The match between Monaco against Lille looks like it will end in a goalless draw, but based on statistics at least Lille has slightly better statistics than Moncao's home team. In my opinion, it's only natural that Lille can play more aggressively in this match, because Lille still really needs three points to make the gap a little wider with Rennes.
Because at this moment Lille's position is still very unsafe, because Lille only has a 1 point gap with Rennes and if in the next match Lille loses and Rennes wins then Lille will fail to finish in the top five. So yes, Lille needs full points in this match but at the same time, Monaco also has to maintain its place in fourth place to get a Europa League ticket and that makes it difficult for Lille to win this away match.
The match ended in a goalless draw but LOSC was the better team. They had more shots on target and controlled the game. Both teams still maintained their position in the Ligue 1 but Lille is just one point above Rennes. This entails that Lille might lose their chances of playing in the Europa Conference League. Their next game will be at home with Olympique de Marseille. Marseille is in the third position making them a Europa League candidate but they have not also lost hope of getting a champions league slot. So Lille will have to put up a good performance to win the game on the 20th. This was a very important match for both Monaco and Lille. It was really good for Monaco as they were able to win the match and solidify their position in the fourth position of the table. This also creates a significant difference between the points of both of these teams. Now it is almost certain that Monaco is going to stay on top of Lille. Right now the task for Lille is going to be to stay in the position where they are right now. Even though they do not have a chance to improve their standing on the table they do have a very big chance of dropping positions. |
|
|
|
Did we witness the sexism of the organizers towards women at the tournament in Madrid? Are men and women treated differently in this tournament? This topic was opened after Jessica Pegula, a doubles finalist, complained that the organizers did not allow her to give a speech after the final match. On the other hand, all singles finalists and men's doubles finalists were able to give their speeches. Another serious remark about the sexism of the organizers is related to the different clothes worn by the ball girls compared to the ball boys. Girls wore short sleeved shirts and short skirts to tennis matches, while boys wore larger polo shirts and longer shorts. Another example of how the organizers treated girls and boys differently are the birthday cakes. Alcaraz got a three-story cake for his birthday, and Sabalenka got a much more modest cake for her birthday What do you think about this? Is there sexism in sports and tennis? Source: https://www.bbc.com/sport/tennis/65528912I don't think so. I haven't heard about the doubles speech incident so it's really hard to say. Perhaps some lack of time issues? Anyway, ball girl and ball boy outfits were supposed to be sexy. Short skirts and shirts are considered sexy on girls but not on boys. Who prefers short shorts on guys? Mostly gay men. Women and straight guys prefer some more conventional clothes. So it's more about different criteria of sexy. As to the BD cake, I think that's more because Alcaraz is Spanish, he superseded Rafa as some sort of a national hero in Spain, not because he's male.  The reality is sexist. I would simply think that this comes down to the organizations being able to get a lot more money as a form of revenue from the men's competition compared to the women's. So they also tend to show men better treatment. Is it okay to treat men and women equally when when are the ones doing the bulk of the earning? And last time I checked women wanted to have the freedom of wearing anything they want. There is even something called "free the nipple" movement going on. Why is it when women benefit from sexism they don't say anything but whenever it doesn't benefit them they start to complain? |
|
|
|
I think if he is aware about risk and how market reacts to different conditions then it's all right but just want to ask that whether this amount is too big for him? As you said his salary is $400 and he invested $500 in btc which sounds big for him so you should also tell him invest savings but also have in mind the rule invest what you can afford to loose.You should also tell him not to panic in small dips and beleive in long term holding if we wants actual returns.
