Welcome to The Foreign Exchange Clearing House FXCLR
clearing house @ Forex Factory
FXCH Forex Broker, FXCH Review, FXCH Information
Foreign Exchange Clearing House Ltd (or “FXCH”) FCA
My ultra conservative take on staking returns at THIS very moment.
Ok I'm going to be ultra conservative right now and try and calculate our possible staking rewards at this point. First, let's look at some facts: Omise has about 55.000 merchants at this moment using their product at this moment (taken from their website) Let's just say every merchant handles about lets say 60 dollars per day. This is ultra conservative. Let's not forget McDonalds Thailand is added to the merchant list and they are also based in Singapore and Japan. Now I've been in those 2 countries and you pay 20 dollars for a beer sometimes. They are expensive. For a complete list look at the marchant list of Omise: https://www.reddit.com/CryptoCurrency/comments/71h2gv/omisego_merchant_list/ . Note they have Thai Airlines on there as well. They just need 0,5 costumers a day to buy 1 ticket to get to that 60 dollar a day, just saying. Okay so we have 55.000 merchants, handling 60 dollars a day, for 365 days a year (on average, weekdays probably more busy or perhaps saturdays the most busy day of the week, no one knows). That is 1,2 billion dollars a year at the very least. This is JUST the amount of money OMG handles on their regular payments network. This is so freaking conservative I it's funny. Ok so now we have established OMG will handle about 1,2 billion dollars per year just on their payments network. Then we have the international conglomerate, TOPPAN, GlobalBrain, Tendermint, Electrify, and most importantly TrueMoney as partners and users of the blockchain. The last one transferring 4 billion dollars over 6 countries according to Jun. This is the tweet: https://twitter.com/jun_omise/status/917556490189266945 Let's be ultra, ultra conservative and say that adds about 3,5 billion dollars to the network. That totals 4,7. THEN we have Tendermint/COSMOS. This is where it gets interesting. OMG has a longterm partnership with Cosmos, creators of Tendermint. (source https://blog.omisego.network/approach-to-delivering-scalability-56d034619ef0). Omisego will go live on this network and start their PoS protocol here first. Then move to Plasma once its complete. This could also mean that tendermint volume will transact through the OMG network once its own blockchain goes live in order to keep transaction costs as low as possible and allow for even more transaction than tendermint is able to do right now. Why else would they partner up? Lets take a close look at this tweet, retweeted by Tendermint on twitter: https://twitter.com/cerebralbosons/status/944291345597943814 "Just found out there's a production app that's been running on the @tendermint_team platform for 9 months and clears half a billion $$ a day!" In the comments I found the production app is https://fxclr.com/ The Forex Exchange clearing house. Half a billion dollars. Per day. Let that sink in. However, lets be ultra conservative and make that 5 billion dollars per YEAR for an app/business that does only 0,0027% of that amount (I feel stupid for being THAT conservative really). That brings our total to 5 + the earlier mentioned 4,7 billion to 9,7 billion dollars. Now lets also assume that MAYBE some other businesses, merchants or even a freaking NATION STATE as mentioned by Thomas Greco at the Token summit bring another 1,3 billion dollars to the table. This gives us 11 billion dollars through the network per year. Now again, I believe this is ultra conservative and I think this can actually be 2 or even 3 times as high right off the bat as they have a White label wallet, meaning any business can just plugin to the OMG network with the blink of an eye for 2 to 5 times less transaction fees... So what will this deliver for the stakers? Let's take our ultra conservative 11 billion dollars and lets assume 1% transaction fees (Mind you, Omise is currently asking 3,65% per transaction). Also lets assume about 52 million coins are staked from the current circulation supply + the 38million OMG hold themselves meaning 90 million staked coins. 11 billion x 1% fees divided by 90 million stakers = 1,22 dollars per staked coin per year. This is the ABSOLUTE, laughable conservative minimum in my eyes. With a current trading price at 17,81 that gives you a 6,8% return on your initial investment. This is why you buy NOW. HOWEVER. As noted by Omise on their website, they have a 500% increase in transaction from 2015-2016. Adoption rate can be fast, especially with low fees and the most possible transactions in crypto. They are unbanking the banked and they are banking the unbanked. They have a decentralized exchange, they are in talks with a messaging app (source: crowdsale doc), others can stick into the OMG network with their SDK wallet, they have SO MUCH going on right now. This has so much potential I cant even wrap my head around it anymore. Like Thomas Greco said at the token summit (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eluNnM0f9Q) : a 1 billion market cap is potentially insignificant. I believe it is.
