over again,” Young said. “We’re bracing for another 2014.”

U.S. Businesses Worry Stronger Dollar May Weigh on Growth and Exports The Wall Street Journal / December 16, 2015 American businesses fretted that the first interest rate increase in seven years came at a time when a strong U.S. dollaralready is sapping demand for exports and low energy and commodity prices are weighing on growth in the industrial economy. The Federal Reserve’s move Wednesday to raise short-term rates by a quarter percentage point was hardly a surprise to U.S. executives, but it comes as industrial manufacturers such as 3M Co. and Honeywell International Inc. offer cautious sales forecasts, as agriculture commodities are in their third year of declining prices, as transportation firms contend with sagging freight volumes, and as food and beverage companies struggle with the strong dollar sapping sales growth. In making its move to raise rates, the Fed pointed to a strengthening U.S. labor market, more robust household spending and increasing business investment, while noting that exports have been soft. The Fed officials said they expect more gradual rate increases in the coming years. That assessment, however, didn’t jibe with what some businesses are experiencing. “We’re worried because we’re seeing leading indicators showing the economy is not in great shape,” said Glenn Riggs, senior vice president at Odyssey Logistics & Transportation, which books freight transportation for businesses and operates a fleet of about 300 trucks. “If they raise interest rates and things further slow down, that would be a bigger worry.” Freight volumes sagged this fall, as manufacturing activity slowed and retailers cut back on imports. Further interest rate hikes also could increase the cost of borrowing to upgrade trucking fleets, Mr. Riggs said. Major businesses from AT&T Inc. to Johnson & Johnson to International Flavors & Fragrances Inc. played down the immediate impact of Wednesday’s rate increase on business prospects. “I think to a certain extent, having 10 years with no interest rate increases is unnatural,” said General Electric Co. Chief Executive Jeff Immelt. “And I think what’s difficult is there’s just nothing inflationary. And I think that makes it harder for the regulators to figure out what to do.”​ Longer term, however, further interest rate hikes could add to businesses’ borrowing costs, cool capital spending, and prompt a reassessment of inventory levels. Jane Morreau, chief financial officer at Jack Daniel’s maker Brown-Forman Corp. , said the real effect will be further strengthening the U.S. dollar—an issue that already is weighing on results at beverage alcohol companies. Earlier this month, Brown-Forman said that it expects weakening foreign currencies in markets such as Russia and Australia to negatively affect results by 5 cents per share during its current fiscal year. But Ms. Morreau said she trusts that the rate increase signals “an improving U.S. economy, which could benefit our business.” The U.S. accounts for about 40% of the company’s sales. General Motors Co. and home improvement retailer Lowe’s Cos. said the Fed’s decision reflects the strength in the U.S. economy that the auto and housing industries have been experiencing. “Auto sales are at a new peak,” a GM spokesman said. “We don’t expect the rate hike to have any measurable impact on new vehicles sales given the underlying strength of the U.S. economy.” Lowe’s Cos. Chief Financial Officer Bob Hull said the prospect of higher mortgage and borrowing rates could prompt prospective home buyers to act sooner, and jolt some homeowners to splurge on major renovations. Mr. Hull expects the housing market to only slow after the 30-year fixed mortgage rates exceed 6% from their current level of about 4%. Still, many companies have been citing weak economic growth around the globe. Honeywell forecast sales growth in its core businesses, excluding acquisitions, of just 1% to 2% next year largely due to the troubles in the oil and gas sector. “We’re exiting 2015 at a slower growth rates than we had anticipated at this time last year,” Chief Financial Officer Tom Szlosek said Wednesday before the Fed’s announcement. U.S. farmers already struggling with lower prices of major crops such as corn and soybeans for the third consecutive year could be further hurt. Rising global crop stockpiles and the strengthening of the dollar have weighed on U.S. grain exports. And a string of benchmark rate increases at a time when central bankers in Japan and Europe are easing monetary policy would further fuel the dollar’s rise, analysts said. “If we see a rate increase, it just reinforces the economic health of the U.S. and reinforces the backing of a strong dollar, which is overall a negative for the farm segment,” said Joe Lardy, research manager for the brokerage unit of CHS Inc., the biggest U.S. farm cooperative. Ron DeFeo, executive chairman of Terex Corp. , a maker of cranes and other heavy machinery, said the Fed’s move was positive in that it “takes some uncertainty away.” For now, weak commodity and oil prices have plunged parts of industry into “recession-like conditions,” Mr. DeFeo said, but consumers are doing better and their spending eventually should boost manufacturing. Meanwhile, Ryan Lance, chief executive of ConocoPhillips, said that the interest rate increase, which the Federal Reserve hopes will spur inflation, is at odds with the current reality for energy companies, which are in the midst of aggressive cost cutting. In “our business that’s a concept that is completely out of the radar screen right now,” Mr. Lance told an audience in New York at the Council on Foreign Relations. “I review every week what our deflation capture numbers are.”