I think if he invested more than his salary it just means that he has confidence in his friend who shared about bitcoin. He may have heard this before and it may not have been explained as well as his friend's. So I can say that somehow he is aware that there is a real risk in the investment. And first of all, maybe because of his trust in the person even though he didn't say that he would invest, but he still invested. Investing more than salary is not a problem because OP didn't mention whether his friend invests with salary or from savings, as I believe everyone will have savings. Moreover, he only invests once, so it will not be able to affect his daily living needs. I am more interested in whether OP's friend understands the risks of investing in bitcoin? I don't believe anyone could fully understand investment risk in just a few sentences in that brief conversation. I feel OP's friend is investing hastily without any knowledge, too risky for both. |
|
|
|
You are late comer but you are not too late, the party is still here. After 3 more halvings, 98.4% of total supply will be mined and imagine from 2032 to 2140, more than 100 years, there will be only 1.6% of remaining total supply will be mined. If you are wondering about decision, this fact is not challenging too much for you to make your decision. Join or miss the party. -snip- being early or late is just a relative term. even if you are early, if you don't do anything, then being early is useless but if you think you are too late, but you have done something like stashing some satoshis, then you are much better as compared to the one who was early but did nothing. so contemplate on what you are doing doing these times. if you think there's future in this market, act now. but don't regret if you just observed and did nothing today. As I always thought, it doesn't matter when you enter the market, what matters is how long you can stay in the market and how much bitcoin you hold. But admittedly the early entrants have a better chance than us as they always buy at a better price, but they won't be able to beat us if they can't hold long and make a good profit. For me, how long we stay in the market is important because the reward is always for those who remain last. And history has also proven that bitcoin always gives the best returns to those who hold the longest. |
|
|
|
Delhi Capitals vs Punjab Kings is a great game going on right now and Punjab Kings have already lost 3 wickets. In today's match, Punjab Kings as the strongest team is ahead of Delhi Capital in the points table in terms of ranking. However, the weakest team in IPL 2023 is Delhi Capitals as they occupy the last position at the top of the table points. If Delhi Capitals can score 150 plus runs in today's match then there is definitely a chance of victory. Delhi Capitals can win if their batting performance is good in their innings. But at the moment Punjab kings are batting their score is 86 runs for 3 wickets and 10.5 balls.
Sunrisers Hyderabad posted a good score in the first match of the day but lost the match against Lucknow Super Giants. From that point of view, Punjab Kings' collection in the 2nd innings was not good. They able to score only 167 runs after batting 20 overs. However, it will be difficult to predict especially which is low score match. Just look at the Punjab Kings score board where something different. Only Prabhsimran Singh scored a century in which every batsman failed. How is that possible? Following the first innings, it seems very easy that Delhi Capitals will win the match. PBKS got 167 which didn't seem to be a lot at first. But the way they have defended that is certainly incredible. They have been able to restrict DC in only 136. This is suddenly a very big when for the PBKS. This is also going to help them in the net run rate in my opinion. Prabhsimran did well to get his century. When DC came to chase the total they never got going. The openers had a good start in my opinion. But they could not capitalize on that. After they lost their openers they actually were not able to form any kind of partnership at all. And that led them to their failure to score anything close to what they should have. |
|
|
|
From Bangladesh point of view, Najmul Hossain Shanto 117 was the major knock while the rest of the Bangladesh batsmen did contributed along with him and ensure that Bangladesh win this match in the end.
Towhid Hridoy also played an important role in the victory. He had scored 68 runs from 58 balls. Both youngsters deserve the credit for this victory. Mushfiqur has ensured the victory by playing with responsibility. Tamim Iqbal, the captain of Bangladesh made some wrong decisions yesterday. He should have used Mehidy Hasan Miraz early in the bowling as other bowlers were giving a lot of runs. Hopefully he will do a better captaincy in the 3rd ODI. It was actually a very good match between Bangladesh and Ireland. Both of them have given the spectators something to enjoy. I also have some question marks about the captaincy of Bangladesh. I don't think it is the best right now. Certainly, improvements can be made. I am actually missing Mashrafe Mortaza before the world cup. As long as he was the captain Bangladesh actually had been performing really well. Anyway, if Bangladesh is facing so many problems against Ireland how would they perform against the bigger opponents? |
|
|
|
How to teach children economic literacy?
Teaching children to save is very difficult because they do not understand how difficult it is to earn money, so no matter how much advice they give, they will never understand. The best way is to give them experience, if they ask for money, then provide them with a job, and only when they complete the job will they get the money. That way, they'll know how hard it is to make money and appreciate it more than just sitting around explaining it to them. I always use this method with my children. |
|
|
|
snip
it really involves luck but those people that are working so hard but still not succeed is that they dont have a lot of opportunities meaning they are only working so hard like there is no tomorrow but they missed other opportunities or lets say bad decisions. It has really luck involved to it because lets say while working someone noticed your hardworking and your capability which they will hire your or asked the CEO to increase your salary, there are really instances that we cant control which that is luck A person does not have many opportunities, which means they are not lucky enough. Luck appears a lot in our lives, and I believe it plays an important role, but many people deny it. If they don't have luck, then no matter how hard they try, they will never succeed. Honestly, I am where I am today because of luck. I used to be a worker and worked very hard, I never dared to think about big things like houses, cars, or real estate because I knew where I was in society. But luck came to me when a friend helped and recommended a job I had never known. Currently, my life is very well off and stable thanks to my job. Although I have worked hard, there is no denying that without luck, I would never have had the opportunity to do a job I know nothing about. |
|
|
|
Money plays an important role for people's daily life. But more impotent than money is the good health of a person because a sick person cannot be happy even if he has a lot of wealth and money. Money is only needed to reach every stage of life without money nothing is possible in this world. With money the power of everything is instantly sold out and without money life is stagnant. A person who does not have money can never reach a good stage in life. Without money, people are like spineless animals. Just as an animal without backbone can never stand upright, without money it is not possible to take life to a good level. so to brighten your future life you have to work hard and earn a lot of money and move ahead in the future.
