Author

admin

Browsing

The Real Estate sector took the lead in Tuesday’s trading, probably because interest rate cuts are approaching. Technology and Consumer Discretionary took second and third place, respectively.

Overall, it was a pretty quiet trading day except for the energy sector, which showed the biggest decline. The Energy Select Sector SPDR Fund (XLE), the StockCharts proxy for the Energy sector, declined 1.75%.

FIGURE 1. SEPTEMBER 10, 2024 MARKETCARPET. Real Estate was the leading sector, followed by Technology and Consumer Discretionary. Energy was the laggard.Image source: StockCharts.com. For educational purposes.

It looks like investors are slowly rotating back into large-cap growth stocks just in case the asset class quickly trends higher. At the same time, investors aren’t losing sight of the FOMC September 18 meeting, in which the Fed is expected to cut interest rates by at least 25 basis points. A rate cut would favor the Real Estate sector, since lower interest rates encourage borrowing, which could increase real estate sales.

Real Estate Pushes Higher

The Real Estate Select Sector SPDR Fund (XLRE) chart below shows that the ETF set a new two-year high on Tuesday.

FIGURE 2. CHART OF REAL ESTATE SELECT SECTOR SPDR FUND (XLRE). The ETF is trading above its 50-day moving average, with a SCTR score of 99.2 and relative performance against the S&P 500 edging higher.Chart source: StockCharts.com. For educational purposes.

XLRE is trading above its 20-day simple moving average (SMA), and the StockCharts Technical Rank (SCTR) score is at 99.2. XLRE’s relative performance against the S&P 500 ($SPX) is at 2.09%, which is slightly higher than the large-cap index, but there is potential for it to rise further.

CPI and Large-Cap Growth Stocks

The August CPI data is expected to rise 2.6% year-over-year and core CPI is expected to rise 3.2%. Investors will closely watch the data when it’s released Wednesday morning before the open. The CPI will give insight into how much of an interest rate cut to expect at the FOMC meeting, which could cause some waves in tomorrow’s trading. We could see a switcheroo in tomorrow’s MarketCarpet or a continuation of the same, with more buying pressure in the large-cap growth stocks. 

Looking at the Market Factors widget in one of the Dashboard panels, the large-cap growth factor was Tuesday’s top gainer, with a 0.48% rise.

The StockCharts proxy for this market factor is the SPDR S&P 500 Growth ETF (SPYG). This fund’s top holdings include all Mag 7 stocks.

The chart of SPYG is similar to the charts of the Nasdaq Composite ($COMPQ), Nasdaq 100 ($NDX), and Invesco QQQ Trust (QQQ). There’s a little upside movement, but not enough to convincingly suggest a momentum shift.

FIGURE 3. DAILY CHART OF SPDR S&P 500 GROWTH ETF. SPYG is trading in the middle of its July high-to-August low range, which means the ETF has an equal chance of moving in either direction. The RSI needs to move above 50 with above-average volume.Chart source: StockCharts.com. For educational purposes.

There still needs to be much more bullish pressure to move Tech stocks higher. The relative strength index (RSI) should cross over the 50 level with increasing volume. SPYG is trading in the middle of the July high-to-August low range and could move in either direction. A break below the lower blue dashed line could start a bearish move, whereas a break above the upper trendline would be bullish.

Hopefully, we won’t have to wait too long to know whether it’ll be the bulls or bears who dominate the large cap growth stock arena. Tomorrow will present a clearer picture of which way investors are rotating their holdings. 


As a side note, Extended Factors is one of the latest additions to the SharpCharts dashboard panels. These are very useful for identifying which market factors are leading and lagging.


Energy Slump

Oil prices have slid lower recently and have now reached their lowest level in more than two years. The fall in price is related to weaker demand and concerns about China’s economic growth. The chart of the Energy Select Sector SPDR Fund (XLE) shows the magnitude of the fall in energy prices. XLE is trading below its 200-day simple moving average, and the Energy Sector Bullish Percent Index ($BPENER) crossed below 30.

FIGURE 4. THE ENERGY SECTOR’S SLIDE. The Energy Select Sector SPDR Fund (XLE) is trading below its 100-day moving average, and its Bullish Percent Index is below 30. Technically, XLE looks very bearish. Chart source: StockCharts.com. For educational purposes.

Closing Bell

There wasn’t much movement in equities today. Tomorrow could be a different story, with CPI data tomorrow morning before the close. There could be a lot of choppiness in early trading hours.


Disclaimer: This blog is for educational purposes only and should not be construed as financial advice. The ideas and strategies should never be used without first assessing your own personal and financial situation, or without consulting a financial professional.

In this video from StockCharts TV, Julius takes a look at rotations in an asset allocation RRG. He compares fixed-income-related asset classes, commodities, the US dollar, Bitcoin and stocks to a balanced portfolio of 60% stocks/40% bonds. The long-lasting outperformance of stocks seems to be coming to an end.

This assessment of asset allocation is then followed by a look at S&P 500 sector rotation using Relative Rotation Graphs broken down into three groups — offensive, defensive, and (economically) sensitive. The current rotation in the defensive group is really standing out.

This video was originally published on September 10, 2024. Click anywhere on the icon above to view on our dedicated page for Julius.

Past episodes of Julius’ shows can be found here.

#StayAlert, -Julius

Democrats are embracing Taylor Swift’s endorsement of Kamala Harris for president, calling the megastar’s backing “huge” for her campaign — while some Republicans were quick to dismiss it and others warned her against alienating Donald Trump voters.

