|
Here's an interesting thought for the AI discussion.
If someday artificial intelligence is smart enough to replace doctors, lawyers, engineers, scientists--virtually every form of employment and every job on the planet. What happens to job markets? Does society and civilization experience some massive shift where people no longer work? If we no longer work, how do we support ourselves?
Already we see pushes for self driving buses, robotic submarines armed with nuclear missiles, drone aircraft. Perhaps the prime motive for developing better AI comes not from benefits to humanity but rather a desire to eliminate human workers and replace them with robots? Wouldn't that be an interesting twist?
Of course, given Elon Musk and Tesla's recent struggles with attempting to replace human workers with automation in car factories, which appears to be resulting in failure. Factor in recent failures with self driving car technology. Perhaps that goal is further away than it is to being fully realized.
|
|
|
|
The yield curve will invert, leading to a shrinking of the money supply, and a recession later this year, Michael Pento of Pento Portfolio Strategy tells Silver Doctors. The most lolworthy outcome here is if our fiat money supply does shrink as some are predicting. Then the diminishing money supply is negated by an expansion of crypto altcoins and token based ICOs which prevent our economy from crashing. Behold the benefits of currency decentralization! Then as eyes are opened to the long term value, reliability and stability which bitcoin offers, we see a huge increase in demand which fuels btc's rise to a price greater than $50k. Incidentally, there is a page referencing words said by Ben Bernanke posted on the federal reserve's website where Bernanke admits the federal reserve played a crucial role in causing the Great Depression by shrinking the money supply: https://www.federalreservehistory.org/essays/great_depressionIs it feasible that we'll see history repeat itself in such a painful, preventable and obvious way? |
|
|
|
So, the question is really about adoption. How do we expect cryptocurrencies to be adopted as valid payment methods when everyone is really using them as investment stocks? Will we only see proper adoption once the current greed and "quick buck" mentality subsides? The price of bitcoin has a seasonal tendency to peak at the end of each year during black friday on expanded transactional volume and higher demand when peak christmas shopping is occurring. This suggests that not only does bitcoin (and other crypto currencies) function as a store of value, it also has a secondary role as a true currency which people utilize to get their christmas shopping done. The concept of bitcoin needing to utilize a heavy volume transactional model where people use it constantly for anything and everything never had any real evidence to support it, in my opinion. It is often faster, more efficient and cheaper in network fees for people to utilize altcoins for a transaction heavy role. Bitcoin can be relegated to a role which emphasizes store-of-value and let altcoins be utilized for coffee buying and whatever other buying/selling is necessary. That arrangement makes sense. It appears to be a natural progression we may see in the future. |
|
|
|
|
I still think AI is vastly overrated. There haven't been many software based breakthroughs or advancements in the past 50 years. The gains we've witnessed from the AI industry are primarily produced by advances in hardware(faster clock cycles, greater processor parallelism, improved branch prediction, being able to fit more transistors on a die). Many successes falsely attributed to AI are brute force mechanisms which calculate every possible move on a chess board. It is arguable that these types of brute force programs are not intelligent. They have no more brain power than an app which tries every possible combination of alphanumeric characters to brute force a password.
What makes things complicated is we still don't understand how specifics regarding how human consciousness functions. There are still many unknowns and so we can't model AI software after true human consciousness although there are many AI applications which benefit from advances made in biomimicry and other fields which attempt to emulate organic processes in silicon.