ATO Australian tax treatment for options trades 🇦🇺
I am posting this as I hope it will help other Australian options traders trading in US options with their tax treatment for ATO (Australian Tax Office) purposes. The ATO provides very little guidance on tax treatment for options trading and I had to do a lot of digging to get to this point. I welcome any feedback on this post.
The Deloitte Report from 2011
My initial research led me to this comprehensive Deloitte report from 2011 which is hosted on the ASX website. I've been through this document about 20 times and although it's a great report to understand how different scenarios apply, it's still really hard to find out what's changed since 2011. I am mainly relating myself to the scenario of being an individual and non-sole trader (no business set up) for my trading. I think this will apply to many others here too. According to that document, there isn't much guidance on what happens when you're an options premium seller and close positions before they expire. Note that the ATO sometimes uses the term "ETO" (Exchange Traded Option) to discuss what we're talking about here with options trading. Also note: The ATO discusses the separate Capital Gains Tax ("CGT") events that occur in each scenario in some of their documents. A CGT event will then determine what tax treatment gets applied if you don't know much about capital gains in Australia.
ATO Request for Advice
Since the Deloitte report didn't answer my questions, I eventually ended up contacting the ATO with a request for advice and tried to explain my scenario: I'm an Australian resident for tax purposes,I'm trading with tastyworks in $USD, I'm primarily a premium seller and I don't have it set up with any business/company/trust etc. In effect, I have a rough idea that I'm looking at capital gains tax but I wanted to fully understand how it worked. Initially the ATO respondent didn't understand what I was talking about when I said that I was selling a position first and buying it to close. According to the laws, there is no example of this given anywhere because it is always assumed in ATO examples that you buy a position and sell it. Why? I have no idea. I sent a follow up request with even more detail to the ATO. I think (hope) they understood what I meant now after explaining what an options premium seller is!
First, I have to consider translating my $USD to Australian dollars. How do we treat that? FX Translation If the premium from selling the options contract is received in $USD, do I convert it to $AUD on that day it is received? ATO response:
Subsection 960-50(6), Item 5 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) states the amount should be translated at the time of the transaction or event for the purposes of the Capital Gains Tax provisions. For the purpose of granting an option to an entity, the time of the event is when you grant the option (subsection 104-20(2) ITAA 1997).
This is a very detailed response which even refers to the level of which section in the law it is coming from. I now know that I need to translate my trades from $USD to $AUD according to the RBA's translation rates for every single trade. But what about gains or losses on translation? There is one major rule that overrides FX gains and losses after digging deeper. The ATO has a "$250k balance election". This will probably apply to a lot of people trading in balances below $250k a lot of the FX rules don't apply. It states:
However, the $250,000 balance election broadly enables you to disregard certain foreign currency gains and losses on certain foreign currency denominated bank accounts and credit card accounts (called qualifying forex accounts) with balances below a specified limit.
Therefore, I'm all good disregarding FX gains and losses! I just need to ensure I translate my trades on the day they occurred. It's a bit of extra admin to do unfortunately, but it is what it is.
This is the scenario where we SELL a position first, collect premium, and close the position by making an opposite BUY order. Selling a naked PUT, for example. What happens when you open the position? ATO Response:
The option is grantedCGT event D2 happens when a taxpayer grants an option. The time of the event is when the option is granted. The capital gain or loss arising is the difference between the capital proceeds and the expenditure incurred to grant the option.
This seems straight forward. We collect premium and record a capital gain. What happens when you close the position? ATO Response:
Closing out an optionThe establishment of an ETO contract is referred to as opening a position (ASX Explanatory Booklet 'Understanding Options Trading'). A person who writes (sells) a call or put option may close out their position by taking (buying) an identical call or put option in the same series. This is referred to as the close-out of an option or the closing-out of an opening position. CGT event C2 happens when a taxpayer's ownership of an intangible CGT asset ends. Paragraph 104-25(1)(a) of the ITAA 1997 provides that ownership of an intangible CGT asset ends by cancellation, surrender, or release or similar means. CGT event C2 therefore happens to a taxpayer when their position under an ETO is closed out where the close-out results in the cancellation, release or discharge of the ETO. Under subsection 104-25(3) of the ITAA 1997 you make a capital gain from CGT event C2 if the capital proceeds from the ending are more than the assets cost base. You make a capital loss if those capital proceeds are less than the assets reduced cost base. Both CGT events (being D2 upon granting the option and C2 upon adopting the close out position) must be accounted for if applicable to a situation.
