Over the past decade, a large swath of the American population has migrated to the Sunbelt in search of a better climate, fewer taxes, and lower costs of living. Unfortunately, this area is among the most vulnerable to extreme changes in climate.

 

In total, nearly 5 million Americans abandoned states in the Northeast and Midwest and migrated to the Sunbelt states in the last 10 years. As such, it has become the fastest-growing region in the country. At the same time, as climate change accelerates, this region has been experiencing higher temperatures, more frequent hurricanes, and in some metro areas a scarcity of water.

 

Of course, this is not the only U.S. region impacted by climate change. The litany of climate disasters impacting this country this summer would just be too long to list.  From raging fires to floods, drought, air pollution, and of course heat. June and July 2023 were the hottest months in recorded history. And where are the highest temperatures occurring -- in the states that attracted the lion's share of new residents in 2022.

 

Florida, Texas and the Carolinas, followed by other states in the South and West. Among the 10 fastest-growing counties in the U.S., two are considered at very high risk for natural hazards and eight are considered at relatively high risk, according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). All of these fastest-growing counties are in the West and South, including six counties in Texas, three in Florida, and one in Arizona.

 

Despite the well-known climate risks, Americans continue to disregard the present and, more importantly, the future dangers to their environment in pursuit of "milder" temperatures, bigger homes, and more reasonable prices now. This has long been the trend among retirees here in the Northeast with coastal Florida and the Carolinas the most popular destinations for snowbirds. In California, Texas seems to be a top choice.

 

It is not completely clear what motivates people to ignore the risks of hurricanes, fire, and the like in their migration decisions. A research article by Frontiers in Human Dynamics, "Flocking to Fire: How Climate and natural hazards shape human migration across the U.S," penned by researchers from the University of Vermont and the U.S. Department of Agriculture indicates that the dangers of climate change (such as wildfires) do not outweigh the perceived benefits of life in a fire-prone area.

 

Moving to a new location is a risky bet at the best of times whether for one who is hoping to find better employment opportunities or simply retiring. Normally, buying a home, for example, is the single largest investment a family will make. And yet, climate change does not even make the list of the top 10 things to consider when relocating.

 

In a recent article, I wrote about the increasing difficulty in obtaining home insurance in many of these areas. Insurance companies are simply refusing to insure homeowners in affected areas. Few migrating families are even aware of this issue until it is too late to do anything about it.

 

Retirees have even more at stake when it comes to climate change. So many of the elderly list a warmer climate as their first or second reason for moving to the Sunbelt. Be careful what you wish for. The older one gets, the more air and water pollution becomes serious health risks and this summer's record-breaking heat is already threatening the health of some of our nation's most vulnerable people.

 

Scientists warn that the prospects for even hotter summers in the future will make certain areas uninhabitable, especially for the elderly. Aside from the present recognized dangers of forest fires, drought, hurricanes, tornados, and flooding, the future danger of these events is not being considered. The violence and frequency of these weather events will increase and encompass a wider and wider area. Settling inland from a coast or a waterway is the knee-jerk answer for some seeking safety. The problem with that approach is how far inland is "safe." 

 

My own opinion on why people are deliberately putting themselves in harm's way is twofold. Although there is a wealth of information on climate change and its impact on the environment in the future, few have taken the time to read it, and even fewer care to. Unless the water is lapping at our bedroom doors or sparks are falling on the roof, Americans would rather watch the latest episode of their favorite show or tune in to the ball game.

 

My second reason has to do with America's national trait — eternal optimism. It has stood us in good stead for centuries, but in this case, it is our worst enemy. Around 80 percent of people, across all age groups and genders, suffer from what social psychologists call optimism bias.

 

Tali Sharot, a neuroscientist, and professor of cognitive neuroscience at University College in London, brought the theory of optimism bias into popular consciousness. She argued that many of the seemingly unbiased decisions we make every day are influenced by the fact that we think positively about the future. It is one of America's strengths, but it also gives way to that "it won't happen to me" attitude. It leads us all into believing that whatever the disaster or danger that may threaten those around us "it won't happen to me."