The pop star — one of the most famous celebrities in the world — waded into the contentious 2024 election with a message to her 283 million Instagram followers shortly after the debate between Vice President Harris and former president Trump ended Tuesday night, saying she “fights for the rights and causes I believe need a warrior to champion them.” Her decision to speak out came after Trump embraced AI-generated images of Swift appearing to endorse him, saying this “really conjured up my fears around AI, and the dangers of spreading misinformation.”

Tim Walz, Harris’s vice-presidential candidate, as he learned the news live on MSNBC, said “that’s the type of courage we need in America.” Patting his heart and grinning, Walz said he was “incredibly grateful” to Swift for her “eloquent” and “clear” message. Walz called on Swifties — as fans of the pop star are known — to “give us a hand, get things going.”

Swift’s endorsement post racked up nearly 2.5 million likes within a half-hour as reactions poured in. It was shared over 1 million times within six hours.

Swift’s fans could become a force in the presidential election. The singer and performer has surged in popularity and is viewed increasingly favorably by most American men, women and Democrats, and her favorability improved since the last election cycle among independents and Republicans. In a May poll, 1 in 10 women, Americans under 35 and independents said that a Swift endorsement might influence their vote at least a little — and as The Washington Post’s Philip Bump previously wrote in a column, “this is probably overstated, but a Swiftian nudge would not do nothing.”

“She is a cultural icon,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) told reporters about Swift after the debate, warning Trump to disparage Swift’s endorsement “at your own peril.”

“Her speaking out is a big darn deal,” said Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro (D). “That’s a huge endorsement.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Taylor Swift (@taylorswift)

Trump said little when asked by reporters about Swift’s endorsement of his rival. “I have no idea,” he said.

Brian Hughes, Trump campaign’s spokesman, declined to comment, saying, “I’m not a teeny-bopper.”

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) said he liked Swift’s music but wanted “to live in a world where liberals make my art and conservatives make my laws.”

Conservative media personality Megyn Kelly called Swift’s endorsement “disgusting” and said it would cost the pop star support among Republicans. “You can kiss your sales to the Republican audience goodbye, Taylor. Hope you enjoyed them while you had them,” she said on “The Megyn Kelly Show.”

Former Dallas County GOP chair Jennifer Stoddard-Hajdu questioned how many of Swift’s fans vote and said on local ABC affiliate television station WFAA, “I don’t think a pop star or Hollywood is going to be a big factor in this election.”

In 2020, Swift had endorsed the Biden-Harris ticket, and many fans of Swift had been waiting breathlessly to see if the pop star would back Harris in this election. Swifties have already been lining up behind Harris even before the endorsement. More than 34,000 joined the “Swifties for Kamala” call in August and raised more than $122,000.

The account Swifties for Kamala, which has over 77,000 followers on X, said it was “thrilled” about Swift’s endorsement and added, “we never doubted Taylor would endorse at the right time because we know that her values align with Harris and our community.”

Alongside her endorsement, Swift posted a photo of herself with her pet cat Benjamin Button, and signed off as a “childless cat lady” — embracing the phrase that Trump’s vice-presidential running mate, Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio), has used to criticize people without kids.

Democrats hailed the timing of the announcement, coming at the back of what they described as a strong debate performance from Harris. MSNBC anchor Lawrence O’Donnell called it “the most important celebrity endorsement” he had ever seen given the tight race. “The timing on it is absolutely exquisite, the wording of it is flawless,” he said on air.

Praising Harris’s debate performance, late-night show host Stephen Colbert said that nothing could have made tonight any better for the vice president. But after playing a clip of Swift’s endorsement news, he added: “I stand corrected.”

This post appeared first on washingtonpost.com

With the conclusion of the first debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former president Donald Trump, eyes have already turned to when — or whether — subsequent debates between the two candidates might take place.

Harris’s campaign has signaled that it wants a second debate, in October — while Trump is wavering.

“Under the bright lights, the American people got to see the choice they will face this fall at the ballot box: between moving forward with Kamala Harris, or going backwards with Trump,” Harris campaign chair Jen O’Malley Dillon said in a statement after Tuesday night’s debate hosted by ABC News. “That’s what they saw tonight and what they should see at a second debate in October. Vice President Harris is ready for a second debate. Is Donald Trump?”

In the spin room in Philadelphia on Tuesday night, Trump repeatedly told reporters that Harris would likely want a redo because he claimed she performed poorly.

“We’ll look at it, but they want a second debate because they lost,” Trump said.

By Wednesday morning, however, Trump told the hosts of “Fox & Friends” that he was leaning against debating Harris a second time.

“When you win the debate, I don’t know that I want to do another debate,” Trump said, prompting host Steve Doocy to observe, “It sounds like you’re a no.”

“Well I’d be less inclined to,” Trump said, again claiming he had a “great night” — though many Republicans felt he allowed Harris to stay on the attack.

Doocy said Fox News proposed several more debate dates in October to the Trump and Harris teams Tuesday night, moderated by the network’s Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum.

Trump interrupted to say he’d rather not have Baier and MacCallum and would prefer someone like “Sean, Jesse or Laura” — apparently referencing Sean Hannity, Jesse Watters and Laura Ingraham.

“I didn’t think Martha and Brett were good last night … Jesse was fantastic last night, what he said,” Trump said. “Jesse really got it. Jesse said Trump won that debate.”

Since 1988, presidential candidates traditionally participated in three debates before Election Day, including one that was conducted in the style of a town hall, all organized by the bipartisan Commission on Presidential Debates. There were only two in 2020, with one canceled after Trump was diagnosed with covid-19 and declined to appear remotely rather than in person with Joe Biden.