|
|
|
|
Goldman will poll their userbase to gauge how much interest there is in crypto. Then they'll calculate how much potential money bitcoin support could make them and make a decision as to whether its something they will pursue. I think goldman sachs and other banks can be summarized in this way: "if they don't do it, someone else will." Banks stand to lose a lot of money if they aren't involved with the hottest and newest thing in finance: bitcoin and crypto currencies. If banks don't offer support for crypto those who do offer support will gain a lot of ground and establish themselves in a way which could make them strong competitors to banks in the future. Goldman sachs bought Poloniex crypto exchange for $400 million earlier this year through Circle Internet Financial which GS has a controlling interest in. Banks are taking steps to buy a slice of interest in bitcoin and crypto. The logical move for them to make. |
|
|
|
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. has opened a probe into alleged coordination by AT&T Inc, Verizon Communications and a telecommunications standards organization to hinder consumers from easily switching wireless carriers, a person briefed on the matter said on Friday. Verizon and AT&T acknowledged the government probe and said they were working with regulators. At issue is a technology that could make carriers’ business more volatile. Called eSIM, it allows consumers to switch wireless providers without having to insert a new physical SIM card, an identifying microchip. That makes it easier to compare wireless networks and easily select a new service when desired. Verizon called the probe “much ado about nothing,” adding that it has been working with the Justice Department for several months “regarding the inquiry,” according to spokesman Rich Young. The New York Times reported on Friday that the Justice Department had opened an investigation about five months ago after at least one device maker and one wireless carrier filed formal complaints with the Justice Department. The Justice Department sent demands to AT&T, Verizon and the GSMA, an industry standards-setting group, on efforts to thwart eSIM. Apple Inc and other equipment makers have complained to the Justice Department about wireless carrier practices related to eSIM technology, two sources familiar with the matter said. Apple declined to comment. “The reality is that we have a difference of opinion with a couple of phone equipment manufacturers regarding the development of e-SIM standards. Nothing more,” Verizon’s Young said. An AT&T spokesman said in an email: “Along with other GSMA members, we have provided information to the government in response to their requests and will continue to work proactively within GSMA, including with those who might disagree with the proposed standards.” News of the probe comes at a critical time for AT&T which is being sued by the Justice Department to stop its deal to buy media company Time Warner Inc. The U.S. government has argued in a trial that is nearing completion that the proposed deal would spur AT&T to charge its pay TV rivals more for Time Warner content. However, Judge Richard Leon, who will decide if AT&T will be allowed to buy Time Warner, is unlikely to consider a report of potential wrongdoing by the wireless giant because it is irrelevant to the merger trial under way in Washington, said Seth Bloom, a veteran of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division. The Department of Justice and the GSMA, the telecommunications standard setting group, declined to comment on news of the investigation. The person briefed on the matter told Reuters that other wireless operators potentially received inquiries from the government. It is common practice for the Justice Department to send CIDs, the civil equivalent of a subpoena, to all major players in the industry because the agency wants evidence from companies that allegedly participate in any conspiracy as well as those outside of it, according to Ethan Glass, a former trial attorney with the Justice Department now at the law firm Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP. The source said the Obama administration had investigated similar claims in 2016 but did not take any action.
Consumer advocates learned in February that Verizon was apparently planning to lock phones as an anti-theft measure, and later were told by industry participants that Verizon was working with AT&T in hopes of convincing the GSMA to create a standard for locking the phones, according to Harold Feld, a senior vice president at Public Knowledge.
Consumer advocates support the idea of an electronic SIM card, which is in the process of being rolled out, since it allows phone owners to bargain hunt and contract with any network or to shift networks easily while traveling, said Feld.
“I am very happy that the DOJ is taking its job as a cop on the beat very seriously,” said Feld.https://www.reuters.com/article/us-doj-at-t/u-s-said-to-investigate-att-verizon-over-wireless-collusion-claim-source-idUSKBN1HR2Z8.... This may not seem like relevent news but there could be some interesting tie ins to other topics like healthcare and AT&T attempting to buyout Time Warner and also a substantial shift in policy brought about by Trump taking office. What we have here are allegations of telecoms like verizon and AT&T attempting to create barriers which prevent customers from switching providers. This could draw parallels to the united states healthcare industry where healthcare providers have influenced lawmakers into creating barriers which prevent consumers from shopping for healthcare out of state, essentially creating a network of healthcare monopolies which exist on a state by state basis. Market centralization in order to prop up monopolies is an ongoing theme for many markets and industries worldwide. Here we could have a real world example of telecoms attempting to centralized cellphone markets by preventing consumers from switching providers which could over the long term give them a system of monopolies similar to what we experience today with healthcare and its extremely high costs. |
|
|
|
|
Bumping this.
I know there are many "why do people dislike bank" posts on this forum.
There are also many "credit provided by banks drive industry wide innovation and progress" posts here. This OP serves as a different perspective on things. It may also represent a departure from a financial and economic policy where banks receive relatively minor penalties for exploiting consumers. This could be brought on by shifts in policy brought on by the inception of Trump's Administration. Then again, last year the EU tried to fine google $2.7 billion in an anti trust suit. Perhaps there are other circumstances contributing towards larger fines being imposed on banks and corporations?
