Canadian Forces - Wiktionary

Dollar Index and its impact on USDINR movement

Dollar Index and its impact on USDINR movement

image courtesy : pixabay
Many people in India who are just beginning their career in Currency Derivatives frequently hear about Dollar index. The social media and other platforms full of questions like “What is the Dollar Index?” and how it will impact the Indian currency pairs, especially the USDINR pair. This article will try to explain the US Dollar Index or USDX and its impact on the Indian currency pair.

What is the Dollar Index?

To put in simple words, it is the value of USD relative to the basket of major currency pairs. The value of the USDX tells the strength of the dollar. The six major currency pairs forming the basket along with weight are :
  1. EUR (57.6% )
  2. CHF (Swiss Franc -3.6%)
  3. YEN (Japanese yen — 13.6%)
  4. CAD (Canadian Dollar -9.1%)
  5. GBP(11.9% )
  6. SEK (Swedish Krona — 4.2%)
The USDX was created after the Bretton Woods agreement was dissolved in 1973. The base value was taken as 100, and the value of USDX is relative to the base value. The USDX is similar to the other indexes such as stock indices such as S&P 500, Nifty 50, where the weighted average of most valuable stocks is taken to form the stock index.
For calculation purpose, the exchange rates of six major currencies are taken with their respective weights in the index.
Prior to the establishment of USDX, all the major participating countries settled their balances in USD. The USD could be converted to Gold at $ 35/ounce. This led to the overvaluation of USD and the linked gold prices resulting in the temporary suspension of the gold standard. The countries then were free to choose the exchange rate, which did not depend on the price of the Gold and several countries freely floated their exchange rates. This led to a search for another standard, and thus, the dollar index was born.

Highs and lows in dollar index value

In 1973 the value of dollar index was set to 100. It reached its peak in 1985 where its value was around 165. In 2008 it hit the low of 70. If the value of the dollar index is above 100, then the dollar has appreciated against the basket of currencies. In contrast, any value below 100 or equivalent to 100 means dollar has depreciated against the basket of currencies. It can also be referred that the dollar is weak below 100 and strong above 100. There are several factors which impact the dollar index. These factors include macroeconomics, deflation/inflation of dollar and other currencies in the basket, etc.

Is US Dollar Index Traded?

Yes Dollar Index popularly known as USDX or DXY is available for trading on the US and other overseas exchanges, but not in Indian bourses.

Is USDX available for Investment?

Yes, it is also available indirectly for Investment via ETF and mutual fund routes in the US markets. At the moment, the Indian market doesn’t have any such products for investment purpose.

How dollar index impacts USDINR?

Indeed weakening and strengthening of dollar impacts USDINR movement. If take into consideration businesses and services where we deal in dollars only then strengthening of dollar increases the Forex reserve value. In contrast, the weakening of the dollar globally reduces the income of all the export-oriented industries. The reverse is true for import oriented industries in the country.
If you are a trader, then falling and rising dollar index provides you with the opportunities to trade in the USDINR pairs in both ways. You can either short when the dollar is weakening or go long when the dollar is strengthening. You can also hedge your position in the wake of weakening dollar through options and future trades. Corporate Business houses hedge their risk by hedging against any Dollar appreciation/depreciation based on the index value.
But the movement of USDINR pair should not be solely analyzed merely on the movement of the dollar index, and other factors also play a key role in the USDINR movement. Other factors, such as crude oil prices, trade deficit, inflation, etc., should also be considered along with USDX to analyze the movement of USDINR pair.

Where to get USDX charts?

You can get the USDX charts at in.investing.com

USDX charts on NYSE
I hope I have explained the dollar index in detail, however any comment, correction and feedback is welcome on the article.
submitted by bhaskarndas to u/bhaskarndas [link] [comments]

Dollar Index and its impact on USDINR movement

Dollar Index and its impact on USDINR movement

image courtesy : pixabay

Many people in India who are just beginning their career in Currency Derivatives frequently hear about Dollar index. The social media and other platforms full of questions like “What is the Dollar Index?” and how it will impact the Indian currency pairs, especially the USDINR pair. This article will try to explain the US Dollar Index or USDX and its impact on the Indian currency pair.

What is the Dollar Index?

To put in simple words, it is the value of USD relative to the basket of major currency pairs. The value of the USDX tells the strength of the dollar. The six major currency pairs forming the basket along with weight are :
  1. EUR (57.6% )
  2. CHF (Swiss Franc -3.6%)
  3. YEN (Japanese yen — 13.6%)
  4. CAD (Canadian Dollar -9.1%)
  5. GBP(11.9% )
  6. SEK (Swedish Krona — 4.2%)
The USDX was created after the Bretton Woods agreement was dissolved in 1973. The base value was taken as 100, and the value of USDX is relative to the base value. The USDX is similar to the other indexes such as stock indices such as S&P 500, Nifty 50, where the weighted average of most valuable stocks is taken to form the stock index.
For calculation purpose, the exchange rates of six major currencies are taken with their respective weights in the index.
Prior to the establishment of USDX, all the major participating countries settled their balances in USD. The USD could be converted to Gold at $ 35/ounce. This led to the overvaluation of USD and the linked gold prices resulting in the temporary suspension of the gold standard. The countries then were free to choose the exchange rate, which did not depend on the price of the Gold and several countries freely floated their exchange rates. This led to a search for another standard, and thus, the dollar index was born.

Highs and lows in dollar index value

In 1973 the value of dollar index was set to 100. It reached its peak in 1985 where its value was around 165. In 2008 it hit the low of 70. If the value of the dollar index is above 100, then the dollar has appreciated against the basket of currencies. In contrast, any value below 100 or equivalent to 100 means dollar has depreciated against the basket of currencies. It can also be referred that the dollar is weak below 100 and strong above 100. There are several factors which impact the dollar index. These factors include macroeconomics, deflation/inflation of dollar and other currencies in the basket, etc.

Is US Dollar Index Traded?

Yes Dollar Index popularly known as USDX or DXY is available for trading on the US and other overseas exchanges, but not in Indian bourses.

Is USDX available for Investment?

Yes, it is also available indirectly for Investment via ETF and mutual fund routes in the US markets. At the moment, the Indian market doesn’t have any such products for investment purpose.

How dollar index impacts USDINR?

Indeed weakening and strengthening of dollar impacts USDINR movement. If take into consideration businesses and services where we deal in dollars only then strengthening of dollar increases the Forex reserve value. In contrast, the weakening of the dollar globally reduces the income of all the export-oriented industries. The reverse is true for import oriented industries in the country.
If you are a trader, then falling and rising dollar index provides you with the opportunities to trade in the USDINR pairs in both ways. You can either short when the dollar is weakening or go long when the dollar is strengthening. You can also hedge your position in the wake of weakening dollar through options and future trades. Corporate Business houses hedge their risk by hedging against any Dollar appreciation/depreciation based on the index value.
But the movement of USDINR pair should not be solely analyzed merely on the movement of the dollar index, and other factors also play a key role in the USDINR movement. Other factors, such as crude oil prices, trade deficit, inflation, etc., should also be considered along with USDX to analyze the movement of USDINR pair.

Where to get USDX charts?

You can get the USDX charts at in.investing.com

USDX charts on NYSE
I hope I have explained the dollar index in detail, however any comment, correction and feedback is welcome on the article.
submitted by bhaskarndas to StockMarketIndia [link] [comments]

Trump Didn’t Kill the Global Trade System. He Split It in Two.

This article is taken from the Wall Street Journal written about nine months ago and sits behind a a paywall, so I decided to copy and paste it here. This article explains Trump's policies toward global trade and what has actually happened so far. I think the article does a decent job of explaining the Trade War. While alot has happenedsince the article was written, I still think its relevant.
However, what is lacking in the article, like many articles on the trade war, is it doesn't really explain the history of US trade policy, the laws that the US administration is using to place tariffs on China and the official justification for the US President in enacting tariffs against China. In my analysis I will cover those points.

