Due to the rapid rise of commodity prices – especially metals - during the start of 2008, the cost of minting American pennies and nickels is now twice their actual face value. Weird economics at work?
By: Ringo Bones
When the global economic downturn instigated by the subprime mortgage crisis of the summer of 2007 started to be noticed on American soil during the first quarter of 2008. The US Mint or The Bureau of the Mint also started to notice that it’s now worth twice as much to “make” pennies and nickels than their face value – i.e. the coin’s buying power - due to the increasing prices of “coinage” metals like copper and zinc.
Noting that it now costs 2 US cents to make an American penny (a US 1 cent piece) and a nickel (a US 5 cent piece) now cost a dime or 10 US cents to make. It would only be a matter of time that the US Treasury Department will tell The Bureau of the Mint in Washington, D.C. to stop minting coins because they’ll be losing money - weird economics has finally arrived. Given that a typical American “Honest Abe” penny is 98% zinc while an American nickel is 25% nickel and 75% copper. The three metals – namely zinc, nickel and copper - whose trading values went through the roof during the first part of 2008 makes it easy to see why that minting coins using these traditional coinage metals is now more expensive compared to a generation ago.
Most countries around the world has since abandoned using gold and silver as coinage metals since making them costs way more than the coin’s intended face value, looks like copper, zinc and nickel will now be deemed too expensive for coinage use. Some countries have even resorted to using steel and aluminum to keep the cost of minting coins down. Especially during the early 1990’s when Sumitomo attempted to unlawfully manipulate copper prices in the London Metals Exchange by hoarding large stocks of copper for six years.
In the US, grassroots movements like Americans for Common Cents has been busy campaigning for the US Government to keep minting coins because if Uncle Sam ever decides to stop minting pennies and nickels, the penniless could literally become penniless. Like when merchants start rounding-off prices of goods to the nearest dime – given that if the US 10 cent piece or dime becomes the smallest American currency denomination – could cost American consumers 600 million dollars a year in retail expenses.
As we celebrate the 200th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birth and the 100th anniversary of the “Honest Abe” penny in 2009, has the American penny and nickel become an archaic time-wasting transaction of our modern credit-based economy? In my opinion, coins of small denominations – like the American penny and nickel – are still relevant in today’s economic transaction, especially at the retail level. Plus, given that coins are more difficult to counterfeit when compared to paper currency and are less tempting to steal in comparison to credit card data, American pennies and nickels still serve an indispensable part of the American – if not of the global – economy.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
US Treasury Bonds and Securities: A Bubble that’s About to Burst?
With a budget deficit that could reach 1 trillion dollars in order to save it’s own economy, are US Treasury bonds and securities still a sound investment choice in 2009?
By: Ringo Bones
With the critics of incoming US president Barack Obama’s supposedly socialist-leaning economic policies now segueing into the background like their empty rhetoric, the question still remains whether US treasury bonds and securities are still the safe-haven investments that they are touted to be. Or are they the latest speculative bubble just waiting to burst?
With the US government now printing money at an unprecedented scale and the government spending deficit that is predicted to reach over a trillion dollars just to save the American economy, financial analysts around the world are now casting their doubts over the long-term profitability of US treasury bonds and securities. Because if you choose to invest in US treasury bonds now, there’s no telling of it’s actual value when it matures. Looks like when one invests in US treasury bonds he or she will be primarily driven by patriotism rather than for profit. If he or she is willing to overlook the inherent disadvantages of financial and / or speculative bubbles.
Since US treasury bonds and securities was no longer the safe-haven investment vehicle that it once was, what are our options? In my opinion, investing in gold is a better bet right now because gold is not backed by credit – i.e. it has inherent value of it’s own. But if the patriotism issue is really nagging you, here’s my view on this: Does investing in a less desirable financial instrument in order to “help keep our fellow Americans employed and off welfare” both economic common sense and patriotic?
My answer to this is a really big fat no. Investing your hard-earned money in a less desirable financial instrument in order to “help keep our fellow Americans gainfully employed and off welfare” does not really make economic common sense or is really patriotic, it is just thinly veiled charity. A charity that most of us succumb into every time we use “liberal guilt” as a defense mechanism every time we are emotionally blackmailed into buying something we don’t really need. And by the way, when it comes to good business practices, emotional blackmail is still illegal.