Should also be mentioned some of the nefarious activities Wells Fargo is guilty of mentioned in the article could be common practices in many banks who have been found guilty of utilizing many similar exploitive methods to boost their profit margins in the past.
|
|
|
|
|
Edson Barboza took one of the most brutal beatings I've ever seen anyone take in the cage. Hope he's ok. Kevin Lee easily took Barboza down in rounds 1 and 2 and did nothing but punch Barboza in the face for the entire 5 minutes. It was ugly.
7/12 of my picks were accurate. Couldn't should've done better. For some strange reason I forgot that Kevin Lee had a staph infection when he fought Tony Ferguson which probably didn't have the best effect on his cardio. And I forgot Edson Barboza didn't defend many of Khabib's takedowns properly and was unlikely to be able to stop Kevin Lee from taking him down.
David Branch's KO of Thiago Santos was bizarre. He barely touched him. Didn't look like a KO shot at all. Kind of a strange night for MMA with how the Ricky Simon fight went too.
|
|
|
|
Last September’s official restrictions have unleashed a wave of below-the-radar innovation.At 11 p.m. on September 4 last year, Chuan Zhang logged into his account on Huobi.com, a popular Chinese cryptocurrency trading website, and sold every bitcoin he had. He lost about 400,000 yuan ($63,000), but he had little choice. Earlier that day the Chinese government had issued a seeming death blow to the country’s burgeoning cryptocurrency scene. Although it didn’t outlaw virtual coins or the mining of them, it did ban initial coin offerings (ICOs) and trading on domestic cryptocurrency exchanges, rendering many people’s holdings effectively worthless. The cryptocurrency sell-off that day was so massive that it took four days for money from Zhang’s Bitcoin sales to show up in his bank account, something that usually takes half an hour or so. (That he was able to sell at all was thanks only to a delay between the government’s declaration of the ban and its shutdown orders to the exchanges.) At their peak, during the last two months of 2016, transactions in Chinese yuan accounted for more than 90 percent of global Bitcoin trading volume, according to Morgan Stanley. A month after the crackdown, in October 2017, that figure was down to less than 10 percent. The authorities have since tightened things further, closing loopholes that allowed investors to trade cryptocurrencies on overseas websites. In January, the central bank proposed limiting supplies of power to China’s bitcoin-mining industry, which currently accounts for two-thirds of the world’s processing power devoted to such activity, most of it in sparsely populated areas with abundant surplus electricity. Local authorities are enforcing the restrictions haphazardly. Yet cryptocurrency is far from dead in China. In fact, the restrictive measures may have inadvertently triggered a wave of innovation that targets some of the problems faced by cryptocurrencies everywhere, not just in China. New kinds of exchange Cryptocurrency exchanges handle trades from one digital currency to another, as well as trades between digital coins and ordinary fiat currencies. But whereas cryptocurrencies are (at least in theory) decentralized and under no one organization’s control, exchanges are typically run by a single company, just like ordinary stock exchanges. This is one of cryptocurrencies’ biggest weak points. Indeed, it creates a raft of potential problems. The exchanges are prime targets for hackers because, like banks, they hold investors’ assets. Insider deals are hard to prevent. And there are hundreds of separate exchanges around the world, making for a fragmented and inefficient financial system: the account holders on one exchange often don’t have quick access to better deals on others. That was why Daniel Wang, who used to run a centralized exchange in Shanghai, founded a project called Loopring. It’s an open-source software platform that anyone can use to build a decentralized exchange—a marketplace for cryptocurrency transactions that doesn’t hold investors’ assets. Instead, all assets and transactions are recorded on a public blockchain, much like the blockchains that underlie cryptocurrencies themselves. That prevents insider trading, because anyone can view transactions on the blockchain. Smart contracts on the blockchain regulate the way orders are matched. Once there is a match, the parties transfer currency to each other electronically. China’s crackdown should have killed Loopring in its cradle. Wang, who came up with the kernel of the idea in 2016, had just finished raising money for it in an ICO three weeks before the government banned ICOs and demanded that money they had raised be returned. But Wang enjoyed such support from his investors that he was able to keep part of their investment and continue the project. Loopring’s own decentralized exchange is now hosted on Amazon Web Services, and it was set to start offering trading services in April, after this story went to press. But since Loopring is also open-source software that anyone can use to set up an exchange, it is relatively resilient against restrictions in any one country. Wang, who spends a lot of time in New York these days trying to get Loopring established in the US crypto community, says that if trading digital assets on a blockchain becomes a widespread practice, it will be harder for a country such as China to block it. “Shutting it out will reduce [a country’s] international