 

Unfortunately, climate change overall, in this country is still in the "show me" stage and that show is just beginning. Recall that fewer than half a dozen years ago, many of our politicians in federal, state, and local governments denied even the existence of climate change and there are still a few holdouts today. For people to begin to include the danger of climate change in their future migration decisions, a lot must change. It will. Unfortunately, those changes will be up close and personal for too many of us.

 

Bill Schmick is the founding partner of Onota Partners, Inc., in the Berkshires. His forecasts and opinions are purely his own and do not necessarily represent the views of Onota Partners Inc. (OPI). None of his commentary is or should be considered investment advice. Direct your inquiries to Bill at 1-413-347-2401 or email him at bill@schmicksretiredinvestor.com.

August into September are usually difficult months in the stock market. So far, this August is no exception but how you handle it will make all the difference to your investment plan.

 

If you have been reading my weekend columns, you know that I have been warning investors to prepare for a 5-6 percent pullback in the markets. For many investors who have enjoyed more than six months of gains in their portfolios, even a minor decline in the markets will be painful.

 

On average, pullbacks like the one I am expecting last a month or more and then require another month to regain the previous price level. Stocks can repeat this behavior several times a year before regaining losses and moving higher. Every two or three years the markets experience a 10-20 percent correction. Since the year 2000, downturns of 10 percent or more occurred in more than half of those years. Only 20 percent of these corrections have resulted in a bear market since 1974. 

 

The fact is that most people are hard-wired to react emotionally to the ups and downs in the stock market. Scientists believe that it all stems back to prehistoric times when a struggle for survival evoked a fight-or-flight impulse that exists to this day.

 

Those same experts argue that the pain of losing is psychologically about twice as powerful as the pleasure of gaining. This loss aversion principle affects us all. The difference between successful investors and those who are not depends on how we handle these emotional responses.

 

Many times during my career as an investment adviser I found myself talking clients off the edge, especially in bear markets or sharp pullbacks. The longer the downturn the more time I spent just keeping clients from caving into their impulse to sell in many cases simply to stop the pain of losses. These same clients would often set themselves up for a fall by getting too aggressive on the way up or making other rooky mistakes.

 

I asked my former colleague and financial adviser at Berkshire Money Management, Scott Little, for his view on the subject. Scott recently completed a certificate in behavioral finance (BFA) to further assist his clients in times like these. Here are his thoughts on the subject:

 

"When markets gain like they have in 2023 with so many consecutive months of returns since the October 2022 low, it becomes a breeding ground for several dangerous biases. The first is the optimism bias. This is the tendency to overestimate the likelihood of positive outcomes and downplay the possibility of negative ones. The market is going up, I feel great, and everything will continue to be great.

 

"The second is the recency bias which is the tendency to overemphasize the importance of recent experiences or the latest information we possess when estimating future events. Recency bias often misleads us to believe that recent events can give us an indication of how the future will unfold. Because the market was positive last month, I should add to my stock position so I make more money next month.

 

The last is the confirmation bias. This is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values. Because I just invested a bunch of money in the market, I begin reading all the analysts and reports that support what I did while I ignore those with a contrarian position. They don't know as much as the other people.

 

"To avoid falling prey to these biases try to keep emotions in check. Avoid chasing stocks when arrows are green and stick to your long-term plan. Be open to differing opinions about the market and weigh each equally. Finally, understand that human's ability to predict the future has never been greater than zero. Stay diversified within a portfolio that suits your risk tolerance and will help you achieve your long-term goals."

 

Amen to that.

 

Bill Schmick is the founding partner of Onota Partners, Inc., in the Berkshires. His forecasts and opinions are purely his own and do not necessarily represent the views of Onota Partners Inc. (OPI). None of his commentary is or should be considered investment advice. Direct your inquiries to Bill at 1-413-347-2401 or email him at bill@schmicksretiredinvestor.com.