But if you are like me – and many others - who still believes that America under the helm of President Obama, miracles – especially economic miracles – can still happen. Then by all means invest in US treasury bonds and securities as your patriotic duty to help keep the American economy strong. But beware and be very aware that the current state of the US economy still resembles some rickety contraption being held by bailing wire and the good intentions of a czarist-era mad Russian. Which is my latest assessment given the aftermath of the Bernard L. Madoff fraud that could put Charles Ponzi and his start-up pyramid scheme to shame.
By: Ringo Bones
With the critics of incoming US president Barack Obama’s supposedly socialist-leaning economic policies now segueing into the background like their empty rhetoric, the question still remains whether US treasury bonds and securities are still the safe-haven investments that they are touted to be. Or are they the latest speculative bubble just waiting to burst?
With the US government now printing money at an unprecedented scale and the government spending deficit that is predicted to reach over a trillion dollars just to save the American economy, financial analysts around the world are now casting their doubts over the long-term profitability of US treasury bonds and securities. Because if you choose to invest in US treasury bonds now, there’s no telling of it’s actual value when it matures. Looks like when one invests in US treasury bonds he or she will be primarily driven by patriotism rather than for profit. If he or she is willing to overlook the inherent disadvantages of financial and / or speculative bubbles.
Since US treasury bonds and securities was no longer the safe-haven investment vehicle that it once was, what are our options? In my opinion, investing in gold is a better bet right now because gold is not backed by credit – i.e. it has inherent value of it’s own. But if the patriotism issue is really nagging you, here’s my view on this: Does investing in a less desirable financial instrument in order to “help keep our fellow Americans employed and off welfare” both economic common sense and patriotic?
My answer to this is a really big fat no. Investing your hard-earned money in a less desirable financial instrument in order to “help keep our fellow Americans gainfully employed and off welfare” does not really make economic common sense or is really patriotic, it is just thinly veiled charity. A charity that most of us succumb into every time we use “liberal guilt” as a defense mechanism every time we are emotionally blackmailed into buying something we don’t really need. And by the way, when it comes to good business practices, emotional blackmail is still illegal.
But if you are like me – and many others - who still believes that America under the helm of President Obama, miracles – especially economic miracles – can still happen. Then by all means invest in US treasury bonds and securities as your patriotic duty to help keep the American economy strong. But beware and be very aware that the current state of the US economy still resembles some rickety contraption being held by bailing wire and the good intentions of a czarist-era mad Russian. Which is my latest assessment given the aftermath of the Bernard L. Madoff fraud that could put Charles Ponzi and his start-up pyramid scheme to shame.
Saturday, January 3, 2009
The Lowdown on Commodities
The current low price of commodities – especially that of crude oil - had lessened the impact of the global financial crisis to most sectors of the economy even though it will be very bad in the long run. A good time to cry wolf?
By: Ringo Bones
The world’s leading economist had already reached a consensus and had been warning us for sometime that the low prices of economies resulting in the lack of demand due to the global economic downturn. Will be bad in the long run – even if the global economy recovers sometime in the future – because producers are not making the necessary investments to expand current production to meet possible future demands. The proverbial “ticking time bombs” in the commodities market are copper and crude oil whose prices could skyrocket way pass their 2008 peak once the global economy recovers causing an increase in demand.
Violent price rises will be the norm – rather than the exception – when it comes to commodities prices when the global economy recovers around 2010 or so. Due to lack of current investment to expand production, demand for copper and crude oil in 2010 might not be met fast enough - which could be a headache to commodities trading. Especially when it comes to the demands of emerging economies in Asia like India and China whose economies are not as badly affected as those in the United States and Europe despite of the tragic job loss figures. Plus the increased affluence of consumers in Asia could also send prices of wheat, corn, and soybean skyrocketing past their 2008 levels due to these food crops being diverted into meat production as animal feed.
The world’s policymakers better start consulting their economic advisory team on how to plan ahead to avert disastrous and violent commodity price volatility in the near future. Even if the global economy eventually recovers, it could derive our poorer brethren of their daily bread if the recovery plan is ill conceived. Making that “dramatic” percentage-point rises in the global stock market a rather Pyrrhic victory for stock market traders.