SUMMARY

When Trump entered the White House people feared he would dismantle the global system the US and its allies had built over the last 75 years, but he hasn't. He has realign into two systems. One between the US and its allies which looks similar to the one built since the 1980s with a few of quota and tariffs. As the article points out
Today, Korus and Nafta have been replaced by updated agreements(one not yet ratified) that look much like the originals. South Korea accepted quotas on steel. Mexico and Canada agreed to higher wages, North American content requirements and quotas for autos. Furthermore, the article points out Douglas Irwin, an economist and trade historian at Dartmouth College, calls these results the “status quo with Trumpian tweaks: a little more managed trade sprinkled about for favored industries. It’s not good, but it’s not the destruction of the system.” Mr. Trump’s actions so far affect only 12% of U.S. imports, according to Chad Bown of the Peterson Institute for International Economics. In 1984, 21% of imports were covered by similar restraints, many imposed by Mr. Reagan, such as on cars, steel, motorcycles and clothing. Protectionist instincts go so far in the US, there are strong lobby groups for both protectionist and freetrade in the US.
The second reflects a emerging rivalry between the US and China. Undo some of the integration that followed China accession to the WTO. Two questions 1) How far is the US willing to decouple with China 2) Can it persuade allies to join.
The second is going to be difficult because China's economic ties are greater than they were between the Soviets, and China isn't waging an ideological struggle. Trump lacks Reagan commitment to alliance and free trade. The status quo with China is crumbling Dan Sullivan, a Republican senator from Alaska, personifies these broader forces reshaping the U.S. approach to the world. When Mr. Xi visited the U.S. in 2015, Mr. Sullivan urged his colleagues to pay more attention to China’s rise. On the Senate floor, he quoted the political scientist Graham Allison: “War between the U.S. and China is more likely than recognized at the moment.” Last spring, Mr. Sullivan went to China and met officials including Vice President Wang Qishan. They seemed to think tensions with the U.S. will fade after Mr. Trump leaves the scene, Mr. Sullivan recalled. “I just said, ‘You are completely misreading this.’” The mistrust, he told them, is bipartisan, and will outlast Mr. Trump. both Bush II and Obama tried to change dialogue and engagement, but by the end of his term, Obama was questioning the approach. Trump has declared engagement. “We don’t like it when our allies steal our ideas either, but it’s a much less dangerous situation,” said Derek Scissors, a China expert at the American Enterprise Institute whose views align with the administration’s more hawkish officials. “We’re not worried about the war-fighting capability of Japan and Korea because they’re our friends.”
The article also points out unlike George Kennan in 1946 who made a case for containing the Soviet Union, the US hasn't explicitly made a case for containing the Soviets, Trump's administration hasn't, because as the the article explains its divided Michael Pillsbury a Hudson Institute scholar close to the Trump team, see 3 scenarios
Pillsbury thinks the third is most likely to happen, even though the administration hasn't said that it has adopted that policy. The US is stepping efforts to draw in other trading partners. The US, EU and Japan have launched a WTO effort to crack down on domestic subsidies and technology transfers requirement. US and Domestic concerns with prompted some countries to restrict Huawei. The US is also seeking to walloff China from other trade deals. However, there are risk with this strategy

ARTICLE

Trump Didn’t Kill the Global Trade System. He Split It in Two.

INTRODUCTION

My main criticism of this article is it tries like the vast majority of articles to fit US trade actions in the larger context of US geopolitical strategy. Even the author isn't certain "The first goes to the heart of Mr. Trump’s goal. If his aim is to hold back China’s advance, economists predict he will fail.". If you try to treat the trade "war" and US geopolitical strategy toward China as one, you will find yourself quickly frustrated and confused. If you treat them separately with their different set of stakeholders and histories, were they intersect with regards to China, but diverge. During the Cold War, trade policy toward the Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc was subordinated to geopolitical concerns. For Trump, the trade issues are more important than geopolitical strategy. His protectionist trade rhetoric has been fairly consistent since 1980s. In his administration, the top cabinet members holding economic portfolios, those of Commerce, Treasury and US Trade Representative are the same people he picked when he first took office. The Director of the Economic Council has changed hands once, its role isn't as important as the National Security Advisor. While State, Defense, CIA, Homeland Security, UN Ambassador, National Security Advisor have changed hands at least once. Only the Director of National Intelligence hasn't changed.
International Trade makes up 1/4 of the US economy, and like national security its primarily the responsibility of the Federal government. States in the US don't implement their own tariffs. If you add the impact of Treasury policy and how it relates to capital flows in and out of the US, the amounts easily exceed the size of the US economy. Furthermore, because of US Dollar role as the reserve currency and US control of over global system the impact of Treasury are global. Trade policy and investment flows runs through two federal departments Commerce and Treasury and for trade also USTR. Defense spending makes up 3.3% of GDP, and if you add in related homeland security its at most 4%. Why would anyone assume that these two realms be integrated let alone trade policy subordinate to whims of a national security bureaucracy in most instances? With North Korea or Iran, trade and investment subordinate themselves to national security, because to Treasury and Commerce bureaucrats and their affiliated interest groups, Iran and the DPRK are well, economic midgets, but China is a different matter.
The analysis will be divided into four sections. The first will be to provide a brief overview of US trade policy since 1914. The second section will discuss why the US is going after China on trade issues, and why the US has resorted using a bilateral approach as opposed to going through the WTO. The third section we will talk about how relations with China is hashed out in the US.
The reason why I submitted this article, because there aren't many post trying to explain US-China Trade War from a trade perspective. Here is a post titled "What is the Reasons for America's Trade War with China, and not one person mentioned Article 301 or China's WTO Commitments. You get numerous post saying that Huawei is at heart of the trade war. Its fine, but if you don't know what was inside the USTR Investigative report that lead to the tariffs. its like skipping dinner and only having dessert When the US President, Donald J Trump, says he wants to negotiate a better trade deal with other countries, and has been going on about for the last 35 years, longer than many of you have been alive, why do people think that the key issues with China aren't primarily about trade at the moment.