Money not only plays an important role, arguably taking precedence over health and love in today's world, because without money, we wouldn't have those things. People create money so that we can easily exchange goods with each other, as a place to store property value...money is designed to serve people. But with what's going on, money is ruling us more than serving us. Society is becoming more and more pragmatic, but we won't be able to do anything but adapt to it. I never wanted to think of money as everything, but everyone around me is doing it, and I can't fight them alone. Yes, money is everything, as long as we have money, we can buy everything in this world, including love and health. |
|
|
|
I don't agree that success is based on luck rather than effort. it's because luck won't come if we don't try. The meaning, in this case, is that not all of our businesses can be successful, but by trying to find the best business, you will get a business that can make you successful. Is that lucky? no, it is done with effort and hard work. in fact, building a business or running a business is included in the effort. You will not get success just by waiting for luck. no one is successful if they just watch tv and sleep in their room waiting for their luck.
It is not like gambling that you are sitting and betting some small money on it and waiting for bigger return, life is not like that. I agree with you that lucks attract hard work that is why those rich people will always say that do your very best and be hard working on something for sure you'll be able to get that and the luck is just a 2nd factor on it. Relying on luck is not a good idea for sure you'll not going to be successful on it as it is still another term for lazy stuff. It is true that we cannot be lazy, not work hard and just wait for luck to come to us because there is no success without trade-offs. But to succeed beyond your best efforts, you need to have a little luck, or you will never succeed. When you start a business or do anything that always goes smoothly, that is also your luck. If luck is not needed to succeed, why do so many people work hard but never succeed? While many people don't spend too much time and effort to achieve success, it is quite common in our lives. I believe that luck plays an important role in everyone's success. |
|
|
|
The price of commodities are becoming more scary by the day. As an economist with lots of bills to settle how do you deal with the price hikes, the expensive cost of living, The fluctuation in volatile assets and the demand to meet our every day needs.
Most nations are facing currency devaluation, economic downturn, Static GDP and slow revenue generation. What are your secrets for meeting the day to day expenses regardless of the inflation.
The general solution that I see most people using is to save, not spend on things that are not worth it, find additional sources of income, and accumulate inflation-resistant assets like gold or bitcoin. Those are the things that I am also applying to myself. I'm doing more work now than before the covid pandemic, and I'm not spending as much on unnecessary things as before the inflation hit. In this way, I find myself quite okay with the inflation going on. I think inflation will pass soon, but it will repeat in the future, so we should not only prepare for the present but also prepare for the future. |
|
|
|
Tonight we have the 76ers and the Nuggets trying to send the Suns and the Celtics fishing… I would’ve chosen the Celtics and Suns to win their series’ so this is a bit surprising to me. I’d hate to see the Durant experiment fall so short already. Now we see how Phoenix and Boston respond to having their backs against the wall.
I would actually say that this is not that surprising at all. After all these teams are very capable and qualified to take on their respective opponents. There is a good chance that the 76ers will win their game against the Celtics. I trust them. However, at this moment, I cannot trust the Nuggets at all. Honestly, I feel like the Phoenix Suns have a good chance of winning this game. However, all four teams are actually quite capable in their own right. As a result, it is hard to predict anything about them at this point. |
|
|
|
Well at least in football they have the citizenship to play for that respective country. But in cricket that is not the case. In cricket, anyone can play for any country. That is wondering which ICC have to make a change on.
We certainly wouldn't have made any comments if only 1 or two or even 3 players were actually from another country presenting the national team. But the problem has come when 10/11 players are from another country. ICC also knows very well that those associate teams which are actually made out of foreign players actually do not have any intention of getting better in cricket. They are just here to find some profit.
At this point, a country such as Norway receives almost the same amount of funds as Nepal. And the funds are significant (~$200,000 per year). Nepali players are struggling, because they need to fund the domestic cricket and school cricket as well with this amount, and the players are all native. On the other hand, teams like Norway and Sweden are 100% composed of foreign players and the cricket board has no recognition from the sports ministries in these countries. Whatever funds provided by the ICC is shared between the players and they don't spend any of that amount to increase the popularity of cricket, or to teach the sport to schoolkids. This is a big scam and has been going on for many years now. Hundreds of millions of USD worth of ICC funds are being stolen by undeserving people. Do teams like Norway and Sweden actually need the same type of funding that Nepal gets? I absolutely do not think so. I think ICC really should think about having less money for the teams which are absolutely made out of foreign players. They should also allocate that money for teams like Nepal which are made up of native players. I understand ICC is always looking for profit. But they should also understand that once it actually becomes a big enough game all around the world it is not going to be a problem to earn profit. |
|
|
|
|
Sorry that your health condition has prevented you from living a normal life like others. But glad you found bitcoin, and I believe if you can't find a perfect job out there, bitcoin can help you do it. Investing 30€ per month in bitcoin is a good start, I hope you can maintain it for as long as possible and maybe at least until the next bull season, which is scheduled to take place in 2025-2026 ( I guess so). I'm not sure if it will help you to be financially free and independent of your family, but it will certainly give you a decent amount of money to live on.
|
|
|
|
Of course it's nice if we have passive income from saving, there are many saving options that we can choose to get passive income, of course it takes a lot of capital to reach this passive income position, but if we start from small things and we do it regularly for a long time then we will be successful.
Saving is a very important thing in life and it doesn't only apply to those who have passive income. Because those who don't have passive income also have to save even though it's still very difficult for them when they want to do it, especially for those who already have passive income. It's definitely easier to save the amount of money they want each week or month, and I personally also make savings for the time being in case of a hard time or a sudden large need. That is, I don't dedicate it to being successful even though I also don't stop fighting to be successful in my life. Sometimes many people think that saving is not important but to be honest it really helps, saving is not for now but for the future besides that we also never know what will happen later, regardless of whether saving or not is a choice. I wouldn't call saving important, I would consider it extremely important that anyone should have it at all costs. Because life is full of surprises, and if we don't prepare in advance, we will likely have a crisis when the unexpected happens. A lot of people complain that they can't save because their income is so low, that can be a real problem, but if we really want to do it, then we will find a way. But when we don't want to, there will always be a thousand reasons. Investing and saving are two things that everyone should have because they will be the premise for us to have a better future. |
|
|
|
I'd say if spending money doesn't make you happy maybe you're all spending it wrongly, even though all the advices above seems good, but I think important what makes one happy isn't necessarily coming from textbook advices like this. Just spend whatever you want, one might be happy enough when they can buy some good cars, not necessarily need good experience, everyone differ to each other.
someone else might also be happy by spending their money for buying luxury goods, it's all relative. but what matters most is that, an individual will be really happy when they got their basic needs settled. it's the most important thing, then the other thing comes after that.
You have a point there. How we can earn and spend is up to us, as long as we feel satisfied and happy. We don't have to follow the advice or what the textbook says, we can't force everyone to do the same thing when everyone is different. Recently I have bought some necessary products for my work and needs, many people say that I am quite wasteful when buying such expensive things. But I don't care because it's my money, and I work hard to earn a lot of money simply to have a better life. I feel happy owning those things, I don't see anything wrong here. They are not me, how will they know what I need and think? |
|
|
|
That's true, cricket rules are completely different and ICC doesn't care about it. ICC play its role only when the four powers of cricket experience some problem. According to me, playing with foreign players is not an issue. Let the funding be provided equally to every team than the performance based system. Even in football it is possible to see the players descent from two different countries and the kid playing for another nation. This doesn't come under foreign playing just because the player is born in that country.
