Another good looking setup that will be featured in the upcoming report. Candidate for a breakout to all-time highs. Stay tuned >> blog.techcharts.net

Will 5.0% be the ceiling for the nominal Treasury yield? Maybe not, but for bond investors the risk-reward math has gotten considerably better. The 5% yield provides such a good cushion that if the 10-year yield were to fall 100 bps, an investor would make 11.9%, while only losing 1.9% if the yield were to rise to 6%.

BREAKING: The US Navy has completely withdrawn its warships from the blockade line around Iran after Iran’s first operational use of the advanced Qasem Basir “carrier killer” anti-ship ballistic missile, with satellite imagery showing no US carriers or destroyers in the Gulf of Oman or Arabian Sea since early September, per open-source intelligence and Sentinel-2 data. The Qasem Basir has a declared range of roughly 1,200 kilometers — enough to cover nearly the entire Gulf of Oman and the US fleet’s previous positions — and is reportedly equipped with electro-optical and thermal imaging seekers designed to track naval targets. SNSC Secretary Mohsen Rezaei said the missile “created hell for the Americans,” while CENTCOM acknowledged US vessels came under attack by hostile missiles but said they were defeated without damage. Satellite imagery shows the USS George Washington, USS George H.W. Bush, USS Tripoli and Arleigh Burke-class destroyers are no longer visible in the designated blockade zone, with the line reportedly pushed beyond the missile’s range. The USS Gerald R. Ford has also left the Middle East after a ten-month deployment, leaving the US with two carriers in the region as CENTCOM prepares “short and strong” strike options against Iran. The blockade remains in place on paper, but the warships enforcing it have reportedly moved beyond the range of Iran’s anti-ship missiles.