My take on this is that the BUY position that cancels out your SELL position will most often simply realise a capital loss (the entire portion of your BUY position). In effect, it 'cancels out' your original premium sold, but it's not recorded that way, it's recorded as two separate CGT events - your capital gain from CGT event D2 (SELL position), then, your capital loss from CGT event C2 (BUY position) is also recorded.In effect, they net each other out, but you don't record them as a 'netted out' number-you record them separately. From what I understand, if you were trading as a sole tradecompany then you would record them as a netted out capital gain or loss, because the trades would be classified as trading stock but not in our case here as an individual person trading options. The example I've written below should hopefully make that clearer. EXAMPLE: Trade on 1 July 2020: Open position
SELL -1 SPY 85 PUT, exp 30 August 2020
Collect Premium USD$1 per unit, and brokerage USD$5
= USD$100 premium collected, minus USD$5
= Net amount of USD$95 collected
FX Translation rate on the date of the trade: AUD $1.00 = $USD 0.70
Net Premium Collected in $AUD
= USD$95 x (1/.7)
CGT Event D2 triggered and a capital gain of $135.71 is recorded
Trade on 15 July 2020: Close position
BUY 1 SPY 85 PUT, exp 30 August 2020
Pay Premium $0.50 per unit, and brokerage $5
= $50 premium paid, plus $5
= Net amount of USD$55 paid
FX Translation rate on the date of the trade: AUD $1.00 = $USD 0.60
Net Premium Collected in $AUD
= USD$55 x (1/.6)
CGT Event C2 triggered and a capital loss of $91.66 is recorded
We can see from this simple example that even though you made a gain on those trades, you still have to record the transactions separately, as first a gain, then as a loss. Note that it is not just a matter of netting off the value of the net profit collected and converting the profit to $AUD because the exchange rate will be different on the date of the opening trade and on the date of the closing trade we have to record them separately. What if you don't close the position and the options are exercised? ATO Response:
The option is granted and then the option is exercisedUnder subsection 104-40(5) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) the capital gain or loss from the CGT event D2 is disregarded if the option is exercised. Subsection 134-1(1), item 1, of the ITAA 1997 refers to the consequences for the grantor of the exercise of the option. Where the option binds the grantor to dispose of a CGT asset section 116-65 of the ITAA 1997 applies to the transaction. Subsection 116-65(2) of the ITAA 1997 provides that the capital proceeds from the grant or disposal of the shares (CGT asset) include any payment received for granting the option. The disposal of the shares is a CGT event A1 which occurs under subsection 104-10(3) of the ITAA 1997 when the contract for disposal is entered into. You would still make a capital gain at the happening of the CGT event D2 in the year the event occurs (the time the option is granted). That capital gain is disregarded when the option is exercised. Where the option is exercised in the subsequent tax year, the CGT event D2 gain is disregarded at that point. An amendment may be necessary to remove the gain previously included in taxable income for the year in which the CGT event D2 occurred.
This scenario is pretty unlikely - for me personally I never hold positions to expiration, but it is nice to know what happens with the tax treatment if it ultimately does come to that.
What about the scenario when you want to BUY some options first, then SELL that position and close it later? Buying a CALL, for example. This case is what the ATO originally thought my request was about before I clarified with them. They stated:
When you buy an ETO, you acquire an asset (the ETO) for the amount paid for it (that is, the premium) plus any additional costs such as brokerage fees and the Australian Clearing House (ACH) fee. These costs together form the cost base of the ETO (section 109-5 of the ITAA 1997). On the close out of the position, you make a capital gain or loss equal to the difference between the cost base of the ETO and the amount received on its expiry or termination (subsection 104-25(3) of the ITAA 1997). The capital gain or loss is calculated on each parcel of options.
So it seems it is far easier to record debit trades for tax purposes. It is easier for the tax office to see that you open a position by buying it, and close it by selling it. And in that case you net off the total after selling it. This is very similar to a trading shares and the CGT treatment is in effect very similar (the main difference is that it is not coming under CGT event A1 because there is no asset to dispose of, like in a shares or property trade).
Other ATO Info (FYI)
The ATO also referred me to the following documents. They relate to some 'decisions' that they made from super funds but the same principles apply to individuals they said.
The ATO’s Interpretative Decision in relation to the tax treatment of premiums payable and receivable for exchange traded options can be found on the links below. Please note that the interpretative decisions below are in relation to self-managed superannuation funds but the same principles would apply in your situation [as an individual taxpayer, not as a super fund].
Key quote from this decision: CGT Event D2will apply on the writing of an ETO by the Fund. The Fund as grantor of the option will make a capital gain (or loss) of the difference between the capital proceeds (that is, the premium receivable) and the cost of granting the option (for example, brokerage fees) at the time the option is granted
My take on this is that you will realise a capital gain on issuing of the selling position. I don't see how you could realise a capital loss in that scenario? Or maybe if you sell a position and the brokerage is so high that it outweighs the premium received (a dumb trade) then that would be a capital loss (a rare scenario).
Key quote from decision: When the Fund opens a position by buying an ETO, no immediate taxation consequences arise.CGT Event C2will happen to the Fund when its position under an ETO is closed out where the close-out results in the cancellation, release or discharge of the ETO
Don't forget to declare your trades on your tax return and keep a nice spreadsheet
Keep track of the exchange rates for each day you make a trade. You could do as you go and check the RBA exchange rates website for the daily number, or just do it all at once at the end of the financial year
Finally - I recommend ensuring that you save a portion of your income to pay the capital gains tax at the end of the year so you don't have to withdraw it from your portfolio and pay exchange rate fees to convert it back to Australian dollars. It will depend on your marginal tax rate what that percentage will work out to be in the end.
Withdrawing USD Funds from Philippine-Based Paypal Account Using TransferWise Borderless Account
This is a response tou/sgicruz*'s post:* Best way to receive USD payment into a USD savings account?I created a post since this is a bit long comparison. If you are transferring large amounts of USD from Paypal (i.e. >USD 2,000 at a time), you are forced by Paypal to withdraw in PHP, since you cannot withdraw USD directly to Philippine-based USD accounts. Instead, you can use the TransferWise Borderless Account. The Borderless Account allows you to hold multiple currencies on the account, and also provides USD US Bank Account details (also GBP, Euro, AUD, NZD) which can receive funds via local ACH (automated clearing house). Paypal can withdraw USD funds via US ACH. (There is a verification step before being assigned bank account details: see footnote at the bottom of my post)* For comparison, below are three scenarios:
Total fees: PHP 200 (for USD 2,000 sample computation) (Note: if you use GCash, I think total fee is always PHP 0, subject to wallet and transaction limits) Exchange Rate (sample for May 8, 2020): 1 USD => PHP 48.9414 Net PHP received thru bank: PHP 97,682.70 (BDO) or PHP 97,882.70 (GCash) Paypal's PHP-USD buy/sell spread is horrendous at around ~3.0-3.5% compared to the mid-market rate. But this is still a valid option if (1) you are withdrawing small amounts, or (2) you need instant access to cash. --------------------------- 2. Paypal -> (Withdraw to US Bank Account) -> TransferWise Borderless Account -> (Send USD via SWIFT) -> BDO USD Savings Account Associated fees (sample computation for USD 2,000):
Paypal withdrawal from USD balance to US Bank Account = USD 35.00 (flat fee)
TransferWise fee for USD transfer over SWIFT = USD 1.40+3.20 = USD 4.60 (flat fee)
SWIFT intermediary/correspondent bank fees = USD 15.00 (flat fee, but can vary from 0-60 USD depending on route taken and on int'l bank relationships your local USD bank has)
BDO Incoming SWIFT Remittance = USD 5.00 (flat fee)
