CMR is the leading provider of funding and management support for small to medium-sized businesses and entrepreneurs 

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

I have been feverishly writing lately on covid mandates and vaccine passports issues, and I’m sure most readers understand why – We are currently at the cusp of a great conflict against the powers that be; people who are exploiting the (mostly manufactured) covid crisis for unprecedented political and economic control. And when I say “manufactured”, I mean that there is no crisis, no need for mandates, no need for lockdowns and no need for vaccine passports.

We are dealing with a virus that around 99.7% of people will easily survive according to the medical establishment’s own studies and stats as well as numerous independent studies, yet, for some reason we are being bombarded with fear mongering from the media and from governments.

Why is the only solution being suggested to the general public involve us giving up all of our freedoms and medical autonomy? Why is 99.7% of the population supposed to lock down, mask up and submit to an experimental mRNA vaccine with no long term testing data to prove its safety? Why don’t the 0.26% of people that are truly at risk of dying from the virus simply take precautions or stay home while the rest of us get on with normal life? Hell, I would be fine with contributing to a fund to help support the 0.26% at risk, to help their families and help with their medical bills.

The Federal Reserve and other central banks burned trillions of dollars in stimulus measures and PPP loans to keep businesses from going completely bankrupt, and to keep jobless “non-essential” workers from starving during the initial shutdowns. But , we could have simply kept the economy going this entire time and paid a fraction of that cost helping the tiny minority of people that would actually suffer from the illness.

Yes, that’s right, I’ll say it again and again because I STILL to this day see the media and misinformed covid cultists continually claim the death rate of covid is much higher. It is not. The median Infection Fatality rate of covid is ONLY 0.26%. This is a FACT. This is the science according the vast majority of medical studies out there on the IFR. Let me repeat: The entire world is being locked down and told we have to give up our inherent human liberties because 0.26% of the population might get more than sniffles and brain fog from a covid infection. Why?

Well, that’s easy; because the covid response and restrictions have nothing to do with public health and everything to do with public control.

This essay is a little different from what I usually write in that it is not so much an appeal to pure reason or pure science and more an appeal to principle. I have been asked by many readers lately if it is not better to argue against pandemic mandates based on ideals and principles rather than hammering away at the science. I think it’s important to do both, but let’s take a moment to consider the moral question and the moral question alone.

To do that we must ask some simple questions:

Who has the right to control your medical decisions?

Who is qualified to control your constitutional right to life, liberty and the right to seek out prosperity?

Who should be given the power to tell you what you can say, where you can work, where you can buy, where you can sell, where you can walk, where you can travel, what you must believe in?

The answer is NO ONE, except yourself that is.

But of course, the covid cult and the people that benefit from the pandemic will claim that your rights no longer apply when you are “putting the lives of others at risk”. It’s the old social contract argument – You are “part of a society”, therefore society has expectations that supersede your rights. This is all nonsense, but it’s a classic strategy used by every totalitarian in modern times. It’s never been about what “society” wants, it’s always only ever been about what the tyrants want.

As I have noted in numerous articles with endless scientific facts and evidence, no one who wants to remain free from covid mandates or vaccine passports is putting anyone else at risk. Again, the median death rate for covid is 0.26% and neither the mandates, nor the masks, nor the vaccines have put a stop to covid infections. Interestingly, it has been the states with the harshest lockdowns and mask restrictions that had the highest rates of infection for the past 18 months. Even now, fully vaccinated people are getting covid by the thousands in “breakout cases”, and some of them have died. Infections and deaths dropped off in January long before the vaccines were widely manufactured. Only 5% of the US population was vaccinated with a single dose by February. The fact is, the vaccines have achieved nothing.

Even if I was among the 0.26% of people that are at risk of dying, I would NEVER demand that the other 99.7% of the population give up their freedoms and their children’s freedoms just so I might feel a little bit safer. That would be an act of selfish madness.

But lets say for a moment that we set aside all the science that supports the anti-mandate position. What if the death rate of the virus was much higher? What if we were dealing with Ebola or some other nasty pathogen? What if 1 out of 100 people were at risk? What if 1 out of 10 people were are risk? Would medical tyranny and mass lockdowns be acceptable then? The answer is no, they would not be.

Why? Honestly, it’s a matter of who is in power and who is implementing such mandates. Why should we have blind confidence in governments made up of corrupt elitists and globalists? Who are they to look out for our best interests? How are these people qualified to protect the public trust? They are not qualified and will never be.

They do not care about us. They are only interested in serving their own interests and pushing forward their own agendas. Just look at how excited globalist institutions like the World Economic Forum have become, calling the pandemic an “opportunity” to force through their “Great Reset” agenda. These ghouls are not the type of people the public wants in charge of micromanaging their lives.

Thus, it is left up to the individual to protect themselves how they see fit, but the establishment tells us we are not capable of doing this. Rather, we must defer to their “better judgment”. They are supposedly smarter than us all, and as “benevolent” technocrats only they have the knowledge and righteousness to determine the course of every living person’s future.

Globalists like Gideon Lichfield at MIT told us exactly what the plan was in March of 2020 in an article tiled ‘We’re Not Going Back To Normal’. They admit that the goal has always been to institute vaccine passport restrictions that will last for many years to come, if not forever. From the article:

“Ultimately, however, I predict that we’ll restore the ability to socialize safely by developing more sophisticated ways to identify who is a disease risk and who isn’t, and discriminating—legally—against those who are.

…one can imagine a world in which, to get on a flight, perhaps you’ll have to be signed up to a service that tracks your movements via your phone. The airline wouldn’t be able to see where you’d gone, but it would get an alert if you’d been close to known infected people or disease hot spots. There’d be similar requirements at the entrance to large venues, government buildings, or public transport hubs. There would be temperature scanners everywhere, and your workplace might demand you wear a monitor that tracks your temperature or other vital signs. Where nightclubs ask for proof of age, in future they might ask for proof of immunity—an identity card or some kind of digital verification via your phone, showing you’ve already recovered from or been vaccinated against the latest virus strains.”

I say to you that this is the classic philosophy of almost every semi-human monster that has ever lived. This is the ideology of narcissistic sociopaths. The religion of soulless robots. Some of the greatest evils known to mankind have been committed in the name of “the greater good of the greater number”. This mantra cannot be tolerated under any circumstance; it cannot be allowed to infect our nation and supplant our deeper values. Because if it does, we may find ourselves slaves to the system for a very long time.