China has now released its official press release of today's Xi-Trump meeting at the White House. At the moment, the US side's press release is not out yet. I read the Chinese version as soon as it came out. It is not particularly long, but it is surprisingly dense. And one thing stood out to me: Beijing is not simply talking about "cooperation." It is laying out a framework for how China and the United States can compete and win together. And the structure of Xi's remarks is revealing: Trade: cooperate. AI: compete, but cooperate. Taiwan: red lines. Read together with the written statement Xi issued upon arriving in Washington yesterday, today's readout may offer the clearest explanation yet of what Beijing means by a "constructive relationship of strategic stability." Here is how I read it. As in my previous posts, the italicized text comes from the Chinese official release, the bolded text highlights key points, and everything else is my analysis. -- Xi pointed out that the exchange of visits between the heads of state of China and the United States in less than half a year is unprecedented in the history of China-US relations. President Trump and I have maintained communication through various channels and have jointly been steering the great ship of China-US relationship. In May this year, President Trump and I jointly agreed to work toward building a constructive China-US relationship of strategic stability. The new vision reflects the realities of China-US ties, embodies our aspirations for the future, and represents an important step toward finding the right way for the two countries to get along with each other. We need to work toward a relationship featuring cooperation as the mainstay, competition with bounds, manageable differences, and promises of peace, so as to find the right way for two major countries to coexist. China and the United States should, and fully can, achieve mutual benefit and win-win results through practical cooperation, help each other succeed through healthy competition, properly manage differences by seeking common ground while respecting differences, and build peace by fostering mutual trust, so that a constructive China-US relationship of strategic stability can better benefit the two peoples and people around the world. There is a lot packed into these three paragraphs. First, the reference to the "unprecedented" frequency of leader-level exchanges is notable. Xi's framing moves from his personal communication with Trump, to sustained communication between the two presidents, and then to something much larger: a mechanism for stabilizing the bilateral relationship itself. Then comes the metaphor of the "great ship." This is not new. Xi has used the ship metaphor in previous meetings or phone calls with Trump. A ship this large does not turn quickly. And if it veers badly off course, the consequences can be enormous. I think the stage on which this "ship" is sailing is the broader Pacific. The ship may encounter storms and rough seas, but the two countries' top leaders are presenting themselves as jointly responsible for keeping it on course. And then there is a phrase that appears twice: "finding the right way." I don't think that repetition is accidental. Beijing is trying to define what coexistence between two competing major powers should actually look like. And the next sentence gives us the formula: "cooperation as the mainstay, competition with bounds, manageable differences, and promises of peace" was already included in Xi's statement after arriving in the United States the day before. It provides a concrete framework for managing the competition and building this new type of relationship. In many ways, this is an attempt to answer a question that has long complicated China-US relations: Do China and the United States have to choose between cooperation and confrontation? Beijing's answer is no. And more importantly, it is beginning to spell out what that alternative might look like. -- Xi stressed that the economic and trade teams of the two countries held a new round of consultations and reached a new joint arrangement, which is good news for industries and people of both countries, as well as the global economy. Cooperation is a two-way street. The stability of US-China economic and trade relations requires both sides to expand the list of cooperation, while shortening the list of problems. As long as the two sides uphold the spirit of equality, mutual respect and mutual benefit, a way out of problems can be found. Xi expressed his hope that the two sides will work in the same direction, stay committed to the principle of mutual benefit and win-win cooperation, and promote the sustained, stable and sound development of China-US economic and trade relations. And this is where the broader idea of "strategic stability" starts becoming concrete. How do you prevent competition from turning into confrontation? Beijing's answer begins with two lists: The cooperation list. The problem list. In my view, expanding the cooperation means continually broadening the areas in which both sides can achieve tangible results. Reducing the problem list, meanwhile, means preventing new disputes from continuously piling onto the bilateral relationship. This is very pragmatic to manage the relationship. The goal is not to build a relationship completely free of friction-that is clearly unrealistic. The real goal is this: To keep increasing the number of areas where the two sides can cooperate, while preventing disputes from expanding to the point where they overwhelm the entire bilateral relationship. And that helps explain why Xi repeatedly emphasizes equality, mutual respect, and mutual benefit. In addition, the phrase "cooperation is a two-way street" carries a significant message: Beijing is signaling that it is willing to cooperate, but it does not believe strategic stability can be built by China alone. One side cannot keep extending the cooperation list if the other side keeps extending the problem list. Meaningful progress requires both sides to engage, compromise, and reciprocate. -- Xi said that while China and the United States, as both major powers in AI, compete in AI, they have even more reasons to cooperate. The two sides should leverage respective strengths in AI rather than guarding against each other. We can continue to engage in dialogue on AI, exchange views on its risks and benefits, and work together to prevent the misuse and abuse of AI. The two sides should maintain human control over AI technologies, uphold a people-centered approach and the principle of using AI for good, and ensure that AI serves human progress. What happens when an issue belongs on both lists at the same time? That is where AI becomes particularly interesting. The AI competition between the two countries are obvious. But the risks of AI do not respect national borders. Misuse, loss of human control, safety risks, and broader questions of governance cannot necessarily be contained within China or the United States alone. Two countries can compete fiercely over who develops the most advanced AI systems while still sharing an interest in preventing those systems from creating risks neither side can control. This is why Xi said the two countries have even more reasons to cooperate. And the remark also echoes President Trump's statement on social media that he would discuss "super intelligence" today. Trade is about expanding the cooperation list. AI sits on both lists. But Taiwan is different. Let's move on. -- Xi stressed that the Chinese side's position on safeguarding national reunification and territorial integrity is clear-cut. It is hoped that the US side will adhere to the correct position of opposing "Taiwan independence," and handle the Taiwan question with caution, so as to lay a solid foundation for China-US strategic cooperation and the development of bilateral relations. The Taiwan question finally came into focus. It's different from the previous topics. There had previously been speculation in the United States that Xi's asking Trump to stop arms sales to Taiwan based on the 1982 US-China Communique. I do not know whether that report was accurate. But the language of the communique is quite explicit: "Having in mind the foregoing statements of both sides, the United States Government states that it does not seek to carry out a long-term policy of arms sales to Taiwan, that its arms sales to Taiwan will not exceed, either in qualitative or in quantitative terms, the level of those supplied in recent years since the establishment of diplomatic relations between the United States and China, and that it intends gradually to reduce its sale of arms to Taiwan, leading, over a period of time, to a final resolution. " Clearly, 44 years is long enough to qualify as a long term. Yet US policy has failed to follow through on the promise made in that document. Looking at the structure of Xi's remarks, Taiwan has surely been placed within the boundaries of strategic stability. After outlining substantial areas for cooperation, the Chinese side is also sending Washington a clear message: Strategic stability does not mean stability without red lines. -- Trump said that the state visit of Xi to the United States is a great visit. China and the United States are both major countries, and he and Xi are good friends who maintain in-depth and close communication. The US-China relations will surely be handled well under the leadership of the two heads of state. The latest round of economic and trade consultations between teams of both countries achieved new outcomes, and both sides should continue dialogue to reach a better agreement. Artificial intelligence concerns the future of humanity, and China and the United States should maintain dialogue and strengthen cooperation on this issue. Trump's response, as presented in the Chinese readout, is notable for what it reinforces. He described the visit as "great." This effectively signaled to the outside world that the meeting did not need to be portrayed as a tense, difficult, or deeply divided encounter. Judging from the narrative presented in the Chinese readout, the two sides have established fairly clear areas of common ground on several fronts: - High-level communication should continue. - Economic and trade negotiations should continue. - Dialogue on AI should continue. - The overall stability of bilateral relations needs to be maintained. At the same time, it is equally important to note that Trump's remarks were relatively broad and general, while Xi's remarks played a more substantial role in defining the broader framework of the relationship. -- Both heads of state also exchanged views on major international and regional issues including the Middle East situation, Ukraine crisis and Korean Peninsula. The two leaders also confirmed that the two countries will support each other in hosting the 2026 APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting and the G20 Leaders' Summit. I would not pass over this final section too quickly. The Middle East. Ukraine. The Korean Peninsula. None of these issues is simply about China-US bilateral relations. Their inclusion reminds us that the relationship between Washington and Beijing does not exist in isolation. China and the United States are permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, two of the world's largest economies, and leading technological powers. Whether they can maintain channels of communication therefore has implications far beyond trade, technology, or Taiwan. Both are deeply embedded in a broader multilateral system. The immediate references to the APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting in China's Shenzhen and the G20 Leaders' Summit in America's Miami reinforce that point. They place the bilateral relationship in a wider context: even as China and the United States compete with each other, they must also continue engaging within institutions and forums where their decisions affect countries far beyond their own. How will Beijing and Washington manage the competition in a healthy way? When the cooperation list and the problem list are both on the table, which one will Washington choose to make longer? There is no answer to that question tonight. What comes next will.