In 2022, the Republican National Committee withdrew from the nonprofit commission, accusing it of being biased in favor of Democrats, leaving campaign teams to negotiate debate dates and terms directly with television networks.

Trump previously called for three debates with Harris, though none but the ABC News one was solidified — and only after extensive back-and-forth over rules, including whether each candidate’s microphone would be muted while the other was speaking. On CNN on Wednesday morning, Trump campaign spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt did not commit to a second debate, saying she would “let [Trump] make an announcement on that front.”

The only other firmly scheduled debate is one between the vice-presidential nominees, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) and Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio), that will be hosted by CBS News on Oct. 1.

On Tuesday, Walz praised Harris’s debate performance and said that, though he couldn’t speak for Harris, he “would be there encouraging her to [debate Trump] every day.”

“It’s the same old tired agenda that he brings every time, and she’s bringing this new hopefulness, this ability to be able to articulate what Americans are asking for. … We agreed to these two debates. We will carry them out. We’ll see where it goes,” Walz said.

In the spin room Tuesday night, Trump surrogates also were encouraging the former president to participate in another debate against Harris. Both Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) praised Trump’s performance, while acknowledging some skill on Harris’s part.

“What we learned tonight is that Kamala Harris is actually probably pretty good at needling people,” Donalds said, referring to several moments in which Harris appeared to get under Trump’s skin.

Republican National Committee co-chair Lara Trump said that she thought Tuesday night’s debate was “absolutely necessary” and acknowledged that typically candidates have three such meetings leading up to the general election.

“Donald Trump would certainly be willing to do another,” Lara Trump, the former president’s daughter-in-law, said Tuesday.

Biden, when he was leading the Democratic ticket, proposed a June debate on CNN as well as Tuesday’s debate on ABC, and Trump quickly agreed. But after a disastrous June debate performance resulted in Harris taking over Biden’s campaign, Trump initially indicated that the debate planned for Tuesday on ABC had been “terminated.”

“I’ll see her on September 4th or, I won’t see her at all,” he posted on social media on Aug. 3.

Nine days later, he proposed three debates, on Sept. 4, Sept. 10 and Sept. 25. Harris responded by saying she would talk about future debates only after Trump and her met on Sept. 10. Trump opted to do a town hall with Fox News host Sean Hannity on Sept. 4 instead, and agreed to Tuesday’s debate.

Hannah Knowles, Michael Scherer, Maeve Reston, Mariana Alfaro and Isaac Arnsdorf contributed to this report.

This post appeared first on washingtonpost.com

There weren’t many things that could have diverted the political world’s attention from Vice President Kamala Harris’s dominant performance against Donald Trump in Tuesday night’s debate. But at 11 p.m., Taylor Swift managed it.

Her endorsement of the Democratic nominee wasn’t surprising, as such. She endorsed Joe Biden in 2020 and has endorsed other Democrats in the past. It was so expected, in fact, that people were surprised when rumors about her performing at the Democratic convention didn’t come to fruition. But “unsurprising” doesn’t mean “not impactful.” And by at least one immediate measure, the endorsement had impact.

As has been the case in the past, Swift’s endorsement was a careful one. Posted on Instagram, it encouraged her followers — all 283 million of them — to look into the candidates for themselves. But then she explained why she backed Harris, ending the post with a pointed description of herself as a “childless cat lady.”

Her most forceful plug was one she’d offered before: that her followers should register to vote. Google data suggests that this pitch had an effect, correlating with an uptick in the number of people headed to the search engine to figure out how to do so.

The biggest spike Tuesday came about halfway through the debate, at about the point that Trump was being asked about his role in the riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Search interest tapered off as the debate wound down. And then, when Swift’s endorsement dropped, it jumped back up.

How do we know this was a function of Swift? Well, we don’t specifically, except that the surge overlapped with a big spike in searches for Swift herself. Google’s data also indicates that the top search related to the term was “taylor swift voter registration.”

Mind you, the graph above isn’t to scale. It simply shows the peak interest in both terms over the three-hour period displayed. If we show search interest for Swift and voter registration relative to each other, there’s no contest.

In August, as a pro-Harris group of Swift fans got geared up, we looked at the way in which the pop megastar was better positioned to have a political impact now than in past election cycles. For one thing, she’s way more famous than she used to be. For another, her fan base of young women has, like all of us, gotten older — and many or most are now able to vote. For a third, as we noted then, Swift is viewed more positively now than she was in 2018 when she offered her endorsement to a Democratic Senate candidate.

Even among Republicans.

Trump, who was already having a bad night by the time Swift’s endorsement landed, is doing his best to take the development in stride. On Wednesday morning, he called in to Fox News’s “Fox & Friends,” a show on which he was once a weekly contributor. The hosts gently probed Trump for his reaction to Swift’s move; he suggested, sort of randomly, that he preferred the wife of Kansas City Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes.

Then he made a prediction: Swift would “probably pay a price for it in the marketplace.”

It’s possible, sure. It is also possible that the result of Swift’s endorsement will be that Trump pays a price for it on Election Day.

This post appeared first on washingtonpost.com

Jane Hynous was bored watching “National Treasure” in her social studies class, so she pulled out a few markers and drew the first quirky image that entered her mind: a werewolf.

That June morning, the 12-year-old had learned that her state of Michigan was holding a competition for the best custom election stickers. Jane drew the werewolf ripping off its blue shirt while howling, with the words “I VOTED” in the background above an American flag.

When the middle school student returned to her home that afternoon in Grosse Pointe Farms, Mich., she took a picture of her drawing and submitted it online, not expecting much to come of it.