The Guardian / December 16, 2015 US central bank signals end to seven years of a monetary policy that began amid the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression The Federal Reserve raised interest rates on Wednesday, ending an extraordinary period of government intervention in the financial markets that started at the height of the recession. After holding its benchmark federal-funds rate near zero for seven years, the Fed increased rates a quarter-percentage point. The move signals the end of a monetary policy that began amid the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. In a statement, the Fed said economic activity had been “expanding at a moderate pace. Household spending and business fixed investment have been increasing at solid rates in recent months, and the housing sector has improved further.” Given the economic outlook, and “recognizing the time it takes for policy actions to affect future economic outcomes”, the Fed decided to raise the target range for the federal funds rate a quarter point, the first such rise in close to a decade. The central bank signalled more increases to come “with gradual adjustments in the stance of monetary policy” and argued that “economic activity will continue to expand at a moderate pace and labor market indicators will continue to strengthen”. At a press conference, Fed chair Janet Yellen said: “This action marks the end of an extraordinary seven-year period during which the federal funds rate was held near zero to support the recovery of the economy from the worst financial crisis and recession since the Great Depression.” She said the economy “has come a long way”, though normalization “is likely to proceed gradually”, and “inflation continues to run below our longer-run objective”. The US has now added new jobs every month since October 2010. In November, the economy added 211,000 jobs and has added an average of 237,000 jobs a month over the past 12 months. However, some have expressed concern about the move. Inflation appears to be under control – mitigating an imminent need to slow the economy by raising rates. And there are still signs of weakness in the jobs market, with historically high numbers of people no longer looking for work. Ahead of the meeting, Richard Trumka, president of the US’s largest union federation, the AFL-CIO, urged the Fed to “avoid making a mistake” by raising interest rates. “Too many working people are not feeling the economic recovery because of stagnant wages. In the months to come, the Fed should focus on the policy goal that real wages should rise with productivity. Working people deserve to lead better lives by sharing in the wealth we all create,” he said. After the announcement, Senator Bernie Sanders, a Democratic presidential candidate, denounced the move as “bad news for working families”. “At a time when real unemployment is nearly 10% and youth unemployment is off the charts, we need to do everything possible to create millions of good-paying jobs and raise the wages of the American people. The Fed should act with the same sense of urgency to rebuild the disappearing middle class as it did to bail out Wall Street banks seven years ago,” he wrote in a blogpost. Stock markets around the world had risen on anticipation of the move, a clear signal that the US has shaken off the aftermath of the last recession. The zero rate policy was introduced by Yellen’s predecessor, Ben Bernanke, on 16 December 2008, exactly seven years ago. At the time, global stock markets were in turmoil following the bursting of a mortgage-backed financial bubble that triggered a global recession. Bernanke backed the zero rate move with a massive bond buying programme, spending billions to buy Treasury- and mortgage-backed bonds in a move aimed at keeping rates low and encouraging investment, a policy known as quantitative easing (QE). QE ended last October. Gus Faucher, senior macroeconomist at PNC, said the policy had been a success. “If you compare the US to other industrial economies, the recovery in the US has been better,” he said. “You can see proof of that in Japan and Europe now, where they have decided that QE is the way to go.” Video - http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/dec/16/federal-reserve-us-interest-rate-rise-fed-funds-janet-yellen Related reading - http://www.bigmacktrucks.com/index.php?/topic/43121-us-industrial-heartland-frets-as-fed-rate-rise-looms/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Guardian view on the US interest rate rise: risky and premature The Guardian (editorial) / December 16, 2015 It has been eight years since the US slipped into recession, and seven since it dawned upon central bankers that they were not merely enduring a storm, but sailing in uncharted waters. The unthinkable suddenly became the unavoidable: some institutions were left to collapse, others were nationalised, and the electronic printing presses were set whirring. Interest rates were slashed to virtually zero, lower than ever before, and then left there. In the pre-crisis world, this ultra-cheap money would have spurred cavalier investments, wild pay demands, and – soon enough – inflation. But this slump defied the old models. Growth came back only slowly, and even after it did prices and pay remained eerily stagnant. By comparison with the UK and Europe, it is true, the US did enjoy certain advantages. It was spared Osborne-style retrenchment in the aftermath of the crash, and – when a nascent recovery stirred – it wasn’t choked by flawed currency union. Output did grow, unemployment did fall, and America settled into a tolerable if lacklustre new normal. For the Federal Reserve, the question became whether it was normal enough for it to revert to the old maps, which pointed to raising interest rates. For chair Janet Yellen, navigating by an old map must feel more reassuring than steering with no map at all. For market sentiment, too, there is comfort in the symbolic declaration of “emergency over” that a rate rise provides, which is why stock prices rallied ahead of Wednesday’s move, even though the immediate effect of costlier borrowing is negative for profits. So it is reassuring for America to feel like it is back in familiar waters – until it transpires that it is not. The quarter-point rate rise addresses one potentially serious problem, but does so in the wrong way. QE dollars have puffed up the price of some assets, and if that puffing goes unchecked, the next bubble and bust could begin. The right way to tackle speculative investment, however, is through targeted regulatory curbs on lending for speculative purposes, not by raising borrowing costs for all investments, including those that America needs. The justification for higher rates should be a real economy moving at an unsustainable pelt. There’s no sign of that. Unemployment has fallen, but it doesn’t mean what it used to before so many jobseekers became too discouraged to seek; the overall employment rate is low. Inflation is forecast to creep back to target, but that has been true many times since the crash, and it has consistently undershot. Inflation has been stuck below the 2% target for much of the post-2008 era, and so the rate rise should have awaited it bursting through this threshold. But it remains well short on all measures, and close to zero on some. The biggest judgment concerns the recovery’s strength. Growth has recently been respectable, but the bounceback needs to be measured against the crash before, and in that context it is less impressive. Real GDP per head has, on average, inched up by only a fraction of a percent annually since late 2007. By any ordinary standards that represents seven lost years for living standards, and all the more so because the very rich have grabbed so much of such growth as there has been. Even though the Fed was careful to signal that it will tread cautiously in relation to future rate rises, the dollar’s might in the world’s financial system remains such that other countries could be forced to follow suit, with particularly serious implications for some developing economies. Since the crisis other central banks, from Israel to New Zealand, tried raising rates before being forced into reverse. If the chain reaction proves severe the question is whether the US, too, could be beating a retreat. The closest parallel, perhaps, is with Japan, which briefly raised rates from the floor in 2000, a decade into the long stagnation that dogs it still. Japan discovered in 2000 how painfully different its new normal was from its old, a painful lesson that the Fed may yet have to learn.

http://www.bigmacktrucks.com/index.php?/topic/42910-volvo-trucks-to-lay-off-734-workers-at-its-virginia-plant/ http://www.bigmacktrucks.com/index.php?/topic/42949-union-authorizes-volvo-strike/

Thanks to Olof Persson, he inherited a rocky situation.

The Wall Street Journal / December 16, 2015 In a move considered unthinkable even a few months ago, congressional leaders have agreed to lift the nation’s 40-year-old ban on oil exports, a historic action that reflects political and economic shifts driven by a boom in U.S. oil drilling. The measure allowing oil exports is at the center of a deal that Republican leaders announced late Tuesday on spending and tax legislation. However, Democrats haven't confirmed the agreement. Both the House and Senate still must pass it and President Obama must sign it into law. The deal would lift the ban, a priority for Republicans and the oil industry, and at the same time adopt environmental and renewable measures that Democrats sought. These include extending wind and solar tax credits; reauthorizing for three years a conservation fund; and excluding any measures that block major Obama administration environmental regulations, according to a GOP aide. By design or not, the agreement hands the oil industry a long-sought victory within days of a major international climate deal that is aimed at sharply reducing emissions from oil and other fuels, a deal opposed by the industry and one that will arguably require its cooperation. More than a dozen independent oil companies, including Continental Resources and ConocoPhillips, have been lobbying Congress to lift the ban on oil exports for nearly two years, arguing that unfettered oil exports would eliminate market distortions, stimulate the U.S. economy and boost national security. A handful of Washington lawmakers representing oil-producing states, including Sens. Heidi Heitkamp (D., N.D.) and Lisa Murkowski (R., Alaska), have been working to convince once-wary politicians to back oil exports and allay worries that they will be blamed if gasoline prices were to rise. Some U.S. refineries oppose oil exports, saying their business would be hit if crude oil is shipped overseas to be refined and warning that higher costs might be passed along to consumers. The U.S. government doesn’t limit exports of refined petroleum products, and those exports have more than doubled since 2007. To address the refiners’ concerns, expressed most vocally by Democrats from the Northeast where several refineries are located, the spending bill changes an existing tax deduction for domestic manufacturing to benefit independent refineries in particular. President Barack Obama had threatened to veto separate legislation lifting the export ban, but the White House isn't expected to oppose the overall spending bill simply because it includes the measure, according to congressional aides. Congress moved to ban oil exports under most circumstances following a 1973 Arab oil embargo that sent domestic gasoline prices skyrocketing. With the increased use of fracking and other drilling technologies in recent years, U.S. oil production has shot up nearly 90% since August 2008, helping lower gasoline prices to levels not seen since 2009. Gas prices are less than $2 a gallon in many regions of the country, and the U.S. Energy Information Administration forecasts the price will average $2.04 this month and $2.36 next year. It took this dramatic drop in oil prices, hovering below $40 a barrel, to catapult the policy change to the top of the Republican agenda. It helped prompt lawmakers of both parties to consider pairing renewable energy support with oil exports, a type of grand Washington deal-making that hasn't been seen for years on the highly divisive issues of energy and environment. The same low prices that generated momentum for lifting the ban could reduce its short-term economic impact, however, because the global market is saturated and U.S. oil companies have already slowed drilling in response. John Hess, chief executive of Hess Corp., said low oil prices have increased the urgency for Congress to lift the ban, but he declined to say whether his company would immediately begin exporting oil if given the opportunity. “It would be a function of market conditions,” Mr. Hess said in a recent interview. “But I think over time, definitely; If the market signals were there, we would have that option.” The U.S. is already exporting nearly 400,000 barrels of crude a day to Canada, the biggest exemption under the ban. That is more than nine times as much as in 2008 but still just 3.8% of the U.S. oil produced every day. A certain type of light oil is also already starting to flow overseas thanks to permission granted in 2014 by the Commerce Department, which allows producers to reclassify a certain type of oil as a refined fuel, similar to gasoline, which is legal to ship abroad. The logistics of a new surge of oil exports would be relatively manageable, especially compared to exporting natural gas, which takes years of federal permitting and billions of dollars in technology to liquefy the gas. Extensive networks of oil pipelines and storage tanks already stretch along the Gulf Coast from Corpus Christi, Texas, to St. James Parish, La. Those oil ports, where nearly a third of U.S. refineries are located, are for now geared toward unloading crude from tankers, not loading them. So initially there would be some constrained capacity that caps energy companies’ ability to ship crude out to foreign buyers. But retrofitting those facilities—adding more deep-water dock space and equipment to load oil tankers—could happen quickly in a place like Texas, where permitting is easy and such projects face little community opposition. The ports of Corpus Christi and Houston are already undergoing dramatic expansions. Several companies, including Enterprise Products Partners LP, have already been ramping up their ability to export oil from Texas, and Enbridge Energy Partners LP, based in Canada, plans to spend $5 billion to construct three new oil terminals between Houston and New Orleans. Related reading - http://www.bigmacktrucks.com/index.php?/topic/43100-oil-tumbles-towards-crisis-era-lows/