By: Ringo Bones
The world’s leading economist had already reached a consensus and had been warning us for sometime that the low prices of economies resulting in the lack of demand due to the global economic downturn. Will be bad in the long run – even if the global economy recovers sometime in the future – because producers are not making the necessary investments to expand current production to meet possible future demands. The proverbial “ticking time bombs” in the commodities market are copper and crude oil whose prices could skyrocket way pass their 2008 peak once the global economy recovers causing an increase in demand.
Violent price rises will be the norm – rather than the exception – when it comes to commodities prices when the global economy recovers around 2010 or so. Due to lack of current investment to expand production, demand for copper and crude oil in 2010 might not be met fast enough - which could be a headache to commodities trading. Especially when it comes to the demands of emerging economies in Asia like India and China whose economies are not as badly affected as those in the United States and Europe despite of the tragic job loss figures. Plus the increased affluence of consumers in Asia could also send prices of wheat, corn, and soybean skyrocketing past their 2008 levels due to these food crops being diverted into meat production as animal feed.
The world’s policymakers better start consulting their economic advisory team on how to plan ahead to avert disastrous and violent commodity price volatility in the near future. Even if the global economy eventually recovers, it could derive our poorer brethren of their daily bread if the recovery plan is ill conceived. Making that “dramatic” percentage-point rises in the global stock market a rather Pyrrhic victory for stock market traders.
Friday, December 19, 2008
The Global Credit Crunch: Benefiting House Buyers?
Despite the groans of Wall Street insiders over the housing slump, will the ongoing credit crunch be a good thing for prospective house buyers since real estate agents are now forced to slash prices just to make a sale?
By: Ringo Bones
Even though it is a sure sign of our ever-deepening global credit crisis when real estate agents and property developers start to aggressively slash their prices just to make a sale. They are even staring to reduce the prices of their “Root of all Gentrification” luxury-themed gated communities. Fire sale prices without the fire?
The bad news (or good news depending on which side of the transaction you lie) is that prospective buyers are still harboring a wait-and-see attitude. Understandably so given that property prices will certainly be slashed further in the near future. The better deal that’s still at hand in the near future can be too tempting to pass up. Worse still, the housing market could initiate a runaway deflation caused by delayed spending of the wait and see attitude of prospective house buyers.
No matter what side of the transaction you lie, sometimes you’ll wonder if this is just a simple by-product of the global economic downturn or a much-feared anti-gentrification backlash. Given that the new generation can now safely afford to be “noveau-poor” due to the new income opportunity paradigm provided by the Internet, they might be practicing a new form of Socialism for all intents and purposes. And since the “nuclear” family had fallen out of fashion for over 30 years now, real estate agents and property developers better start tweaking their antiquated business models if they chose to survive in our current climate of fiscal and consumer austerity.
By: Ringo Bones
Even though it is a sure sign of our ever-deepening global credit crisis when real estate agents and property developers start to aggressively slash their prices just to make a sale. They are even staring to reduce the prices of their “Root of all Gentrification” luxury-themed gated communities. Fire sale prices without the fire?
The bad news (or good news depending on which side of the transaction you lie) is that prospective buyers are still harboring a wait-and-see attitude. Understandably so given that property prices will certainly be slashed further in the near future. The better deal that’s still at hand in the near future can be too tempting to pass up. Worse still, the housing market could initiate a runaway deflation caused by delayed spending of the wait and see attitude of prospective house buyers.
No matter what side of the transaction you lie, sometimes you’ll wonder if this is just a simple by-product of the global economic downturn or a much-feared anti-gentrification backlash. Given that the new generation can now safely afford to be “noveau-poor” due to the new income opportunity paradigm provided by the Internet, they might be practicing a new form of Socialism for all intents and purposes. And since the “nuclear” family had fallen out of fashion for over 30 years now, real estate agents and property developers better start tweaking their antiquated business models if they chose to survive in our current climate of fiscal and consumer austerity.
The US Economic Downturn: A Boon for Indian Law Firms?
Rumored to have the world’s largest population of underutilized professionals, will the current US economic downturn be a good thing for Indian law firms?
By: Ringo Bones
Ever since globalization created the outsourcing market, low cost services – no matter how far away – has always been too tempting for the richest countries to ignore despite of quasi-protectionism legislation. And while the world markets waited with baited breath whether the US economic downturn will get much worse, the American economic hardship had inadvertently become a good thing to a service sector half a world away – namely Indian law firms.
