Thread: Sell everything! 2016 will be a 'cataclysmic year,' warns RBS

Sell everything! 2016 will be a 'cataclysmic year,' warns RBS
by Jim Boulden @CNNMoneyInvest January 12, 2016: 10:51 AM ET

"Sell everything."

That harrowing advice is from The Royal Bank of Scotland, which has warned of a "cataclysmic year" ahead for markets and advised clients to head for the exit. Do not wait. Do not pass go.

"Sell everything except high quality bonds," warned Andrew Roberts in a note this week.

He said the bank's red flags for 2016 -- falling oil, volatility in China, shrinking world trade, rising debt, weak corporate loans and deflation -- had all been seen in just the first week of trading.

"We think investors should be afraid," he said.

Morgan Stanley warned this week that oil could touch $20 a barrel. RBS says if it falls below $30, then $16 is on the horizon.

The world is in a global recession, Roberts wrote. This terrible cocktail means investors should now be thinking about getting a "return of capital, not return on capital."

RBS compares the market mood with that of 2008 before the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the start of the global financial crisis.

At least then, emerging markets were there to save the world from complete collapse.

China cannot this time around, let alone any other big emerging market. RBS remains "deeply skeptical" that Chinese authorities can right the ship any time soon. It warns that without allowing a massive devaluation of its currency -- around 20% -- China can be of no help.

RBS believes China suffered a massive outflow of capital in December -- perhaps as much as $170 billion - with much of that money going straight into the dollar. A chart showing Chinese outflows in 2015 is "surely now the most important chart in the world," concluded Roberts.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/12/inve...smic-year-rbs/

I don't see this. I think the RBS is grotesquely overstating the situation. It's not good but it's not been good for long time. I saw on CNN today that Obama has created more net new jobs than any President since Reagan including Reagan, 22.9 million during his term. While this may be true, they weren't the right jobs. When Bush left office in 2008, there were 49 million Americans on Medicaid. Today, there are over 73 million. So whatever jobs Obama created they didn't go to our poor, they didn't go to our middle class and they didn't go to our college graduates. So who got them? I guess immigrants got them.

Under Obama, all job gains among women have gone to foreign-born

Jobs shock: 100% of female employment gains taken by foreigners since 2007

By Paul Bedard 8/7/15

All of the employment gains among women since the recession hit in December 2007 have been taken by foreigners, even at a time when the numbers of U.S.-born women surged more than 600,000, according to new federal statistics.

The jobs data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed gains in the "employment level" among "foreign born women" and losses among "native born women."
AP Photo

The charts show that 9.041 million foreign-born women held jobs in December of 2007 compared to 10.028 million today – or a gain of roughly 1 million jobs.
In contrast, 59.322 million U.S.-born women held jobs in December of 2007 compared to 59.258 million today – or a loss of nearly 64,000 jobs.

Overall, nearly 25 million foreign workers, men and women, hold jobs inside the United States, according to a Senate immigration expert.

The shocking female jobs statistic comes as the U.S. provides some 1 million green cards to new permanent immigrants, along with 700,000 foreign workers visas, and accepts 70,000 refugees and asylum-seekers, and half a million foreign students.

And according to Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., if changes to green card allotments are not changed to lower, the U.S. will issue more green cards to new permanent immigrants over the next decade than the combined populations of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/jo...rticle/2569824


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
698K Native-Born Americans Lost Their Job In August: Why This Suddenly Is The Most Important Jobs Chart


Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/08/2015

After the Fed admitted over a year ago that the US unemployment rate (which in 2012 was supposed to be a rate hike "threshold" once it hit 6.5% and is now at 5.1%) has become irrelevant in a country where a record 94 million people have left the labor force, and with the Fed poised to hike rates even though US hourly wages have not only not increased for the past 7 years, but for the vast majority of the labor force continue to decline, some have asked - is there any labor-related chart that matters any more?
The answer: a resounding yes, only it is none of the conventional charts that algos and sometimes humans look at.
The one chart that matters more than ever,has little to nothing to do with the Fed's monetary policy, but everything to do with the November 2016 presidential elections in which the topic of immigration, both legal and illegal, is shaping up to be the most rancorous, contentious and divisive.
The chart is the following, showing the cumulative addition of foreign-born and native-born workers added to US payrolls according to the BLS since December 2007, i.e., since the start of the recession/Second Great Depression.


The chart is especially important because what it shows for just the month of August will be enough to provide the Trump - and every other - campaign with enough soundbites and pivot points to last it for weeks on end: namely, that in August a whopping 698,000 native-born Americans lost their job. This drop was offset by 204,000 foreign-born Americans, who got a job in the month of August.