As I have been warning they would do for the past year, multiple governments are keeping pandemic lockdowns and restrictions in place or they are bringing them back (in the case of the US), and it should be clear to everyone that this circular process of medical tyranny is not going to end. It is never meant to end. The goal of the establishment, of globalists and governments, is to keep the restrictions in place indefinitely.

The mainstream media has consistently attacked the claim that governments would enforce vaccine passports as conspiracy theory. Now they are openly admitting that the plan is to institute vaccine passports and they are vigorously defending it. They are discussing with avid fervor how they might be able to FORCE or compel each and every person to take the jab, even if they don’t want it and even if the jab serves no purpose.

I have my own suspicions of the jab and its true purpose and safety, but lets not forget that the jab is at the very least a stepping stone to the vaccine passports. The passports are the key to everything. Without the passports, medical tyranny cannot be established. Without the passports they have no leverage over the population to dictate the fundamental aspects of our lives. They NEED the passports in order to get their “Great Reset”. Without a “papers please” social credit system in place, their Reset will fall apart.

It is therefore imperative above all else that the vaccine passports are never allowed to take root. The program must be stopped and destroyed.

I am not a major “influencer” in conservative or liberty movement circles. I am not a big YouTube personality or a media Juggernaut. I have no big business backing or deep pockets to spur a national campaign. I’m not particularly fond of public speaking though I have learned to deal with it. I am just a writer with a love for the values of freedom, the values of reason and in many cases the values of faith that give humanity meaning. And, what I see is a deadly serious need; a need for an organized front line against the storm of dictatorship that is on our doorstep.

What I suggest is simple – A national campaign against the medical passports. Globalists, socialists and corporatists understand the concept of “pressure” and how to apply it to get what they want. I believe we must also learn how to wield pressure in the opposite direction. It is not enough to sit in our homes isolated from each other content in the knowledge that millions of other people feel the same way we do. We must also take action.

We must send a message: WE WILL NOT COMPLY!

I’m not sure that any single person out there has the “clout” to drive this campaign alone, and it’s probably better that way. What is required is a mass movement united by principles, not a movement tangled together by a cult of personality.

There are many ways to do this, from simple actions to more complex strategies. Any liberty activist can send a message through signs, bumper stickers, advertisements, billboards, etc., reminding the establishment that we will refuse to submit to the jab or the vaccine passports under any circumstances. They need to understand that there is nothing they can do that will make us change our minds. Nothing.

The primary strategy of the covid cult has been to work with larger corporations to demand proof of vaccination (vaccine passports). We must let these companies know in no uncertain terms that we will cut off all consumer support for their businesses. We will not work for them and we will not give them a penny of our money. Instead, we will approach smaller local businesses, find out if they are a part of the ‘We Will Not Comply’ campaign, and if they are, then we will support them instead. It’s time to teach these corporations a lesson and put them out of commission by removing our money and our labor from their pockets.

The next strategy by the establishment has been to mandate vaccinations for government workers. Again, mass walkouts are the answer. Let them sweat by losing half of their workforce. And then maybe take them to court. Bury them in lawsuits while strangling their ability to operate.

Eventually, the Biden Administration is going to attempt federal level lockdowns and vaccine controls. It’s only a matter of time. This is where organization is vital. Counties and states with majority conservatives and liberty advocates must band together and once again say “We Will Not Comply”. If your state government is on board and defying Biden then that will be extra helpful, but do not make the mistake of assuming that state governments alone will protect you. You must be organized at a local level, with your community and local businesses ready to make a stand. This must start now, before it is too late.

Finally, if the covid cult decides to pursue direct force as an option, we must be ready to fight back. Without local organization at minimum, defending ourselves will be difficult or impossible. This means bringing back an old standby of the Founding Fathers: The militia.

There is a time for preparation and a time for taking risks. Without risk there can be no freedom. We are quickly approaching a time in which gamblers and true believers could decide the fate of the world for the next century. A grassroots and organic movement needs to be assembled to fight back against the rising tide of totalitarianism. Each of us can only do our own small part, but together, in concert, I believe we can stop medical tyranny and the Reset in its tracks and even reverse the damage done.

I believe we are living here now at this crossroads for a reason. I believe we are meant to be here; that we are being given a chance to be the right people in the right place at the right time. I believe that we can end this evil, but only if we dare to try. It begins with one simple step: Telling the world “We Will Not Comply!”  And then, we must follow through on our promise.

*  *  *

If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

As expected Beijing has responded by warning Washington over Thursday's announced next round of arms sales to Taiwan, which marks the first of the Biden administration, and is to include 40 self-propelled howitzers and 1,700 kits designed to convert projectiles into more precise GPS-guided munitions.

The Chinese embassy slammed the US for "interfering in its internal affairs" and "sending wrong signals" towards an "inalienable part of the Chinese territory." The statement further said that Biden's new arms sale "severely jeopardizes China-US relations and peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait" while also violating the One China policy.

"China will resolutely take legitimate and necessary counter-measures in light of the development of the situation," the embassy statement warned without elaborating further. 

The contract by BAE Systems must first pass through congressional review, which is expected, and while it's not a large number for a foreign country weapons systems sale at an estimated $750 million, the symbolism is huge nonetheless - signaling the seamless continuity of Trump-era arms sales.

CNN earlier cited a State Department spokesperson, who said, "If concluded, this proposed sale will contribute to the modernization of Taiwan's howitzer fleet, strengthening its self-defense capabilities to meet current and future threats."

Taiwan is seeking a strategy dubbed as establishing "fortress Taiwan" - building up enough advanced weaponry to blunt a direct Chinese assault - at least until bigger allies could be called in. The focus on modernizing the army's howitzer fleet is geared toward that strategic goal.

Meanwhile, rival military drills are kicking off in the South China Sea region as Taiwan tensions grow...

This drill is clearly a response to LSGE 21 executed by US Indo-Pacific Command. The US wants to demonstrate it doesn’t fear fighting a war in the Indo-Pacific, while China’s response is we are not afraid of fighting a war in the South China Sea, where it is the real focal point. https://t.co/hJeXdS0XlC

— Hu Xijin ??? (@HuXijin_GT) August 4, 2021

Last year after the Trump administration pushed forward an unprecedented seven major weapons systems sales to the democratic island, the South China Morning Post recently had warned of China's 'red lines': "Unlike other areas of territorial contention, such as in the South China Sea, analysts say Beijing will show no flexibility on this issue and has not ruled out force to reunify Taiwan with the mainland," it said at the time.

A dangerous close call incident involving a woman approaching grizzly bears in Yellowstone National Park has resulted in federal charges, given she violated laws and park policies for intentionally disturbing wildlife. 