2 children murdered, found dead in a California storage unit KCRA / December 15, 2015 The bodies of a 3-year-old girl and 6-year-old boy have been found by police in a storage unit in Redding, California, shoved inside plastic tote containers. A third child, a severely abused 9-year-old girl and sibling to the murdered children, is in a critical condition in a Sacramento hospital following emergency surgery. Sheriff Greg Hagwood said she weighed just 40 pounds, had broken bones in her shoulder, broken fingers, a dislocated jaw, teeth that were missing or loose, open sores and was infested with lice. Hagwood said, 'This has shaken my staff to the core. That little girl had been subjected to the most unspeakable measure of torture for an extended period of time. This is child abuse, the likes of which we haven't experienced here.” Plumas County authorities on Monday arrested Tami Joy Huntsman, 39, and her boyfriend Gonzalo Curiel, 17, on charges of felony child abuse, torture and mayhem (the intentional disfiguration of another person). Both are from Quincy, California. Huntsman is a relative of the two homicide victims but not their mother. Huntsman was caring for the murdered children because their mother had been struck by a car and died, and the father gave up custody. Huntsman's 12-year-old twins were taken by Child Protective Services agents when she was arrested. Bail has been set at $1 million for both Huntsman and Curiel. Curiel is being charges as an adult. Curiel told police they would find the missing children's bodies in the storage locker. Neither of the murdered children or the nine-year-old girl had been enrolled in school. Elliott Robinson, director of social services for Monterey County, said Huntsman and her family had been investigated for the last year, suspected of abusing their children. Tami Huntsman’s brother, Wayne Huntsman, is currently in prison for intentionally igniting the massive King Fire which scorched 120 square miles and 12 homes before firefighters contained it last fall. The King Fire cost $5 million a day to fight. .

I believe the Lund exterior sunvisor, in the past available thru Mack parts operations, had the brace. But the better looking (my opinion) factory-installed exterior sunvisor (different vendor) did not have the brace.

AutoKrAZ Press Release / December 11, 2015 Under a contract awarded this year by Ukraine’s Emergency Response agency, truckmaker KrAZ has been chosen to supply specially prepared chassis to the countries fire apparatus body manufacturers. The trucks will be available as ladder, pumper, tanker and rescue trucks. The basis for the 6x4 custom fire apparatus chassis is the KrAZ model 65053 6х4. A 4x4 chassis is also being provided, based on the KrAZ model 5233НЕ. In addition to the six-man four-door crew cab configuration, the trucks are fitted with preheated 330-horsepower engines. Some of the chassis will become AC 40 and AC 60 fire fighting tanker trucks equipped with both water and foam delivery hoses, monitors and foam generators. KrAZ offers a wide range of custom-built cab and chassis to meet the unique needs of the specialty truck market. Photo gallery - http://www.autokraz.com.ua/index.php/en/novosti-i-media/news/item/2438-avtokraz-vyhotovyv-dlia-hschs-avtomobili-shasi

Fuso Press Release / December 15, 2015 Daimler Trucks subsidiary Mitsubishi Fuso Truck and Bus Corporation (MFTBC) has announced that it will begin supplying differential components to the parent’s Detroit unit in the United States. Mitsubishi’s Kawasaki plant will produce ring and pinion gear sets for Detroit brand axles which are featured in North American Freightliner and Western Star trucks. The components are currently produced at Detroit's U.S. plant, Germany (Kassel) and Brazil (São Bernardo do Campo). In response to increasing demand thanks to strong North American business for Daimler Trucks, these gear components will be machined at the Kawasaki Plant as well, and then shipped to be assembled into parts for axles and installed on Freightliner and Western Star trucks in North America. .

Union deal allows Mack Trucks workers to 'share the pain' of 400 layoffs Lehigh Valley Live / December 15, 2015 United Auto Workers Local 677's president calls the arrangement unique, but he doesn't pretend it'll entirely erase the burden Mack Trucks Inc. workers will face when 400 layoffs go into effect next month at Mack's Lehigh Valley plant. Mack Trucks announced the layoff plan on Tuesday. The 400 job losses represent a more than 20 percent reduction in the plant's workforce of about 1,850, a spokesman for the company said. UAW Local 677 President Ed Balukas, whose union represents the majority of that workforce, said there's no way to put a positive spin on what is happening to workers, but a provision in the union's contract should at least soften the blow. It has a program in place that allows workers to take layoffs in increments of 13 or 26 weeks and collect unemployment during that time instead of languishing in some cases for years without getting a call back to the plant. Senior workers who would likely be shielded from losing their job volunteer to take the temporary layoffs to allow junior workers to continue punching in, Balukas explained. Once the 13 or 26 weeks is up, ideally, the senior worker returns to a position opened up by another worker voluntarily taking a layoff for the same period of time, he said. "We can share the pain with each other," the union president said. He said the arrangement is "in these days very rare," noting that sister plants run by Volvo, Mack Trucks parent company, don't do it. "Those people go right out into unemployment with no chance of returning until there's an actual upturn," Balukas said. Balukas is confident there will again be an upturn in truck manufacturing, perhaps as early as the first or second quarter of 2017. It's a cyclical industry. Usually, layoffs happen every few years, but the economic recovery in recent years from the recession slowed the latest cycle, he said, adding that Mack Trucks hasn't had layoffs of this magnitude since 2007. Mack spokesman Christopher Heffner also invoked the cyclical nature of the business in an email about the layoffs. The company anticipated the market for Class 8 heavy-duty trucks, the kind manufactured at the plant, would peak this year, he said. "We regret having to take this action, but we must adapt to market demand," Heffner said. The layoffs take effect Jan. 25. In a separate move, Volvo announced Tuesday it plans to lay off 200 people from its powertrain facility in Hagerstown, Maryland. The facility manufactures Mack engines, transmissions and axles.