But in the past week, Jane’s drawing has gone viral on social media and appeared on national TV programs since the Michigan Department of State announced that it was one of nine winners. The image might serve as a reflection of voters’ anxiety about two months before the election, but Jane said her drawing had little to do with politics.

“I just wanted to do something that was going to be, I guess, funny and not so serious,” Jane, a seventh-grader, told The Washington Post. “Because, you know, voting is such a serious topic, and you want to have something fun that’s going to lighten it up.”

Jane started doodling on her parents’ iPad as a 4-year-old and has since gone on to make beaded bracelets, origami art and dioramas in shoe boxes.

Still, when Jane’s teacher distributed templates and instructions for the sticker contest in June, Jane wasn’t sure whether she would enter. She said she didn’t think anything she created would stand out. But she didn’t want to watch “National Treasure,” so she drew with the markers and pens from her pencil case.

Jane figured other contestants would draw designs related to Michigan — lighthouses, trout and white-tailed deer — but she wanted to create something unique. She said she drew her werewolf in less than an hour.

Michigan residents submitted more than 480 designs between May and June, according to the Michigan Department of State.

Competitions in other states inspired Michigan’s contest, Zena Aljilehawi, the chair of a college student-led task force that helped organize the competition, told The Post. A third-grader in Kentucky this year drew a humanoid lizard, and in New York in 2022, a 14-year-old drew a multicolored, discombobulated human head on top of six turquoise legs.

Aljilehawi, 23, hoped Michigan’s contest would receive similar quirky designs. The competition’s template listed a few rules and tips: The design must say “I Voted,” be nonpartisan, avoid artificial intelligence, and participants should “be creative and HAVE FUN!”

Unbeknownst to Jane, Aljilehawi said she and the 33 other members of her task force had a feeling the sticker would win when they first saw it.

“Our group chat went crazy,” said Aljilehawi, a junior studying biology, health and society at the University of Michigan.

People interpreted the drawing differently. Aljilehawi said some task force members thought the werewolf was based on the Michigan Dogman, a humanoid dog who legend says was seen around North Michigan in the 1880s. Aljilehawi said the sticker emitted “freedom” and “rock-and-roll energy.”

“If you asked an AI to generate the American spirit sticker,” she said, “I don’t think it could have done something better than what we got.”

Angela Benander, a spokeswoman for the Michigan Department of State, said the design was “delightfully unhinged.”

“It’s kind of a fun spin on just, you know, what feels like a crazy season to a lot of people,” she said.

A few weeks after entering her drawing, Jane learned that the task force, which works with the Michigan Department of State to encourage young people to vote, selected her sticker as a semifinalist. The public could vote for the winners on the department’s website.

Jane said she had just finished swimming in Lake Huron one day in August when her social studies teacher called her mother, Amy, to deliver an update: Jane had won the contest.

“It was really surprising,” Jane said. “I’m standing there in a bathing suit like, ‘What?’”

Jane’s design received 20,000 votes from the public — about 2,000 more than any other sticker, Samantha May, a spokeswoman for the Michigan Department of State, said in an email.

The department announced the winners on Sept. 4. Some of the other winners featured a cat holding an “I VOTED” sign, a deer wearing sunglasses and a lighthouse projecting “I VOTED!” One sticker said, “I Voted yay” — with the “e” backward — and another used Midwest slang: “OPE, I VOTED.”

A few days after the announcement, Jane said her classmates told her that her drawing was on their social media feeds.

Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson posted Jane’s drawing on X with the caption: “Walking into general election season like.”

Derek Dobies, the chief of staff for Michigan’s AFL-CIO, wrote on X: “If there is ever a year to have an unhinged werewolf ripping its shirt off as the ‘I Voted’ sticker … it’s 2024.”

John Oliver joked on his show “Last Week Tonight” on Sunday that he would commit voter fraud to obtain multiple copies of the sticker.

Michigan clerks will order and distribute rolls of the winning stickers to voters in November, and Benander said she expects the werewolf designs to run out quickly. Regardless of voters’ interpretation of her drawing, Jane said, she hopes it will bring them joy.

“They’re going to be wearing this on their chest the day they vote,” she said, “and I want them to be proud of it.”

This post appeared first on washingtonpost.com

It took 19 years for the symptoms to emerge. Tom Beyrer, who served for six months as a police officer at Ground Zero following the Sept. 11 attack on the World Trade Center, was 65 when his memory and cognitive abilities began to crumble.

Gradually, he pulled away from things that brought him joy. He no longer remembered how to open the family’s backyard pool in the spring. He stopped tinkering on his Corvette. He began sitting in his living room alone without the television on.

Then one night, distraught, he called his wife, Maria.

“I don’t know where I am,” he told her. He had driven 15 to 20 miles north of his suburban home outside of Manhattan — an area he’d known for years — but suddenly needed his wife to give him directions.

Cancer, respiratory ailments, mental health conditions and musculoskeletal disorders have long been linked to work at the site of the World Trade Center attack, and medical costs for them have been covered by the World Trade Center Health Program since it was established by an act of Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama in 2011.

Only recently, however, have scientists begun to find that cognitive impairment and dementia are also afflicting first responders at rates far higher than in the general population. The revelations are pushing physicians and advocates to be more vocal about lobbying the World Trade Center Health Program, overseen by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, to include dementia among illnesses covered.

“I’m hoping they will,” said Dr. Benjamin Luft, director of a program at Stony Brook University that cares for and monitors the health of first responders. “They have a systematic process in which they evaluate the scientific data. We’ve spent a huge amount of time and effort to establish that exposure to the neurotoxins and dust could cause these problems and so should be eligible for coverage.”