25-year-old Illinois resident Samantha Dehring was identified by federal prosecutors after video of the incident surfaced and gained attention through local media. US Attorney for the district of Wyoming Bob Murray announced this week that the tourist is charged with "one count of willfully remaining, approaching, and photographing wildlife within 100 yards and one count of feeding, touching, teasing, frightening, or intentionally disturbing wildlife."

Harrowing video which appears to have been taken by eyewitnesses from inside a nearby car showed Dehring approaching the grizzly and her cubs, before the mother bear briefly charged the woman. The bear halted the charge at the last moment, and a belatedly frightened Dehring only then backed off with camera in hand.

"While other visitors slowly backed off and got into their vehicles, [Samantha] Dehring remained," the US Attorney's office said. Park rules require that tourists back off when wildlife appear. She reportedly came within 15 feet of the wild animals.

Below is the statement of events from the federal prosecutor's office: 

According to the violation notices, Dehring was at Roaring Mountain in Yellowstone Nation Park on May 10, 2021, when visitors noticed a sow grizzly and her three cubs. While other visitors slowly backed off and got into their vehicles, Dehring remained. She continued to take pictures as the sow bluff charged her.

Watch the moment the grizzly charged the woman...

The daring woman who appears to be oblivious to how dangerous grizzlies are particularly when they feel their cubs are threatened got caught after "Witnesses took pictures and video of the incident which was shared with news outlets and eventually led to her identification," according to the statement. She faces $10,000 in fines and possibly up to a year in prison for the incident which happened in May.

According to National Park Service figures, 44 people have been attacked and injured by grizzly bears in the park since 1979, with eight deaths since the park's opening in the late 19th century.

"The risk is significantly lower for people who don't leave developed areas or roadsides, and higher for anyone hiking in the backcountry," the NPS has stated.

Authored by Paul Sperry via RealClearInvestigations.com,

Kicking off the first hearing of the House Select Committee investigating the U.S. Capitol riot, Chairman Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat,  promised to fully investigate "the facts of what happened on Jan. 6,”  calling it “a scene of violence in the citadel of democracy.”

Photos from Jan. 6 show Byrd “gunslinging like some cowboy,” the Babbitt family lawyer says. In this detail from the photo at top, the officer's pistol is low at his side -- pointed in the direction of other officers with their backs to him, finger apparently on the trigger.

Stefani Reynolds/Bloomberg News

But over the next 3½ hours, he and other Democrats, along with their handpicked Republican panelists and police witnesses, never mentioned the most lethal act committed that day — the fatal Capitol Police shooting of unarmed protester Ashli Babbitt. It was the only shot fired during the entire riot.

This omission angered Babbitt’s family and a number of Republicans who maintain that the Select Committee and the Capitol Police are covering up the circumstances surrounding her death. Questions linger over the shooting, especially whether the officer who fired the fatal shot warned Babbitt to stop before he opened fire as she attempted to breach a barricaded door inside the Capitol Building.

The officer’s lawyer insists his client not only issued such a command, but did so loudly and clearly. However, in an interview with RealClearInvestigations, Babbitt family attorney Terry Roberts said he has gathered evidence indicating the officer, a plainclothes police lieutenant, remained silent. Far from warning Babbitt he would shoot, Roberts said the officer “ambushed” her from the side where she could not see he had taken up position in a hall doorway and had trained his weapon on her.

“It’s not debatable,” said Roberts. “There was no warning.”

Ashli Babbitt, shown with husband Aaron, was the victim of an ambush without warning, the family's lawyer says.

Facebook

A Maryland personal-injury lawyer who specializes in police misconduct cases, Roberts has won several million dollars for victims of police brutality. He said he is preparing to file a wrongful-death lawsuit against the Capitol Police and the officer, seeking more than $10 million in damages.

Babbitt, 35, was fatally wounded as she attempted to climb through the broken window above a door leading to the House chamber, where lawmakers were being evacuated. Standing to the side of a pile of furniture blocking the doors and out of Babbitt’s view, the officer took aim with his Glock service pistol, striking her in the left shoulder. Babbitt fell back from the doorway to the floor. She was transported to Washington Hospital Center, where she died from injuries sustained from the .40-caliber bullet wound.

More than six months after the shooting, the U.S. Capitol Police still refuse to release the name of the officer. But several sources have identified him as Lt. Michael L. Byrd, a 53-year-old veteran of the force who was serving as commander of the House Chamber Section of the Capitol Police on Jan. 6. He has not returned to duty and remains on paid administrative leave. Attempts to reach Byrd were unsuccessful.

From Ashli Babbitt's left as she climbed through a broken window, the officer took aim with his Glock service pistol ...

nbcsandiego.com

... striking her in the left shoulder. Babbitt fell back to the floor, fatally wounded.

YouTube/National File

Though Byrd appears to have been cleared of criminal wrongdoing, he may still be subject to civil action. If Babbitt was not given an opportunity to obey commands before she was shot, it could figure prominently in the family’s planned wrongful-death suit against the officer. Roberts said he has interviewed several witnesses who were standing outside the Speaker’s Lobby with Babbitt, and that they'll testify they did not hear the officer issue "any kind of warning."

He also said video recordings his investigators have analyzed reveal that other police who were in the hallway with the officer did not react as expected before he fired. He said they seemed to be caught unaware as he opened fire. Roberts said he has lined up expert witnesses, including ex-cops and use-of-force experts, who will testify that the officers behind him in the Speaker’s Lobby would have taken cover or crouched and pulled their own weapons if they heard the lieutenant give repeated warnings he was going to shoot. Instead, Roberts said, they appeared to be casually standing or walking around in the lobby in the seconds leading up to the shooting.

Terry Roberts, Babbitt family lawyer: If Byrd were giving a warning, why didn't other officers present react?

Roberts & Wood

“Those other officers were within earshot. If he’s yelling, they certainly aren’t showing any reaction to it,” he said.

“If he was giving any kind of warning, why didn’t they react?” Roberts added that no warnings can be heard coming from the officer in any videos taken at the scene.

The officer’s lawyer, Mark Schamel, insists his client issued verbal commands and warnings to Babbitt.

“He was screaming, ‘Stay back! Stay back! Don’t come in here!” Schamel said.

Schamel said witness statements back him up. He explained the lieutenant's commands were not picked up on video recordings because the footage was shot on the other side of the doors where dozens of rioters were shouting and banging and drowning out his words. And he said his client could not be seen yelling out the instructions because his mouth was covered by a mask he wore as part of COVID-19 protections.

