Tag Archives: Collection

Just a reminder: The world is perilously close to annihilation!

by ErnestiCardell Posted on January 24, 2019

Subscribe to The Beacon

The world’s most eminent predictors of doom, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, gathered Thursday to announce just how close humanity is from irreversible collapse. The answer: pretty damn close.

The Doomsday Clock is two minutes from midnight (read “the end of everything”), thanks largely to climate change and the threat of nuclear annihilation. That’s exactly where it was last year, when the collection of scientists set it at 11:58, the nearest it’s been to midnight since 1953 when the Soviet Union and the United States were testing nukes.

The current state of climate and political doom is starting to feel familiar. The Bulletin’s name for it is the “new abnormal.”  

“The longer world leaders and citizens carelessly inhabit this new and abnormal reality, the more likely the world is to experience catastrophe of historic proportions,” said Robert Rosner, a professor of astronomy and physics at the University of Chicago, during a press conference announcing the Doomsday Clock’s settings in Washington, D.C. The most serious global threats — climate change, nuclear, and information warfare — are all being denied or ignored, Rosner said.

Since 1947 when the Cold War was getting underway, the Doomsday Clock has been used to bring awareness to the biggest existential threats. The first team behind the iconic clock came from The Manhattan Project, the scientists and engineers who produced the first atomic bomb. For most of the clock’s history, nuclear war has been the largest threat (it started at seven minutes to midnight). Yet since 2007, climate change has become a growing risk, nudging the clock’s minute hand closer to Doomsday.

The scientists noted that there’s another way to measure of our proximity towards doom: carbon dioxide levels. “Every year that we continue to add carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, irreversibly ratchets up the level of human suffering and ecosystem destruction that will occur due to global climate change,” said Susan Solomon, an atmospheric scientist and professor at MIT, at the announcement.

After years of remaining stable, global emission levels rose in 2017 and reached an all-time high in 2018. Part of the reason is that the United States, China, and other big polluters have increased their emissions, which Solomon called an “act of gross negligence.”

That the clock didn’t tick this year is a sign that we’ve made no progress on avoiding impending disaster. “The new abnormal climate that we already have is extremely dangerous,” said Solomon. “And we’ve moved onto a path that will make our future much more dangerous still.”

Original article:

Just a reminder: The world is perilously close to annihilation!

Posted in Accent, alo, Anchor, Casio, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, global climate change, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Just a reminder: The world is perilously close to annihilation!

Wild Thoughts from Wild Places – David Quammen

by Myrna Posted on August 9, 2018

READ GREEN WITH E-BOOKS

Wild Thoughts from Wild Places

David Quammen

Genre: Nature

Price: $0.99

Publish Date: October 16, 2012

Publisher: Scribner

Seller: SIMON AND SCHUSTER DIGITAL SALES INC


In Wild Thoughts from Wild Places, award-winning journalist David Quammen reminds us why he has become one of our most beloved science and nature writers. This collection of twenty-three of Quammen's most intriguing, most exciting, most memorable pieces takes us to meet kayakers on the Futaleufu River of southern Chile, where Quammen describes how it feels to travel in fast company and flail for survival in the river's maw. We are introduced to the commerce in pearls (and black-market parrots) in the Aru Islands of eastern Indonesia. Quammen even finds wildness in smog-choked Los Angeles — embodied in an elusive population of urban coyotes, too stubborn and too clever to surrender to the sprawl of civilization. With humor and intelligence, David Quammen's Wild Thoughts from Wild Places also reminds us that humans are just one of the many species on earth with motivations, goals, quirks, and eccentricities. Expect to be entertained and moved on this journey through the wilds of science and nature.

Visit site:  

Wild Thoughts from Wild Places – David Quammen

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, PUR, Scribner, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Wild Thoughts from Wild Places – David Quammen

Here Is Today’s French Fiscal Horsepower History Lesson

by CandyTobias Posted on February 7, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

No one is going to care about this post. Too bad. I feel like writing, and on a weekend you take what you can get.

Anyway, I was musing the other day about the fact that I’ve always owned foreign cars. Partly this is just chance, partly the fact that I live in California, and, I suppose, partly because my parents always owned foreign cars. The first one was purchased around the time of my birth, and we kids called it the bye-bye, for reasons I presumably don’t have to explain. It was, as it happens, a Renault. But which Renault?

I did a bit of lazy googling last night, but nothing looked quite right. Then this morning, I noticed one of those Fiat 500s that J-Lo hawks on TV, and thought that it looked a little like the old Renault. Except I was sure the Renault had vents in the rear.

But wait. Rear vents means a rear engine. So I googled that, and instantly got a million hits for the 4CV, which was clearly the old bye-bye. My mother confirmed this telephonically a bit later. And that got me curious. Citroën, of course, produced the iconic 2CV, which first came off the assembly line at about the same time. What’s with that? What’s the appeal of __CV to postwar French auto manufacturers?

The answer turned out to be pretty funky. CV stands for chevaux vapeur, or horsepower. But the 4CV is not a 4-horsepower car. CV, it turns out, is used to mean tax horsepower. After World War II, France (along with other European countries) wanted to encourage people to buy low-power cars, so they put a tax on horsepower. But just taxing horsepower would have been too simple. Instead, they used a formula that took into account the number of cylinders, the piston bore, and the stroke. Here’s the formula for the 4CV:

These numbers were undoubtedly carefully engineered to produce the highest result that would round down to 4. In fact, the 4CV had a whopping 17 horsepower, and could get to 60 mph in just under 40 seconds. Ours had a few wee problems chugging along at 6,000 feet in Flagstaff on the way to Denver in 1960, but what can you expect for 17 horsepower?

So that’s your history lesson for the day. Apparently the French tax the horsepower of cars to this day, though the formula has changed over time. According to Wikipedia, “Since 1998 the taxable power is calculated from the sum of a CO2 emission figure (over 45), and the maximum power output of the engine in kilowatts (over 40) to the power of 1.6.” The power of 1.6? I guess they still love a little pointless complexity in France.

Link: 

Here Is Today’s French Fiscal Horsepower History Lesson

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here Is Today’s French Fiscal Horsepower History Lesson

A Nice Paragraph About Why Humans Are So Damn Paranoid

by LatiaChumleigh Posted on February 6, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

I’m reading Sapiens right now, a history of early mankind published last year by historian Yuval Noah Harari. I haven’t gotten very far into it, so I don’t know if his idiosyncratic theories will end up being persuasive. Still, it’s the kind of learned but big-think book I tend to like regardless of how well it holds up. I wish more deeply accomplished people were willing to write stuff like this.

That said, here’s a nice excerpt about the dangers of moving to the top of the food chain too fast:

It was only in the last 100,000 years—with the rise of Homo sapiens—that man jumped to the top of the food chain….Other animals at the top of the pyramid, such as lions and sharks, evolved into the position very gradually, over millions of years. This enabled the ecosystem to develop checks and balances that prevent lions and sharks from wreaking too much havoc.

….In contrast, humankind ascended to the top so quickly that the ecosystem was not given time to adjust. Moreover, humans themselves failed to adjust. Most top predators of the planet are majestic creatures. Millions of years of dominion have filled them with self-confidence. Sapiens by contrast is more like a banana republic dictator. Having so recently been one of the underdogs of the savannah, we are full of fears and anxieties over our position, which makes us doubly cruel and dangerous. Many historical calamities, from deadly wars to ecological catastrophes, have resulted from this over-hasty jump.

This is just another way of saying that human intelligence evolved too fast for human emotions and morals to keep up. Either way, though, it sure rings true. Just take a look at the current presidential race. If any country should feel self-confident and safe, it’s the United States. But boy howdy, we sure don’t, do we?

Link to article: 

A Nice Paragraph About Why Humans Are So Damn Paranoid

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on A Nice Paragraph About Why Humans Are So Damn Paranoid

We Are Live-Blogging the Democratic Debate in New Hampshire

by GenevieveKunkel Posted on February 5, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

As debates go, this one was pretty good. The moderators generally did a good job, allowing the candidates to argue when it made sense, but ending things when it looked like there was nothing useful left to say. This is a lot easier with two people than ten, of course, and also easier when both candidates are relatively civil.

Hillary was more aggressive than I’ve seen her before. He complaint early on that Bernie was slandering her with innuendo and insinuation (and “artful smears”) was tough but, I think, also fair. And I have a feeling Bernie felt a little embarrassed by it. He was certainly careful to pull things back to a civil tone after that. Hillary is not a natural campaigner, but she’s a good debater, and this was Hillary at her pugnacious best.

Obviously foreign affairs are not Bernie’s strong point, but I was still a little surprised at just how poorly prepared he was to say much of anything or to draw much of a contrast with Hillary’s views. Either he really doesn’t know much, or else he thinks his dovish views are losers even among the Democratic base. I won’t pretend that Hillary was a genius on this stuff—almost nobody is on a debate stage—but at least she sounded well briefed and confident.

On financial issues, Bernie was surprisingly weak. This really is his strong point, but he continues to have a hard time getting much beyond platitudes. I get that it’s a debate and 90 seconds isn’t much, but it’s still enough time for a little more detail than “the system is rigged.” Hillary didn’t do much better, but she held her own and gave a strong response to the two (!) questions about her Goldman Sachs speeches.

Overall, I doubt this debate changed many minds. Bernie insisted that we can dream. Hillary insisted that we figure out what’s doable. I’d score it a clear win for Hillary based on her aggressiveness and generally solid answers compared to Bernie’s platitudes and obvious reluctance to attack hard. But I admit this might just be my own biases talking, since Hillary’s approach to politics is closer to mine than Bernie’s.

Debate transcript here.

11:06 – And that’s a wrap.

11:04 – Hillary: We need to “come up with the best answers.” That’s her campaign in a nutshell.

11:02 – No, neither Hillary nor Bernie will pick the other as VP. Come on, Chuck.

10:58 – But Bernie will happily get suckered! It’s campaign finance reform for him.

10:55 – Hillary isn’t going to be suckered into setting a top priority, thus throwing all the others under the bus. Come on, Chuck.

10:47 – I thought this was a 90-minute debate. What’s the deal?

10:44 – Regarding Flint, I will not be happy until either Hillary or Bernie mentions that we now know lead poisoning leads to higher crime rates, “as brilliantly set out in an article by Kevin Drum a couple of years ago.” I will vote for whoever says this first.

10:42 – Bernie on the death penalty: In a violent world, “government should not be part of the killing.” I have to admit I’ve never really understood this particular bit of reasoning.

10:31 – Ah. Hillary now gets to use Colin Powell as backup for her email problems.

10:29 – Hillary is thrilled about all the young people supporting Bernie. OK then.

10:25 – Bernie loves the caucus process? Seriously?

10:17 – Bernie: “Pathetic” that Republicans refused to support VA reform.

10:12 – I hate to say this, but Bernie on North Korea sounds about as well briefed as Donald Trump. Very strange situation. Handful of dictators—or, um, maybe just one. Gotta put pressure on China. “I worry very much about an isolated, paranoid country with atomic bombs.”

10:10 – Bernie does himself no favors on national security. I’m closer to his position than Hillary’s, but Bernie honestly sounds like he’s never given this stuff a moment’s thought. At least Hillary has some views and sounds confident in her abilities.

10:08 – Bernie wagging his finger again. I’m pretty sure the hosts will call on him regardless.

10:06 – Bernie really needs to have a foreign policy other than “I voted against the Iraq War.”

10:05 – Why is there bipartisan loathing of being “the policeman of the world”? What does this even mean?

10:03 – Hillary: we have a very cooperative government in Afghanistan. You bet. Wildly incompetent and corrupt, but pliable.

10:01 – Everyone agrees that a Muslim civil war is the right way to handle the Middle East.

9:59 – Hillary frequently insists on responding even when Bernie hasn’t really left a mark. Leave well enough alone!

9:58 – Hillary provides Shermanesque answer about not sending ground troops to Iraq or Syria.

9:46 – Oh FFS. Is “Release the transcripts!” going to be the next big Hillary “scandal”?

9:44 – Unfortunately, Hillary doesn’t really explain her more complicated financial regulation plan very well. There’s probably no help for that, especially in 90 seconds.

9:42 – I’m with Hillary on reinstating Glass-Steagall. To me, it’s the Democratic equivalent of raising the retirement age to save Social Security: easy to understand, but not the best answer by a long way.

9:41 – Hillary defends her Goldman Sachs speeches competently, but Bernie doesn’t really fight back. He just provides a generic answer about the pernicious power of Wall Street.

9:31 – Hillary is attacking very hard tonight. Bernie voted to deregulate derivatives! Not that there’s anything wrong with that. You think she’s played this game before? Bernie responds by telling people to look up a YouTube.

9:29 – Bernie answers with generic criticism of special interests and money in politics. Not a strong response.

9:27 – Hillary criticizes Bernie for claiming to run a positive campaign, but constantly attacking her “by innuendo, by insinuation.” Then she asks him to stop the “artful smear” he’s been carrying out against her. This is a tough hit on Bernie.

9:26 – Hillary: “I won’t make big promises.” Not sure that came out as well as it should have.

9:23 – I think Hillary missed a chance to say that of course Bernie is a Democrat and he shouldn’t have to defend himself on that score. It would have been a nice moment for her with no downside.

9:19 – Hillary refers to Bernie as “self-appointed gatekeeper” of who’s a progressive. Ouch.

9:17 – Bernie: Obama was a progressive by 2008 standards.

9:15 – Bernie: none of his ideas are radical. True enough, by non-American standards.

9:14 – Good answer from Hillary on whether she’s progressive enough: Under Bernie’s standards, no one in the party is truly progressive.

9:07 – Hillary: “The numbers just don’t add up” for all of Bernie’s proposals.

9:01 – I see that Rachel Maddow is as excited as I am that Martin O’Malley has dropped out.

9:00 – And with that, on with the debate!

8:58 – This is the second election cycle in which I’ve liked both of the Democratic frontrunners. In 2008 I ended up leaning for Obama, which I don’t regret. This year I’m leaning toward Hillary. Both times, however, I’ve been surprised at how fast things turned ugly. But ugly they’ve turned.

8:53 – Last night on Twitter I said that Hillary Clinton had given a terrible answer to the Goldman Sachs speech question. I was immediately besieged with outraged comments about how I was just another Beltway shill who’s always hated Hillary. This morning I wrote that Bernie Sanders was disingenuously pretending not to criticize Clinton over her Wall Street contributions even though he obviously was. I was immediately besieged with outraged comments about how I was just another Beltway shill who’s always been in the bag for Hillary. Welcome to the Democratic primaries.

Taken from: 

We Are Live-Blogging the Democratic Debate in New Hampshire

Posted in alo, American Standard, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on We Are Live-Blogging the Democratic Debate in New Hampshire

How to Simplify Your Wardrobe in 3 Easy Steps

by VWKKarol94 Posted on February 4, 2016

An overstuffed closet and a mountain-sized pile of discarded clothing options after each round of getting ready may indicate that your fashion philosophy values quantity over quality. Create a cohesive collection of streamlined wearable looks and kick the chaos and castoffs out of your closet with a simple capsule wardrobe in three easy steps:

Step 1: Out With the Old

Like many of lifes challenges, this situation is going to get worse before it gets better. However, if you clear a couple hours of your schedule and stay committed, the end result will be a closet you can love again. To get a true view of what you need, love, and wear, you need to start with an honest of assessment of what youre currently working with and why you have it.

Take everything clothes-related out of your closet and pile it up somewhere unavoidable now theres your assurance that this project gets finished today. (Seriously, dont skip that part. Its important.) Try on each piece and ask yourself the following questions:

1. Does this fit?

2. Do I feel confident when wearing this?

3. Have I worn it in the past six months?

If the answer to any of the above is no, its time to honor that item with new opportunity by donating it. The only exception is if a much-loved quality piece can be tailored; if so, drop it off within the week.

Snap a quick full-length mirror selfie for any outfits you feel unsure aboutthe camera is your most honest friend. Once you have separated the trash from the treasure, analyze what you have left. Your keep pile holds clues to your personal style. Why do these items appeal to you? What do they have in common? A successful capsule wardrobe will keep you comfortably and happily clothed. If your everyday style has an easy casual vibe, a closet of fussy fashionista frocks wont solve your problem; youll just go from not having anything to wear to not having anything you want to wear. Be true to your real self.

Step 2: In With the New

Take a look at what you already own and set aside essential foundation pieces. These are items that every wardrobe needs, like a little black dress, a white button-up shirt, a pencil skirt, nice jeans, quality leggings, black pants and a few fitted tees. Anything missing from the essentials should take priority on the shopping list; these key pieces become the uniform for life and are worth the investment. Buy the basics in neutral colors like black, white, khaki or gray. These items are the core of your capsule collection and become the backdrop for most outfits.

Step 3: Freshen Up

Now take a new look at the clothes you have leftis there an underlying color theme? Pick out a few pieces where you feel drawn to the color or pattern and create your personal style palette. Buy accent items and accessories that coordinate with your capsule collection colors to maximize your ability to mix and match, and easily update your wardrobe seasonally by swapping out colors or clothing types.

If youre adopting the capsule wardrobe approach for its simple minimalism, aim to have approximately 30 pieces. If youre just trying to simplify your morning routine, dont overwhelm yourself with options, but dont obsess over item numbers or perfecting your collection, either. Just like your personal sense of style, your capsule collection will evolve as you do.

The ultimate goal is to create a mix-and-match recipe of your ideal outfit for every occasion, which is easy when the closet is full of coordinating favorites. The most essential part of creating a capsule collection isnt in perfecting the numbersits in making sure you feel fashionable and fantastic wearing each and every piece!

Ashley McCann writes foreBayabout mindful living as a Floridian mother of two. She makes affordable and sustainable fashion possible bybuying and selling her clothes online.

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

View article: 

How to Simplify Your Wardrobe in 3 Easy Steps

Posted in Accent, alo, Casio, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How to Simplify Your Wardrobe in 3 Easy Steps

Marco Rubio Lashes Out Against Call For Religious Toleration

by GlindaHaight Posted on February 4, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

President Obama, during a speech today at a Baltimore mosque:

If we’re serious about freedom of religion — and I’m speaking now to my fellow Christians who remain the majority in this country — we have to understand an attack on one faith is an attack on all our faiths. And when any religious group is targeted, we all have a responsibility to speak up. And we have to reject a politics that seeks to manipulate prejudice or bias, and targets people because of religion.

Marco Rubio, commenting a couple of hours later on Obama’s speech:

Always pitting people against each other. Always. Look at today: he gave a speech at a mosque. Oh, you know, basically implying that America is discriminating against Muslims….It’s this constant pitting people against each other that I can’t stand.

There you have it. Ask Christians to reject the politics of bigotry, and you’re pitting people against each other. And Marco Rubio, for one, will have no part of that.

UPDATE: Revised to include exact quote from Rubio.

Source:  

Marco Rubio Lashes Out Against Call For Religious Toleration

Posted in alo, bigo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Marco Rubio Lashes Out Against Call For Religious Toleration

The New York Public Library Just Unleashed 180,000 Free Images. We Can’t Stop Looking at Them.

by LoisCraine Posted on January 7, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
Blossom Restaurant, 103 Bowery, Manhattan Bernice Abbott/The Miriam and Ira D. Wallach Division of Art, Prints and Photographs: Photography Collection, The New York Public Library.

The New York Public Library just digitized and made available more than 180,000 high resolution items, which the public can download for free.

The images come from pieces in the library’s collection that have fallen out of copyright or are otherwise in the public domain. This includes botanical illustrations, ancient texts, historical maps–including the incredible Green Book collection of travel guides for African American travelers in mid-1900s. They’ve also released more than 40,000 stereoscopes, Berenice Abbott’s amazing documentation of New York City in 1930s and Lewis Hines’ photos of Ellis Island immigrants, as well as the letters of Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, among other political figures.

One of the related projects they’ve created with this release is a cool visualization tool that lets you browse every item released.

It’s a true treasure trove and–warning!–a total time suck.

Say goodbye to your afternoon.

Original article – 

The New York Public Library Just Unleashed 180,000 Free Images. We Can’t Stop Looking at Them.

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The New York Public Library Just Unleashed 180,000 Free Images. We Can’t Stop Looking at Them.

Obamacare Rates May Be Going Up Significantly in 2016 — Or Maybe Not

by MckinleyClaborn Posted on July 4, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The New York Times reports that insurers are asking for significant rate increases for 2016:

Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans — market leaders in many states — are seeking rate increases that average 23 percent in Illinois, 25 percent in North Carolina, 31 percent in Oklahoma, 36 percent in Tennessee and 54 percent in Minnesota….The rate requests, from some of the more popular health plans, suggest that insurance markets are still adjusting to shock waves set off by the Affordable Care Act.

It is far from certain how many of the rate increases will hold up on review, or how much they might change. But already the proposals, buttressed with reams of actuarial data, are fueling fierce debate about the effectiveness of the health law.

….Insurers with decades of experience and brand-new plans underestimated claims costs. “Our enrollees generated 24 percent more claims than we thought they would when we set our 2014 rates,” said Nathan T. Johns, the chief financial officer of Arches Health Plan, which covers about one-fourth of the people who bought insurance through the federal exchange in Utah. As a result, the company said, it collected premiums of $39.7 million and had claims of $56.3 million in 2014. It has requested rate increases averaging 45 percent for 2016.

The rate requests are the first to reflect a full year of experience with the new insurance exchanges and federal standards that require insurers to accept all applicants.

I’d continue to counsel caution until we get further into the process. Big rate increase requests have been the opening bids from insurance companies for years, and they usually get knocked down to something much more reasonable by the time the regulatory process is finished. It’s also the case that if lots of young people have been paying the tax penalty instead of getting insured, that might change as the penalty goes up. It was $95 in 2014, went up to $325 this year, and goes up to $695 in 2016. At some point, more and more of these folks are going to decide that they really ought to get something for their money instead of just paying a penalty to the IRS, and that will help broaden the insurance pool.

Still, the bottom line here is that credible evidence is growing that we might see biggish rate increases in 2016. They won’t be the monster increases that Fox News will be hyping endlessly, but they might be bigger than us liberal types expected. We’ll know in a few months.

Link to original:

Obamacare Rates May Be Going Up Significantly in 2016 — Or Maybe Not

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Obamacare Rates May Be Going Up Significantly in 2016 — Or Maybe Not

China Halts IPOs in Peculiar Attempt to Prop Up Stock Market

by CorrineGrondin Posted on July 4, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The latest from China, where the stock market continues to plummet:

China has decided to suspend new stock sales and establish a market-stabilization fund aimed at fighting off the worst equities selloff in years, as concerns grow among China’s leadership that the stock-market malaise could be spreading to the other parts of the world’s second-largest economy.

…Previous steps including an interest-rate cut by the central bank have failed to impress investors, many of whom have been forced to unwind their leveraged bets as stocks continue to drop.

Chief among the decisions made is to halt new initial public offerings in a bid to preserve liquidity in an increasingly volatile market, the people said. Officials also discussed the setup of a market-stabilization fund.

Another odd move that I don’t entirely understand. Do IPOs reduce market liquidity in any significant way? Put another way: Am I missing something here, or is this just another panicky move by the Chinese authorities that’s unlikely to make things better?

Follow this link:  

China Halts IPOs in Peculiar Attempt to Prop Up Stock Market

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on China Halts IPOs in Peculiar Attempt to Prop Up Stock Market