The NASDAQ 100 index has carried the market for the first half of the year. Over the last few weeks, however, other areas of the markets have been coming back to life. Nimble traders might look at some of those sectors in the weeks ahead.

 

August into September is a fairly volatile period for markets historically. We could see markets suffer bouts of profit-taking, which could give investors a chance to buy stocks in certain sectors that have lagged the markets but have the potential to outperform in the months to come.

 

One area that is risky, but may promise higher rewards, could be the China trade. Most readers are aware of the many negative developments that have plagued the Chinese market over the last two years. Political issues between the U.S. and China including trade tariffs, microchip sanctions, national security blacklisting of certain companies, and limitations on U.S. investments in certain targeted areas have soured investor attitudes toward the Chinese stock market.

 

On the Chinese side, regulatory crackdowns on mega-cap companies by their central government devastated their stock market. The stock prices of many companies that had represented the best that China had to offer were decimated. All of this is well known.

 

At the same time, thanks to the Peoples' Republic of China's zero COVID-19 tolerance policies, the mainland economy was severely damaged and has still not recovered.

 

Chinese retail investors, who represent 60 percent of trading volume on China's stock market, are cautious if not downright bearish on their market. Domestic and foreign Investors have been waiting for months watching for signs that the government will begin to announce plans to jump-start this faltering economy.

 

Only recently has there been any indication that economic policy is beginning to change. And while officials promise to change, they are taking their sweet time in providing any concrete stimulus measures that could do the job. Nonetheless, anticipation that change is just around the corner has ignited what I call a catch-up trade in China and its beneficiaries.

 

Globally, commodities, material stocks, mines and metals, oil stocks, and agricultural equities are all beginning to show some life. Why? On the margin, a growing Chinese economy will create increased demand for all these raw materials. These products have traditionally fueled China's factories and their exports. In addition, a recovering Chinese economy becomes the locomotive for dozens of emerging and frontier markets throughout the world.  

 

All the above areas have been left in the dust this year as everyone's focus was squarely on the Magnificent Seven and lately AI stocks. As a contrarian, I am attracted to unloved areas like this. That is not to say that the technology sectors of the market will not participate. They will, just not at the same rate as those in a catch-up trade, in my opinion.

 

There is also a second player in the metals markets with billions in cash to spend. Saudi Arabia has decided to become a hub for the processing and trade of minerals which are vital for the energy transition. In an ongoing effort to diversify the country's oil-dependent economy, they plan to develop more than $1 trillion in copper, phosphates, zinc, uranium, and gold.

 

Progress in this effort thus far has been slow so to jump-start their processing facilities, a new entity controlled by its huge sovereign wealth fund and its national mining company has begun to buy up mineral resources around the world and ship them home for processing.

 

I believe the prospects are attractive in the second half of the year for further gains in China, emerging markets, mines, metals, materials, energy, and other commodities.

 

Bill Schmick is the founding partner of Onota Partners, Inc., in the Berkshires. His forecasts and opinions are purely his own and do not necessarily represent the views of Onota Partners Inc. (OPI). None of his commentary is or should be considered investment advice. Direct your inquiries to Bill at 1-413-347-2401 or email him at bill@schmicksretiredinvestor.com.

Between the weather, shortage of planes, computer snafus, and pre-pandemic levels of customers, air travelers face a gauntlet of travel delays. A lack of pilots and air traffic controllers is adding to the high level of aggravation during this summer season.

 

The pilot shortage has been building in the aviation industry for several years. It is not confined to the U.S. Global air travel has surged in the post-pandemic era as emerging economies grow and more people can afford air travel. Airlines have expanded their fleets while extending and adding new routes to capture this spike in business.

 

This has led to increased demand for airline pilots just as a substantial portion of the pilot population here in the U.S. is reaching the mandatory retirement age. You can blame the Baby Boomers once again. Nearly 50 percent of the commercial airline workforce will retire in the next 15 years. Unless things change, prospects are dim that supply and demand for this vital workforce can come back into balance any time soon.