Mark Schamel, lawyer for shooting officer: “He was screaming, ‘Stay back! Stay back! Don’t come in here!' ”

Business Wire

It’s not clear if this critical issue was resolved by the investigation of the shooting by the Justice Department, which concluded in April that “there is insufficient evidence to support a criminal prosecution” of the officer for “willfully” violating Babbitt’s civil rights, though it did not rule out the possibility he acted out of “panic” or “even poor judgment." Justice investigators reportedly did not pursue murder or manslaughter charges.

“They cleared him real fast,” U.S. Capitol Police Labor Committee Chairman Gus Papathanasiou said. "I was surprised."

“I’m not sure how he was justified shooting her when there was a SWAT team right behind her,” added a veteran Capitol officer, referring to three heavily armed USCP officers who had positioned themselves between the doors and the mob. “They saw no immediate threat.” The officer spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter. A Capitol Police spokeswoman would not say if the officer’s actions were consistent with use-of-force policies, which are not publicly available. In a statement released earlier this month, however, USCP noted that it is "increasing its use-of-force ... training.”

Schamel said his client received his training primarily at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers in Glynco, Ga., where Capitol Police recruits spend about two months before coming back for another two months of agency-specific training. Although the FLETC training emphasizes use-of-force decisions through simulated-shooting exercises, Capitol Police officers are not trained for riot-control situations on the scale of Jan. 6.

“We were trained in what to do if gunmen tried to storm the Capitol, but we were not trained in what to do if hundreds of people decided to rush the building,” former Capitol Police officer Patrick Skinner said. On Jan. 6, he added, police were unsure whether they were facing an imminent deadly threat or whether they were authorized to use deadly force.

“There was only one incident of deadly force by a police officer,” Skinner noted. “Every instinct of those [other] police officers was to not shoot.”

Rep. Bennie Thompson, right, a Mississippi Democrat, promised to fully investigate "the facts of what happened on Jan. 6.” But in his panel's extensive opening hearing, there was no mention of the killing of Ashli Babbitt.

AP Photo/Andrew Harnik, Pool

A former federal inspector general told RealClearInvestigations that even the Capitol Police are relatively unprepared to react to the kind of threat posed on Jan. 6 in which a mob tried to beat down doors leading to the House chamber.

“This is not meant pejoratively but just as a fact, but the [Capitol Police] is far from being some kind of elite law enforcement body,” the inspector general said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Its principal function is to assist tourists, maintain decorum in a tourist environment, and help out members of Congress and their staffs."

Roberts said as part of the discovery process, he plans to seek the shooting officer’s training records and his discipline file containing any infractions or complaints of misconduct. He noted that in February 2019, Byrd was investigated for leaving his department-issued Glock-22 firearm unattended in a restroom on the House side of the Capitol, even though the potent weapon, which fires .40-caliber rounds, has no manual safety to prevent unintended firing. The abandoned gun was discovered by another officer during a routine security sweep.

A Capitol Police spokeswoman would not say what, if any, disciplinary actions were administered against the officer. Unlike other police forces, it does not have to disclose records on police misconduct.

The Photo Evidence

Also, Roberts said the officer appeared to lack trigger discipline, judging from photos taken by a freelance photographer inside the House chamber before the shooting down the hall in the Speaker’s Lobby. “He’s gunslinging like some cowboy,” the lawyer said.

In one of the freelancer’s photos obtained by RCI,  the officer can be seen advancing toward the door of the chamber while several other law enforcement officers had taken position behind a barricade. His Glock-22 is slung low at his side pointed in the direction of the other officers, whose backs are to him, and his finger appears to be on the trigger.

The veteran Capitol Police officer who spoke to RCI on the condition of anonymity said his colleague was not following department firearms training, which requires officers to keep their weapons pointed in a safe direction while making sure of what’s in front of and beyond a target, and to keep the finger off the trigger until ready to fire.

“His trigger finger shouldn’t be inside the trigger guard and the gun shouldn’t be pointed at other officers. He’s even pointing it in the direction of a member of Congress,” the fellow officer said, referring to Rep. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.), a former professional mixed-martial-arts fighter who had joined the scrum in front of the chamber doors.

I can’t tell you how many officers have contacted me to say that what that guy did doesn’t pass muster,” Roberts said in an extensive interview. “No one has come forward to say this was justified homicide, not even the Justice Department.”

“The way he did it — hiding in a room and then popping out and firing — is a problem,” Roberts added.

“If his objective was to stop her, he didn’t need to shoot. He could have got out in front of her and used a number of other methods of less-lethal force. He could have tried to cuff her.”

Police have confirmed that Babbitt, an Air Force veteran, was unarmed. (If arrested, she would have faced unlawful entry and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds charges, police sources say.) “I would call what he did an ambush,” Roberts continued, “I don’t think he’s a good officer. I think he’s reckless.”

While Roberts argued Babbitt did not pose a threat, the officer’s lawyer insisted that his client was acting to protect himself and lawmakers from “bodily harm."

Rep. Paul Gosar, Arizona Republican: He wants SWAT team members to testify in the House probe. “They were right next to her and saw no threat, certainly no lethal threat.”

Jonathan Ernst/Pool via AP

"He was acting within his training,” Schamel said.

"Lethal force is appropriate if the situation puts you or others in fear of imminent bodily harm.”

Added Schamel:

"There should be a training video on how he handled that situation. What he did was unbelievable heroism."

Roberts argued that he could have retreated if he feared for his life, as other officers did that day — and later received medals for heroism — but Schamel countered that he was guarding a critical chokepoint and saved a "potential massacre of lawmakers and staff” by the mob.

“The speaker may have been escorted out of the area, but there were still at least 100 people including lawmakers in the hallway behind my client,” Schamel said.

Still, Republican lawmakers want to know why SWAT team members standing behind Babbitt before she was shot were not more alarmed.

“They were right next to her and saw no threat, certainly no lethal threat,” said GOP Rep. Paul Gosar, who sits on the House Oversight Committee.

He and other Republicans are demanding the Select Committee call the SWAT members to testify about what they heard and saw before the shooting.

“Why were there no warnings given or escalation of command and force in proper law enforcement technique?” Gosar asked.

A superyacht that belonged to late Microsoft Corp. co-founder Paul Allen has found a buyer in a red-hot yachting market. 

According to Bloomberg, the 414-foot yacht, Octopus, sold for a whopping 235 million euros ($278 million) to an undisclosed buyer.