OVERVIEW OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE ORIENTATION

Before 1940s, the US could be categorized as a free market protectionist economy. For many this may seem like oxymoron, how can an economy be free market and protectionist? In 1913, government spending made up about 7.5% of US GDP, in the UK it was 13%, and for Germany 18% (Public Spending in the 20th Century A Global Perspective: Ludger Schuknecht and Vito Tanzi - 2000). UK had virtual zero tariffs, while for manufactured goods in France it was 20%, 13% Germany, 9% Belgium and 4% Netherlands. For raw materials and agricultural products, it was almost zero. In contrast, for the likes of United States, Russia and Japan it was 44%, 84% and 30% respectively. Even though in 1900 United States was an economic powerhouse along with Germany, manufactured exports only made up 30% of exports, and the US government saw tariffs as exclusively a domestic policy matter and didn't see tariffs as something to be negotiated with other nations. The US didn't have the large constituency to push the government for lower tariffs abroad for their exports like in Britain in the 1830-40s (Reluctant Partners: A History of Multilateral Trade Cooperation, 1850-2000).
The Underwood Tariffs Act of 1913 which legislated the income tax, dropped the tariffs to 1850 levels levels.Until 16th amendment was ratified in 1913 making income tax legal, all US federal revenue came from excise and tariffs. In contrast before 1914, about 50% of UK revenue came from income taxes. The reason for US reluctance to introduced income tax was ideological and the United State's relative weak government compared to those in Europe. After the First World War, the US introduced the Emergency Tariff Act of 1921, than the Fordney–McCumber Tariff of 1922 followed by a Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930. Contrary to popular opinion, the Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930 had a small negative impact on the economy, since imports and exports played a small part of the US economy, and the tariffs were lower than the average that existed from 1850-1914.
Immediately after the Second World War, when the US economy was the only industrialized economy left standing, the economic focus was on rehabilitation and monetary stability. There was no grandiose and ideological design. Bretton Woods system linked the US dollar to gold to create monetary stability, and to avoid competitive devaluation and tariffs that plagued the world economy after Britain took itself off the gold in 1931. The US$ was the natural choice, because in 1944 2/3 of the world's gold was in the US. One reason why the Marshall Plan was created was to alleviate the chronic deficits Europeans countries had with the US between 1945-50. It was to rebuild their economies so they could start exports good to the US. Even before it was full implemented in 1959, it was already facing problems, the trade surpluses that the US was running in the 1940s, turned to deficits as European and Japanese economies recovered. By 1959, Federal Reserves foreign liabilities had already exceeded its gold reserves. There were fears of a run on the US gold supply and arbitrage. A secondary policy of the Bretton woods system was curbs on capital outflows to reduce speculation on currency pegs, and this had a negative impact on foreign investment until it was abandoned in 1971. It wasn't until the 1980s, where foreign investment recovered to levels prior to 1914. Factoring out the big spike in global oil prices as a result of the OPEC cartel, it most likely wasn't until the mid-1990s that exports as a % of GDP had reached 1914 levels.
Until the 1980s, the US record regarding free trade and markets was mediocre. The impetus to remove trade barriers in Europe after the Second World War was driven by the Europeans themselves. The EEC already had a custom union in 1968, Canada and the US have yet to even discuss implementing one. Even with Canada it took the US over 50 years to get a Free Trade Agreement. NAFTA was inspired by the success of the EEC. NAFTA was very much an elite driven project. If the Americans put the NAFTA to a referendum like the British did with the EEC in the seventies, it most likely wouldn't pass. People often look at segregation in the US South as a political issue, but it was economic issue as well. How could the US preach free trade, when it didn't have free trade in its own country. Segregation was a internal non-tariff barrier. In the first election after the end of the Cold War in 1992, Ross Perot' based most of independent run for the Presidency on opposition to NAFTA. He won 19% of the vote. Like Ross Perot before him, Donald Trump is not the exception in how America has handled tariffs since the founding of the Republic, but more the norm.
The embrace of free trade by the business and political elite can be attributed to two events. After the end of Bretton Woods in 1971, a strong vested interest in the US in the form of multinationals and Wall Street emerged advocating for removal of tariffs and more importantly the removal of restrictions on free flow of capital, whether direct foreign investment in portfolio investment. However, the political class embrace of free trade and capital only really took off after the collapse of the Soviet Union propelled by Cold War triumphalism.
As mentioned by the article, the US is reverting back to a pre-WTO relations with China. As Robert Lighthizer said in speech in 2000
I guess my prescription, really, is to move back to more of a negotiating kind of a settlement. Return to WTO and what it really was meant to be. Something where you have somebody make a decision but have it not be binding.
The US is using financial and legal instruments developed during the Cold War like its extradition treaties (with Canada and Europe), and Section 301. Here is a very good recent article about enforcement commitment that China will make.‘Painful’ enforcement ahead for China if trade war deal is reached with US insisting on unilateral terms
NOTE: It is very difficult to talk about US-China trade war without a basic knowledge of global economic history since 1914. What a lot of people do is politicize or subordinate the economic history to the political. Some commentators think US power was just handed to them after the Second World War, when the US was the only industrialized economy left standing. The dominant position of the US was temporary and in reality its like having 10 tonnes of Gold sitting in your house, it doesn't automatically translate to influence. The US from 1945-1989 was slowly and gradually build her influence in the non-Communist world. For example, US influence in Canada in the 1960s wasn't as strong as it is now. Only 50% of Canadian exports went to the US in 1960s vs 80% at the present moment.

BASIS OF THE US TRADE DISCUSSION WITH CHINA

According to preliminary agreement between China and the US based on unnamed sources in the Wall Street Journal article US, China close in on Trade Deal. In this article it divides the deal in two sections. The first aspects have largely to do with deficits and is political.
As part of a deal, China is pledging to help level the playing field, including speeding up the timetable for removing foreign-ownership limitations on car ventures and reducing tariffs on imported vehicles to below the current auto tariff of 15%. Beijing would also step up purchases of U.S. goods—a tactic designed to appeal to President Trump, who campaigned on closing the bilateral trade deficit with China. One of the sweeteners would be an $18 billion natural-gas purchase from Cheniere Energy Inc., people familiar with the transaction said.
The second part will involve the following.
  1. Commitment Regarding Industrial Policy
  2. Provisions to protect IP
  3. Mechanism which complaints by US companies can be addressed
  4. Bilateral meetings adjudicate disputes. If talks don't produce agreement than US can raise tariffs unilaterally
This grouping of conditions is similar to the points filled under the 301 investigation which serve the basis for initiating the tariffs. I have been reading some sources that say this discussion on this second group of broader issues could only be finalized later
The official justifications for placing the tariffs on Chinese goods is found under the March 2018 investigation submitted by the office of the President to Congress titled FINDINGS OF THE INVESTIGATION INTO CHINA’S ACTS, POLICIES, AND PRACTICES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, AND INNOVATION UNDER SECTION 301 OF THE TRADE ACT OF 1974. From this investigation the United States Trade Representative (USTR) place US Tariffs on Chinese goods as per Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. Here is a press release by the USTR listing the reasons for placing tariffs, and the key section from the press release. Specifically, the Section 301 investigation revealed:
In the bigger context of trade relations between US and China, China is not honoring its WTO commitments, and the USTR issued its yearly report to Congress in early February about the status of China compliance with its WTO commitments. The points that served as a basis for applying Section 301, also deviate from her commitments as Clinton's Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky paving the way for a trade war. Barshefsky argues that China's back sliding was happening as early as 2006-07, and believes the trade war could have been avoided has those commitments been enforced by previous administrations.
I will provide a brief overview of WTO membership and China's process of getting into the WTO.
WTO members can be divided into two groups, first are countries that joined in 1995-97, and were members of GATT, than there are the second group that joined after 1997. China joined in 2001. There is an argument that when China joined in 2001, she faced more stringent conditions than other developing countries that joined before, because the vast majority of developing countries were members of GATT, and were admitted to the WTO based on that previous membership in GATT. Here is Brookings Institute article published in 2001 titled "Issues in China’s WTO Accession"
This question is all the more puzzling because the scope and depth of demands placed on entrants into the formal international trading system have increased substantially since the formal conclusion of the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations in 1994, which expanded the agenda considerably by covering many services, agriculture, intellectual property, and certain aspects of foreign direct investment. Since 1994, the international community has added agreements covering information technology, basic telecommunications services, and financial services. WTO membership now entails liberalization of a much broader range of domestic economic activity, including areas that traditionally have been regarded by most countries as among the most sensitive, than was required of countries entering the WTO’s predecessor organization the GATT.
The terms of China’s protocol of accession to the World Trade Organization reflect the developments just described and more. China’s market access commitments are much more far-reaching than those that governed the accession of countries only a decade ago. And, as a condition for membership, China was required to make protocol commitments that substantially exceed those made by any other member of the World Trade Organization, including those that have joined since 1995. The broader and deeper commitments China has made inevitably will entail substantial short-term economic costs.
What are the WTO commitments Barshefsky goes on about? When countries join the WTO, particularly those countries that weren't members of GATT and joined after 1997, they have to work toward fulfilling certain commitments. There are 4 key documents when countries make an accession to WTO membership, the working party report, the accession protocol paper, the goods schedule and service schedule.
In the working party report as part of the conclusion which specifies the commitment of each member country what they will do in areas that aren't compliant with WTO regulations on the date they joined. The problem there is no good enforcement mechanism for other members to force China to comply with these commitments. And WTO punishments are weak.
Here is the commitment paragraph for China
"The Working Party took note of the explanations and statements of China concerning its foreign trade regime, as reflected in this Report. The Working Party took note of the commitments given by China in relation to certain specific matters which are reproduced in paragraphs 18-19, 22-23, 35-36, 40, 42, 46-47, 49, 60, 62, 64, 68, 70, 73, 75, 78-79, 83-84, 86, 91-93, 96, 100-103, 107, 111, 115-117, 119-120, 122-123, 126-132, 136, 138, 140, 143, 145, 146, 148, 152, 154, 157, 162, 165, 167-168, 170-174, 177-178, 180, 182, 184-185, 187, 190-197, 199-200, 203-207, 210, 212-213, 215, 217, 222-223, 225, 227-228, 231-235, 238, 240-242, 252, 256, 259, 263, 265, 270, 275, 284, 286, 288, 291, 292, 296, 299, 302, 304-305, 307-310, 312-318, 320, 322, 331-334, 336, 339 and 341 of this Report and noted that these commitments are incorporated in paragraph 1.2 of the Draft Protocol. "
This is a tool by the WTO that list all the WTO commitment of each country in the working paper. In the goods and service schedule they have commitments for particular sectors. Here is the a press release by the WTO in September 2001, after successfully concluding talks for accession, and brief summary of key areas in which China hasn't fulfilled her commitments. Most of the commitments made by China were made to address its legacy as a non-market economy and involvement of state owned enterprises. In my opinion, I think the US government and investors grew increasingly frustrated with China, after 2007 not just because of China's back sliding, but relative to other countries who joined after 1997 like Vietnam, another non-market Leninist dictatorship. When comparing China's commitments to the WTO its best to compare her progress with those that joined after 1997, which were mostly ex-Soviet Republics.
NOTE: The Chinese media have for two decades compared any time the US has talked about China's currency manipulation or any other issue as a pretext for imposing tariffs on China to the Plaza Accords. I am very sure people will raise it here. My criticism of this view is fourfold. First, the US targeted not just Japan, but France, Britain and the UK as well. Secondly, the causes of the Japan lost decade were due largely to internal factors. Thirdly, Japan, UK, Britain and France in the 1980s, the Yuan isn't undervalued today. Lastly, in the USTR investigation, its China's practices that are the concern, not so much the trade deficit.