competitiveness,” he says. From “air tokens” to serious sales China’s September crackdown also included a ban on ICOs, the crowdfunding schemes based on crypto-tokens. In China as elsewhere, these had acquired a shady reputation. Companies looking to raise funds quickly were selling digital tokens or “coins” that were supposed to buy access to some product or service in the future, but they often had no way to fulfill these promises. A Chinese term emerged: kongqibi, or “air token.” The ICO ban suppressed this digital crowdfunding, but it didn’t address the root of the problem. Illegal fund-raising of all kinds has thrived in China because the formal banking sector still favors large corporations and state-owned enterprises. Smaller firms and entrepreneurs rely on a shadow banking sector to meet their needs for financing. But though using token sales to raise funds is now illegal, merely issuing a digital token isn’t explicitly prohibited. Despite the ICO ban, therefore, a few people are forging ahead with token experiments. One company at the forefront of this is Beijing-based Spectra Ventures, founded about a month after the crackdown in September. The founders, Iris Zhang and Aaron Chen, have worked in investment banking and China’s cryptocurrency community. Using their experience to evaluate both companies that want to issue tokens and the buyers of those tokens, they advise the companies on how to price the tokens, how many to issue, and how to get listed on cryptocurrency exchanges. To get around the restrictions on token sales, Spectra doesn’t engage in crowdfunding from Chinese retail investors but only from established digital-currency funds registered overseas. It’s common for a project to raise 10,000 to 40,000 ether (Ethereum’s cryptocurrency) within a week, says Iris Zhang. At the exchange rate in early April, that was worth about $4 million to $16 million. Projects that have sold tokens through Spectra Ventures include an app for soccer fans and an instant-messaging app that allows users to transfer cryptocurrencies to each other. These activities may appear to go directly against the Chinese government’s orders. But in a sense, they may be what Chinese officials wanted to see. In their September edict, the authorities talked about “avoiding market chaos, strengthening the education of investors, and collectively safeguarding the normal financial order.” But China doesn’t have a fundamental aversion to digital currencies; in fact, the central bank is developing its own fiat digital currency. “A digital currency will bring about a new financial ecosystem,” says Shenglin Ben, dean of the Academy of Internet Finance at Zhejiang University. The purpose of the crackdown, he says, was to curb excessive speculation and give the authorities time to upgrade their regulatory capabilities. Some of the centralized cryptocurrency exchanges that China banned last year still exist—they have simply set up servers abroad—and up until mid-March their websites were accessible in China. Since then they have been blocked, though Chinese users can still access them via virtual private networks. The one used by Chuan Zhang and his investor friends, Huobi.com, is among them. After the panic sell-off last year, Zhang and his friends reinvested whatever savings they had left in cryptocurrencies again. This time, they do not plan to sell. Before the September ban, they had seen cryptocurrency as a way to prop up their fragile financial well-being. Now it has become a faith. “It’s something that cannot be suppressed,” says Long Zhang, 30, a close friend of Chuan Zhang’s. “It will definitely be worth a lot in the future.” https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610808/chinese-entrepreneurs-have-some-creative-responses-to-the-governments-crackdown-on-crypto/ .... This piece is about china's crackdown on crypto. How chinese are finding ways around restrictions or how paradigm shifts in the status quo are contributing towards crypto still being viable and utilized in china despite restrictions imposed by regulation. The open source project "loopring" which allows virtually anyone to setup a crypto exchange is mentioned as emerging technology which could help address this. A Beijing based firm called "Spectra Ventures" is mentioned as partially cirvumventing china's ICO ban by only dealing with business overseas. I'm 100% clueless as to how effective or ineffective either of things may be but it is nice to hear some optimism and positivity out of china which according to the media harbors a strict anti-crypto stance of late. |
|
|
|
I really believe that Bitcoin will make the same effect to banks that youtube did to television ( at least). Many banks are rolling out new *features* to make them more competitive with bitcoin and crypto. Faster transactions, lower fees, better service. Of course in developing nations there are still many banks who refuse to lower fees or implement new measures which make them more competitive. In those cases, they illegalize bitcoin and attempt to repress the technology similar to how oil companies repressed nickel metal hydride batteries to prevent electric cars from being viable in earlier eras. The big question here could be what happens to banks if either the dollar or euro crash under the collective burden of trillions in debt. A significant portion of bank holdings must be denominated in fiat which could make them vulnerable to a massive crash if things go south for the mad printing presses creating ever increasing amounts of paper out of thin air. I think bitcoin and crypto could be insulated from a crash. Banks may not be so lucky. |