But the punchline: since December 2007, according to the Household Survey, only 790,000 native born American jobs have been added. Contrast that with the 2.1 million foreign-born Americans who have found a job over the same time period...

... and you have a combustible mess that will lead to serious fireworks during the next GOP primary.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-0...ortant-jobs-ch

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Have immigrants taken most of the new jobs? Yes and no

By Jeffry Bartash
Published: Sept 15, 2015

People born in U.S. tend to have better jobs, earn more




A meme making the rounds on conservative websites implies that foreign workers are taking lots of jobs away from those born in the U.S. — yet another reason why the nation needs tighter immigration laws, a theme pushed by presidential candidates including Donald Trump.
The truth is a lot more complicated.
Here’s a widely circulated chart showing that only 790,000 native-born Americans found jobs between August 2015 and the start of the Great Recession in December 2007. By contrast, a net 2.1 million foreign-born people obtained work during the same span.

The chart quickly spread on the Internet and as used to criticize the Obama White House and politicians who favor loosened immigration laws, a major issue ahead of the 2016 presidential election.
Now, there’s nothing technically wrong with the chart. But the number of jobs obtained by native and foreign-born workers in the U.S. looks dramatically different depending on which month is used as the starting point.
If January 2007 is used, for example, some 2.4 million native-born Americans have found jobs in the past eight years vs. 2.6 million foreign-born workers. That’s a category that includes legal and illegal immigrants, foreign students and guest workers.
If June 2009 — the end of the Great Recession — is used as the starting point, the numbers are much more favorable to native-born workers. About 5.3 million are working now vs. mid-2009, compared with 3.1 million foreign-born workers.


The government’s data on the birth status of U.S. workers has other shortcomings. For one thing, the stats don’t go back very far or offer easy comparisons with other economic cycles. The employment numbers alone also don’t tell us anything about the quality of the new jobs or how much they pay.
Foreign-born workers, who often have less formal education, are more likely to hold lower-paying jobs. Many work at service-related firms such as retailers, restaurants and hotels, doing work that native-born Americans are less eager to perform. And these sectors have witnessed some of the fastest job growth since the U.S. exited recession in mid-2009.
People born in the U.S. occupy more higher-paid jobs in management and white-collar fields, but those jobs haven’t grown as fast.
The disparity in the kinds of work performed by the foreign and native-born is evident in paychecks. The average foreign-born worker was paid $664 a week in 2014 excluding overtime and bonuses, Labor Department data shows. That’s 19% less than the average $820 weekly paycheck of native-born Americans.






Foreign-born people in the U.S., meanwhile, also appear to show a somewhat greater willingness to work. Some 61.8% of all those 16 or older held a job as of August, compared with 59% of native-born Americans. And a higher percentage of the foreign born were looking for work as well.
Of course, the retirement of the baby boomers accounts for some of the difference in the shifting composition of the labor force. Foreign-born people in the U.S. are younger on average.
What’s also reflected in the employment numbers is the bigger share of the U.S. populace who are foreign born. They accounted for 16.5% of the labor force in 2014 vs. 13.3% in 2000 and just a little over 10% in the early 1990s.
Whatever the case, the bigger problem for American workers born both inside and outside the country is a slowdown in the long-term creation of new businesses and new jobs. What’s especially needed are more higher-paying occupations in which the increasing number of Americans going to college can best put their talents to use.
That’s an area in which the foreign born with strong educational backgrounds can help. Studies show that immigrants play a bigger role than the native born in starting up new companies that generate good jobs in fields such as technology.


http://www.marketwatch.com/story/nat...ers-2015-09-14

Great article, artist! Thank you!

And this job stat from a petition just released by NumbersUSA to your representatives.....


[QUOTE] Dear Your Three Members of Congress,

Newly-released data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that U.S.-born workers lost 320,000 jobs while 306,000 foreign-born workers gained jobs. This is unacceptable and is another example why immigration to the U.S. needs to be reduced. I hope you will help American workers by reducing immigration numbers.

Every month, U.S.-born workers are squeezed out of the workplace. The most recent jobs data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics only reinforces this trend. The U.S. currently brings in more than 125,000 new foreign workers each month -- that's more than 1.5 million each year. How can U.S.-born workers hope to compete when many of the newly-created jobs go to foreign-born workers?

American workers are struggling and they need Congress' help. I hope you will help all U.S.-born workers by taking steps to reduce immigration numbers.

Sincerely,

[QUOTE]

https://www.numbersusa.com/petition?id=17200