Herald Mail Media (Hagerstown) / December 15, 2015 About 200 workers at the Volvo Group Trucks plant in Hagerstown will be laid off during the first quarter of 2016 as the company faces a decline in demand for long-haul trucks, according to a company spokesman. John Mies, vice president of communications for Volvo Group North America, said employees were notified Tuesday morning. The layoffs could begin as early as late January, he said. "We regret having to take this action, but ... we do operate in a cyclical market, and we have to adapt to market demand," Mies said. Plant spokeswoman Belinda Vinson said the company has a contractual obligation to notify all of the roughly 1,800 workers at the powertrain-manufacturing facility when a layoff is announced. However, specific employees to be affected have yet to be determined, she said. Mies described the jobs being cut as production positions. The company plans to assist laid-off workers with outplacement services in accordance with the union's bargaining agreement, he said. The plant off Pennsylvania Avenue north of Hagerstown currently employs about 1,800 people. "We value and appreciate our employees, and this is an unfortunate time," Pierre Jenny, vice president of operations at the Hagerstown plant, said in a statement. Vinson said some employees are eligible for voluntary layoffs, which would enable them to still receive certain benefits over the duration of a specified period. Company officials have contacted the Washington County Department of Business Development and the state to assist laid-off workers with identifying current needs in the county and other employment opportunities, Vinson said.

I have an issue with this article, as a employee of Mack Trucks. Neither the company nor the union local 677 have notified us of the date of layoff or the number affected. If they told you otherwise, it is a bold face lie. And I am willing to meet with you, [Morning Call reporter] Jon Harris and the person who told you this information face to face. This is noting but a slap in the face to the employees of Mack Trucks since we found out through the local news outlets and NOT from any representatives of the company or union. If you want to discuss further, I am available after 3:10 every weekday. Mike Reap Joepa18067@aol.com« less http://www.mcall.com/news/breaking/mc-mack-trucks-announces-job-cuts-20151215-story.html

Today’s Trucking / December 15, 2015 Nearly 16,500 Navistar International model trucks including 1,500 in Canada are being recalled. The bulk are ProStar models, but the recall also includes the DuraStar, WorkStar, TransStar and LoneStar models, all from the 2012-2013 model year. The move follows an investigation by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) that the trucks may have accelerator pedals that do not fully return to the closed throttle position, resulting in engines idling at slightly higher RPMs, which can keep the engine brake from engaging. The investigation was opened following complaints from truck owners. Navistar identified 1,233 warranty clams related to accelerator pedal issues, with 70.3% of these claims on manual transmission vehicles. “Some drivers indicated they were annoyed, while others stated that at idle they were able to keep the vehicle stopped but need to apply more pressure to the brake pedal,” said one NHTSA investigation document. “Some consumers indicated that the engine speed was so high with a manual transmission that the engine-brake would not work, while others stated they were able to pull the accelerator pedal back from underneath with their foot and bring the engine speed back to normal.” Dealer notification is expected to begin around mid-January, according to Lyndi McMillan, external communications manager for Navistar. “There were no crashes, property damage, injuries or fatalities resulting from this issue, and the remedy will involve recalibration of the engine Electronic Control Module (ECM) to eliminate the high idle condition,” she said. Navistar informed NHTSA it became aware of an unauthorized part change to the throttle control unit assembly, manufactured by Williams Controls, from April 2012 to March 2013. This unauthorized change was corrected and all vehicles were being retrofitted with the originally designed part.

The Morning Call / December 15, 2015 Mack Trucks said Tuesday it will lay off about one-fifth of its Lehigh Valley workforce in late January, one of the largest local job announcements from the heavy-duty truck manufacturer since it decided to move its headquarters from Allentown to North Carolina six years ago. "Regretfully, based on the need to adjust production to meet the reduced demand in the market, we will unfortunately have to lay off about 400 people at Mack Lehigh Valley Operations*," Mack spokesman Christopher Heffner said. * The former Macungie Division of Mack Trucks Inc. While Heffner said the company began notifying employees at its Lower Macungie Township plant at 8 a.m. Tuesday., the United Auto Workers Local 677, which represents the Mack workers, and other Mack employees said many learned about the layoff from news reports — not from the company. "It's just a rotten way to find out you're getting laid off," said Ed Balukas, who has been president of UAW Local 677 since 2007. He said affected employees will work their last day on Jan. 22. Mike Reap, a production technician who has worked at Mack since 1998, said employees were "blindsided" by the announcement. He said some wives were texting their husbands who work at Mack, asking: "Are you getting laid off?" "After it hit the news, you could feel a very high level of stress in the plant," said Reap, a 47-year-old Catasauqua resident who will be taking a voluntary 13-week layoff from Mack. "A lot of guys were upset, and felt betrayed and disrespected." While employees did not know the layoff figure before Tuesday, they were aware a reduction was in the works, as the union said in a Nov. 2 letter to its members. But, to some, the layoff of 400 — representing more than 21 percent of Mack's current employment figure of 1,850 in the Lehigh Valley — was higher than expected. "We thought it would be somewhere close to this, but we didn't think it would be this high," Balukas said. The market for Mack trucks also has a direct impact on ancillary businesses, such as Westport Axle, which makes chassis for Mack at a plant nearby in Breinigsville. In a Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification filed with the state Friday, Westport Axle said it will lay off in excess of 50 assembly and warehouse employees in Breinigsville within 60 days. Westport Axle officials did not return calls seeking comment Tuesday. While fluctuations in Mack's workforce are not uncommon because the company monitors the market and adjusts employment needs accordingly, the announcement Tuesday ranks among the largest layoffs from the company in recent years. During the 2008-2009 recession, low truck orders prompted Mack Trucks to reduce staff in Lower Macungie and launch a series of plant shutdowns. For example, Mack laid off 25 employees in May 2009 and held three week-long shutdowns in April and May that year, which sent 425 workers to collect unemployment compensation. And when Mack relocated its headquarters to [the Volvo Headquarters facility in] Greensboro, N.C., in 2009, it resulted in the net loss of 580 Lehigh Valley jobs over two years. Slightly larger than Tuesday's announcement was the news from Mack in October 2006, when the company announced it would lay off 450 of the Lower Macungie plant's 1,040 workers because of a sales slowdown following a boom. Now, Mack says, it is again adapting production at its Lehigh Valley operations to meet market demands. Heavy-duty truck production is expected to peak this year, and Mack's Lower Macungie plant, where all Mack trucks built for the North American market and export are assembled, has been pumping out 116 trucks a day. While Mack's corporate parent, Sweden-based Volvo Group, expects the total North American retail market for heavy-duty trucks to approach 310,000 trucks in 2015, the company is anticipating lower demand, about 280,000 trucks, in 2016. Volvo's anticipated 10 percent decline is actually optimistic compared with other market estimates. In a Dec. 7 report, Stifel Financial Corp. decreased its 2016 North American heavy-duty truck production estimate from 280,000 units to 250,000 after order data underwhelmed for the second consecutive month in November. Stifel's projection of 250,000 units represents an expected 24 percent decline from this year's estimated production of around 327,000. Preliminary heavy-duty truck orders for November of 16,600 units "were disappointing to us considering that November is typically a seasonally strong month for orders," Stifel analysts wrote in the report. That total was down 59 percent from the 41,000 units ordered in November 2014 and down 36 percent from the 26,000 ordered in October, according to the report. As to the main factors slowing the 2015-16 order season, Stifel analysts wrote in the report that freight volumes have softened in recent months, used tractor prices are falling, lower diesel prices are lessening the incentive to upgrade to the newest equipment and heavy-duty retail inventories are higher than they were a year earlier. While Mack deliveries were up 10 percent through October, the company's orders in North America have been headed in the opposite direction. Mack orders declined 51 percent in the third quarter, the result of "dealers focusing on reducing their inventories and the comparison with a good quarter last year," Volvo said. Similarly, in the second quarter, Mack orders were down 50 percent, mainly "a result of cancellations of some of the large quantities of dealer orders placed in the fourth quarter of 2014 combined with a softening in demand in some of Mack's core market segments," such as energy, the company said. The anticipated decline in demand and its consequent employment impact has not been limited to Mack. Also on Tuesday, Volvo said it would lay off about 200 workers at its powertrain-manufacturing facility in Hagerstown, Md., in the first quarter of next year. About two weeks earlier, Volvo said it would lay off 734 employees at the New River Valley Assembly Plant in Dublin, Va., beginning in February. Locally, Balukas said the union's contract expires next October, with negotiations slated to begin in August. As long as the contract's recall rights remain the same, Balukas said those employees who are laid off would have the right to return to Mack first if the company starts hiring again. Heffner said affected employees will have recall rights, with the exception of probationary employees. In addition, he said outplacement support through the local CareerLink office will be offered. While bargaining-unit employees will not receive a severance package, Heffner said they will get certain benefits based on the collective-bargaining agreement. Jeffrey Sheridan, press secretary for Gov. Tom Wolf, said in a statement the state Department of Labor and Industry's Rapid Response Unit has been in contact with Mack's Human Resources Department, the United Automobile Workers union and the local United Way. "The Wolf administration is working on a plan to address the potential negative economic impact for the Lehigh Valley region and to provide assistance to the workers affected by the news concerning Mack," Sheridan said. Despite the upcoming layoffs, Wade Watson, vice president and general manager of Mack Trucks Lehigh Valley Operations, has said that Mack is here to stay in the Lehigh Valley. He has also announced some planned changes at Mack's 1 million-square-foot plant in Lower Macungie, which include expanding the building's south end by adding receiving docks and putting a new facade on the 40-year-old plant. While Balukas and Reap are fully aware that Mack is a cyclical business — sometimes hiring and laying off by the hundreds — they remain discontent with how the company went about its announcement Tuesday. Typically, Reap said, town hall meetings were held [at the former Mack Trucks Inc.] to provide employees with information surrounding a layoff. "It really sucks. It's a bad time of year," Reap said, referencing the upcoming Christmas holiday. "And to be handled this way is very disrespectful to the employees who spend their time and effort building the trucks." Related reading: http://www.bigmacktrucks.com/index.php?/topic/42910-volvo-trucks-to-lay-off-734-workers-at-its-virginia-plant/ http://www.bigmacktrucks.com/index.php?/topic/42949-union-authorizes-volvo-strike/ http://www.bigmacktrucks.com/index.php?/topic/42752-volvo-to-cut-production-in-december-january/ http://www.bigmacktrucks.com/index.php?/topic/42494-layoffs-likely-to-hit-mack-trucks/