Luft was the senior author of a study published this summer involving more than 5,000 first responders who have undergone regular testing for over a decade. Those with the highest exposure to the dust and potentially neurotoxic debris at the World Trade Center, he found, were over 14 times more likely than those with the lowest exposure to be diagnosed with dementia before the age of 65.

Dr. Ray Dorsey, professor of neurology at the University of Rochester, said tiny grains of ordinary dust, called fine particulate matter, can enter the nose and reach the brain to cause damage.

“The nose is the front door to our brain,” Dorsey said. “Dust and chemicals set up shop in the smell area of our brain, then spread to the parts of the brain important for memory.”

Recent studies have found that air pollution from factories, automobiles and forest fires can all increase the risk of dementia. “And you couldn’t get worse air pollution than being at that World Trade Center site,” Dorsey said.

On the morning of 9/11, Beyrer was stationed at a firearms training center in the Bronx. Within minutes of the first plane flying into the World Trade Center, he and other officers set off in a van, arriving before either of the buildings had collapsed.

“We were the only guys at that time who had the long guns,” he recalled. Told to station himself a couple of blocks away to provide security, he was enveloped in white-out conditions when the first building fell.

“It was terrible,” he said. “It was completely dark with dust.”

After some 48 hours on and around the mound of debris without a mask or any other protective equipment, Beyrer returned home covered in white soot.

“He took a shower and told me to take those clothes, throw them outside, get rid of them,” Maria Beyrer said. “Then he got dressed and went back out. He was there for six months, 12 hours a day.”

Although light face masks were eventually distributed, he said, “they didn’t really help. I guess they were better than nothing.”

Told by Luft that his months of exposure probably played a role in his cognitive symptoms, the Beyrers have made accommodations. She does the driving, for instance, when they’re together.

But whether it was dust alone that increased the risk of dementia in first responders, or harmful chemicals that piggy-backed on the dust, is impossible to disentangle, at least for now, said a co-author of the study led by Luft published in the journal JAMA Network Open.

“We focused on dust in this study because that is what people could see,” said Dr. Sean Clouston, director of research and a professor in the department of Family, Population and Preventive Medicine at Stony Brook Medicine. “They knew if they had or had not been exposed to it. But there were fumes from chemicals, jet engine fuel, burning computers, asbestos, heavy metals. There’s a whole bucket of things people were exposed to.”

The longer responders spent on the site, and the less protective gear they wore, the higher their risk of developing early dementia, the study found. Using a metric called “person-years” (by multiplying the number of responders times the amount of time they spent at the site), they found that for those who had the lowest exposure, the incidence rate of dementia was 2.95 per 1,000 person-years. But even those who had “mild” exposure had a greatly increased risk: 12.16 per 1,000 person-years.

The next highest level of exposure, labeled “moderate,” carried only slightly more risk, at 16.53 per 1,000 person-years. Those with “high” exposure, however, had an incidence rate of 30.09 per 1,000 person-years, while responders with “severe” exposure had a rate of 42.37 per 1,000 person-years.

“The fact that they’re showing a dose-response effect makes me more confident in the results,” said Dr. Caroline Tanner, a neurologist at the University of California, San Francisco, who was not involved in the study. “It’s usually very hard to know exactly how much exposure people have to fine particulate matter. It’s remarkable that they could measure it and show a higher risk of dementia as the exposure went up. It’s an extremely well done study.”

An earlier study by Clouston and Luft offered a possible explanation for why exposure to the World Trade Center site would be linked to dementia. In a paper they published last year in the journal Molecular Neurobiology, they reported that the longer responders spent at the site, the more inflammation they had in their hippocampus (the seahorse-shaped brain area that plays a crucial role in memory) and cerebral white matter (the nerve fibers that connect neurons to each other).

The years it has taken for cognitive deficits to develop among responders is one reason that the World Trade Center Health Program, overseen by the CDC, does not currently cover dementia or milder cognitive disorders.

Anthony Gardner, spokesman for the World Trade Center Health Program, said in a statement that the program’s leaders are aware of the study by Clouston and Luft, and are reviewing the findings. In fact, he said, the program partly funded it.

But, he said, the program has a high scientific standard for adding any condition to the list of those covered by the program. “Meeting this standard generally requires consistent findings among several high-quality, large studies of persons representing different groups,” he said. “To date, the program has not received a valid petition to add dementia or other cognitive conditions to the list of WTC-related health conditions.”

Benjamin Chevat, executive director of 911 Health Watch, an independent group that monitors World Trade Center programs and advocates for changes when necessary, said the study of dementia risk will need to be replicated by other researchers to meet the requirements of the federal program.

“It would be great if this condition could be added tomorrow, but regretfully science does not work at the speed we would like,” he said.

Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said that he helped to establish and fund the World Trade Center program so responders and survivors get the care they need. “We pushed for robust research funding for the program and wrote a process that allows for the program to follow the research to add conditions that are supported by scientific evidence,” he said. “I very much support this process and the research running as quickly as possible.”

U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) said the study’s finding of a 14-fold increased risk of early-onset dementia is “extremely alarming.”

“It’s essential that the CDC and medical community analyze this further in order to determine whether to add it to the list of conditions covered by the [World Trade Center Health Program],” she said.

Regardless of whether dementia and other cognitive issues are recognized by the program, Tanner said, an important lesson can already be drawn from the study of dementia in World Trade Center responders.