REASONS FOR TRUMPS UNILATERAL APPROACH

I feel that people shouldn't dismiss Trump's unilateral approach toward China for several reasons.
  1. The multilateral approach won't work in many issues such as the trade deficit, commercial espionage and intellectual property, because US and her allies have different interest with regard to these issues. Germany and Japan and trade surpluses with China, while the US runs a deficit. In order to reach a consensus means the West has to compromise among themselves, and the end result if the type of toothless resolutions you commonly find in ASEAN regarding the SCS. Does America want to "compromise" its interest to appease a politician like Justin Trudeau? Not to mention opposition from domestic interest. TPP was opposed by both Clinton and Trump during the election.
  2. You can't launch a geopolitical front against China using a newly formed trade block like the TPP. Some of the existing TPP members are in economic groups with China, like Malaysia and Australia.
  3. China has joined a multitude of international bodies, and at least in trade, these bodies haven't changed its behavior.
  4. Dealing with China, its a no win situation whether you use a tough multilateral / unilateral approach. If the US endorse a tough unilateral approach gives the impression that the US is acting like the British during the Opium War. If you take a concerted Western approach you are accused of acting like the 8 Powers Alliance in 1900.
  5. Trump was elected to deal with China which he and his supporters believe was responsible for the loss of millions manufacturing jobs when China joined the WTO in 2001. It is estimate the US lost 6 Million jobs, about 1/4 of US manufacturing Jobs. This has been subsequently advanced by some economists. The ball got rolling when Bill Clinton decided to grant China Most Favored Nation status in 1999, just a decade after Tiananmen.
  6. China hasn't dealt with issues like IP protection, market access, subsidies to state own companies and state funded industrial spying.
To his credit, Trump has said his aim was not to overthrow authoritarian governments, and that even applies to the likes of Iran. The Arab spring scared Russia and China, because the US for a brief moment placed the spread of democracy over its security interest.

UNDERSTANDING HOW THE US MAKES DECISIONS REGARDING CHINA

At this moment, China or the trade war isn't an area of great concern for the American public, among international issues it ranks lower than international terrorism, North Korea and Iran's nuclear program.
According to the survey, 39 percent of the country views China’s growing power as a “critical threat” to Americans. That ranked it only eighth among 12 potential threats listed and placed China well behind the perceived threats from international terrorism (66 percent), North Korea’s nuclear program (59 percent) and Iran’s nuclear program (52 percent). It’s also considerably lower than when the same question was asked during the 1990s, when more than half of those polled listed China as a critical threat. That broadly tracks with a recent poll from the Pew Research Center that found concern about U.S.-China economic issues had decreased since 2012.
In looking at how US conducts relations foreign policy with China, we should look at it from the three areas of most concern - economic, national security and ideology. Each sphere has their interest groups, and sometimes groups can occupy two spheres at once. Security experts are concerned with some aspects of China's economic actions like IP theft and industrial policy (China 2025), because they are related to security. In these sphere there are your hawks and dove. And each sphere is dominated by certain interest groups. That is why US policy toward China can often appear contradictory. You have Trump want to reduce the trade deficit, but security experts advocating for restrictions on dual use technology who are buttressed by people who want export restrictions on China, as a way of getting market access.
Right now the economic concerns are most dominant, and the hawks seem to dominate. The economic hawks traditionally have been domestic manufacturing companies and economic nationalist. In reality the hawks aren't dominant, but the groups like US Companies with large investment in China and Wall Street are no longer defending China, and some have turned hawkish against China. These US companies are the main conduit in which China's lobby Congress, since China only spends 50% of what Taiwan spends lobbying Congress.
THE ANGLO SAXON WORLD AND CHINA
I don't think many Chinese even those that speak English, have a good understanding Anglo-Saxon society mindset. Anglo Saxons countries, whether US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Ireland are commerce driven society governed by sanctity of contracts. The English great philosophical contributions to Western philosophy have primarily to do with economics and politics like Adam Smith, John Locke, David Hume and Thomas Hobbes. This contrast with the French and Germans. Politics in the UK and to a lesser extent the US, is centered around economics, while in Mainland Europe its religion. When the Americans revolted against the British Empire in 1776, the initial source of the grievances were taxes.
Outside of East Asia, the rest of the World's relationship with China was largely commercial, and for United States, being an Anglosaxon country, even more so. In Southeast Asia, Chinese aren't known for high culture, but for trade and commerce. Outside Vietnam, most of Chinese loans words in Southeast Asian languages involve either food or money. The influence is akin to Yiddish in English.
Some people point to the Mao and Nixon meeting as great strategic breakthrough and symbol of what great power politics should look like. The reality is that the Mao-Nixon meeting was an anomaly in the long history of relations with China and the West. Much of China-Western relations over the last 500 years was conducted by multitudes of nameless Chinese and Western traders. The period from 1949-1979 was the only period were strategic concerns triumphed trade, because China had little to offer except instability and revolution. Even in this period, China's attempt to spread revolution in Southeast Asia was a threat to Western investments and corporate interest in the region. During the nadir of both the Qing Dynasty and Republican period, China was still engaged in its traditional commercial role. Throughout much of history of their relations with China, the goals of Britain and the United States were primarily economic,
IMAGINE JUST 10% OF CHINA BOUGHT MY PRODUCT
From the beginning, the allure of China to Western businesses and traders has been its sheer size I. One of the points that the USTR mentions is lack of market access for US companies operating in China, while Chinese companies face much less restrictions operating in the US.
This is supported by remarks by Henry Paulson and Charlene Barshefsky. As Paulson remarked
Trade with China has hurt some American workers. And they have expressed their grievances at the ballot box.
So while many attribute this shift to the Trump Administration, I do not. What we are now seeing will likely endure for some time within the American policy establishment. China is viewed—by a growing consensus—not just as a strategic challenge to the United States but as a country whose rise has come at America’s expense. In this environment, it would be helpful if the US-China relationship had more advocates. That it does not reflects another failure:
In large part because China has been slow to open its economy since it joined the WTO, the American business community has turned from advocate to skeptic and even opponent of past US policies toward China. American business doesn’t want a tariff war but it does want a more aggressive approach from our government. How can it be that those who know China best, work there, do business there, make money there, and have advocated for productive relations in the past, are among those now arguing for more confrontation? The answer lies in the story of stalled competition policy, and the slow pace of opening, over nearly two decades. This has discouraged and fragmented the American business community. And it has reinforced the negative attitudinal shift among our political and expert classes. In short, even though many American businesses continue to prosper in China, a growing number of firms have given up hope that the playing field will ever be level. Some have accepted the Faustian bargain of maximizing today’s earnings per share while operating under restrictions that jeopardize their future competitiveness. But that doesn’t mean they’re happy about it. Nor does it mean they aren’t acutely aware of the risks — or thinking harder than ever before about how to diversify their risks away from, and beyond, China.
What is interesting about Paulson's speech is he spend only one sentence about displaced US workers, and a whole paragraph about US business operating in China. While Kissinger writes books about China, how much does he contribute to both Democrats and the Republicans during the election cycle? China is increasingly makING it more difficult for US companies operating and those exporting products to China.