Rep. Delia Ramirez, who said she is more proud to be Guatemalan than American, says in Spanish: "We are going to abolish the Department of Homeland Security...we are going to create a Department of Community Safety" so immigration is not handled by an agency that "likes to call immigrants terrorists..."

No one demands you to give an answer as to who an Indian is. No one is ever confused as to who an Israeli or Turk or Japanese or Korean is. And yet every time someone tries to assert an American identity that’s worthy of being protected politically, suddenly we all act as if no one has any idea what an American is. It’s as if these people demand you define what a chair is and then when you give an answer, they’ll tear it to pieces and then claim chairs don’t exist even as they’re sitting in one. It’s all so incredibly disingenuous. We aren’t playing this game any longer. “American” is not a synonym for abstract universal man who also happens to believe non vague notions of freedom. Everyone knows what an American is, including those who pretend not to know, which is why they constantly attack the concept in the first place because they are fundamentally opposed to the idea that there could ever be an inherited identity that anyone ever organizes themselves around politically.

ICE killed another man. His name is Mario David Coronado Juarez. Mario lived and worked in Michigan for 7 years as a construction worker, sending money home to his kids in Guatemala. ICE pursued him in an unmarked car, causing a fatal car crash. These killings have to stop. #AbolishICE.

The bond and note futures notional yield is 6%. IV and CTD is gonna get interesting soon.

Oh my god. My friend. Open your ear most wide. Japan yield go up very, very bad news. This piece of news mean we all soon go be only fan sIut sell picture of buthole for make money. Why? I explain > Japan go through deflation for much long time, maybe since 1980s. This mean their price of goods keep go down. Why? Low birth rate. >If everyone old, no one buy anything. If no one buy, price alway be low. >Japanese government then say, “okay, we print much money try make price go up”. >So Japan print much money, and also make interest rate be zero for long time. > all venture capital and hedge fund borrow Japan money, use for buy America asset > price for all asset in America go up > now Japan say “okay nigga, no more cheap money. Pay high yield now” > now all world hedge fund and private equity must sell asset for pay back borrowed Japan currency > now all asset price crash. Company no money. Cannot raise capital, must fire people > you and me must go on onlyfan sell buthole picture for not be starvation Oh no.

Bigoted attacks on Indian-Americans by a section of MAGA signal a deeper problem for the GOP. The multiracial coalition that powered Trump to victory in 2024 is collapsing. [My take] wsj.com/opinion/some-republi…

Assisted suicides now makes up more than 1 in 10 deaths in parts of Canada - and rates are rising trib.al/9aezo5P

I think Jews are expecting some kind of trap if they start funding white Christian American nationalist right-wing young men. They don't want to build us up, give us resources, provide institutional legitimacy, and then watch us turn on them. It's important for guys like me to come out publicly in recognition of where the Jewish coalition is at, and to say it's okay to be pro-Israel and pro-100 million mass deportations. This is a natural partnership. Jews should be donating to the Bo French campaign and they should be funding 100 million mass deportations of the Third World foreigners who despise Jews. We can all be friends and this is a long-term stable equilibrium. American Empire.

Serious question, would you be motivated to work hard, build, innovate and create jobs for others if, after a certain threshold, the state took more than 50% of your efforts? Research keeps finding the same thing, when the after-tax reward for extra effort shrinks, you get fewer patents, fewer startups and fewer of the inventors who lift everyone else’s living standards. Entrepreneurs bet years, savings and reputation on ideas that drive prosperity and progress. Why should they be punished for that? Does this make any sense to you?