“The big take-home from this paper is that people who used personal protective equipment were protected from the worst effects,” she said. “That should apply to people in any industry where they run the risk of exposure to fine particulate matter. It applies certainly to firefighters. And for those of us who live downwind from a forest fire, maybe we should be asking about public health measures that can protect people when we know the air quality is poor.”

Beyrer’s cognitive symptoms, which have stabilized in the past couple of years, are hardly the only effects he’s lived with since serving at Ground Zero. He suffered for years with lung, stomach and sleep problems, and half of his left lung had to be removed because of a noncancerous growth, which doctors told him was probably due to something he breathed in at the site. But despite it all, Maria insists they are among the lucky families who sent a loved one to respond to the World Trade Center attack.

“He still has problems sleeping,” she said. “But we are one of the fortunate ones. We’re able to manage. Whereas people have lost their parents, lost their children.”

As Tom Beyrer sees it, “There are times when it’s not okay. But I did what I had to do. Me and my friends. That was our job.”

This post appeared first on washingtonpost.com

Discount home goods retailer Big Lots filed for bankruptcy protection on Monday after high interest rates and a sluggish housing market slowed demand for its low-priced furniture and decor. 

As part of its Chapter 11 filing, Big Lots agreed to sell its business to private equity firm Nexus Capital Management for about $760 million, consisting of $2.5 million in cash plus its remaining debt and liabilities, court records show. 

The company, which runs more than 1,300 stores across 48 states, is one of the country’s largest closeout retailers and specializes in offering bargain-basement pricing on all things home. It brought in about $4.7 billion in revenue in fiscal 2023, but sales have consistently fallen after pandemic-era demand for home furnishings dropped.

In a press release and court filings, Big Lots said it will operate its business normally but has started the process of closing nearly 300 stores so it can fix its balance sheet and reduce costs.

“The actions we are taking today will enable us to move forward with new owners who believe in our business and provide financial stability, while we optimize our operational footprint, accelerate improvement in our performance, and deliver on our promise to be the leader in extreme value,” CEO Bruce Thorn said in a news release. “As we move through this process, we remain committed to offering extreme bargains, enabling easy shopping in our stores and online, and providing an outstanding customer experience.” 

Evan Glucoft, managing director at Nexus, said the firm is “confident” that Big Lots’ “greatest days are ahead.” 

“We are excited to have the opportunity to partner with Big Lots and help return this iconic brand to its status as America’s leading extreme value retailer,” said Glucoft. 

Big Lots has been teetering near the edge for months after high interest rates and a sluggish housing market slowed consumer demand for new furniture, decor and other home supplies. While discount retailers tend to do well in rough economic cycles, Big Lots primarily caters to lower- and middle-income consumers, who have curbed discretionary spending at a higher rate than their more affluent counterparts. 

“The company has been adversely affected by recent macroeconomic factors such as high inflation and interest rates that are beyond its control,” Big Lots said in a news release. “The prevailing economic trends have been particularly challenging to Big Lots, as its core customers curbed their discretionary spending on the home and seasonal product categories that represent a significant portion of the company’s revenue.” 

Beyond macroeconomic conditions, Big Lots also operates in a highly competitive space and has struggled to differentiate itself from other discounters that offer home goods or specialize in the category, such as Wayfair, Walmart and TJX Cos.′ Home Goods.

“Big Lots is not always good value for money. Many of the items it sells are not high end and are not drastically expensive, but equivalents can often be found much cheaper at other stores, including Walmart,” Neil Saunders, managing director of GlobalData, said in a note.

“The other issue [is] the assortment is very jumbled and muddled, which is partly a function of the way the business operates,” Saunders added. “However, there is far too much choice and not nearly enough treasure for consumers to be enticed by. This creates an unsatisfactory shopping experience, especially compared to other players operating in the discount space, such as off-price retailers.”

As part of the bankruptcy process, Big Lots will hold a court-supervised auction for its business. It could go to a different buyer if they make a bid that’s higher than Nexus’ offer. 

It’s working with law firm Davis Polk & Wardwell, investment bank Guggenheim Securities and advisory firm AlixPartners. A&G Real Estate Partners has been tapped as Big Lots’ real estate advisor, while Nexus will be represented by law firm Kirkland & Ellis.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

New Starbucks CEO Brian Niccol will focus on improving the chain’s U.S. business in his early days on the job before he moves to fix its issues abroad, according to an open letter published on Tuesday.

″… In some places — especially in the U.S. — we aren’t always delivering,” Niccol wrote in the open letter addressed to customers, employees and stakeholders. “It can feel transactional, menus can feel overwhelming, product is inconsistent, the wait too long or the handoff too hectic. These moments are opportunities for us to do better.”

Niccol, who calls himself a longtime Starbucks customer, outlined four areas for improvement: the barista experience, morning service, its cafes and the company’s branding.

“This is our plan for the U.S., and where I need to focus my time initially,” Niccol wrote in the letter.

To tackle those challenges, Starbucks will invest in tech to improve baristas’ working conditions and allow them to craft drinks more quickly, make the company’s supply chain more efficient and upgrade its app and mobile ordering.

Later, Niccol plans to address its international business, such as in China, its second-largest market. Starbucks’ business in China has struggled to bounce back from the Covid-19 pandemic, and increased competition has led the coffee chain to lean more on discounts and promotions to win back customers.

“In China, we need to understand the potential path to capture growth and capitalize on our strengths in this dynamic market,” Niccol said.

He also said the company will try to curb what he called “misconceptions” about its brand in the Middle East. Many U.S. brands, including Starbucks and McDonald’s, have faced boycotts tied to backlash against U.S. support for Israel’s offensive in Gaza.