CONTINUED

submitted by weilim to IntlScholars [link] [comments]

[ECON] 2022 People's Bank of China Statement

Press Conference with the Governor of the People's Bank of China 任中国人民银行行长 Yi Gang 易纲 on current monetary and regulatory matters in the People's Republic of China for the year 2022
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen
The People's Bank of China (PBOC) is gladdened to announce that the efforts made by the Bank to consolidate financial markets and reign in unproductive credit and the misappropriation in debt lending are seeing bountiful returns. For the 2022 year forecast, we are thus heartened to state that the economy has exponentially preformed to bring growth above 7 percent, beating negative analysis on efforts on the PBOC and government's meaningful reforms to address core structural issues that have threatened the Chinese and global economy.
While we have identified specific measures in relation to consumer demand and business growth, in conjunction with the improving regulatory framework, we foresee promising inflationary movement and are pleased to see an adaptive labour market take hold in overall trends for key benchmarks.
In regards to the current developments in the Banks's stimulus efforts, we shall maintain the current level of market guidance and capital assistance. While we continue this approach, we are constantly assessing the Mainland's capital markets liquidity and should concerns be spotted that identify general overheating, the PBOC is ready to address those concerns and enforce targeted measures.
Now, onto the main elements of the year's statement: the current status on the internationalisation of the Renminbi and policy responses to optimise a favourable environment as well as new guidelines on capital market
The following discussion shall be complimented with the following handout:

The Renminbi - The People's Currency, and Soon the World's?

The Continued Dollar Dominance
Chinese Efforts to Open Up the Renminbi - An Uneven Effort
Making The Cross Across the Riverbed Towards A More Global Renminbi
The PBOC has issued the following in its Guiding Measures to the Chinese Mainland and SAR financial markets:
This new rule will further buoy the offshore Renminbi (“Dim Sum”) bond market and accelerate the pace of Renminbi internationalisation.
submitted by Relativity_One to GlobalPowers [link] [comments]

Dive Bar Pub Crawl 2018 - Third Six

I'm doing a tribute to the 24 days of Christmas by going over the financial statements of 24 companies that are considered downrange, speculative, and just plain high risk.
The legal cannabis industry already has a ton of risk in it - but this stuff - is only for thrill seekers. All opinions are my own, and certainly not a recommendation for or against any of them, or to buy or sell.
I've limited myself to 45mins to each, and kept to most recent financial statements You'll likely know more about the company than me if you're following them. This is only my reactions with a brief commentary about what I see in their financial statements.
I haven't been consistent in following them all over the past year: some I have, others not.
The second one of this year.....is here
CMM - Canabo Medical Inc.
Scratched! Guess there’s another slot open for a Dive in this year’s Crawl! I did take a run at Aleafia’s financials a few weeks ago though. Their ‘merger’ with Emblem hadn’t yet been announced. Alefia ‘Just Said No’ to cultivation by the looks of it. Best choice for them, at least on the face of it.
ISOL - Isodiol International
Price Then: $11.50 Price Now: $1.71
Well then. International operations do attract cost (their G&A is bracing), as does business dev. Especially in Brazil. When a company with a net book value of $2.7MM costs $36MM (takes me back to Canopy buying 2 money losing greenhouses with a net book value of $6MM for $86MM at the time).
ISOL’s still shopping too. Round Mountain looks like ISOL tossed them a life preserver. One will have to trust mgmt as to quality/fit of underlying assets. I didn’t detail, it’s only a half million, they bought it for what looks like working capital, I assume it saved them from insolvency.
A pretty sweeping and broad horizon is presented by these statements - in a company looking internationally. They’ve got a clean professional presence (I’ve seen them at pretty much every trade show I’ve attended), yet, $12MM in op costs per quarter based on $8MM in sales for same….sheesh.
Margin relatively static as well. That needs to improve, and sales need to triple+ to support ops. They lost $6MM per quarter this year, sales modestly up Q over Q.
IMH - Invictus MD
Price Then: $1.40 Price Now: $0.81
Few things here. While I don’t get the warm and fuzzies from this (what the elves are taking these days apparently does give you that & they swear by it), it looks better than it did last year. I have concerns over sales, margins, and the assets in subs. Wrote one off this year. Only 9 months to find out it’s a mutt? Honestly, this company requires far (far) more time to get a handle on. Will do on website. Needs a full once over to be fair.
MDM - Marapharm Ventures (now: LIHT CANNABIS)
Price Then: $0.92 Price Now: $0.17
Sigh. Another that needs more time. Where is Quadron when you need them?
Nothing stand out - at least in terms of company differentiation or size. Boring. And leveraged. The Full Spectrum thingy hits their financials like landing an 8 ft fish in a 7 ft boat. I’d need to deconstruct that ‘asset’ to get any strong utility out of this. I’d really want to have a handle on it - and management - if I was to go anywhere near this outfit. Doesn’t look unfairly priced. Unless you ask the people who placed at $0.865, $0.70, and $0.50 during the year.
Ugliest thing I see is them issuing shares for $0.38 and $0.04 to retire debts, when the share price was $0.80 and $0.40 respectively. If I was one of those in the private placements, I’d be coming out of my shoes on that (Note 14). Even if it was only $40k. Speaks to quiet desperation at one point.
Whether there’s a viable business in here….tune in next time for another episode of ‘Dive Bar Pub Crawl’. As I see it….this would take far too much time for the level of interest I have in it. Unless Full Spectrum is a home run…..
ATT - Abattis Biocuetical Corp.
Price Then: $0.48 Price Now: $0.08
Man, what a difference a year makes. I’ve largely avoided looking over last years’ Crawl as reference, except to skim for major points. This one remains clear in my memory…it looked like a complete mutt then. Only thing they looked good at was producing press releases. They’re still kicking, as is the rate of news releases/month. They have begun paying a formal IR front end, so maybe this will slow down. Or perhaps speed up. Can’t tell. Ah well, latest fins I can find are somewhat old (Sept release. Amended too :( ). New ones should be due pretty quick.
Gonna stop there. I’ve got a stitch in my side, and a headache. If I ever get my hands on the mug who suggested this one….the elves heads are collectively a ‘bag of cats’, and the little buggers staged a walkout. They’re outside singing Woody Guthrie songs and burning pallets. This totally sucks. As does Abattis’ financials.
They offer low friction on tokens perhaps, but any cash put toward this thing will probably have the friction of a canvas bag re-entering the atmosphere. Poof. My personal choice for ‘Dive Bar of the Year’. Curiously, it’s not an easy title to take.
IN - Inmed Pharmacuetical
Price Then: $1.47 Price Now: $0.37
TGIF - Friday Night Inc.
Price Then: $1.20 Price Now: $0.37
I looked at these guys as recently as July. I also met up with them at MJBizCon in Vegas. I asked for a look at their facility….they never did get back to me. I won a laptop bag and some nice swag at the booth on a business card ‘draw’, it didn’t help getting a tour tho. I really wanted to see it…the financials got me curious in last year’s Crawl, and I strongly get the sense I’m missing something of note in them. Seems an incomplete story tbh. Maybe just some mild indigestion.
And….for a region notorious for $70 eights in top shelf, I was also curious why they were recording sub $5 revenue on grams. Got the annuals now….
There’s a reason price softening is lower in this one compared to others - at least they are in production & they have a product suite (at least in their booth at MJBizCon). No retail frontage (?) would explain the shitty sales price. I have somewhat of a soft spot for Canadian business, and I’d hope that relatively early movers would be seeing this start to ramp.
As my trip to the US revealed - the US is a hyper-competitive compartmentalized environment. I do believe vertical integration is requisite for a company with this breadth and spend.
Gonna sit in on the next call on these guys, and try and get a (the) story. Looks like false starts in build out, and challenges ramping. Sales are growing. They don’t look to be peddling a ’take me out’ story or stance…but….I have blind spots on this one.
Because of Abattis, the elves are now wearing balaclavas and carrying home-made gas masks. Told me they are going for a stroll. I gave the RCMP a heads up. Gotta keep up good community relations and all.
submitted by mollytime to TheCannalysts [link] [comments]