Octopus has eight decks, two helipads, two elevators, a car garage, and an eight-person submarine. There's enough room for 26 guests, and it also has space for 63 crew members. 

Allen had the superyacht built in 2003 by German boatbuilder Lürssen for approximately $200 million. 

The sale of the vessel comes as the world's largest luxury boat market is on fire. 

Ship appraisal company Vessels Value said 219 superyachts were sold in the first quarter of this year, more than double the number last year over the same period. 

Octopus is the ideal explorer yacht, and there's no word on where it will sail next or what flag it will be flying under new ownership. 

The timing of the sale comes months after billionaire Jeff Bezos purchased a 417-foot yacht, or about three-foot bigger than Octopus. If it's all about size, Bezos wins. 

Billionaires are buying superyachts and private islands as everyone else is told they can't travel. 

Just hours after Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker issued a new 'cruel and unusual' mandate requiring all Illinois public school students to wear masks when they return to school later this month, the Chicago Teachers Union has issued a letter addressed to Mayor Lori Lightfoot, Chicago Public School officials, and members of the school board, warning that:

"new pandemic variants pose immediate threats to the health of all Chicagoans, but especially our unvaccinated student population." 

In the letter, CTU praise the Governor's new mask mandate, but said its

"school communities need more than masking to ensure safety – especially as we continue to learn about the delta variant." 

CTU specifically listed recommendations for ensuring safety, among which was the maintenance of criteria and health metrics based on the prevalence of COVID "to pause in-person instruction." 

Full Letter below (emphasis ours)

Dear Mayor Lightfoot, Dr. Torres, Mr. Swinney, President del Valle, Board of Education Members and CPS Bargaining Team:

As we prepare for the start of the 2021-2022 school year, it is imperative that we acknowledge the changing dynamics of the COVID-19 virus and the importance of engagement with Chicago Public Schools families and communities. Since presenting our comprehensive proposal to Dr. Torres and the Chicago Board of Education on July 8, 2021, Chicago Teachers Union officers, counsel and rank-andfile educators have held a series of bargaining sessions with senior CPS management and legal representatives. We have made incremental progress, but with less than 30 days until the August 30, 2021, return to classes for our students, we must ensure that all stakeholders in our district are clear on plans and proposals for maximum safety in the upcoming year.

To that end, we are inviting members of the CPS bargaining team, CPS leadership and the Chicago Board of Education to participate in an open bargaining session with Union educators and representatives on August 11, 2021. Chicago public school educators and families have long desired transparency in the negotiation process — well before the COVID-19 pandemic — and our Union believes that an open bargaining session is essential to improving trust between our district and the community it serves. This is especially important as new pandemic variants pose immediate threats to the health of all Chicagoans, but especially our unvaccinated student population.

Parents are concerned, and they deserve assurances that our Union and the CPS team are working in lockstep to ensure safety in hundreds of school buildings across the city. For the past year, our Union has been consistent in our call for layered mitigations to keep educators, students and all families safe.

While we applaud Gov. J.B. Pritzker for his leadership regarding today’s forthcoming statewide mask mandate, which CPS has already adopted, our school communities need more than masking to ensure safety — especially as we continue to learn about the Delta variant.

Also needed are:

• Ventilation upgrades

• A COVID-19 testing plan for vaccinated and unvaccinated members of our school communities

• Maintenance of criteria and health metrics based on COVID prevalence to pause in-person instruction

• Full-time contact tracers, nurses, social workers and counselors in every school building

• A comprehensive home visit program to engage students and families in every school community

Mayor Lightfoot, there is $4 billion in federal funding that you have to invest in our schools and communities — a once-in-a-generation opportunity to provide all of our students with the staff and services they deserve. Open bargaining will provide Chicago families insight into how the CPS budget will directly impact their children and schools, where we stand in negotiations today, and the gaps that must be closed before the fall return.

Merely surviving the COVID-19 pandemic is not enough. Chicago Public Schools needs to earn the trust and confidence of families across the city, and by joining our Union team for open bargaining, we can reach that goal together.

Please let us know as soon as possible if you are accepting of this invitation, and we look forward to continued negotiations regarding the safety and long-term success of our students and their families.

So, it's for the children, eh?

Let's look at some data!

All of COVID’s key metrics have collapsed dramatically compared to their pre-vaccine peaks. Daily cases are down 80 percent compared to their November 2020 peak. Hospitalizations are down 84 percent. Most importantly, average daily COVID deaths are down to about ten a day, 95 percent lower than their peak in December of last year. Deaths have yet to show any real reaction to the increase in cases due to the Delta variant.

And here's the cases, hospitalization, and death data for kids (Aged 0-17)

Source

In case your super-zoom eyes are failing. Yes, 'positive' tests are higher (according to PCR tests), but there has still not been one death according to the official data of any child in Chicago from COVID and there are de minimus children being hospitalized (an average of less than 1 in the last 3 months).

Having been busted providing the exact wording to CDC for their "guidance" for in-person teaching protocols, is there any reason to trust that CTU has anyone but themselves in mind when they proclaim 1) no mandatory vaccinations for teachers will be permitted, and now 2) in-person instruction is at risk because 'we must protect the children'.

From the sounds of that letter, it has sweet f**k all to do with childrens' safety and entirely everything to do with the $4bn that Lightfoot has at her disposal.

Disgusting!!

As a reminder, Fox news reports that last week, American Federation of Teachers (AFT) President Randi Weingarten got pushback after suggesting that school reopenings this fall are not a done deal.

"So the bottom line is, we're going to keep kids safe, we're going to keep our members safe, we're going to try to open up schools, and we're going to move through this political battlefield," Weingarten said.

Critics picked up on her comment about the reopening of schools because it sounded like backpedaling from when she argued in May that "we can and we must reopen schools in the fall."

Those looking for signs of transitory inflation are advised to not look at the latest container data, which contrary to many commodities tracked by Wall Street, resolutely refuses to turn lower.

Of course, regular readers are well aware of the hyperinflation in shipping rates as we have extensively covered this move in the past few months, as well as some more unique cases such as this one "More Container Ships Score "Astronomical" $100,000/Day Rates" but today Reuters readers are also learning that shipping rates from China to the United States have scaled fresh highs above $20,000 per 40-foot box as rising retailer orders ahead of the peak U.S. shopping season, adding strain to global supply chains.

Having already scaled all time highs, the acceleration in Delta-variant COVID-19 outbreaks in several counties has added to the upward price pressure by slowing global container turnaround rates. Typhoons off China’s busy southern coast in late July and this week have also contributed to the crisis gripping the world’s most important method for moving everything from gym equipment and furniture to car parts and electronics.