|
|
|
Indeed, we shouldn't exclude from consideration the cases when a government is made up of criminals who just use their power (this is to the question of the value of power) to steal the nation's wealth. I love what Ronald Reagan said on this.  Politics are structured in a way which rewards politicians for selling out their own values and beliefs in favor of special interests who provide campaign funding and other monetary incentives. No matter which nation on earth we're discussing, its extremely common for the most successful politicians to be the ones willing to sellout the most and whore out themselves for anyone with money and an agenda. Its a race to the bottom and opposite of free markets, competition in politics breeds failure for everyone rather than positive rewards. What may be needed is some form of restructuring. Removing the degree to which special interests are able to influence politicians with lobbyist incentives, greater safeguards and accountability. We've seen the trend be strongly in the opposite direction of the last x number of decades. The quality of legislation has greatly suffered as a result as we've seen standard of living, education, wages and other metrics fall substantially in recent times. |
|
|
|
The article: JPMorgan Chase has partnered with National Bank of Canada and other major firms to trial a blockchain platform aimed to improve the debt issuance process. As reported by Reuters, the investment bank said in a statement Friday that the trial, which took place on Wednesday, mirrored a $150 million offering the same day by the the National Bank of Canada of a one-year floating-rate Yankee certificate of deposit. The trial also saw participation from Goldman Sachs Asset Management, Pfizer, Legg Mason Inc's Western Asset and others. David Furlong, senior vice president of blockchain at National Bank of Canada, said in a statement that blockchain technology "has the potential to bring about major change in the financial services industry." Based on JPMorgan's Quorum blockchain, the debt-issuance platform took over an year to build, according to the report. As reported by CoinDesk in March, the bank is currently mulling spinning off the Quorum project as an independent company. A spokesperson for the bank declined to comment on what they called "speculation" at the time, but said that "Quorum has become an extremely successful enterprise platform even beyond financial services and we're excited about its potential." However, Umar Farooq, head of blockchain initiatives for JPMorgan's corporate and investment arm, confirmed the move to Reuters in today's report, saying that discussions are in the early stages and the bank has had interest from financial institutions in the project. The open-source Quorum blockchain was launched in 2016 as a permissioned version of ethereum. In October 2017, it notably integrated the zero-knowledge security layer (ZSL) from privacy-focused public blockchain zcash. The technology obscures all identifiable information about a transaction but still provides the ability to audit those transactions. https://www.coindesk.com/jpmorgan-trial-puts-debt-issuance-on-a-blockchain/.... JP Morgan operates the united states food stamp welfare program and profits billions of dollars from it. There is potential for this technology to be utilized in conjunction with welfare programs as we've seen the UN, IMF, World Bank, etcetera attempt to sponsor biometric electronic welfare programs for africans and others. That could be one route they would pursue if this technology were implemented. This last line is a contradiction and untrue: The technology obscures all identifiable information about a transaction but still provides the ability to audit those transactions. I would guess there is some meta data the ledger screens on an application level but it doesn't 100% wipe all relevent data. Even if it did a lot of the relevent data could be logged and recorded in other ways which would allow law enforcement or state surveillance to recompile it if necessary. I think that is more a marketing gimmick than something which reflects reality. The concept of true anonymous transactions is not likely something we will ever see implemented in blockchain. |
|
|
|
Here are the weigh ins for the event. I ended up not making any bets. Lol. No confidence on my decision making in making picks. I already bet what's left in my Nitrogen account on the Stoke vs Burnley match. Lol. UFC Fight Night Atlantic City: Weigh Inhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBOOznjrlpMGood luck. Hope you win the internets! I'll probably wait till the last minute to decide whether or not to drop a few plays depending on how things are going for the night. ^ Swanson at 3.00 (at Nitrogen, last time I saw) is looking good imo. I think Edgar is in too much of a hurry to get back competing again. That could be bad... I don't think he's in the right mindset after getting KO'd by Ortega.
Frankie Edgar is rushing back to the octagon and i am not sure what his conditioning is but i think he is super confident that he could take down Swanson like he did in his first fight and win this fight easily. - Kevin Lee missed weight and i would like to see Barboza wheel kick the lights out of Kevin Lee as he is talking too much as he said he is going to work Barboza and finish him in the first round.