Basing on the increased visibility of Indian law firms advertising on the Internet like the Singhania & Co. LLP Advocates and Solicitors for example, offering arbitration and all types of business assistance. And given that as a business model, outsourcing has proven to be very economically viable, it is inevitable that Indian law firms will soon be benefiting from the misfortunes of corporate America’s woes.
Outsourcing has since outgrown from the fledgling phoning in of DVD player queries. The evaluation of legal documents via legal outsourcing has recently reduced the cost overheads of US financial lawsuits and other corporate legalese and rigmarole. Given that corporate legal procedures are seldom cheap – especially when it involves filing for bankruptcy – every method of cost reduction, like legal outsourcing, had recently been in vogue. Looks like corporate America’s loss will be every Indian law firm’s gain. Looks like the US economic crisis might wind up helping others before it disappears.
By: Ringo Bones
Ever since globalization created the outsourcing market, low cost services – no matter how far away – has always been too tempting for the richest countries to ignore despite of quasi-protectionism legislation. And while the world markets waited with baited breath whether the US economic downturn will get much worse, the American economic hardship had inadvertently become a good thing to a service sector half a world away – namely Indian law firms.
Basing on the increased visibility of Indian law firms advertising on the Internet like the Singhania & Co. LLP Advocates and Solicitors for example, offering arbitration and all types of business assistance. And given that as a business model, outsourcing has proven to be very economically viable, it is inevitable that Indian law firms will soon be benefiting from the misfortunes of corporate America’s woes.
Outsourcing has since outgrown from the fledgling phoning in of DVD player queries. The evaluation of legal documents via legal outsourcing has recently reduced the cost overheads of US financial lawsuits and other corporate legalese and rigmarole. Given that corporate legal procedures are seldom cheap – especially when it involves filing for bankruptcy – every method of cost reduction, like legal outsourcing, had recently been in vogue. Looks like corporate America’s loss will be every Indian law firm’s gain. Looks like the US economic crisis might wind up helping others before it disappears.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Pyramid Scheme Killed the Hedge Fund Star?
Dubbed by Wall Street insiders as a scandal bigger than ENRON, will the Bernard L. Madoff hedge fund scandal forever undermine investor confidence?
By: Vanessa Uy
When the 70 year old former NASDAQ chairman Bernard L. Madoff was arrested a few days ago as the result of an on-going investigation over might be one of the largest fraud case of the 21st Century. He is suspected of being responsible for creating a pyramid / Ponzi scheme disguised as a hedge fund firm that dates back to the 1960 which resulted in the defrauding of his investors by 50 billion US dollars.
Bernard L. Madoff started a hedge fund firm called Bernard L. Madoff Securities LLC was even regarded by many Wall Street insiders as “the birthplace of modern Wall Street” due to it’s pioneering business model. Bernard L. Madoff’s business model was deemed to tempting – even to seasoned investors due to his promise of relatively high return of investment when compared to the norm despite of the risks involved or the obvious lack of transparency. During its heyday, Madoff’s hedge fund firm was trading on average of 50 million shares a day. And even during October 2008, when the global financial crisis was already in full steam, his firm was still the 23rd largest market maker on NASDAQ.
What became of Bernard L. Madoff’s undoing is by running his hedge fund firm like a pyramid or Ponzi scheme, where money is being exchanged despite of the lack of trade in goods or services being provided – the primary reason that made it illegal. First tier investors were comfortably living off from the investment funds of latter entrants of their shaky pyramid scheme, which miraculously, only recently collapsed despite dating from the 1960’s. Bernard L. Madoff’s fraudulent dealings even predated mortgage backed securities and other complex credit derivatives which are primarily blamed for the ongoing global financial crisis.
Will Bernard L. Madoff’s stunt forever undermine investor confidence? Well, given that the start of 2008 saw the audacious rogue trading antics of Société Générale junior trader Jérôme Kerviel, lack of investor confidence will be the norm – rather than the aberrant exception – which will probably worsen our ongoing global financial crisis. Those new “green technologies” being peddled by newly elected US President Barack Obama will never get of the ground due to lack of investment. The pyramid scheme did indeed killed one of NASDAQ’s leading hedge fund “stars” by sending its greedy CEO to the slammer.
By: Vanessa Uy
When the 70 year old former NASDAQ chairman Bernard L. Madoff was arrested a few days ago as the result of an on-going investigation over might be one of the largest fraud case of the 21st Century. He is suspected of being responsible for creating a pyramid / Ponzi scheme disguised as a hedge fund firm that dates back to the 1960 which resulted in the defrauding of his investors by 50 billion US dollars.
Bernard L. Madoff started a hedge fund firm called Bernard L. Madoff Securities LLC was even regarded by many Wall Street insiders as “the birthplace of modern Wall Street” due to it’s pioneering business model. Bernard L. Madoff’s business model was deemed to tempting – even to seasoned investors due to his promise of relatively high return of investment when compared to the norm despite of the risks involved or the obvious lack of transparency. During its heyday, Madoff’s hedge fund firm was trading on average of 50 million shares a day. And even during October 2008, when the global financial crisis was already in full steam, his firm was still the 23rd largest market maker on NASDAQ.
What became of Bernard L. Madoff’s undoing is by running his hedge fund firm like a pyramid or Ponzi scheme, where money is being exchanged despite of the lack of trade in goods or services being provided – the primary reason that made it illegal. First tier investors were comfortably living off from the investment funds of latter entrants of their shaky pyramid scheme, which miraculously, only recently collapsed despite dating from the 1960’s. Bernard L. Madoff’s fraudulent dealings even predated mortgage backed securities and other complex credit derivatives which are primarily blamed for the ongoing global financial crisis.
Will Bernard L. Madoff’s stunt forever undermine investor confidence? Well, given that the start of 2008 saw the audacious rogue trading antics of Société Générale junior trader Jérôme Kerviel, lack of investor confidence will be the norm – rather than the aberrant exception – which will probably worsen our ongoing global financial crisis. Those new “green technologies” being peddled by newly elected US President Barack Obama will never get of the ground due to lack of investment. The pyramid scheme did indeed killed one of NASDAQ’s leading hedge fund “stars” by sending its greedy CEO to the slammer.
Monday, November 17, 2008
IMF and World Bank: Obsolete Financial Institutions?
Born out of the Articles of Agreement drawn up during the Bretton Woods Conference of July 1944. Are the IMF and the World Bank still relevant financial institutions in the 21st Century?
By: Ringo Bones
As the scheduled G20 Summit of the November 14, 2008 weekend at Washington, D.C. attempts to solve our current global financial crisis. Many leading academics of the financial world now wonder if there is a need to drastically overhaul the workings of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank since these institutions seem powerless in reversing the tide of current the global financial crisis whose worse is yet to come. Plus the criticisms of an overwhelming majority about the two institutions’ development programs which seems to entrap poor countries into an endless cycle of debt. Barring radical policy changes does the IMF and the World Bank still relevant in the 21st Century economic globalization that’s fuelled by credit and it’s derivatives?
Back in July 1944 at the Bretton Woods Conference - which was held in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire as a post World War II reconstruction and global development plan. The soon to be victorious Allied Nations were already planning their post World War II economic development in which Adolph Hitler was even powerless to utter the phrase “Are you already measuring the drapes?” in protest to this conference. The historic conference led to the establishment of The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development – also known as the World Bank – together with the International Monetary Fund or IMF under the Articles of Agreement. Among the main objectives of the former were stabilization of the foreign exchanges and improvement of foreign economic relations. Since the US dollar was then the form of currency in greatest demand, contributions to the Fund by the United States were to be an important ingredient in worldwide stabilization. The Bank’s headquarters are in Washington, D.C.
Presently, after many years of change, the consensus reached at the Bretton Woods Conference – were its used to be that various currencies were pegged against the US dollar and backed by gold as a means of global financial stability – no longer holds true. There are other countries that had managed to transform themselves into a formidable economic superpower rivaling that of the United States. Like China for example, with the country’s large currency reserves and strong economy has the ability to undervalue her own currency. Thus gaining an unfair advantage when it comes to the pricing of export products. But is our present global economic structure that’s modeled after the consensus reached in the Bretton Woods Conference of July 1944 is now having trouble keeping up with its commitment of promoting development of poor countries without entrapping them to an endless cycle of debt? The inability to efficiently adapt to recent financial trends, not to mention in tackling our current ever deepening global financial crisis.
Recently the G20 Summit in Washington with the official banner of “ Summit for Financial Markets and the World Economy” was beginning to be seen by many as “Bretton Woods Part II” or “Bretton Woods Version 2.0”. This is so because it has set some pretty lofty goals – in the staunchly conservative financial world it does pass muster as lofty - to end our deepening current global financial crisis. The world leaders in the G20 summit had very much reached a consensus to promote free market capitalism or free trade and the rejection of wholesale protectionism. Other notable reforms of the 10-page long G20 declaration include new regulations to curb risky practices of banks and other financial institutions. Credit Default Swaps – those extremely sexy financial instruments that instigated the current global financial crisis – are now targeted for stricter regulation by allowing them to be processed on a centralized clearinghouse for better monitoring.
The existing practices that make “common folks” bedevil the world’s two leading financial institutions, IMF and World Bank, were not tackled. Like measures to end free trade distorting trade subsidies and “debt entrapment” of poor nations. Though the powers-that-be say that the latest G20 Summit is only a part of a series of high-level meetings aimed at resolving our present financial crisis, I just hope that they will to their part to end our existing global financial woes. After all, this recovery process requires the involvement of everyone of us. I mean, isn't the G20's "Global Economic Crisis Action Plan" granting a bigger role for developing nations just a euphemism for "we need everyone's help"?
By: Ringo Bones
As the scheduled G20 Summit of the November 14, 2008 weekend at Washington, D.C. attempts to solve our current global financial crisis. Many leading academics of the financial world now wonder if there is a need to drastically overhaul the workings of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank since these institutions seem powerless in reversing the tide of current the global financial crisis whose worse is yet to come. Plus the criticisms of an overwhelming majority about the two institutions’ development programs which seems to entrap poor countries into an endless cycle of debt. Barring radical policy changes does the IMF and the World Bank still relevant in the 21st Century economic globalization that’s fuelled by credit and it’s derivatives?
Back in July 1944 at the Bretton Woods Conference - which was held in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire as a post World War II reconstruction and global development plan. The soon to be victorious Allied Nations were already planning their post World War II economic development in which Adolph Hitler was even powerless to utter the phrase “Are you already measuring the drapes?” in protest to this conference. The historic conference led to the establishment of The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development – also known as the World Bank – together with the International Monetary Fund or IMF under the Articles of Agreement. Among the main objectives of the former were stabilization of the foreign exchanges and improvement of foreign economic relations. Since the US dollar was then the form of currency in greatest demand, contributions to the Fund by the United States were to be an important ingredient in worldwide stabilization. The Bank’s headquarters are in Washington, D.C.
Presently, after many years of change, the consensus reached at the Bretton Woods Conference – were its used to be that various currencies were pegged against the US dollar and backed by gold as a means of global financial stability – no longer holds true. There are other countries that had managed to transform themselves into a formidable economic superpower rivaling that of the United States. Like China for example, with the country’s large currency reserves and strong economy has the ability to undervalue her own currency. Thus gaining an unfair advantage when it comes to the pricing of export products. But is our present global economic structure that’s modeled after the consensus reached in the Bretton Woods Conference of July 1944 is now having trouble keeping up with its commitment of promoting development of poor countries without entrapping them to an endless cycle of debt? The inability to efficiently adapt to recent financial trends, not to mention in tackling our current ever deepening global financial crisis.
Recently the G20 Summit in Washington with the official banner of “ Summit for Financial Markets and the World Economy” was beginning to be seen by many as “Bretton Woods Part II” or “Bretton Woods Version 2.0”. This is so because it has set some pretty lofty goals – in the staunchly conservative financial world it does pass muster as lofty - to end our deepening current global financial crisis. The world leaders in the G20 summit had very much reached a consensus to promote free market capitalism or free trade and the rejection of wholesale protectionism. Other notable reforms of the 10-page long G20 declaration include new regulations to curb risky practices of banks and other financial institutions. Credit Default Swaps – those extremely sexy financial instruments that instigated the current global financial crisis – are now targeted for stricter regulation by allowing them to be processed on a centralized clearinghouse for better monitoring.
The existing practices that make “common folks” bedevil the world’s two leading financial institutions, IMF and World Bank, were not tackled. Like measures to end free trade distorting trade subsidies and “debt entrapment” of poor nations. Though the powers-that-be say that the latest G20 Summit is only a part of a series of high-level meetings aimed at resolving our present financial crisis, I just hope that they will to their part to end our existing global financial woes. After all, this recovery process requires the involvement of everyone of us. I mean, isn't the G20's "Global Economic Crisis Action Plan" granting a bigger role for developing nations just a euphemism for "we need everyone's help"?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