“These factors have turned global container shipping into a highly disrupted, under-supplied seller’s market, in which shipping companies can charge four to ten times the normal price to move cargoes,” said Philip Damas, Managing Director at maritime consultancy firm Drewry.

“We have not seen this in shipping for more than 30 years,” he said, adding he expected the "extreme rates” to last until Chinese New Year in 2022.

Here are some mindblowing numbers: the spot price per container on the China-U.S. East coast route - one of the world’s busiest container lanes - has climbed over 500% from a year ago to $20,804 this week, freight-tracking firm Freightos said. That compares to just under $11,000 on July 27 or about one week ago. The cost from China to the U.S. west coast is a little below $20,000, while the latest China-Europe rate is nearly $14,000, Freightos’ data shows. Ding Li, president of China’s port association, told Reuters the spike followed a rebound in COVID-19 cases in other countries, which has slowed turnover at some major foreign ports to around 7-8 days.

The surging container rates have fed through to higher charter rates for container vessels, which has forced shipping firms to prioritize service on the most lucrative routes.

“Ships can only be profitably operated in the trades where freight rates are higher, and that is why capacity is shifting mostly to the U.S.,” said Tan Hua Joo, executive consultant at research consultancy Alphaliner.

Some shippers have also reduced volumes in less profitable routes, such as the transatlantic and intra-Asia, said Damas. “This means that rates on the latter are now increasing fast.”

The rate surge is the latest reflection of disruptions since COVID-19 slammed the brakes on the global economy in early 2020 and triggered huge changes to the flows of goods and healthcare equipment around the world.

"Every time you think you’ve come to an equilibrium, something happens that allows shipping lines to increase the price," said Jason Chiang, Director at Ocean Shipping Consultants, noting the Suez canal blockage here in March had played a major role in allowing firms to hike rates.

"There are new orders for shipping capacity, equal to almost 20% of existing capacity, but they will only come online in 2023, so we will not see any serious increase in supply for two years," Chiang added.

Then again, perhaps expectations that all will be resolved by the Chinese new year are overly optimistic. In "Shipping braces as China goes into lockdown mode" we read that most Chinese ports are now requiring a Covid test for all crew, with vessels forced to remain at anchor until negative results are confirmed, and/or requiring ships to quarantine for 14-28 days if they previously berthed in India or changed crew within 14 days of arriving. That spells further delays. After all, when Covid was detected at Yantian Port in late May, that key export hub cut its operations by 70% for most of June.

Rabobank's Micheal Every touched on this topic and underling some key points regarding shipping and the consequences for global markets:

• Before this surge in shipping costs, most economists thought logistics were invisible, efficient, and of no interest. Like plumbing, you need it, but don’t let it dictate your plans for the day;
• Those logistics assumptions were only possible because since 1945 the US Navy has kept global sea lanes open and safe for all maritime traffic. Pirates and hijacking get attention today because they are *rare* – but they did not used to be. Indeed, global sea lanes used to be carved up by empires for their preferred shipping and production, not open to all;
• That paradigm starting to fray along with the rest of the post-WW2 global architecture;
• Current price surges are due to massive supply-demand imbalances that are not going to go away any time soon;
• But imagine shipping costs, and the broader implications, if we get maritime chaos in the Straits of Hormuz, around Suez, or in the South China Sea;
• Building new maritime capacity from ship to port to warehouse to rail to truck to store to home to address our supply-demand imbalances is tied to the post-Covid economic geography: is it still a post-1945 open economy?; if not, where will things be made? We still don’t know, but we BRI vs. B3W is an example of how things are trending; and
• In short, the ship of apolitical logistics has sailed. Just as ‘a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged’, so a ‘mercantilist is a free trader with squeezed supply chains’.

As a result, Every argues that "markets are right to price for the risk-off of very low bond yields - if they are willing to look past the demand-destroying price surge that will precede that slump; and if they remain unsure about the map of the reflationary, more fragmented world that emerges afterwards."

Of course, at some point rates will need to reverse and this is what SocGen's Albert Edwards touched on in his latest note, first noting the obviously namely that when it comes to shipping rates, "there is no inflationary parallel! The doubling of the commodity-led Baltic Dry Index since the outbreak of the pandemic last year is a mere blip compared to container shipping inflation – especially on the China-US West Coast route!"

However, Edwards then asks what happens when this surge reverses, supply chains normalize, and all those backlogged containers finally reach their port of call. In addressing this question, Edwards points to a recent column by the FT's John Dizard who discussed the potential for an old-fashioned inventory-led recession next year when the current bottlenecks affecting container shipping dissipate. All that “delayed stuff, when it finally lands where it is supposed to, looks as though it will create a big enough pile to trigger a bad inventory recession.… The supply chain practitioners I’ve been interviewing figure that the port backups, unavailable trucks, Covid-19 restrictions and unskilled warehouse staff will be more or less ironed out by Chinese New Year.”

The SocGen strategist concludes that "if the FT’s Dizard is right, we should watch for a reversal of container prices as an indication that  normality is returning to the global supply chain. US domestic demand has run well ahead of restricted supply recently. But the current depleted inventory levels may be rising rapidly by Chinese New Year (February) – causing production to adjust sharply downwards."

July's jobs report will shape expectations of when the Fed will announce, and then start, the process of tapering its asset purchases. Accordingly, as Newsquawk notes, some analysts argue that "good data is bad for the prospects of continued policy accommodation" may be the play book traders reach for, while others suggest that many of the key debates will not be resolved with the release of the July jobs report, and therefore the event may be subject to the usual post-data knee-jerk reactions, but ultimately do little to materially shift expectations just yet - it may not be until December when a clear picture emerges on the progress that the labor market is making to meet the Fed's "substantial" threshold.

That said, whether he wanted to or not, Fed Governor Christopher Waller set up the market to expect a big payrolls print on Friday morning, when he said earlier this week that if July jobs report shows a gain of 1 million workers and there is close to another million next month, the labor force will have recovered 85% of the losses suffered during the pandemic setting up the stage for "substantial further progress" - as defined by Jerome Powell last week - and for a Jackson Hole taper announcement. And so, the whisper number on trading desks quick became 1 million if not a little big higher, even as the Wall Street consensus is somewhat lower, at 880K and just barely higher compared to last month's nice, round 850K. Of course, being a "whisper number" means that while aspirational, few banks are willing to bet their reputation on its actually being met and of 70 forecasts, only 14 are calling for a 1MM+ print.