- I am interested in Magomed Bibulatov and i like taking a chance with David Branch too as he is a good striker and he is under rated.
- This is the last fight for Leslie Smith in the UFC as they are releasing her for her efforts of planning to create a fighters union.
Hate to be the bearer of bad news but Bibulatov wasn't medically cleared to fight and his fight was pulled. Leslie Smith's opponent showed up 1.8 pounds overweight and she declined to take the fight @ catchweight. I think the UFC paid Leslie Smith her show and win money and cut her from the roster. I'm not certain about Frankie Edgar vs Cub Swanson. I think if Frankie doesn't get the fight to the ground he will probably lose. Being KO'ed about a month ago doesn't help his chances. Frankie might have been better off giving his brain time to fully recover before stepping back into the cage. This type of quick turnaround is the type of thing which can contribute towards greater statistical probability of developing head trauma although in Frankie's case he doesn't cut much if any weight. That's one advantage he has in that he's not dehydrating himself which also contributes towards sustaining greater injury from concussions. |
|
|
|
After Venezuela, Germany, Austria and the Netherlands prudently repatriated a substantial portion (if not all) of their physical gold held at the NY Fed or other western central banks in recent years, this morning Turkey also announced that it has decided to repatriate all its gold stored in the US Federal Reserve and deliver it to the Istanbul Stock Exchange, according to reports in Turkey's Yeni Safak. It won't be the first time Turkey has asked the NY Fed to ship the country's gold back: in recent years, Turkey repatriated 220 tons of gold from abroad, of which 28.7 tons was brought back from the US last year. According to the latest IMF data, Turkey’s gold reserves are estimated at 591 tons, worth just over $23 billion. This makes Ankara the 11th largest gold holder, behind the Netherlands and ahead of India.  Image link: https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/turkey%20gold%20holdings.jpgTurkey's gold repatriation come at a sensitive time for Turkey's currency, the lira, which has been pounded, and plunged to all time lows against both the dollar and the euro despite runaway, double-digit inflation in Turkey, as the central bank is seemingly afraid of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and refuses to raise rates. Meanwhile, Erdogan has taken a tough stance against the US currency, criticized dollar loans and saying that international loans should be given in gold instead. "Why do we make all loans in dollars? Let’s use another currency. I suggest that the loans should be made based on gold,” Erdoğan said during a speech at the Global Entrepreneurship Congress in Istanbul on April 16, according to Hurriyet. In what some saw an appeal for a gold standard by the Turkish president, Erdogan added that “with the dollar the world is always under exchange rate pressure. We should save states and nations from this exchange rate pressure. Gold has never been a tool of oppression throughout history."Well, now that Turkey will soon have all of its gold on the ground, Erdogan will be able to launch a gold-backed currency if he so desires. Unfortunately, all signs point to the gold being repatriated only so it can be raided, pillaged and promptly deposited in offshore vaults by members of the ruling oligarchy. As noted above, Turkey has been one of several countries which have moved their gold from the world's biggest, and most secure gold vault, that located 95 feet below sea level at 33 Liberty Street in Manhattan, also known as the New York Fed. The repatriation wave began in 2012, when Venezuela announced it was withdrawing all of its 160 tons of gold at the NY Fed, valued at around $9 billion. Germany’s Bundesbank then demanded 300 tons be returned, with the Fed saying it would take seven years to do so; a scrambling Germany was able to complete the process 3 years ahead of schedule. The Netherlands has also repatriated 122.5 tons of gold.
As a result, according to the latest Fed data, the amount of physical gold stored at the NY Fed has dropped to the lowest on record, or 7.819 thousand tons, following a withdrawal scramble that started in 2014 and continued until the end of 2016. After a 15 month hiatus, withdrawals resumed in 2018, with 15.5 tons of gold repatriated in January and February.  “The central banks started the repatriation already a few years ago, meaning before we had Brexit, Catalonia, Trump, AFD or the rising tensions between the Politburo in Brussels and the nations of Eastern Europe,” said Claudio Grass of Precious Metal Advisory in Switzerland. According to him, the world is becoming less centralized. “If we follow this trend, it should be obvious that the next step should be an even bigger break up into smaller units than the nation state. With such geopolitical fragmentation comes also the decentralization of power." https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-20/turkey-will-repatriate-all-gold-us-attempt-ditch-dollar.... Tried to bold the most relevent points but tbh the whole thing is worth reading. President Erdogan of Turkey offered some of the most hilarious pro-gold / pro-precious metals promotional material in recent history with this newscap: "Why do we make all loans in dollars? Let’s use another currency. I suggest that the loans should be made based on gold,” Erdoğan said during a speech at the Global Entrepreneurship Congress in Istanbul on April 16, according to Hurriyet[/b].
In what some saw an appeal for a gold standard by the Turkish president, Erdogan added that “with the dollar the world is always under exchange rate pressure. We should save states and nations from this exchange rate pressure. Gold has never been a tool of oppression throughout history." I have a feeling Erdogan's gold push is identical to Maduro of Venezuela's crypto currency push. They're get-rich-quick-schemes promoted by dictators of countries whose economies are likely to suffer over the short term. With many nations dropping the dollar, promoting gold/precious metals and even crypto currencies in the case of Maduro. And also with china and many other nations choosing to denominate oil transactions in something other than the petro dollar, it seems this recent trend of "de dollarization" and negative sentiment against the US dollar will continue to propagate. |
|
|
|
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is levying a $1 billion fine against Wells Fargo — a record for the agency — as punishment for the banking giant's actions in its mortgage and auto loan businesses. Wells Fargo's "conduct caused and was likely to cause substantial injury to consumers," the agency said in its filings about the bank. Wells Fargo broke the law by charging some consumers too much over mortgage interest rate-lock extensions and by running a mandatory insurance program that added insurance costs and fees into some borrowers' auto loans, the CFPB said. Because of the penalties, Wells Fargo says, it is adjusting its preliminary financial results for the first quarter of 2018, shifting $800 million in its balance sheet — and dropping its net income for the quarter to $4.7 billion. The new federal action against the bank comes less than two years after Wells Fargo was fined $185 million over what the CFPB called "the widespread illegal practice of secretly opening unauthorized deposit and credit card accounts." Those earlier penalties included a $100 million fine by the CFPB — a record at the time. The new punishment stems from the agency's findings that Wells Fargo abused its relationship with home and auto loan borrowers. Wells Fargo was also punished by the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency over its risk management practices, with the agency collecting a $500 million penalty as part of the fines announced Friday. Along with treating its customers unfairly, the OCC said, Wells Fargo had failed to maintain a compliance risk management program that was appropriate for a bank of its size and complexity. That failure, the OCC said, led Wells Fargo to "engage in reckless unsafe or unsound practices and violations of law." Auto loans, insurance and fees Problems in the way the Wells Fargo auto loan unit handled consumers' accounts exposed people to hundreds or thousands of dollars in premiums and fees. The issues were also found to have possibly contributed to thousands of cars being repossessed. The CFPB said problems with the auto loan unit persisted for more than 10 years, from October 2005 to September 2016. Lenders can require borrowers to maintain insurance on their vehicles — and if a borrower doesn't do that, there is a process that allows lenders to arrange for what is called force-placed insurance and add that cost to the loan. But Wells Fargo acknowledged that of the roughly 2 million car loans that it put into that program, it "forcibly placed duplicative or unnecessary insurance on hundreds of thousands of those borrowers' vehicles."For some borrowers, the bank also improperly maintained those force-placed policies on their accounts even after they secured adequate insurance. According to the CFPB, "if borrowers failed to pay the amounts [Wells Fargo] charged them for the Force-Placed Insurance, they faced additional fees and, in some instances, experienced delinquency, loan default, and even repossession." In one five-year period from 2011 to 2016, Wells Fargo acknowledged in the settlement, the extra costs of force-placed insurance may have played a role in at least 27,000 customers having their vehicles repossessed. Home loan rate locks Wells Fargo failed to follow its own policies in how it charged fees over locking in mortgage interest rates beyond the standard guaranteed window, the CFPB said, adding that the bank charged customers for the rate extension — even in cases in which the bank itself was the reason for delays in closing on a home loan. The problems persisted for several years after the bank's internal audit identified the risk of harming consumers, according to the government's filing about the settlement. Wells Fargo unfairly and inconsistently applied its policy on rate-extension fees from September 2013 through February 2017, the agency said. In February, Wells Fargo also faced a government reprimand in February, when the Federal Reserve took the rare step of "restricting Wells Fargo's growth and demanding the replacement of four board members in response to 'widespread consumer abuses and compliance breakdowns' at the bank," as NPR reported. At the time, the Fed faulted Wells Fargo for maintaining a business strategy that prioritizes its own growth at the expense of risk management. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/04/20/604279604/wells-fargo-hit-with-1-billion-in-fines-over-consumer-abuses .... Tried to bold relevent points. According to this, Wells Fargo charged people with car insurance for a 2nd and completely unnecessary insurance policy to boost their car loan premiums. Then they charged late fees for delays in locking in mortgage terms, even though Wells Fargo may have been the cause of those delays. As many as 27,000 people could have had their cars repossessed over the technicality. A $1 billion fine is definitely more than a slap on the wrist, like many previous fines imposed on banks have been. I guess this article summarizes some of the less severe reasons people have for disliking banks and not viewing them as advocating things like fractional reserve banking simply because they help banks to "further progress of civilization and society" and other propaganda which could be standard curriculum in some places. |
|
|
|
This topic has come up a few times. Here's the closest thing to a definitive answer I've seen:  Image link: https://i.imgur.com/hMZpOZp.jpgSource: https://www.elitefixtures.com/blog/post/2683/bitcoin-mining-costs-by-country/Unsurprisingly, financial and economics spokespersons aren't the most reliable nor accurate source of information. The cost of mining is also expected to decrease as the ASIC market becomes more decentralized with intel, samsung, nvidia and others due to enter the market. The cost per watt of hashpower is also expected to decline further as competition incentivizes advancement and industry wide innovation in ASIC production with smaller nanometer scale lithographic silicon etching processes which will be empowered by Moore's Law, et al. |
|
|
|
Regardless of whether you think about it or not, it is going to think about you, and the economy as a whole. Trouble is brewing.
I think we've all known that since 2008. The question is how events will unfold and what the fallout will be. How do you see events panning out?  Here's another thread in this section on china's theft of patented/copyrighted/intellectual property/industrial processes/etcetera: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3318614I think the european union, japan and the united states were all planning to file a joint WTO complaint against china for similar things. Some have said its impossible for the united states to lose a trade war with china when our trade deficit with them is measured in the hundred of billions of dollars range(I think its between 300 and 400 billion iirc). |
|
|
|
|
$164 trillion in deficit and debt is much more dangerous to national security and the welfare of the public than terrorists "laundering money" via bitcoin. Unfortunately deficit and debt are unlikely to be acknowledged as a legitimate issue as it empowers wealth redistribution and makes it easier for the rich to become richer at the expense of everyone else.
The agenda based media has been discussing a "bitcoin bubble" when in reality they would discuss a "global debt bubble" if they did their jobs and reported on real issues which affect you and I.
If economists like Robert Shiller and Paul Krugman did their jobs they would be warning the public about the negative long term consequences $164 trillion in global debt can have on everyone. Unfortunately, they don't seem to do anything unless they get paid for it. And there appear to be many who will pay for them to *invent* negative stories about bitcoin, rather than report on legitimate issues.
|
|
|
|
|
Not many initial notes for this card.
-One of Kevin Lee's coaches, Robert Follis, passed away recently. Don't know what effect it might have.
-Ryan LaFlare vs Alex Garcia is a wrestling specialist vs wrestling specialist match up. What's weird is both of them appear to be slowing down at different times. Alex Garcia looked like he was slowing down when he got KO'ed by a jab from Sean Strickland and Ryan LaFlare looked like he was slowing down a bit when he was finished by Alex Oliveira. Although its been said that Alex Oliveira is extremely strong, maybe why LaFlare had problems.
-Cub Swanson vs Frankie Edgar 2. I think if Frankie can't get it to the ground he'll be KO'ed again. This fight seems to have been made on short notice with neither of them having much time to prepare.
|
|
|
|
If you take the official statistics on inflation in the US, it is no more than 5 percent per year, already for 30 years. US inflation statistics are similar to unemployment statistics. The "official" number cited by politicians and the media do not reflect real unemployment / inflation. Real inflation is closer to 10%, it well exceeds 10% in many instances. One of the first topics "financial freedom" gurus might address is how to best beat inflation to retain or enhance the value of wealth, being how significant an obstacle to overcome inflation is. An example of real inflation are 2 liter bottles. Less than 10 years ago, they were $0.99. Today they're $2.00. That's more than 100% price inflation in less than 10 years which amounts to more than 10% per year. Water shortages in some areas and drought related to climate change do factor into that price inflation, but still real inflation is generally agreed to be much nearer to 10% year than it is 3% annually. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