In football if a player is allowed to represent two different countries, that is because he holds the citizenship of both these nations. Diego Costa is an example. He was born in Brazil and represented that country, before switching to Spain in 2014. A more recent example is that of Rogelio Funes Mori, who switched from Argentina to Mexico. Anyway, no one complains when 1-2 players are included from other nations. But the problem is when all the 11 players are foreigners, and none of the natives are included in the playing XI (this is the case with 80% of the associate teams). Well at least in football they have the citizenship to play for that respective country. But in cricket that is not the case. In cricket, anyone can play for any country. That is wondering which ICC have to make a change on. We certainly wouldn't have made any comments if only 1 or two or even 3 players were actually from another country presenting the national team. But the problem has come when 10/11 players are from another country. ICC also knows very well that those associate teams which are actually made out of foreign players actually do not have any intention of getting better in cricket. They are just here to find some profit. |
|
|
|
Maybe China has taken such steps to strengthen its economic system. The Chinese government wants to reduce the use of the US dollar in their country. If they succeed in their digital yuan experiment, they may start using this currency instead of the US dollar. The Chinese government may be getting such a fad to reduce the global demand for the US dollar. Now it remains to be seen how successful the Chinese government can be in this new plan. But I believe no other currency can replace the US dollar. Because the demand for the US dollar has increased several times over before, the value of the Euro and the US dollar have been close recently.
China is rising and it is true. We still don't know if China can beat the US to become the world's No. 1 power and whether the renminbi can replace the US dollar. But it is not true to claim that no currency or country can defeat the United States. You should learn the history of world currency, before USD, we had how many other currencies that once ruled the world. Moreover, the value of USD is increasing since inflation is not because its demand is increasing. Rather, the US is abusing its power to export inflation, causing the eurozone economy to fall into crisis, the euro depreciating, not the dollar increasing in value thanks to demand. |
|
|
|
The performance based system is not a problem. The problem is those teams are performing well which have foreign players stacked in the team. I would actually like to see a 50% cut in pay for the teams which have foreign players in the squad. And that 50% should be equally divided into the teams which do not have foreign players in the team.
Actually, another thing which can be done is don't have any performance based payment for the teams which have foreign players in the squad. The performance based pay should actually only exist for those which do not have foreign players in the squad. In this way, the teams will be much more interested in performing well and also not have foreign players in the team.
Cricket should be like any other sport, where only citizens are allowed in national teams. FIFA, FIH or FIBA doesn't allow a single foreigner in national teams. FIBA even have strict rules regarding players who are naturalized and holding citizenship. But cricket is a joke, and you can have a national team of Slovakia or Armenia with 11 tourists from Pakistan. And on top of that, these teams now get a majority of the funding from the ICC, with huge reductions being made in fund allocation to teams with native players (Kenya, Nepal, Namibia, Scotland.etc). That's true, cricket rules are completely different and ICC doesn't care about it. ICC play its role only when the four powers of cricket experience some problem. According to me, playing with foreign players is not an issue. Let the funding be provided equally to every team than the performance based system. When a kid starts playing for a country from a young age that's not a problem. But when they are trying to make a team with people who basically came to the country to find work or just visiting that's the actual problem. The best solution will be to just make those players the citizens of the country. That way no one is going to question anything and the government is also going to be responsible for them. Since the ICC higher officials are mostly big 4 supporters they always support those countries. There may be many other reasons for this, especially the economy. The amount of revenue ICC gets from the Big 4 is not possible by any other countries. On the other hand, paying equally to all countries would not be rational. Because the cost of a team of Big 4 is not the same as the cost of a weaker team. If you follow this rule, the small cricket countries will benefit, but the big 4 will suffer. Which I think will never be possible.
One thing is sure that ICC is not going to do anything which will not be in the best interest for the top 4 teams. They will always think about the top 4 teams first, after that, they will see if that is even good for the game or not. You know that ICC actually does not run the big four, the big four is actually the one running ICC. |
|
|
|
We got the employment numbers last Friday and they were very high. Employment is very tight. Not good for inflation. Good for stocks because earnings will be up but not for the fed rate decisions.
Our next CPI is estimated to come in at 0.6% which obviously is not ideal. It’s 6-7% annualized which is far from the 2% target. If there are no more bank failures and inflation stays this high then we might get more rate hikes and not good for stock or crypto.
Regarding interest rates, I don't think the Fed will continue to raise rates as they have already hit their target of 5%-5.25%. Increasing interest rates further will not tackle inflation but will push the economy into recession faster. What is more frightening if they are maintaining this interest rate for a long time will also cause many consequences as much as continuing to raise interest rates. I think banks will continue to collapse in the near term, and that will make the economy worse. Many people think that's good for bitcoin, but I don't think so, bitcoin is also part of the world economy. People are having financial difficulties, even daily living expenses are a worry, there is no way they are willing to spend to invest. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
