Big banks—mega-banks—arguably deserve a large portion of the blame for the 2008 financial crash. Their risky behavior put the entire global economy in jeopardy, requiring a massive bailout and years of ongoing stimulus to attempt to set things right. But despite the vows of “never again” from those in positions of political and economic power, banks today are even fewer and even bigger than they were in 2008.
Blogs on How to Invest, Gold & Silver, and Economics 101
Nov 29 2013
Gold jewelry is not generally considered an appropriate investment mainstay, due to the fact that the buyer typically pays a high premium over the price of the gold for the workmanship that goes into transforming gold into jewelry, and because the quality of the gold in jewelry varies widely from piece to piece.
Of course, there are exceptions to every rule: if one were able to purchase gold jewelry at near the spot of the gold it contained, and if the quality of the gold it contained were guaranteed, then the value of gold jewelry as an investment would be sound. Fortunately, that type of gold jewelry investment product is now available. Even more serendipitously, the fashion world has recently embraced the chunky gold chain as the “now” jewelry statement.
Nov 22 2013
The ink was still wet on U.S. President Barack Obama’s signature signing the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act into law in July 2010 when the wrangling began over how and how much to clamp down on trading by federally insured banks. Even though the financial reform act was passed, the devil is in the details of how regulators will actually implement it.
Oct 25 2013
In a truth-stranger-than-fiction item, the lower house of the French legislature earlier this month passed a bill that would make it illegal for a company to close as long “as long as it is remotely profitable,” according to a recent post by foreign exchange analyst and writer Martin Armstrong.
Even before the Socialist government of President France Hollande gained the majority in France, the country has operated under a strictly enforced and draconian labor code. Slow-downs, layoffs and plant closings generated by changes in industries and ebbs and flows of the business cycle have long precipitated worker demonstrations and protests in France. Prior to Hollande’s election, in a 2012 article, Why France Has So Many 49-Employee Companies, BusinessWeek discussed the common practice among French entrepreneurs to launch a series of smaller companies rather than adding the 50th employee, thus triggering the French labor code:
Oct 19 2013
Germany is not the only Eurozone nation where a sovereign constitutional court has thrown a hitch in the grand scheme of preserving a single European currency. Portugal has spent the year on a roller coaster of rosy optimism and dashed hopes. Despite promising 3rd quarter numbers, its long-term prospects for economic viability continue to be hampered by a socialist culture,
In 2011 Portugal’s fragile coalition government signed on to an austerity program aimed at lowering its budget deficit to a required percentage of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP). In exchange it received a 78-billion-euro bailout targeted to end in 2014, subject to periodic review by the so-called “Troika” of the International Monetary Fund, European Commission and the European Central Bank (ECB) to ensure Portugal is on track to meet its targets. Until recently, despite three years of recession and unemployment pushing 18%, Portugal had seemed to be managing its austerity plan and had planned to re-enter the debt market soon with a new 10-year bond.
Oct 08 2013
Michael Boldin of The Tenth Amendment Center writes:
On nullification, Mark Levin, the great one, seems to be auditioning for a job at MSNBC, or maybe Esquire Magazine.
Yesterday, he used some of their leading talking points to attack nullification. Some of their most hysterical ones, that is.
I’ll share more in a moment.
First Mark spent a little time educating you on how nullification is unconstitutional, and how James Madison was supposedly opposed to the idea of states resisting federal acts.
Certainly that flies in the face of what Madison had to say as far back as Federalist #46, where he called upon states to take 4 specific actions to resist not just unconstitutional federal acts, but also what he referred to as “warrantable” but “unpopular” federal acts.
Read about those 4 steps here.