One among them is Goldman, which almost went all-in with the 2nd highest forecast, projecting nonfarm payrolls rising 1,150k in July, above consensus of +870k.

Coming just one day after ADP reported a catastrophic 330,000 private payrolls for July, the number sure was ballsy, so how did Goldman get to there? This is how Goldman's Jan Hatzius justifies his outlier bogey:

"Labor supply constraints eased further due to the wind-down of federal unemployment top-ups in some states and the addition of over 2 million youth job seekers in June and July.  Coupled with very strong labor demand and continued progress on vaccinations and reopening, we believe job growth picked up further in the month. We also note little impact on dining activity in response to the Delta variant, even in highly-impacted states."

And while Big Data employment measures tracked by Goldman were mixed in July (more below), continuing jobless claims declined significantly in states that are ending UI top-ups early (as noted before).

Goldman also expects a roughly 150k boost from fewer end-of-year layoffs in the education sector, and notes that the nonfarm seasonal hurdle eases considerably in July.

Other metrics forecast by Goldman are also quite impressive and would likely spark an immediate pro-taper response: the bank estimates a 0.4% drop in the unemployment rate to 5.5% (vs. consensus 5.7%), reflecting a strong household employment gain offset by a sizable rise in the participation rate. Meanwhile, average hourly earnings are expected to rise 0.3% and +3.8% yoy, reflecting some continued wage pressures but mixed calendar effects (consensus is +0.3% and +3.9%.

Goldman aside, here is a snapshot of what consensus thinks will happen tomorrow, courtesy of Newsquawk.

• The consensus looks for 880k jobs to be added to the US economy in July, and if that is realized, it would still mean around 5.84 million fewer Americans employed vs pre-pandemic levels in February 2020.
• The unemployment rate is seen declining to 5.7% from 5.9%, but more useful color will be provided by the participation rate (61.6% in June vs 63.2% pre-pandemic), the U6 measure of underemployment (last 9.8% vs 7.0% pre-pandemic), as well as the employment-population ratio (last 58% vs 61.1% pre-pandemic).
• Average hourly earnings are expected to rise 0.3% M/M taking the annual rate to 3.9% Y/Y, and these measures will be used by analysts to inform the debate on how persistent price pressures in the US are developing.

The read from other labor market metrics calls for some caution:

• ADP's payrolls data disappointed to the downside, while weekly initial jobless and continuing claims data that usually coincide with the BLS survey window rose against expectations of a decline, perhaps relating to seasonal adjustment issues.
• The Conference Board's gauge of consumer confidence said consumer assessments of the labor market were flat on the month, though consumers were more mixed about the short-term outlook.

The Macro Focus: The key question for macro traders is when the Fed announces tapering of its asset purchases, the composition of tapering, how long the process will last, and the sequencing with eventual rate hikes. The FOMC's statement now acknowledges that the economy continues to make progress towards its goals, and language around the pandemic was constructively tweaked. Chair Powell himself seemed little troubled by delta variant fears, noting that further waves of the pandemic were having a smaller economic impact as we learn to live with the virus. The July FOMC was consistent with the expectation that the Fed will provide a taper signal at the upcoming Jackson Hole Economic Symposium (26-28th August), before an official announcement at either the September, November, or December FOMC meetings. This suggests that incoming data will likely dictate the pace of tapering, rather than the announcement itself; and given that Powell also said it was likely that the taper will conclude before the Committee begins lifting rates, these taper timeline expectations will subsequently shape lift-off expectations for the Federal Funds Rate target.

Historical Context: The Jackson Hole Economic Symposium is famed for being a platform where Fed officials signal upcoming policy shifts. But in 2013, there were no explicit taper hints; the outgoing Fed Chair Bernanke did not attend due to a "personal scheduling conflict," although many speculated that he wanted to avoid stepping on the toes of his successor, who had not been announced. (NOTE: Jerome Powell was handed a four-year term as Fed Chair in February 2018; no decision has yet been made on whether he will continue). The FOMC officially announced a taper in December 2013 and implementation began in January 2014, configured so that purchases of MBS and Treasuries were both scaled-back by USD 5bln/month; the program was concluded in October 2014. Given that the pandemic is an unusual event, different from previous economic downturns, there are risks in extrapolating the 2013 normalization parameters to what we are seeing today. Indeed, at least one Fed official has expressed a desire that the future taper of asset purchases not be placed on 'autopilot', in order to give the Fed more flexibility in these uncertain times. It is also worth noting that there is just one jobs report before Jackson Hole, and two ahead of the Fed's September meeting.

Wages: Average hourly earnings are expected to rise by 0.3% M/M, and the annual rate is likely to be lifted to 3.9% Y /Y from 3.6%, marking the third straight rise in the Y/Y metric from the 0.3% Y/Y seen in April. The Fed continues to frame the post-pandemic upside in consumer prices as 'transitory'. Although there is building evidence that this surge in prices is likely temporary, and may already have peaked, this debate cannot be resolved until at least later this year, and perhaps into next. One element that has potential to derail the 'transitory' narrative is the extent to which higher prices result in workers' demands for higher compensation, and how this impacts consumption patterns. Historically, higher wages usually occur with a lag to price rises, and are also typically accompanied by collective bargaining power or labor scarcity; although the former has diminished across the US in recent business cycles, there is building evidence for the latter. The emergence of persistent wage upside could stoke inflationary pressures, which could compel the Fed into a quicker pace of policy normalization down the line.

Slack: The consensus looks for 880k nonfarm payrolls to be added to the US economy in July, with the pace picking up from the 850k added in June. From the period between March 2020 through June 2021, there were still around 6.76 mln fewer Americans in work vs pre-pandemic levels, judging by headline nonfarm payrolls growth (if the consensus is realised, this would fall to 5.84mln). The unemployment rate is seen falling to 5.7% in July from 5.9%, although this metric will be framed in the context of the participation rate (61.6% in the June report vs 63.2% pre-pandemic in February 2020) as well as the U6 measure of 'underemployment' (last 9.8% vs 7.0% pre-pandemic); additionally, some Fed officials are watching the employment-population ratio to judge the pace of slack erosion (last 58% vs 61.1% prepandemic). Enhanced USD 300/week unemployment benefits have already started to roll-off in some states, and the programme is set to expire in September; accordingly, a clearer picture of slack levels might not emerge until further jobs reports are published through the end of the year. More broadly, Chair Powell last week suggested that it would take 'a couple of years' for the US economy to reach maximum employment, and the Fed forecasts 3.5% unemployment by the end of 2023, although at least one member of the Committee has suggested full employment could be achieved in Summer 2022 (NOTE: The Fed's economic projections are next updated at the September meeting).

Recent Labor Market Metrics: ADP National Employment Report for July disappointed to the downside, showing 330k additions to the US labour market against an expected +695k; ADP itself noted that the US labor market recovery continued to exhibit uneven progress, but that was progress nonetheless, adding that the July data represented a marked slowdown from the pace of jobs growth seen in Q2. Jobless claims data for the week that usually coincides with the BLS survey period saw initial claims jump to 419k against expectations of a decline to 350k, while continuing claims rose a little to 3.269mln from 3.262mln (against an expectation of a fall to 3.196mln). Analysts at Pantheon Macroeconomics explained that seasonal adjustment difficulties caused by shifts in the timing and extent of the automakers’ annual retooling shutdowns from year-to-year may have driven the disappointment, and the overall trend still appeared to be falling. Markit's flash composite PMI data for July said firms recorded a solid increase in employment, the level of outstanding business rose further in July as service providers struggled to keep up with incoming new business, and that Amid labor shortages and pressure on capacity, firms noted the lowest degree of optimism since February. The Conference Board's gauge of consumer confidence saw the differential between jobs 'hard-to-get' and jobs 'plentiful' widen to 44.4 from 43.5, although CB said consumers' assessment of the labor market was relatively flat, and consumers were mixed about the short-term labor market outlook.

Arguing for a better-than -expected jobs report:

• Reopening. Despite the rebound in Covid infection rates, business restrictions have continued to ease, as illustrated by the further downtrend in Goldman's Effective Lockdown Index during both June and July. Additionally, the change in the CDC mask recommendation occurred 10 days after the payroll survey week had ended (July 27). Reflecting this and continued progress on vaccination, restaurant seatings on OpenTable rebounded further to 94% of their 2019 levels during the July survey week, compared to 90% in May and 83% in April (respective survey weeks, see Exhibit 1). Goldman also notes continued strength in dining activity in states where the Delta variant is spreading more rapidly (seatings across Florida, Missouri, and Nevada are still above pre-crisis levels, see dotted line). US leisure and hospitality employment has lagged the spring pickup in dining activity, consistent with a drag from labor supply constraints in those months—and introducing scope for catch-up in the July report.

• Seasonality. In April and May, reopening effects likely overlapped with normal seasonal hiring patterns, resulting in less-impressive job gains on a seasonally-adjusted basis. In normal times, many service industries ramp up operations in the spring ahead of peak-season demand. This year, however, firms in heavily-impacted industries may simply have been more focused on bringing back their pre-crisis permanent workforce than on expanding their businesses and adding temporary seasonal labor. Hiring subsequently picked up in June, and the July seasonal hurdle is sequentially easier than in each of the prior three months: the BLS adjustment factors generally assume a 1.1-1.2mn decline in employment, compared to +0.5mn over the previous three months.
• Labor supply constraints. Goldman also expects less of a drag from labor supply constraints in tomorrow’s report, due to the mid-summer peak in the youth labor force and the wind-down of federal unemployment top-ups in some states. As shown in the left panel of Exhibit 2, 2¼ mn 16-24-year-olds typically join the labor force after the school year ends. This may have boosted July payroll growth if a higher proportion successfully found jobs due to strong demand for labor in lower-skilled occupations. According to the household survey, only 1.3mn of these potential jobseekers obtained employment in June. Youth employment typically rises by 500k in July, and any increase in excess of this number would represent a boost to seasonally-adjusted job growth. For example, if three-quarters of the remaining summer youth job-seekers find jobs, it would boost nonfarm payrolls by 750k non-seasonally adjusted and by roughly 250k seasonally adjusted.

• Turning to the unemployment top-ups, the right panel indicates that the expiration of federal benefits in some states has also boosted labor supply. Federal benefits were partially or fully curtailed in half of US states (representing 29% of the outstanding job losses since the start of the pandemic) in June and early July. And encouragingly, continuing claims declined more quickly in these states (by roughly 150k relative to the trend in all other states in the July payroll month).
• End-of-Year education layoffs. Goldman expects a boost from fewer end-of-year layoffs in the education sector (public and private) in tomorrow’s report. With education payrolls still depressed by 0.8mn relative to pre-crisis, many of the end-of-school-year layoffs that normally happen in July have already occurred this year. Goldman assume a similar employment change as in July 2020, which would boost seasonally adjusted payrolls by around 150k.
• Job availability. The Conference Board labor differential—the difference between the percent of respondents saying jobs are plentiful and those saying jobs are hard to get— increased by 0.2pt to +44.4 in July and is now at its highest level since 2000. Additionally, job openings increased by 16k to a record high in May, according to the JOLTS report.
• Employer surveys. The employment component of Goldman's manufacturing survey tracker increased (+1.4pt to 59.1), as did the employment component of our services survey tracker (+0.5pt to 54.8), and both remain around early-2019 levels. Furthermore, the industry commentary of the ISM services report indicated the broadest employment gains in the recreation industry, with accommodation and food services second. The employment component of the GSAI edged down but to a still-elevated level (-1.2pt to 67.2).
• Job cuts. Announced layoffs reported by Challenger, Gray & Christmas decreased by 24% in July after increasing by 16% in June (mom, SA by GS). Layoffs were at the lowest level since 1993.

Arguing for a weaker-than-expected report:

• ADP. Private sector employment in the ADP report increased by 330k in July, below consensus expectations for a 680k gain. While the ADP report was disappointing, Goldman expects a much larger gain in the BLS measure, for two reasons. First, the bank had expected the statistical inputs to the ADP model to be a large drag this month. Education seasonality unique to the BLS measure should boost tomorrow’s report relative to the ADP numbers.
• Big Data. High-frequency data on the labor market were mixed between the June and July survey weeks (see Exhibit 3). Only one of the five measures GS tracks indicates an underlying job gain in excess of consensus (Census Small Business Pulse, +1.2mn). However, Homebase—one of the more reliable indicators—is consistent with a large gain in payrolls (+0.9mn), and that any boost in the BLS measure from education seasonality will be additive to the underlying trend.

• Jobless claims. Initial jobless claims edged down during the July payroll month, averaging 392k per week vs. 394k in June. Continuing claims also decreased, averaging 3,188k in July vs. 3,448k in June. Across all employee programs including emergency benefits, continuing claims remained roughly unchanged between the payroll survey weeks.