But for Niccol’s first 100 days, he plans to spend time in the chain’s cafes and offices and meet with key suppliers in the U.S.

“Today, I’m making a commitment: We’re getting back to Starbucks,” said Niccol.

The coffee giant named Niccol as chief executive in August, in conjunction with the company’s ouster of then-CEO Laxman Narasimhan. The leadership shake-up followed several quarters of slumping sales for Starbucks as demand for its drinks declined, particularly in the U.S. and China.

Niccol’s official first day was Monday. He joined Starbucks from Chipotle Mexican Grill, where he spent six years as chief executive, turning it from a burrito chain in crisis into a consistent favorite of both diners and Wall Street. Now, he is tasked with executing a turnaround for Starbucks.

Read the full letter below:

An open letter for all partners, customers and stakeholders

As I step into my first week as ceo, I do so not only as a leader, but as a long-time customer. Over the past few weeks, I’ve spent time in our stores, speaking with partners and customers, and talking with teams across operations, store design, marketing and product development.

In each conversation, two truths emerged: First, Starbucks is a beloved brand with wonderful people. We are woven into the fabric of people’s lives and the communities we serve. Second, there’s a shared sense that we have drifted from our core. We have an opportunity to make the store experience better for our partners and, in turn, for our customers.

Starbucks was founded on a love for high quality coffee — handcrafted by our outstanding green apron partners and enjoyed with intention. Coffee is our heart. We own and operate Hacienda Alsacia, our coffee farm on the slopes of Costa Rica’s Volcano Poás, which serves as the heart of our research and innovation efforts. From our network of Farmer Support Centers, Starbucks agronomists share research, education and best practices with local farmers. We invest in the finest quality beans. Our skilled team of roasters carefully prepare these beans in five Starbucks roasting facilities across the U.S., in Amsterdam to serve EMEA markets, in Kunshan for China, and in Karnataka, India, for that growing market. We also operate Starbucks Reserve Roasteries in Milan, Shanghai, Tokyo, New York City, Chicago and Seattle, where we roast small batch Reserve coffees. We design the best equipment for our stores and invest in training for our baristas to ensure every cup reflects our commitment to excellence. Each cup is more than a drink; it’s a handcrafted moment, made with care.

Our stores have always been more than a place to get a drink. They’ve been a gathering space, a community center where conversations are sparked, friendships form, and everyone is greeted by a welcoming barista. A visit to Starbucks is about connection and joy, and of course great coffee.

Many of our customers still experience this magic every day, but in some places — especially in the U.S. — we aren’t always delivering. It can feel transactional, menus can feel overwhelming, product is inconsistent, the wait too long or the handoff too hectic. These moments are opportunities for us to do better.

Today, I’m making a commitment: We’re getting back to Starbucks. We’re refocusing on what has always set Starbucks apart — a welcoming coffeehouse where people gather, and where we serve the finest coffee, handcrafted by our skilled baristas. This is our enduring identity. We will innovate from here.

We’ll focus initially on four key areas that we know will have the biggest impact:

Empowering our baristas to take care of our customers: We’ll make sure our baristas have the tools and time to craft great drinks every time, delivered personally to each customer. For our partners, we’ll build on our tradition of leadership in retail by making Starbucks the best place to work, with career opportunities and a clear path to growth.

Get the morning right, every morning: People start their day with us, and we need to meet their expectations. This means delivering outstanding drinks and food, on time, every time.

Reestablishing Starbucks as the community coffeehouse: We’re committed to elevating the in-store experience — ensuring our spaces reflect the sights, smells and sounds that define Starbucks. Our stores will be inviting places to linger, with comfortable seating, thoughtful design and a clear distinction between “to-go” and “for-here” service.

Telling our story: It’s time for us to tell our story again — reminding people of our unmatched coffee expertise, our role in communities and the special experience that only Starbucks can provide. We won’t let others define who we are.

To support this vision for our U.S. business, we’re making investments in technology that enhance the partner and customer experience, improve our supply chain and evolve our app and mobile ordering platform.

This is our plan for the U.S., and where I need to focus my time initially. But Starbucks is a global company. We operate in 87 markets around the world, where thousands of talented green apron partners share their love of coffee with customers every day. I know I have much to learn from these outstanding teams and I look forward to getting on the road and spending time with them. In China, we need to understand the potential path to capture growth and capitalize on our strengths in this dynamic market. Internationally, we see enormous potential for growth, especially in regions like the Middle East, where we’ll work to dispel misconceptions about our brand, and in Asia Pacific, Europe and Latin America, where the love for Starbucks is strong.

My focus for the first 100 days is clear. I’ll spend time in our stores and at our Support Centers, meeting with key partners and suppliers, and working with our team to drive these critical first steps. Together, we will get back to what makes Starbucks, Starbucks.

On we go,

Brian

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

Internet service providers like Charter, Verizon and Comcast have quietly scaled back their efforts to revive the Affordable Connectivity Program, an expired federal internet subsidy that helped low-income households pay for broadband.

The $14.2 billion program provided a discount of up to $30 per month for some qualifying households and up to $75 a month for households on eligible tribal land. But it officially ended in June after Congress decided not to renew its funding.

The ACP served roughly 23 million households, two-thirds of which had either inconsistent or zero internet access prior to enrolling, according to a December survey from the Federal Communications Commission. In February, the ACP stopped accepting new applications as the program’s funding dwindled.

In the wake of the ACP’s expiration, broadband companies reported losing some customers. But overall, they have weathered the storm better than expected.

“Generally speaking, the impact on the companies so far is less than feared.” said analyst Craig Moffett of MoffettNathanson. “But that doesn’t take away from the families for whom this was important, and could now lose access to broadband.” 