 

This year, the gap between demand and supply of pilots will be roughly 17,000 unfilled positions or 15 percent of the workforce. And while pilot shortages are the most visible area, the country also needs workers in several other airline categories such as air traffic controllers, flight attendants, and ground crew. 

 

The root cause of the scarcity of pilots comes down to two factors. The 1,500-Hour Rule, enacted in 2012 by the Federal Aviation Administration, requires first officers in the commercial airline industry, also known as co-pilots, to have a minimum of 1,500 hours of flight training time. Some say this rigorous requirement has made American skyways the safest in the world. Detractors argue that it is a major roadblock in putting more pilots in the air.

 

 The high cost of receiving an airline transport pilot certificate, accruing hours, and flight training are other obstacles an aspiring pilot must contend with.

 

It costs $99,000 to become a pilot, if you are starting with zero experience. If you already have your private pilot certificate, the price drops to $82,000. For many, this is a substantial financial commitment. The traditional view is that young pilots need to "pay their dues" before embarking on the road to riches and achieving a senior pilot position at a major airline.

 

Given the present state of pilot economics, this is a big nut to swallow for a fresh-out-of-school pilot who normally begins her career at a regional carrier. These pilots receive an extremely low hourly rate (as low as $18 an hour) while working long hours under grueling and stressful conditions. It makes paying back student loan debt at minimum wage practically impossible.

 

One could make more at a fast-food outlet, without incurring student debt, or become a truck driver at 2-3 times the income.

 

You may ask what happened to the assumption that airline pilots are among the highest-paid professionals in the world. It is still true, but it depends on a pilot's career path. A pilot may spend years working toward the cockpit of a major airline and might make the cut, but there is no guarantee. His success depends on his seniority and the major airline he works for.

 

The present landscape of pilot shortages in a global airline market of cutthroat competition has forced major airlines to pay up for senior pilots. Recently, both Delta Airlines and American Airlines, two of the largest airlines in the world, for example, ratified an unprecedented new multi-billion-dollar contract with their pilots.

 

Senior captains can make almost $600,000 annually at American. It is expected that most majors will follow suit with senior captains making $500,000 a year and senior first officers over $300,000 yearly. 

 

As for the regional airlines, the growing scarcity of pilots is forcing even the cheapest of the cheap companies to reconsider their pay scale if they want to maintain their existing flight schedules. More pilots, however, only compound the understaffing issues facing the FAA on the air traffic side.

 

The shortage of air traffic controllers nationwide has been around for several years. This year there is an estimated shortfall of 3,000 controllers, according to the FAA. There is no quick fix since, once hired, it requires months of training and three years of on-the-job experience before certification. Many drop out long before that happens. In addition, air traffic controllers are required to retire at 56 years of age. What's worse, the FAA hates to hire anyone over 31 since they want candidates to have at least a 25-year career path at the FAA.

 

This understaffing is both a negative for traffic as well as a danger to the public. This year, there have been several near misses between planes on U.S. runways in at least seven airports. In some airports, like those in the New York metropolitan area, the FAA has asked airlines to reduce summer traffic. A key radar facility there is only 54 percent staffed.

 

The shortage problem has now caught the attention of lawmakers and both the industry, and its workers are looking to Congress to come up with some solutions. There is somewhat of a time limit on legislative action since Washington will be required to pass legislation to reauthorize the FAA by the Fall.

 

Last week, the House of Representatives began work on an airline bill. Two ideas to relieve the pilot shortage would be to increase the retirement age from 65 to 67 years of age. Another idea would be to change the 1,500-hour rule to allow some of these hours to be done in flight simulators. There are also some plans to make the FAA more efficient, strengthen its workforce, and cut some regulatory red tape. Between the airlines, the unions, and the government one would hope that a solution is in the offing.

 

Bill Schmick is the founding partner of Onota Partners, Inc., in the Berkshires. His forecasts and opinions are purely his own and do not necessarily represent the views of Onota Partners Inc. (OPI). None of his commentary is or should be considered investment advice. Direct your inquiries to Bill at 1-413-347-2401 or email him at bill@schmicksretiredinvestor.com.

Retail theft in general is a growing problem in the United States and organized crime has long considered that cargo is its most lucrative target. Crooks have used everything from road pirates to sophisticated computer hacking to rake in billions of dollars and that number is increasing each year.

 

Possibly the fastest-growing segment of theft in the U.S. is related to cargo. The commercial shipment of freight moving by railroad car, truck, and aircraft, as well as storage, warehouses, distribution, and consolidation facilities, is the red meat for cargo pirates.

 

It is a large industry that accounts for anywhere between $15 to $35 billion in thefts per year. Depending on what is inside a container truck, for example, thieves can walk away with thousands to millions of dollars in stolen goods. Common targets this year include food, beverages, auto parts, solar panels, vehicle batteries, tires, and pharmaceuticals.

 

You may think there are plenty of higher-value products that should have made the stolen goods hit list and you would be right. However, the resale of stolen products is just as important as the product itself. Consider the difficulty in identifying stolen avocados or sirloin steak. How would you know a solar panel was pilfered, or a tailpipe?

 

Thus far in 2023, cargo theft has experienced a 41 percent increase from 2022.  Tactics range from targeting refrigerated trucks to Mission Impossible scenarios where criminals are disguised as legitimate drivers, employees, or business representatives. They also use high-tech "sniffers" to detect GPS trackers manufacturers placed in or on high-tech cargos. Cyber robbers hack into dozens of companies exploiting transportation and shipping systems to forge invoices and delivery documentation. This allows bad actors to brazenly pick up cargo from warehouses and other distribution centers offering forged documents and steal containers full of goods in front of unknowing employees and or security guards.

 

Behind this crime wave are professionals with organizations that are capable of evading federal, state, and local police, as well as corporate security including insurance agents. As retail crime continues to rise, a handful of states have attempted to stiffen penalties on those that steal in groups. Other states may follow. However, much of what needs to be done to stop further spikes in retail crime lies in updating and focusing on American crime policies. For example, most police departments do not have a separate category to distinguish retail thefts from other kinds of robberies and larceny.

 

Many of the sophisticated people orchestrating retail crimes tailor their tactics to recent criminal justice reforms. In many cases, mobs employ hundreds of freelancers to steal goods. Changes in bail policies make it easier to entice people to steal because they won't spend time in jail should they get caught. The amount of money stolen to trigger a felony charge is another issue. You would think that upping the penalty for stealing would simply be a commonsense solution to retail theft of any kind, but not in this country.

 

Some argue the problem is too complex for such simplistic solutions. Others question whether increasing sanctions such as an automatic felony for retail crime, in which the thief spends more than a year in prison, is an effective deterrent. Since 2000, at least 39 states have increased the value of stolen goods required to trigger a felony charge.

 

Over two decades, researchers found no change in property crimes in states that increased penalties versus states that did not increase the amount required to warrant a felony charge. Go figure.

 

The retail industry is urging state governments and law enforcement to go after the mob bosses and masterminds behind the crime scene. To do so, organizations such as the National Retail Federation want lawmakers to enact statutes that would create a new category of crime — organized retail theft.

 

This new category would give law enforcement a tool to combat the crime surge. Exactly how the statutes are used is up to the discretion of police and prosecutors and therein lies the rub. Critics say discretion could lead to racial disparities in the justice system and probably has in several states.

 

As in everything else in America, retail crime and its solution are a politicized issue and will likely remain so, leaving the industry to fend for itself. One step that a few large retail chains are using is to simply close their doors in areas where they are experiencing high crime. Although that may be a highly visible act to counter smash and grab theft, it does nothing for the continued upticks in cargo crime, car theft, and so much more.

 

Bill Schmick is the founding partner of Onota Partners, Inc., in the Berkshires. His forecasts and opinions are purely his own and do not necessarily represent the views of Onota Partners Inc. (OPI). None of his commentary is or should be considered investment advice. Direct your inquiries to Bill at 1-413-347-2401 or email him at bill@schmicksretiredinvestor.com.