Janet Yellen: An orthodox economist for unorthodox times Reuters / December 15, 2015 Janet Yellen is guiding the Federal Reserve towards its first rate rise in a decade armed with traditional economic models that some economists worry could fail her in a world of massive money printing and near zero rates. The 69-year-old economist argues the time is coming for a rate-lift-off even though inflation has yet to accelerate, trusting decades of studies that suggest a tight labor market eventually creates inflationary pressures. It is a risky wager considering that global inflation is at historic lows and many central banks remain in an easing mode as their economies struggle to get any traction. If she is right, Yellen, who has already presided over the end of the Fed's bond-buying stimulus program, will cement her reputation and that of her "dashboard" that relies on long-established relationships between jobs, wages and prices. If she is wrong, the Fed could join the European Central Bank and the central banks of Sweden, Israel and Canada, which have all tried, but failed, to escape the drag of zero rates in the wake of the 2007-09 financial crisis. There are reasons to doubt conventional economic theory. Many economists predicted a spiral of falling prices when the U.S. jobless rate soared during the crisis and then thought inflation would rise when unemployment plunged. Neither happened, though Yellen has maintained this year that the Fed was on course for rate increases, which would be "data dependent," likely gradual, and with no pre-set path. This shows Yellen "is grounded in traditional modeling but she is well aware that there is uncertainty," said Randall Kroszner, who served with Yellen as a Fed governor between 2006 and 2009. "It is possible, though unlikely, the traditional models are just all wrong (and) we're in a whole new world. But she's not going to fly by the seat of her pants," Kroszner said. Yellen has made clear that models only serve as guideposts in a complicated decision-making process. MODELS AND HUNCHES Interviews with the Fed chief's former colleagues paint a picture of Yellen as a pragmatic economist who is ready to adjust course when necessary, but one who relies on data and economic theory rather than guesswork or hunches. (Yellen's dashboard. See the graphic here: here) That could mean sometimes missing signals that are either too new or too hard to measure for traditional models and yet possibly relevant for policy. Fed transcripts show that at a Fed policy meeting in September 1996, Yellen, then a Fed board member, said she was "quite willing" to support an increase in rates because her analysis suggested inflation was poised to rise. However, Alan Greenspan, the Fed's chairman at the time, convinced policymakers to hold fire at that meeting arguing that he saw changes in the economy that were holding back prices and it later turned out that inflation indeed stayed low. "It was intuition more than anything else," said Alice Rivlin, fellow board member at the time, referring to Greenspan's hunch that U.S. productivity was rising. A wrong call on inflation now could stunt job growth and possibly keep rates stuck near zero or even force the Fed to reverse course and cut rates. "If they don't see any pickup in costs or prices, that would cause them to be even more gradual than they think they are going to be," said Donald Kohn, who served on the Fed's board when Yellen headed the San Francisco Fed between 2004 and 2010. Fed policymakers saw higher inflation around the corner in 2013 and 2014 that did not materialize. Yellen has argued this year that temporary factors such as low oil prices and a strong dollar will fade while a tight labor market sparks price pressures. "It's straightforward analysis but the issue is they have been saying this for years, so they are not hitting something right in their story," said Timothy Duy, an economist at the University of Oregon. Hiking rates too early could make it more likely the U.S. economy tips into recession, he said. The Fed's preferred inflation measure stripped of food and energy prices is now at 1.3 percent and its policymakers on average see the gauge accelerating next year but not quite hitting their 2 percent target. Jon Faust, a former special adviser to the Fed board whose inflation forecasting research has been cited by Yellen, says he doubts any policymakers have a firm view how to get inflation back to target and keep it there even if they agree that a tightening job market will help. With the jobless rate at 5 percent, half its 2009 level, Yellen was confident enough to warn lawmakers on Dec. 3 that inflation could rise "significantly" above the Fed's 2 percent target if rate-setters aren't ahead of the curve. However, some policymakers, including Fed Governor Lael Brainard, argue that the relationship between unemployment and inflation is not as straightforward as it used to be and that global economic weakness could knock the United States off course. Many analysts expect Brainard, who has emerged as the leader of the Fed's cautious faction, will accept a first hike without dissenting, but could need more convincing for subsequent rate rises. Brainard said on Dec. 1 the U.S. dollar's appreciation, driven in part by global economic weakness, could argue for a "delay in the date of lift-off and a shallower path for the federal funds rate over several years." On the other side of the policy debate is Charles Plosser, who led the Philadelphia Fed from 2006 until March 2015. Plosser would have preferred to raise rates "a year ago" but was glad that the Fed chief facilitated the debate over liftoff. "The fact that she can articulate the rationale, that's really important," he said. "Because then you can debate."

If the Fed raises rates tomorrow, they might fall again before long The Washington Post / December 15, 2015 Whenever the Federal Reserve does start raising rates -- whether on Wednesday, as seems likely, or sometime next year -- the biggest question will be whether the Fed eventually ends up back where it started—at zero. That, after all, is what has happened to every other country that has tried to "lift off" from what economists call "the zero lower bound." The simple story is that central bankers, who pride themselves on choosing the hard right over the easy inflationary wrong, tend to look for any excuse to end zero interest rates, even if they have to invent one. But raising rates before the economy is ready means you will have to cut them back down to zero in rather short order — which has been the case in Europe, Japan, Sweden and Israel. And it might happen here, considering the Fed looks like it's going to start increasing interest rates even though inflation is far below its 2 percent target and isn't really rising. But even if it doesn't, the Fed still might find itself back at zero in just a few years. That's because the central bank thinks the aftereffects of the financial crisis have made the economy susceptible to slowing down at interest rates above 2 percent, instead of the previous 4 percent. And since the Fed usually needs to cut rates by 4 or 5 percentage points to fight a recession, simple math tells us there's a good chance interest rates will end up at zero whenever that is. If it does, the Fed will have to rethink how it does things. It's harder for the Fed to do its job when interest rates are zero. Sure, it can buy bonds with newly-printed money, promise not to raise rates for a long time, or even, as other countries have shown, cut rates ever-so-slightly into negative territory. But none of those work as well as a regular, old rate cut. That's why a central bank that's been forced to reduce rates down to zero is one that probably has more unemployment and less inflation than it wants. That bank has used up its best tool for getting the economy moving again, leaving it no choice but to turn to less effective options. So a future where zero interest rates are a recurring phenomenon would be one where both recessions and recoveries are nasty, brutish, and take too long. The Fed thinks it can avoid this fate, and maybe it can. It has done a better job than almost every other central bank since the crisis hit. But that's the point. If even the Fed can't lift off without crashing back down to zero, the bank needs more than better policy -- it needs a better target. Boston Fed President Eric Rosengren, for one, thinks the Fed would have to seriously consider increasing its inflation target if it returns to the lower zero bound next recession. That would require higher interest rates to keep higher inflation in check, which, in turn, would give the bank the room it needs to later cut rates without getting too close to zero. There's some question whether the Fed could just create as much inflation as it wants, but Japan, at least, shows that a determined central bank can indeed push it up, albeit at a plodding pace. In other words, this might be the Fed's only chance of returning to normalcy. Maybe it can get us back to the economic nirvana of good growth, shallow slumps and 2 percent inflation. But maybe not. It is possible that the financial crisis has changed things forever. The Fed might find out that it has to choose between longer recessions and higher inflation. That, then, is what's really at stake when the central bank starts increasing interest rates in the near future. Is this the beginning of the end of the crisis era or the end of the end of the pre-crisis one? It depends on whether we ever hear the words "zero interest rates" again.

The Financial Times / December 15, 2015 If the Federal Reserve proceeds as expected and raises US interest rates for the first time in almost a decade on Wednesday it will be an affirmation of what Janet Yellen and her fellow policymakers see as the strength of the US recovery. It will also be at odds with what many in the US’s industrial economy are seeing. From manufacturing behemoths like Caterpillar and Deere & Co to companies supplying the industrial sector the common theme in recent months has been that, thanks to a strong dollar and a collapse in commodity prices, tough times are back. Some are going so far as to declare the arrival of an industrial recession. While the Fed appears unlikely to let that stop its well-flagged move to raise rates for the first time since 2006 there are signs that concerns about the dollar and the industrial economy are likely to influence what it does after that. “It is something that makes us more cautious in terms of raising rates,” Ms Yellen, the Fed chair, said earlier this month of the strong dollar and its drag on the economy. The messages emerging from the US industrial heartland remain pretty stark. At WW Grainger, an Illinois-based industrial supply company which sells everything from lightbulbs to electric motors and safety gear, sales in the US are down 5 per cent on last year with government purchases the only segment offering any growth. The company has been warning investors for months that it is facing a “tough industrial economy” which may last into 2016. At Fastenal, which similarly relies on supplying the industrial sector, management has gone a step further. “The industrial environment is in a recession,” Fastenal’s chief financial officer told analysts on an October conference call. For Cummins, the diesel engine maker, a collapse in US demand for trucks has added to the woes it was already facing from the slowdown in big emerging economies such as Brazil and China and forced lay-offs. “It is a really tough time here now,” Tom Linebarger, Cummins’ CEO, said in a recent interview. “In many of our markets we are back to 2009 levels again, which is a story you are not really reading about.” Those sorts of anecdotes translate into a broader view across US manufacturing that the Fed may be pulling the trigger too early if it raises rates now. In a recent survey by the National Association of Manufacturers, 55 per cent of companies still considered the US economy too weak to raise rates before 2016. Less than a third thought the time was right. “There clearly is a sense that this [a Fed hike] is going to happen,” said Chad Moutray, NAM’s chief economist. “But there still is a lot of nervousness out there about what that means.” Much of the focus in the lead-up to the Fed move has been on strong employment numbers — where the big growth has been in professional and other services — and inflation that is creeping back up towards the Fed’s 2 per cent target rate. But the data on America’s industrial sector have been far less encouraging. Industrial production, new figures for which will be released on Wednesday, has contracted in three of the last six months while the Institute of Supply Management’s latest monthly survey of factory orders pointed to a US manufacturing contraction. Behind those figures are the strong dollar and falling US exports which saw US companies export $15bn less in October than at their all-time high in July 2014. Jason Furman, chairman of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers, predicted on Tuesday that net exports would “continue to be a headwind” in 2016. “It is more likely to be taking something off our growth rate rather than adding to it.” While the Fed has traditionally shied away from talking about the dollar, Ms Yellen and other senior Fed officials have been increasingly willing to acknowledge the importance of foreign exchange movements explicitly. Stanley Fischer, vice-chair of the Fed’s board of governors, has dubbed the dollar upsurge since the summer of 2014 a “sizeable shock”. Lael Brainard, another Fed governor, said this month it would take a 1 percentage point cut in the federal funds rate to insulate US employment from the effects of a 15 per cent strengthening in the inflation-adjusted exchange rate. Given rates were already near zero, this implied delayed lift-off and a shallower path of future hikes, she added. The comforting fact for the US economy may be that its industrial sector and exports are now less important than they were. Manufacturing makes up only 12 per cent of US gross domestic product. Exports of goods and services represented 13 per cent of GDP in 2014, a far smaller share of output than in other OECD countries such as Germany. Still, the woes of US manufacturers are real and will weigh on Fed policymakers’ minds. Kevin Logan, an economist at HSBC, argues the impact of the strong dollar is likely to be a more cautious path forward for the central bank. US GDP has risen by 2.2 per cent over the past four quarters. But, if the drag from the decline in net exports were stripped out, it would instead have expanded by 2.9 per cent, he estimates. “It suggests to me that the Fed is not going to be very aggressive in the coming year,” he said. .

The Washington Post / December 14, 2015 There’s a Cuban American first-term senator running for president who has done more than any Republican to stop Obamacare. No, I’m not talking about Ted Cruz (R-Tex.). I’m talking about Marco Rubio (R-Fla.). The battle against Obamacare has been Cruz’s signature struggle. In 2013, Cruz took to the Senate floor and promised to speak out against Obamacare “until I am no longer able to stand.” To fill the time, he even read Dr. Seuss’s “Green Eggs and Ham.” His filibuster, and the government shutdown over Obamacare it sparked, launched Cruz into the political stratosphere — inspiring conservatives eager for a principled fighter who does not back down. But while the shutdown may have helped boost Cruz into the top tier of Republican presidential contenders, it had zero impact on undermining Obamacare. Rubio, by contrast, didn’t read Dr. Seuss on the Senate floor, but he has quietly pushed Obamacare into what may prove to be a death spiral. When the Obama administration was crafting Obamacare, it came up with a crony capitalist solution to entice reluctant insurers to join the exchanges. Many insurers worried that there would not be enough healthy people paying in to cover the costs of sick people. So the administration created a “risk corridor” program to help prop up insurers who lost money in the first three years of the law. Profitable insurers would pay some of those profits into a pool to help insurers who lost money. If the amount insurers lost exceeded what the companies paid in, the government would step in and make up the difference. Calling this “a taxpayer-funded bailout for insurance companies,” Rubio last year quietly inserted language into the omnibus government spending bill that barred the Department of Health and Human Services from dipping into general funds to pay failing insurers. “While the Obama administration can still administer the risk-corridor program, for one year at least, they won’t be able to use taxpayer funds to bail out insurance companies,” Rubio said. His provision sparked little opposition at the time, but it has proved to be a poison pill that is killing Obamacare from within. Last year, insurers lost $2.9 billion more than expected on Obamacare. But insurers had paid only $362 million into the program — leaving it more than $2.5 billion short. Thanks to Rubio’s provision, the administration was allowed to pay only 13 cents of every dollar insurers requested. Without the taxpayer bailouts, more than half of the Obamacare insurance cooperatives created under the law failed. One, Health Republic of Oregon, was expecting a $7.9 million bailout from the government. Instead, thanks to Rubio, it got only $995,000 — not a penny of it from the taxpayers. The Oregon co-op announced in October it was closing its doors. Soon, two other insurers — WinHealth Partners in Wyoming and Moda Health in Washington state — pulled out of the exchanges. And United Healthcare, one of the nation’s largest insurers, announced that it may leave the Obamacare exchanges in 2016. If that happens, and other insurers follow United’s lead, that could spell disaster for Obamacare. The Hill newspaper called Rubio’s provision “the biggest blow in the GOP’s five-year war against Obamacare.” The New York Times declared in a front-page story, “For all the Republican talk about dismantling the Affordable Care Act, one Republican presidential hopeful has actually done something toward achieving that goal,” adding that Rubio’s provision has “tangled up the Obama administration, sent tremors through health insurance markets and rattled confidence in the durability of President Obama’s signature health law.” Now that the Obama administration understands the grave threat Rubio’s provision poses to Obamacare, Democrats are pushing to block it from this year’s omnibus spending bill so that they can bail out the insurers. According to Politico, “HHS officials . . . maintained that insurers will eventually receive the requested payments during the next two years of the temporary program.” The insurers are joining the fight. In talking points obtained by BuzzFeed, Blue Cross Blue Shield Association’s chief executive, Scott Serota, warned congressional Democrats that Rubio’s provision “will result in massive premium increases and could cause private insurers to become insolvent.” In other words, Rubio’s provision poses a mortal threat to Obamacare. Rubio maintains that if it takes a taxpayer bailout of big business to save Obamacare, that alone proves the law is unsustainable. He is pushing to keep his bailout ban in the final bill. “Let’s be clear, the reason these health insurance companies are enduring a financial loss is that Obamacare is a disastrous law,” Rubio declared in a letter to House and Senate leaders. “It broke the promise to lower health insurance premiums . . . Now the very architects of this law are attempting to place taxpayers on the hook.” He’s right — and now it’s up to GOP leaders to back him by refusing to agree to any omnibus spending bill that allows a taxpayer bailout for insurance companies that made a bad bet on Obamacare. And Rubio deserves credit at Tuesday night’s Republican presidential debate as the only candidate on the stage who has done more than talk about killing Obamacare.

Associated Press / October 21, 2015 Five Minnesota men accused of accused of trying to fly overseas to fight with ISIS are now charged with a new count of conspiracy to commit murder outside the United States. Prosecutors say the men are part of a group of friends in Minnesota’s Somali community who recruited and inspired each other to join ISIS. Three members of the group have pleaded guilty, but the rest — Hamza Naj Ahmed, 20; Mohamed Abdihamid Farah, 21; Adnan Abdihamid Farah, 19; Abdurahman Yasin Daud, 21; and Guled Ali Omar, 21 — are scheduled to stand trial in February. Some of the men began talking about fighting with the Islamic State group as early as March 2014. As part of their planning, some of the men communicated with ISIS members overseas, some supplied an informant with materials for fake passports and some played paintball to prepare for combat. The 14-count indictment charges all five men with conspiracy to commit murder outside the U.S. and conspiracy to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization. It also charges all but Adnan Farah with attempting to provide such support. Some of the new charges include perjury counts against Adnan Farah, Mohamed Farah and Daud for allegedly lying to the federal grand jury. Some members of the group provided others with telephone numbers they could use in Turkey to contact members of ISIS. Daud and Adnan Farah used social media to communicate with a self-described ISIS member in Syria who gave them information about the best way to travel to join the fighting. On April 19, Daud and Mohamed Farah received fake passports from an undercover FBI employee in San Diego, California. They were both arrested that day in San Diego, while most of the other members of the group were arrested in Minnesota. .

Reuters / December 11, 2015 A Minnesota man was arrested on Friday on charges that he threatened FBI agents and a judge this week after a friend was taken into custody for conspiring to join ISIS. Khaalid Abdulkadir was accused of impeding and retaliating against a federal judge and federal law enforcement officers on Wednesday, sending two tweets within hours of the arrest of Abdirizak Mohamed Warsame, 20. (see above “Feds Arrest 'Emir' of ISIS Recruitment Effort in Minnesota”). Abdulkadir sent two tweets after Warsame's arrest stating “kill them FBI” and “I'm kill them FEDS for take my brothers” and the judge. Both tweets were removed by Thursday morning, but screenshots were saved, prosecutors said. "While there are many legitimate means in the United States to voice dissent and difference of opinion with our government, threatening violent retaliation against federal agents is both illegal and outrageous," U.S. Attorney Andrew Luger said. An affidavit showed that Abdulkadir had been on the radar of the FBI for some time and was exchanging messages with another former Minnesota native, Mohamed Abdullahi Hassan. Hassan left America in 2008 to join extremist group al-Shabaab fighting government forces in Somalia. While abroad, Hassan turned recruiter, trying to get others from the U.S. to join jihadist groups, and regularly tweeted messages praising the killing of Jews and terror attacks such as those on the Charlie Hebdo offices in Paris. The affidavit claims Abdulkadir and Hassan swapped messages back in January in which the Minnesota native expressed an interest in traveling to Syria. Abdulkadir wrote: 'Brother I’m trying to make moves and I have no connection so what’s the deal brother? I’m trying to bounce for untied state Mpls mn to [iSIS].' Hassan told Abdulkadir to find his way to Turkey, and he would then help Abdulkadir make it to ISIS-controlled territory. Abdulkadir had also been in contact with Abdi Nur, another man from Minneapolis native who is now believed to be in Raqqa, the Syrian city that has become the default capital for ISIS. The affidavit also alleges Abdulkadir was part of a group of young men who videotaped a deputy U.S. marshal through a window on the ground floor of the federal courthouse in Minneapolis. The marshal was filmed after a court appearance by one man from a group of six who were accused of conspiring to provide support to ISIS. Abdulkadir's case has parallels with that of another Minnesota man, Mahamed Abukar Said, who was charged with two felonies for tweeting 'ima whack that us attorney general' after the arrests of the six men in April. Said pleaded guilty to a reduced misdemeanor charge last month and faces a maximum of a year in jail plus supervised release and probation when he's sentenced later this month. Warsame was the tenth Minnesota man charged in an investigation into recruiting and support for ISIS militants among the Twin Cities Somali Muslim community. So far, three men have pleaded guilty, five are scheduled to go to trial in May and one is believed to be with Islamic State militants in Syria. A U.S. magistrate judge ordered Abdulkadir held temporarily in a brief appearance on Friday in U.S. District Court in Minneapolis. A detention hearing was scheduled for Wednesday. Roughly 22 young men have left Minnesota since 2007 to join al-Shabab in Somalia, while about a dozen Minnesota residents have traveled to Syria to join jihadist groups there since late 2013. .

Reuters / December 14, 2015 A Maryland man has been charged with attempting to provide material support to ISIS, obstruction of agency proceedings and making false statements and falsifying or concealing material facts. He faces a maximum of 31 years in prison for the charges. Mohamed Elshinawy, 30, of Edgewood, Maryland, was arrested on Friday. Elshinawy pledged allegiance to ISIS in February and later told his brother he wanted to die as a martyr. He is a U.S. citizen. The FBI discovered a person in Egypt who was trying to send money to the U.S. for possibly nefarious purposes. On June 28,.that person transferred $1,000 to Elshinawy. A month later, Elshinawy told the FBI that his mother had sent him the money to buy an iPhone for a friend. However, he later admitted that a childhood friend had put him in touch with a member of ISIS and that he knew the person who transferred him the money was associated with the ISIS. Elshinawy told the FBI that he had received a total of $4,000 in two payments, one valued at $1,000 and the other valued at $3,000, with the instructions to use the funds for “operational purposes,” which prosecutors say Elshinawy interpreted as to cause destruction through an attack in the U.S. Elshinawy was also told that if he ever came under surveillance, he should stop whatever he is doing in connection to planning an attack. During a second interview with the FBI, Elshinawy said he never received any more money from ISIS other than the $4,000 he disclosed. He later, however, admitted that he received another $1,200 from an ISIS operative through PayPal. An investigation found that between March and June 2015, Elshinawy received at least $8,700 in payments from people he knew to be associated with ISIS. Elshinawy sold printers on eBay as a means to cover the payments from ISIS. Elshinawy also used multiple email accounts and "pay as you go" phones to communicate with ISIS. .

Hillary Clinton promises 'path to full and equal citizenship' for illegal immigrants The Guardian / December 15, 2015 Speaking in New York, Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton has promised she would remove barriers for immigrants on a path to citizenship if elected president. Clinton outlined a progressive immigration agenda, vowing to waive application fees associated with naturalization, while repeating calls to expand on president Obama’s executive actions and push to create “a path to full and equal citizenship” for the more than 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the US. “If you work hard, if you love this country and want nothing more to build a good future for you and your children, we should give you a way to come forward and become a citizen,” she said. The speech was a clear attempt to reach out to the crucial Latino bloc for whom immigration has become a central issue, along with the economy, education and health care. During the address to the annual National Immigrant Integration Conference, Clinton was interrupted several times by hecklers. One criticized remarks she made in 2014: that unaccompanied minors fleeing violence and poverty in central America be “sent back” to their native countries. Another was angry she did not call explicitly for an end to all mass immigration detention. “We are tired of the same machinery,” said Marco Malagon, an activist from Texas who carried a cardboard sign that read “Not Ready 4 Hillary”. “Declare a moratorium on detention. Declare a moratorium on immigrant detention until immigration reform passes.” Clinton was introduced by Luis Gutiérrez, a Democratic congressman from Illinois and a forcible voice in the push for immigration reform, who referred to her in Spanish as the future “la presidencia de los estados unidos”. “Hillary is with the Latina community and I am with her,” Gutiérrez wrote. “She will do what is best for Latinos and all Americans. Hillary is poised to propel the country forward and I’m proud to be with her.” During her speech Clinton took aim at some of her Republican rivals, drawing a link between Donald Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric and the rest of the field. “They’re all moving toward the extreme and away from the rest of America,” Clinton said. Clinton has made immigration reform a central focus of her campaign, framing it as a moral and economic issue. “I want to put an end to families being torn apart,” Clinton said on Monday. In May, Clinton held a roundtable discussion in Las Vegas with the Dreamers, a movement of young activists who were brought to the US as children. There she promised to expand on president Obama’s executive actions and push for a path to citizenship for the more than 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the US. She also called for measures allowing the parents of Dreamers to apply for legal status and a recalibration of targeted enforcement procedures. She also promised to end family detention and close private detention centers. Yet Clinton has made missteps in her outreach to the Latino community. She was criticized by immigration activists and a Democratic challenger for using the term “illegal immigrants” at a campaign event in New Hampshire. She has since said it was a “poor choice of words” and pledged not to use the term [call a spade a spade, from that day forward]. In October, Clinton was heckled during a speech at the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute Gala in Washington by a young organizer with United We Dream Action. The group wanted Clinton to stop accepting campaign donations from lobbyists associated with the two largest private prison companies. More than 60% of immigration detention beds in the US are operated by for-profit companies [i.e., unnecessarily profiting from U.S. taxpayers]. Subsequently her campaign said it would no longer accept campaign contributions from those corporations or lobbyists working for them. America Rising, an anti-Clinton super-PAC, released a video on Monday that attempts to show inconsistencies in the former secretary of state’s record on immigration, contrasted with previous comments by Gutiérrez noting that she struggled to respond to a question during a 2007 debate about whether she would support giving driver’s licenses to undocumented [illegal] immigrants. She now supports such proposals. (Driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants???........these criminals aren’t even suppose to be here........What in the world? Why weren’t they arrested at the Division of Motor Vehicles?) “Secretary Clinton’s willingness to say or do anything reached new levels in 2015 when she completely abandoned her previous positions in order to win a primary,” said Jeff Bechdel, America Rising PAC communications director. “While not surprising it’s a clear indication Clinton is a carefully poll-tested politician, and that’s exactly why a majority of voters say they don’t trust her.” ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ When it comes to illegal immigrants in the United States, neither our clearly worded immigration laws (procedures) nor the will of the people (legal U.S. citizens) ever seem to matter. Why does our government selectively enforce our immigration laws? Want to immigrate from the UK?........then go thru the standard process dictated by U.S. law. Cross the Rio Grande at night illegally into the U.S.......”Welcome, our President and politicians say you can stay without fear of retribution”. (U.S. immigration applicants in the UK wanting an expedited process can fly into Mexico City and follow the crowds northward.) I’m at a loss as to why any politician would promise illegal immigrants amnesty after the crime they've committed, allowing them to become legal U.S. residents. When did rewarding criminals become an American standard? Illegal immigrants are inherently criminals. That they would intentionally ignore our immigration laws and enter into the United States illegally, reveals a character flaw in every one of them which our country doesn’t need more of. The 11.3 million illegal immigrants (aliens) in the United States should be deported, and black-listed from applying to immigrate to the U.S. in the future, the penalty for their crime. The U.S. citizenship of all children born to illegal immigrants in the United States should be revoked. They should be deported with their illegal immigrant parents. The U.S. citizenship of all birth tourism babies over the last 10 years should be revoked. The founding fathers did not intend for foreigners to fly into the US (and even US global territories like Saipan) to give birth, so the child's family could use this means (loophole) to immigrate later. At any point in time, there are millions of people around the world who are waiting in line to legally immigrate to the United States. This is the process, the immigration law, of our country. Should any other individuals wish to immigrate to the U.S., they can apply through the normal process at the U.S. embassy in their home country.

Because the metrics of the world today are entirely different.

For one thing, it destabilizes the markets. You've noticed the stock market falling in parallel with oil prices.