Hedging - Good, Bad, the Dirty

Communication is all about clarity. We communicate some piece of information, the recipient gets it. Straightforward on the face of it. Speaking about trading will typically be succinct, focused, and very clear when complete.
The ‘audience’ has as many expectations as the speaker though: one should know the context and purpose of the information they are getting to a specific discourse.
I occasionally drop into jargon or analogy. It’s a personal weakness: I assume the audience will have the appropriate context of the situation, and knowledge of the context. It’s also a habit. I was on a recorded line for a decade, and use as few a words as possible in a business situation.
My writing, not so much.
I’ve hesitated to talk much about trading, because of ‘it’. I’ve seen ‘it’ far too often…..’it’ being people using language and jargon of trading without really knowing what they are talking about.
A great example of this is around options. People can pick up the definitions, the verbiage, the ‘lingua franca’ as it were.
Problem is, they have no clue what they are talking about in the whole.
Sure, definitions are known and expounded upon. But the context/situation remains in the abstract to them. Or what they are talking about doesn’t sync with the nature and purpose of the exposure they are taking on. Like talking about that cool new skateboard you’re riding as you're sitting on a bicycle.
This isn’t conceit or hubris - it’s only what I’ve observed. Hence the backstory above.
Speaking with u/modo85 and u/TheJosh last week plugged me in again to professionals face to face, and a recent post about Constellation by a sub got me thinking about trade again. So….I’m going to tackle the most misunderstood word in trade: hedging.
I was taught in business school that a hedge is a ‘risk neutral activity’.
One can find definitions for hedging in many places, and for the most part, they’ll align. What won’t is the people using the term.
Dynegy, Enron, and other companies took on ‘hedging programs’ that were often positions of leverage. Even the word ‘hedge fund’ is a relative misnomer. Looking at some of the bomb craters left behind by a couple of them....they were either simply a ponzi or flavours of insider trading. They weren’t hedging, they were stealing.
So, what’s a hedge?
A risk neutral activity that reduces aggregate risk to a primary exposure.
A Canadian company buying a greenhouse from an American supplier in 4 easy payments over the next 2 years? Great. You’ll have to pay in USD, so, buy forwards in 6 month increments, pay CAD at the time they come due, your forex exposure is gone, and the total cost is known in advance.
The USD/CAD rate might move for or against you during that time.
But that’s the point of a hedge: replace risk with certainty.
A while ago, Westjet bought a strip of jet fuel futures, taking out physical price exposure for (a very long) 2 years. While not unheard of, it’s a pretty big move. If jet fuel prices tank, they get to eat the difference. As it happened, jet fuel prices soared, Westjet bought physical with cash and offset the futures gains against it. They enjoyed a 2 year window of serious operational cost advantage, and their share price accretion showed it.
Prescient....or lucky? That’s what business books are written about.
This example might have prompted you to think about another industry where energy is the single largest direct input cost behind headcount (hint: it's cannabis)
Constellation’s entry through the CGC buy is another example of a hedge to myself. Different nature and purpose, but a hedge nonetheless.
In my eyes, STZ sells booze. Weed will impact aggregate sales of booze, with potential to reduce it.
STZ’s buy into the industry is a hedge is to replace dislodged revenue from booze by dope: cannabis exposure will replace these lost revenues, keeping STZ whole.
A hedging program is part of a larger initiative, and plugged directly into the strategic course of the business. It has topline impact.
If you’ve noticed - the Westjet and STZ examples above are for far different underlying purposes - but they are both simply hedges.
Hedging for the retail investor might entail seeking exposure to different provinces, or different links of the value chain, or perhaps within wholesale or retail price exposures.
With hedging, you are seeking to reduce, not enhance, existing exposure.
The other takeaway is (and there is one in here): don’t use terminology and trade terms unless you know exactly what you are talking about, or what the underlying purpose of using it is. It doesn’t matter what someone notices or thinks: any professional can tell pretty quickly if someone knows what they are talking about.
What really matters is that you know what you are actually doing when you take on risk of loss to your capital.
submitted by mollytime to TheCannalysts [link] [comments]

Tips for avoiding card fees and banking charges when traveling abroad long-term [x-post from /r/travel]

I’m leaving on January 1 for open-ended travels, and I thought it might be useful to unpack how I am planning to use credit cards, debit cards and cash to minimize fees and currency-exchange costs.
First, though, I should point out that I’m from the US and using US-based cards, so all the research I’ve done is from that perspective. And my first several destinations will definitely be in Europe, so I assume I’ll be able to use a credit card at most of the places I’ll go.
On past trips, I mostly tried to spend cash everywhere. I have a Chase checking account, and at the beginning of each week I was abroad, I would take out cash for 7 days from a local ATM, for which Chase would charge a flat $5 plus a fee for converting the cash. Most months, this worked out to about $25 in charges, and I just sort of wrote that off as a necessary expense.
This time, I want to be smarter about both avoiding fees and security — I was tempting fate by using a debit card exclusively for all these years. Here is my plan:
The Cards I’m Bringing On My Trip
First, I’m following the advice of Marcello Arrambide at Wandering Trader and setting up two accounts with my bank, still Chase. One has a debit card attached to it, and the other doesn’t. That way, I can easily control the amount of cash my debit card has access to.
Second, I’ll bring a Chase Sapphire Preferred credit card, which is what I’ll use for all of my non-cash payments. That card has no fees for foreign transactions, and that’s the main reason I got it.
Here are a few other American credit cards with no foreign transaction fees, courtesy of Nomadic Matt:
There are many more such cards, and it appears most people who qualify for a credit card in the US can find a decent card to use abroad.
Tips for Using Credit Cards
Circle or check the amount in the local currency before you sign. If your receipt shows the total in dollars only, ask that it be rung up again in the local currency.
Ideally, you would be able to put most of your spending on your no-transaction-fee credit card and pay that off each month. That would be the cheapest way to spend money abroad — but far too many places are cash-only for that to work.
So, you’ll likely have to eat a charge for taking out money. The trick is to strike a balance between going to the ATM only sporadically and not carrying around fat wads of cash.
Getting Cash
/travel pointed me toward the Charles Schwab High Yield Investor Checking Account as the best way to save on ATM fees when traveling. The Schwab debit card charges no currency conversion fees when withdrawing cash from an overseas ATM, and it will give you a rebate for any foreign ATM transaction fees.
After the Schwab card, the cheapest options for using an ATM are if your card is from a bank that’s a part of the Global ATM Alliance, and you’re withdrawing from an ATM that’s part of that alliance. Keeping ATM withdraws within this network mostly eliminates foreign ATM charges, though there are some exceptions.
Again, protox88 has some helpful advice: Alliance members might still charge a forex spread (the cost of exchanging currencies) of 2.5% on your withdrawal.
When withdrawing cash, it’s best to use an ATM inside of a bank rather than one on the street. I’ve had my debit card data stolen a couple of times by opting for convenient ATMs at a metro station (usually during a night out).
Exchanging Currencies
Currencies and forex used to make my eyes glaze over. After a few years of dealing with this stuff, I’ve learned a few things:
EDIT
A couple of other notes left over from memory and research:
submitted by rockproper to personalfinance [link] [comments]