Since the ACP lapsed, some Democratic and Republican lawmakers have been working to bring back the program.

And though broadband companies lobbied to get the ACP renewed before it expired, since then they have done little to revive the program, as there is uncertainty over where the funding would come from and November’s election has cast a chill on Capitol Hill.

“I know the difference between when industry really wants something to happen, and when they say, ‘Well, we support it, sure,’ but they don’t put money into advertising, they don’t put money into lobbyists, they don’t put money into doing the kind of studies that support the case,” New Street Research analyst Blair Levin told CNBC.

Comcast owns NBCUniversal, the parent company of CNBC.

Both Democrats and Republicans in the Senate and the House have brought forward bills that would spend between $6 billion and $7 billion to relaunch the ACP, at least temporarily.

“My hope is that we can get something done rather quickly, especially as kids are getting ready to go back to school,” said Rep. Mike Carey, R-Ohio, in August. He jointly proposed the House bill with Rep. Nikki Budzinski, D-Ill.

The ACP was originally funded as the Emergency Broadband Benefit program, a pandemic-era internet subsidy that quickly gained support when reliable access became a necessity in a world dominated by online school and work. 

Internet usage soared in 2020 and 2021. Even now, usage levels are well above pre-pandemic levels, according to broadband data provider Open Vault.

But as Covid grows more distant in public memory, convincing lawmakers to spend billions to extend these subsidies has become an uphill battle.

One key reason is election year timing.

For example, GOP Sen. JD Vance of Ohio was one of the lead supporters of the ACP. But after he was tapped to be Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s running mate, Vance quieted his advocacy.

In Congress, both the Republican House majority and Democratic control of the Senate could flip in November. This means Democratic leaders may choose to put other priorities ahead of the ACP, while they still control the Senate.

“This is going to be a really close election so maybe they want to use floor time for judicial nominations,” said Gigi Sohn, a consumer broadband advocate and lawyer who formerly served as an FCC commissioner under the Biden administration, in an interview with CNBC.

Still, Sohn believes bipartisan support for the ACP should make reauthorizing it a political slam dunk for Democrats.

“This is one of the things that absolutely perplexes me, because to me, this is the kind of thing you absolutely want to do in an election year.”

As the Sept. 30 government funding deadline inches closer, congressional leaders are heads-down on the scramble to pass a stopgap funding bill to avert a shutdown, pushing the ACP further down the priority list. After September, Congress is expected to be out on recess until after the election.

As some Capitol Hill lawmakers cling to the narrowing possibility of an ACP comeback, the private sector is reining in its hopes.

″[ISPs] are making their plans, they are telling Wall Street that this thing is dead and they’re just not putting effort into it,” Sohn said.

While broadband providers were generally supportive of the ACP, many in the industry believed the subsidy benefitted too wide a swath of U.S. households. In some instances customers used the benefit toward other products, such as mobile or pay TV.

For example, one in four New York households used the ACP, per a White House fact sheet released in February.

Starting from scratch with a new subsidy program, while also building digital literacy among low income consumers, could be a better alternative after the election, some people close to the companies say.

And disillusioned with the temporary model, industry players are more likely to lobby for permanent solutions like strengthening the Universal Service Fund, according to Sohn. But that comes with its own set of political obstacles, especially after a federal court found the USF to be unconstitutional.

With or without private sector resources, lawmakers assure they will not quit the push to bring the ACP back.

“What we’re focused on is the near-term problem,” Carey said. “Then we can build consensus to look at something for a longer-term plan.”

But dwindling support from industry partners casts doubt on the ACP’s future because companies are ultimately the ones who deliver the internet service and can help educate customers about the program.

“Industry is one voice in this because they are the structure providing this service,” Budzinski told CNBC. “It’s important that they be at the table.”

The ACP’s expiration has also cast a shadow over some businesses — namely the companies that had invested heavily in getting new and existing customers enrolled in the program.

Charter Communications CEO Chris Winfrey said in July that the ACP’s expiration impacted both losses and low income broadband connections after the company had “put a lot of effort into the ACP program.”

Charter was one of the ACP’s biggest industry proponents: It received roughly $910 million from the program from 2022 to February 2023, according to FCC dataComcast and Verizon each received over $200 million from the program. 

When Congress decided not to renew ACP funding, these companies were forced to absorb the shock at a time when cable companies have already seen broadband customer growth stagnate due to heightened competition and a slowdown in home sales.

Charter and Comcast representatives declined to comment. Verizon did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

During the second quarter, Charter reported a loss of 149,000 internet customers, while Comcast reported a decline of 120,000 broadband customers. While some of this could be attributed to the ACP, the companies expect the biggest impacts to be felt in the third quarter.

Since the ACP ended, companies have tried to help customers transition to low income or different internet plans, in some cases reverting back to plans they had before the subsidy.

Comcast said in July that it has been helping customers migrate to other broadband plans.

Charter has tried to retain its low-income consumer base by rolling out new savings deals like offering ACP customers a free unlimited mobile line for one year. Others like Verizon decided to just pencil in the financial hit of the customer loss, reporting a loss of 410,000 prepaid wireless subscribers in its second quarter earnings. 

The initial bottom-line pain of the ACP’s lapse so far appears to be milder than what some company leaders and analysts had initially expected. But the process is far from over.

“We’ve only seen the first chapter so far, in that we’ve only seen the impact on gross additions. But we haven’t yet seen the impact on bad debt and unpaid disconnects,” Moffett of MoffettNathanson told CNBC. “That will come in the third quarter.” 

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS