Tag Archives: currency

When Bats Look for Meals Near Wind Power, Bats Die

green4us

Monster Hunter Run Pro – soufiane cherraj

Monster Hunter Run Pro soufiane cherraj Genre: Games Price: $0.99 Release Date: November 7, 2016 © © 2016

iTunes Store
2048 Advance Pro – classic famous puzzle game – JianFeng Yao

2048 Advance Pro – classic famous puzzle game JianFeng Yao Genre: Games Price: $0.99 Release Date: November 7, 2016 © © rrstudio

iTunes Store
Currency Converter Swap – Live Exchange Rates Pro – Q2 Mobile Labs LLC

Currency Converter Swap – Live Exchange Rates Pro Q2 Mobile Labs LLC Genre: Travel Price: $3.99 Release Date: November 7, 2016 © © 2016 Q2 Mobile Labs LLC

iTunes Store
bolita – David Del Olmo

bolita David Del Olmo Genre: Games Price: $0.99 Release Date: November 7, 2016 © © apple

iTunes Store
Angry Clear Pro – Slide The Color Dot – GuoDong Ren

Angry Clear Pro – Slide The Color Dot GuoDong Ren Genre: Games Price: $0.99 Release Date: November 7, 2016 © © GordenApp

iTunes Store
Stickers Rose – Thanh Duong

Stickers Rose Thanh Duong Genre: Stickers Price: $0.99 Release Date: November 7, 2016 © © AE Group

iTunes Store
Shakespeare Insults – Khara Hanlon

Shakespeare Insults Khara Hanlon Genre: Stickers Price: $0.99 Release Date: November 7, 2016 © © Khara Hanlon

iTunes Store
Stickers Bigli Migli – Thanh Duong

Stickers Bigli Migli Thanh Duong Genre: Stickers Price: $0.99 Release Date: November 7, 2016 © © AE Group

iTunes Store
Bali Tours Guide – K MUNILAKSHMI

Bali Tours Guide K MUNILAKSHMI Genre: Travel Price: $4.99 Release Date: November 7, 2016 © © TourCup

iTunes Store
calabacita – David Del Olmo

calabacita David Del Olmo Genre: Games Price: $0.99 Release Date: November 7, 2016 © © apple

iTunes Store

Continue reading: 

When Bats Look for Meals Near Wind Power, Bats Die

Posted in Brita, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, Monterey, ONA, solar, solar power, Uncategorized, wind energy, wind power | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on When Bats Look for Meals Near Wind Power, Bats Die

Bitcoin, Meet China. May You Have Many Happy Days Together.

Mother Jones

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

Tyler Cowen points me to this from the Economist:

Most trading in bitcoin takes place in China: Huobi and OKCoin, two Chinese exchanges, are thought to account for more than 90% of transactions. The currency seems to have become an outlet for Chinese savers frustrated with their limited investment options and searching for high-yielding assets. The Chinese authorities are worried enough to have banned banks from dealing in bitcoin, but individuals are still free to speculate and have been doing so with gusto.

….China has also become the global hub for bitcoin mining, the process by which heavy-duty computing power is used to process transactions involving bitcoin, earning those doing the processing some new bitcoin as compensation. Over 80% of new bitcoin are now minted in data centres in places like Sichuan and Inner Mongolia.

One of the selling points of e-currencies like Bitcoin is that their decentralized nature makes them inherently free of government meddling. But is that really true? I’ve long thought that techno-evangelists show far less respect than they should toward meatspace assets like nuclear bombs, gun-wielding police forces, ownership of fiber optic networks, vast fortunes in physical goods, and so forth. This is, for example, why so many of them were naive enough back in the 90s to believe that the internet would spell doom for traditional marketing—only to wake up a few years later and discover that traditional marketers had adapted remarkably quickly to their supposed revolution. It turned out that high IQs aren’t limited to Silicon Valley, and that websites and Google searches and Facebook advertising posed no more of a challenge to the existing order than television did in the 50s.

So is Bitcoin really safe from government meddling? It has been so far, but only in the same sense that an ant is safe from my boot as long as it doesn’t annoy me. China, however, has already proved that a meatspace government can, in fact, crush the digital world if it’s sufficiently motivated to do so. It’s not even all that hard. So if e-currencies are now mostly a ploy for evading Chinese capital controls, I’d say we’re about to learn pretty quickly whether (a) e-currencies can grow big enough to matter, and (b) national governments are truly helpless to do anything about them. I’ll put my money on the meatspace men in Beijing if push ever comes to shove on this.

See more here:

Bitcoin, Meet China. May You Have Many Happy Days Together.

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Bitcoin, Meet China. May You Have Many Happy Days Together.

Harriet Tubman Was a Republican!

Mother Jones

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

Conservatives have finally found something to like about the Obama administration:

Perhaps some of the voices calling for Tubman on the $20 just wanted any prominent African-American woman to replace one of the white males on our currency. If it was political correctness that drove this decision, who cares? The Obama administration has inadvertently given Tubman fans of all political stripes an opportunity to tell the story of a deeply-religious, gun-toting Republican who fought for freedom in defiance of the laws of a government that refused to recognize her rights.

Yeah. That’s the ticket. All those folks in the Obama administration had no idea who Harriet Tubman really was. They were all like, check this out, Jack: black, female, helped slaves, done. Boxes checked. Identity politics satisfied. Put her on the twenty.

The poor fools. She was religious! She carried a gun while helping slaves escape! She was a Republican! She fought for freedom against a tyrannical government! If you think about it, she’s basically the poster child of the modern-day Tea Party. And none of those idiots in the White House had a clue.

Seriously. That seems to be what they think. Next they’re going to remind us that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican too.

Excerpt from:

Harriet Tubman Was a Republican!

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Oster, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Harriet Tubman Was a Republican!

China Baits the Forex Gods

Mother Jones

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

Yesterday:

Wagers that the yuan will slump 10% or more against the dollar are “ridiculous and impossible,” a senior Chinese economic official said Monday, warning that China had a sufficient tool kit to defeat attacks on its currency. “Attempts to sell short the renminbi will not succeed,” said Han Jun, deputy director of the office of the Central Leading Group on Financial and Economic Affairs, at a briefing at the Chinese Consulate in New York.

I suppose he’s probably right. Still, this has an uncomfortable ring of the kind of thing treasury officials tend to say just before a sustained assault on their currency demonstrates that even huge autocracies with lots of foreign reserves aren’t immune to market forces. Stay tuned.

Taken from: 

China Baits the Forex Gods

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on China Baits the Forex Gods

China Finally Adopts Market-Based Value for its Currency, But We May Not Like the Results

Mother Jones

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

For years the United States has been complaining that China artificially undervalues its currency, which makes their exports cheaper and gives them a trade advantage over American firms. In response, China has gradually let the renminbi rise. By 2015, it had roughly reached fair market value—though not all American politicians agreed about that.

But then the Chinese economy started going sour. Exports were down. The stock market crashed. Growth slowed. What to do? Answer: devalue the renminbi. But instead of doing it by fiat, pretend that you’re merely responding to market forces:

Every morning, Beijing sets a target for the trading of its currency against the U.S. dollar, then allows investors to buy and sell the currency for 2 percent more or less. Tuesday’s change relaxes the government’s control over setting that rate. The midpoint will now be set at the market’s closing rate for the previous day.

….Now, market forces could pressure the currency to depreciate rather than appreciate, making Chinese products comparatively cheaper….In China, the depreciation will be a boon for exporters and heavy industry, but bad news for companies that depend on imported goods. Shares of Chinese airlines plummeted on Tuesday, as analysts predicted that the higher cost of oil in U.S. dollars would weigh on their earnings.

It’s convenient to have a market-based policy as long as that produces a devaluation of the currency. But will Chinese authorities stick to this policy even when it means the renminbi will appreciate? Good question.

So what does it all mean? Here are a few obvious thoughts:

This is yet another vote of no confidence in the Chinese economy. When you put together everything that Chinese authorities have done over the past six months, I’d say they’re close to full-scale panic.
Investors are likely to push the renminbi even lower, and this is going to make life harder on anyone in China with dollar-denominated debt. This includes lots of local governments who have been financing the housing boom, which means this devaluation could hasten the housing bust everyone has been waiting for.
This will be a political issue in the US, but a tricky one. China is manipulating its currency to its own advantage—boo! hiss!—but has also adopted a policy that allows the renminbi’s value to be dictated by market forces—which is what we’ve been demanding all along. It will be interesting to see how all the Republican presidential candidates decide to respond to this.

Generally speaking, I think this should be taken as bad news. The world economy remains fragile, and if the Chinese economy is falling into recession—as the Chinese themselves seem to believe—it will affect all of us. And not in a good way. Stay tuned.

Continue at source:

China Finally Adopts Market-Based Value for its Currency, But We May Not Like the Results

Posted in alo, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on China Finally Adopts Market-Based Value for its Currency, But We May Not Like the Results

ECB Finally Shows Signs of Taking Lousy Economic Growth Seriously

Mother Jones

In a surprise move, the European Central Bank cut interest rates nearly to zero today And there’s more:

The central bank said that in October it would begin buying asset-backed securities, bundles of loans issued by banks to businesses and households….Perhaps more significantly, Mr. Draghi said that the central bank’s governing council was ready to take further measures if needed — a clear reference to quantitative easing, or broad-based purchases of government bonds or other assets.

“The governing council is unanimous in its commitment to using additional unconventional instruments,” Mr. Draghi said at a news conference….“Q.E. was discussed,” Mr. Draghi said. “A broad asset purchase program was discussed.” He said some members of the governing council favored starting such purchases, but others did not.

More from the Wall Street Journal:

While the ECB had in recent months indicated it was considering an ABS purchase program, the addition of a covered bond program and rate cuts was a surprise, and an indication that officials have grown increasingly concerned that the recent period of very low inflation could persist longer than first thought and may threaten the currency area’s economic recovery.

“In August, we see a worsening of the medium-term inflation outlook, a downward movement in all indicators of inflation expectations,” Mr. Draghi said. “Most, if not all, the data we got in August on GDP (gross domestic product) and inflation showed that the recovery was losing momentum.”

It’s still too little, too late—as usual with the ECB—but at least it suggests that European leaders are finally taking seriously the combination of low inflation and lousy economic growth in the eurozone. More please.

Originally from:

ECB Finally Shows Signs of Taking Lousy Economic Growth Seriously

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on ECB Finally Shows Signs of Taking Lousy Economic Growth Seriously

Here’s the Story Behind the Big Wall Street Reform Rule That Was Just Approved

Mother Jones

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

On Tuesday, banking regulators finalized one of the most important provisions of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law. It’s called the Volcker rule, and it’s supposed to prohibit the high-risk trading by commercial banks that helped cause the financial crisis. Here’s what you need to know about it.

What’s the reason for the new rule? In the run-up to the financial crisis, big banks invested in low-quality mortgage-backed securities. When those over-leveraged bets turned sour, the economy collapsed, and the government had to bail out big financial institutions. The Volcker rule ensures that banks don’t engage in what is called proprietary trading—that is, when a firm trades for its own benefit instead of trading on behalf of its customers. In May 2012, JPMorgan Chase lost $2 billion on a bad trade, which led to calls for a strong Volcker rule.

Why is it called the Volcker rule? The rule is named after Paul Volcker, the chairman of the Federal Reserve in the 1980s, and later an adviser to President Barack Obama. He advocated this change in financial regulation and persuaded the president to back the rule in 2010, when the Dodd-Frank bill was passed.

2010? What took so long? One reason it took three years to finish the rule is that after the legislation was passed, the actual regulation had to be crafted jointly by five banking regulators—the Federal Reserve, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). That’s a lot of coordination amongst people with different backgrounds and priorities. And during the 2012 campaign, Mitt Romney vowed to repeal Dodd-Frank. So for several months, wait-and-see regulators slowed down devising the details of the rule.

Wall Street lobbying also played a big part in delaying the unveiling of the final rule. The financial industry pushed like mad to get key loopholes into the regulation. “It’s relentless, nonstop, day and night lobbying,” Dennis Kelleher, the president of the financial reform advocacy group Better Markets, said a year ago. “It is absolute total nuclear war that Wall Street is engaged in here.” One loophole Wall Street tried to get written into the regulation would characterize certain forms of risky trading as hedging against risk. (Yes, you read that correctly.)

So who won? Kelleher says financial reformers won; these loopholes were not included. “Today’s finalization of the Volcker rule ban on proprietary trading is a major defeat for Wall Street and a direct attack on the high-risk ‘quick-buck’ culture of Wall Street,” he said in a statement. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew said the rule would have prevented JPMorgan’s $2 billion trading loss last year. CFTC commissioner Bart Chilton, a fierce Wall Street critic, is happy with the rule. Former Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), one of the authors of the Dodd-Frank law, told Mother Jones today, “I have been confident all along that it would be a tough rule. I’ll make one prediction: all of the cries of doom that you’re going to hear from the financial institutions, three years from now will come to about as much validity as the cries of doom we heard about same-sex marriage.”

Obama noted, “Our financial system will be safer and the American people are more secure because we fought to include this protection in the law….I encourage Congress to give these regulators adequate funding to effectively and efficiently implement the rule, which will help protect hardworking families and business owners from future crisis, and restore everyone’s certainty and confidence in America’s dynamic financial system.”

But the success of the rule depends on how it is implemented. Marcus Stanley, the policy director at Americans for Financial reform, says that he’s “lukewarm” on the rule, mostly because a lot hangs on how it is interpreted by banking regulators who supervise compliance. “Whoever is the primary supervisor has enormous discretion about how this rule will affect trading,” he says, adding that the final Volcker rule does not include transparency provisions that would allow the public to judge whether banks are complying.

So is financial reform all finished now? No. Proprietary trading contributed to the crisis, but it was not the main cause. Regulators still have other Dodd-Frank provisions to finalize. Wall Street watchdogs have to implement plans to wind down failing banks; finish writing rules governing derivatives trading (which was largely unregulated before the financial crisis); and enforce strong requirements regarding the level of reserves banks must maintain.

What’s next? Wall Street is already preparing to fight the Volcker rule in the courts. The regulation could slash the combined annual profits of the eight largest banks by between $2 billion to $10 billion, according to Standard and Poor’s. “Wall Street’s loophole lawyers and other hired guns will… continue to hit at the rule as if it were a piñata,” Kelleher says.

Additional reporting by Patrick Caldwell.

Link: 

Here’s the Story Behind the Big Wall Street Reform Rule That Was Just Approved

Posted in alo, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Safer, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s the Story Behind the Big Wall Street Reform Rule That Was Just Approved