Worrying ICOs of Spot Option and IQ Option WARNING

Hi I am glad icocrypto exists because as a crypto trader and a big enthusiast I want to do my part to keep this space clean. I have been observing a worrying trend that I wanted to share my opinion on and alert fellow investors and traders on giving real hard facts that could save us all, collectively, a lot of money and emotional pain. There are some major fraudsters, conmen and scam artists that are soon looking to ICO and not 1 dollar of the crypto currency communities money should be given to them ESPECIALLY after the STOX ICO which later was exposed as a scam. Read here for those who missed it: https://www.reddit.com/Bancocomments/6o34fz/heads_up_for_those_who_intend_to_invest_in_the/
Around 9 months ago I lost a friend. He was around my age and also a consultant to one of my fledgeling businesses in the Quebec region. At first I thought it was some hoax or prank but he had mentioned to me about some personal problems he was going through during our working relationship. Little did I know the situation was far darker and serious than he had led on, otherwise I would have helped. I am talking about Fred Turbide who killed himself in his garage leaving behind a sad and bankrupt family. He was lied to and cheated out of his live savings by an Israeli binary options company called 23Traders. You can read the whole story here none of this is made up https://www.timesofisrael.com/fleeced-by-israeli-binary-options-firm-canadian-man-commits-suicide/
Based on my research 23Traders is a brand of Spot Option, an Israeli company that owns 70 percent of the binary option trading market. The founders of this company known as Pini Peter and Oren Shabat and some guy called Semi Vahap, have been indicted for fraud/money laundering and their subsidiary brands like Banc De Binary (one of the biggest binary option scams that was ejected from USA and shut down). You can read about this in their OWN WIKIPEDIA page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpotOption
For those who were taken in by the STOX ICO scam where they swindled around 30 million dollars from crypto investors, you will never see any return on that share again. STOX as the reddit thread i have posted above proves, is basically the same team of ANY OPTION another SPOT OPTION brokerage. ANY OPTION has scammed thousands of clients, been fined repeatedly and was "bought out" yeah right. They rebranded to invest.com and ICO'd a company that has no real traffic, lying about their figures.
Having dabbled in binary options before, I knew it was a fun way to trade where one could make a lot of money but after my broker IQ option (I will talk a little bit more about them later in this post because they are planning to ICO!) decided to lock me out and deny me my wins, that is where i knew I was dealing with a sinister set of people. To my dismay, since I hang out at Forex Peace Army which helps keeps traders like me alert for new scams, I found out that these Isreali binary scam brokers are now looking to ICO so they can pull off a giant scam only this time with THE PUBLIC'S MONEY!. https://www.financemagnates.com/fintech/news/exclusive-spotoption-announces-blockchain-based-trading-via-spotchain/
Spot Option is the first one that is looking to ICO and then I found out today that IQ Option, the company that stole my deposit and regularly stops traders from being awarded their RIGHTFUL gains and wins, is also looking to do an ICO. http://www.financemagnates.com/forex/brokers/iq-option-teases-upcoming-ico-limited-tokens/
Here is the truth about IQ Option: They pay hundreds of people including their employees to write good reviews including affiliates who write fake 5 star reviews. The truth however is very dark you can read it here http://brokerscamalert.com/iq-options-review/
and most importantly, Forex Peace Army which actively hunts down these bucket shops paints a very different reality. You will see in this post that there are hundreds of threads of customer complaints of outright denial of withdrawals, manipulation of price data and even threats issued by this company to clients: http://www.forexpeacearmy.com/community/search/6362854/?q=iqoption&o=relevance Only the problem is you don't find these reviews on page 1 or 2 of google so easily so many people get duped. If you know where to look, you can easily find them and the truth emerges.
Before Spot Option and IQ option type of brokers entered binary options actually it was fun and fair and regulated brokers existed but these firms completely destroyed everything by greed and praying upon the hope of the desperate. Do not fuel their intentions or fall prey to their lies. I have so much evidence if any one has questions I will post more.
Please DO NOT give these scammers any money, they have already swindled millions from poor people around the world and now want to use the "lack of information" in the crypto currency about what really went on in the binary options space to create scarcity value and try and hype up their scam. Please post here your responses. I am not promoting anything here I just don't want these leeches to steal any more money.
-danpirung
submitted by danpirrung to icocrypto [link] [comments]

Tips for avoiding card fees and banking charges when traveling abroad long-term

I’m leaving on January 1 for open-ended travels, and I thought some of you might find it helpful to see how I am planning to use credit cards, debit cards and cash to minimize fees and currency-exchange costs while abroad.
First, though, I should point out that I’m from the US and using US-based cards, so all the research I’ve done is from that perspective. And my first several destinations will definitely be in Europe, so I assume I’ll be able to use a credit card at most of the places I’ll go.
On past trips, I mostly tried to spend cash everywhere. I have a Chase checking account, and at the beginning of each week I was abroad, I would take out cash for 7 days from a local ATM, for which Chase would charge a flat $5 plus a fee for converting the cash. Most months, this worked out to about $25 in charges, and I just sort of wrote that off as a necessary expense.
This time, I want to be smarter about both avoiding fees and security — I was tempting fate by using a debit card exclusively for all these years. Here is my plan:
The Cards I’m Bringing On My Trip
First, I’m following the advice of Marcello Arrambide at Wandering Trader and setting up two accounts with my bank, still Chase. One has a debit card attached to it, and the other doesn’t. That way, I can easily control the amount of cash my debit card has access to.
Second, I’ll bring a Chase Sapphire Preferred credit card, which is what I’ll use for all of my non-cash payments. That card has no fees for foreign transactions, and that’s the main reason I got it.
Here are a few other American credit cards with no foreign transaction fees, courtesy of Nomadic Matt:
There are many more such cards, so just about anyone who qualifies for a credit card in the US can find a decent card to use abroad.
Tips for Using Credit Cards
Circle or check the amount in the local currency before you sign. If your receipt shows the total in dollars only, ask that it be rung up again in the local currency.
Ideally, you would be able to put most of your spending on your no-transaction-fee credit card and pay that off each month. That would be the cheapest way to spend money abroad — but far too many places are cash-only for that to work.
So, you’ll likely have to eat a charge for taking out money. The trick is to strike a balance between going to the ATM only sporadically and not carrying around fat wads of cash.
Getting Cash
No matter how you pay, you’ll lose a little bit of money on exchange rates. Credit cards tend to have the smallest spreads. After that are ATM withdrawals (and worst is exchanging cash at a currency exchange / bureau de change desk).
When withdrawing cash, it’s best to use an ATM inside of a bank rather than one on the street. I’ve had my debit card data stolen a couple of times by opting for convenient ATMs at a metro station (usually during a night out).
The cheapest options for using an ATM are if your card is from a bank that’s a part of the Global ATM Alliance, and you’re withdrawing from an ATM that’s part of that alliance. Keeping ATM withdraws within this network mostly eliminates foreign ATM charges, though there are some exceptions.
Again, protox88 has some helpful advice: Alliance members might still charge a forex spread (the cost of exchanging currencies) of 2.5% on your withdrawal.
No matter what, you’ll likely get charged something for taking cash out of an ATM because it costs banks money to exchange currencies.
Open a Schwab checking account and you'll have no fees at any ATM worldwide.
Exchanging Currencies
Currencies and forex are a huge topic, and one that used to make my eyes glaze over. After a few years of dealing with this stuff, I’ve learned a few things:
submitted by rockproper to travel [link] [comments]

Sidebar Navigation (Expanded form)

Welcome to /CanadianInvestor!
This is the expanded version of the sidebar to further explain some of the features of these links
>Resources - Standard websites used for investment products besides Mutual Funds
>Reddit
/Personalfinancecanada
American investing subreddits
/Investing, /Wallstreetbets, /Stocks, /Stockmarket
>ETF's - Exchange Traded Funds (Wiki)
TSX ETF List - All Canadian ETF's listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange (Wiki)
>News
>Commodities NYMEX/COMEX - CME Group - commodity live feed of futures
>Analyst Opinions - Educated guesses or factual information
>Forums
>Definitions Finance - Common Terms - This has every term you need to know about finance
>Couch Potato Beginner Fundamental Index Investing - the go to strategy for setting up a starting portfolio to gain the average market performance
>DRIP Dividend Reinvestment Explained - dripprimer.ca which explains dividend investing. whole shares are only able to be reinvested unless you are enrolled privately through a company agreement to have partial shares reinvested
>Risk in Stocks Understanding your risk - common question in market exposure is sometimes how exposed do you want to be and what is comfortable for your situation. your tolerance level. www.getsmarteraboutmoney.ca has other investment ideas for planning purposes
>TFSA Info Canada Revenue Agency - common Q/A on TFSA's answered which should provide the information you need on withdrawing and contribution limits
>Foreign Tax Withholding Tax - US listed companies or investment products (etfs) are subject to withholding tax unless they are held in an RRSP. this explains foreign withholding tax and what it means for your investments.
>SEDAR Legal Financial Statements submitted mandatory by companies
submitted by vekula to CanadianInvestor [link] [comments]

Concrete problem : I need help from a statistician/actuary/someone who owns at covariance and correlation calculations

Hi reddit, I am a long time reader and I know your power.
first and foremost, I am aware of the fury you unleash at people incult to your writing rules so please forgive any syntax errors or bad grammar from my posts, since english is not my primary language (I am a canadian frenchie).
I am currently working on a pet project in the domain of finance that is becoming quite big. Briefly, I am devising an automated method to make money out of the forex market, based on statistical analysis.
I am reasonably successful as of now, and in order to optimize my method even more, I realize that I need the help of someone who masters statistics even better than me. Being a programmer myself, I am quite litterate in it, but I am far from a PhD in probability theory.
There could be a lot to talk about, but here is the basics of what I am looking for : I want to optimize my expected return/risk, something along the lines of the Capital asset pricing model.
I have a system that trades different currency pairs (e.g.: USDCAD, EURGBP, etc.) from monday to thursday, every week. For now it is always trading evenly. The same position size are opened for every trade, always. What I would like to achieve may resemble Asset Allocation, but applied to the ensemble of trades that are opened (which are in fact random variables) instead of to the traditional assets used (stocks, bonds, etc.).
I would achieve such an optimization by adjusting the position taken (representing a weight, or % of equity risked) for each currency pair traded for each weekday.
The positions taken can be adjusted depending on many factors I think, especially like the correlation between each and every currency pair traded. I guess some sort of correlation analysis, or using a covariance matrix or something would be the way to go but I am not even sure myself. This is where I am starting to get lost.
But the goal I want to achieve is to optimize the positions taken (risk) by adjusting how big of a position will be taken for each trade, every day.
Enough talking, any questions and ideas so far? Don't hesitate to PM me if you would really be interested by this project and are highly skilled in statistics and probabilty theory.
submitted by MarkowitzJr to math [link] [comments]

Canadian dollar (CAD) The Atlantis Report - YouTube What Does Forex Brokers Canada - the Best for Canadian ... The history of Canada explained in 10 minutes - YouTube What Does Canadian Forex Brokers - Trade With Canadian ...

canadianforex.ca receives about 790 unique visitors per day, and it is ranked 586,677 in the world. canadianforex.ca uses n/a web technologies and links to network IP address 27.121.104.10. Find more data about canadianforex. History [edit edit source]. Canadian Military 1942. Shortly following unification, the service-specific uniforms (navy blue, khaki, and light blue) were abandoned in favour of the Canadian Forces rifle green, single-breasted, four-button tunic and pants, with beret or service cap uniform, commonly referred to as "CFs" or "CF greens". Though accommodation was made for army regiments ... (military) the armed forces of Canada ... Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary Best Canadian Forex Brokers for 2020. To find the best forex brokers in Canada, we created a list of all IIROC authorised firms, then ranked brokers by their Trust Score. Here is our list of the top Canadian forex brokers. CMC Markets - Best web platform, most currency pairs; Interactive Brokers - Best for professionals; FOREX.com - Great ... Canadian Heraldic Authority / Canadian Armed Forces Directorate of History and Heritage: Permission (Reusing this file) Trademark protection under Trademark #0920013 created November 10th, 2009. This is a "Prohibited Mark" under subparagraph 9(1)(n)(i) of the Trademark Act, being that "No person shall adopt in connection with a business, as a trade-mark or otherwise, any mark consisting of, or ... Canadian Forces Base Goose Bay. A Canadian Forces Base or CFB (French Base des forces canadiennes or BFC) is a military installation of the Canadian Forces.For a facility to qualify as a Canadian Forces Base, it must station one or more major units (e.g., army regiments, navy ships, air force wings). Français : Les Forces canadiennes (FC) (Canadian Forces en anglais) sont l'organisation militaire responsable de la défense du Canada et de ses intérêts. Les FC composent la majeure partie du ministère de la Défense nationale (MDN) dont le quartier général (QG) est situé à Ottawa en Ontario.Le principal mandat des FC est la protection du Canada et la défense de sa souveraineté.

[index] [24283] [23014] [1416] [15943] [456] [22300] [8534] [27307] [13484] [6037]

Canadian dollar (CAD)

The history of Canada explained in 10 minutesSupport new videos on this channel on Patreon! :)https://www.patreon.com/Epimetheus1776Canadian history from the di... CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFO: https://rebrand.ly/forex33 And start earning in the Forex Market Now! In our growing multinational business environment, there are ... CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFO: https://rebrand.ly/forex33 And start earning in the Forex Market Now! In our growing international business setting, there are busi... FOREX.com is a global leader in forex and CFD trading for individuals worldwide. FOREX.com is a division of GAIN Capital Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: GCAP), a globa... The Atlantis Report is The Best Financial Report on Youtube , bar none . It brings you high quality financial economic and geopolitical analysis on a daily b... CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFO: https://rebrand.ly/forex33 And start earning in the Forex Market Now! In our expanding international corporate atmosphere, there ar... #739 - Canadian dollar (CAD) Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Geografie-28-623380997852178/?ref=aymt_homepage_panel My channel: https://www.youtube.com/cha...

http://binary-optiontrade.dateros.gq