Total fees: 59.60 USD Net USD received thru bank: USD 1940.40 If your ultimate goal is to get the funds in PHP, we can try exchanging the USD to PHP via BDO Exchange Rate (sample for May 8, 2020): 1 USD => PHP 50.0000 (BDO USD Buy rates) Net PHP received thru bank: PHP 97,020.00 There are a lot of fixed fees, so this will only be economical for large amounts of USD (probably >USD 3,000). In addition, BDO's PHP-USD buy/sell spread is around ~0.5-1.0% compared to the mid-market rate. Paypal withdrawal to US bank account takes around 1-2 banking days, while SWIFT transfers take around 1-5 banking days. --------------------------- An alternative is to send PHP directly from TransferWise. This is cheaper than Paypal or even the USD route described above. This is because TransferWise's exchange rate uses the mid-market rate, and they have transparent fees. In addition, TransferWise -> Local PHP Savings Account settles in minutes, as opposed to the SWIFT USD transfer above (which can take anywhere from 2-5 banking days). 3. Paypal -> (Withdraw to US Bank Account) -> TransferWise Borderless Account -> (Send PHP via ACH [this means Bancnet]) -> Local PHP Savings Account Associated fees (sample computation for USD 2,000):
Paypal withdrawal from USD balance to TransferWise US Bank Account = USD 35 (flat fee)
TransferWise fee for PHP transfer over ACH (Bancnet) = USD 12.01
Total fees: USD 47.01 Net USD for conversion: USD 1952.99 Exchange Rate (sample for May 8, 2020): 1 USD => 50.4800 PHP Net PHP received thru bank: PHP 98,586.93 Paypal withdrawal to US bank account takes around 1-2 banking days, while TransferWise USD-PHP ACH (Bancnet) settles in minutes. --------------------------- *To receive your own USD bank account details, you're required to "Add Money" at least GBP 20 or its equivalent (maybe USD 25). This is their verification requirement. I recommend adding money using Visa/Mastercard Debit Card: TransferWise has around 4.5% fees for the Debit Card Add Money option, so it's going to cost around ~PHP 60 in fees. I recommend using CIMB ATM card if you have, since they currently (as of May 8, 2020) do not charge forex conversion fees. If not, any Visa/Mastercard debit card will do (including BDO Visa ATM cards). --------------------------- TLDR; For relatively small amounts, withdraw directly from Paypal to PHP bank account. Best choice is Paypal -> GCash (no inward remittance fee). For larger amounts, withdraw USD from Paypal to TransferWise Borderless Account, then send PHP via ACH (Bancnet) to Philippine PHP Savings account. But if you want to keep the amount as USD: withdraw USD from Paypal to TransferWise Borderless Account, then send USD via SWIFT to Philippine USD Savings account.
No, the British did not steal $45 trillion from India
This is an updated copy of the version on BadHistory. I plan to update it in accordance with the feedback I got. I'd like to thank two people who will remain anonymous for helping me greatly with this post (you know who you are) Three years ago a festschrift for Binay Bhushan Chaudhuri was published by Shubhra Chakrabarti, a history teacher at the University of Delhi and Utsa Patnaik, a Marxist economist who taught at JNU until 2010. One of the essays in the festschirt by Utsa Patnaik was an attempt to quantify the "drain" undergone by India during British Rule. Her conclusion? Britain robbed India of $45 trillion (or £9.2 trillion) during their 200 or so years of rule. This figure was immensely popular, and got republished in several major news outlets (here, here, here, here (they get the number wrong) and more recently here), got a mention from the Minister of External Affairs & returns 29,100 results on Google. There's also plenty of references to it here on Reddit. Patnaik is not the first to calculate such a figure. Angus Maddison thought it was £100 million, Simon Digby said £1 billion, Javier Estaban said £40 million see Roy (2019). The huge range of figures should set off some alarm bells. So how did Patnaik calculate this (shockingly large) figure? Well, even though I don't have access to the festschrift, she conveniently has written an article detailing her methodology here. Let's have a look.
How exactly did the British manage to diddle us and drain our wealth’ ? was the question that Basudev Chatterjee (later editor of a volume in the Towards Freedom project) had posed to me 50 years ago when we were fellow-students abroad.
This is begging the question.
After decades of research I find that using India’s commodity export surplus as the measure and applying an interest rate of 5%, the total drain from 1765 to 1938, compounded up to 2016, comes to £9.2 trillion; since $4.86 exchanged for £1 those days, this sum equals about $45 trillion.
This is completely meaningless. To understand why it's meaningless consider India's annual coconut exports. These are almost certainly a surplus but the surplus in trade is countered by the other country buying the product (indeed, by definition, trade surpluses contribute to the GDP of a nation which hardly plays into intuitive conceptualisations of drain). Furthermore, Dewey (2019) critiques the 5% interest rate.
She [Patnaik] consistently adopts statistical assumptions (such as compound interest at a rate of 5% per annum over centuries) that exaggerate the magnitude of the drain
The exact mechanism of drain, or transfers from India to Britain was quite simple.
Drain theory possessed the political merit of being easily grasped by a nation of peasants. [...] No other idea could arouse people than the thought that they were being taxed so that others in far off lands might live in comfort. [...] It was, therefore, inevitable that the drain theory became the main staple of nationalist political agitation during the Gandhian era.
The key factor was Britain’s control over our taxation revenues combined with control over India’s financial gold and forex earnings from its booming commodity export surplus with the world. Simply put, Britain used locally raised rupee tax revenues to pay for its net import of goods, a highly abnormal use of budgetary funds not seen in any sovereign country.
The issue with figures like these is they all make certain methodological assumptions that are impossible to prove. From Roy in Frankema et al. (2019):
the "drain theory" of Indian poverty cannot be tested with evidence, for several reasons. First, it rests on the counterfactual that any money saved on account of factor payments abroad would translate into domestic investment, which can never be proved. Second, it rests on "the primitive notion that all payments to foreigners are "drain"", that is, on the assumption that these payments did not contribute to domestic national income to the equivalent extent (Kumar 1985, 384; see also Chaudhuri 1968). Again, this cannot be tested. [...] Fourth, while British officers serving India did receive salaries that were many times that of the average income in India, a paper using cross-country data shows that colonies with better paid officers were governed better (Jones 2013).
Indeed, drain theory rests on some very weak foundations. This, in of itself, should be enough to dismiss any of the other figures that get thrown out. Nonetheless, I felt it would be a useful exercise to continue exploring Patnaik's take on drain theory.
The East India Company from 1765 onwards allocated every year up to one-third of Indian budgetary revenues net of collection costs, to buy a large volume of goods for direct import into Britain, far in excess of that country’s own needs.
So what's going on here? Well Roy (2019) explains it better:
Colonial India ran an export surplus, which, together with foreign investment, was used to pay for services purchased from Britain. These payments included interest on public debt, salaries, and pensions paid to government offcers who had come from Britain, salaries of managers and engineers, guaranteed profts paid to railway companies, and repatriated business profts. How do we know that any of these payments involved paying too much? The answer is we do not.
So what was really happening is the government was paying its workers for services (as well as guaranteeing profits - to promote investment - something the GoI does today Dalal (2019), and promoting business in India), and those workers were remitting some of that money to Britain. This is hardly a drain (unless, of course, Indian diaspora around the world today are "draining" it). In some cases, the remittances would take the form of goods (as described) see Chaudhuri (1983):
It is obvious that these debit items were financed through the export surplus on merchandise account, and later, when railway construction started on a large scale in India, through capital import. Until 1833 the East India Company followed a cumbersome method in remitting the annual home charges. This was to purchase export commodities in India out of revenue, which were then shipped to London and the proceeds from their sale handed over to the home treasury.
While Roy's earlier point argues better paid officers governed better, it is honestly impossible to say what part of the repatriated export surplus was a drain, and what was not. However calling all of it a drain is definitely misguided. It's worth noting that Patnaik seems to make no attempt to quantify the benefits of the Raj either, Dewey (2019)'s 2nd criticism:
she [Patnaik] consistently ignores research that would tend to cut the economic impact of the drain down to size, such as the work on the sources of investment during the industrial revolution (which shows that industrialisation was financed by the ploughed-back profits of industrialists) or the costs of empire school (which stresses the high price of imperial defence)
Since tropical goods were highly prized in other cold temperate countries which could never produce them, in effect these free goods represented international purchasing power for Britain which kept a part for its own use and re-exported the balance to other countries in Europe and North America against import of food grains, iron and other goods in which it was deficient.
Re-exports necessarily adds value to goods when the goods are processed and when the goods are transported. The country with the largest navy at the time would presumably be in very good stead to do the latter.
The British historians Phyllis Deane and WA Cole presented an incorrect estimate of Britain’s 18th-19th century trade volume, by leaving out re-exports completely. I found that by 1800 Britain’s total trade was 62% higher than their estimate, on applying the correct definition of trade including re-exports, that is used by the United Nations and by all other international organisations.
While interesting, and certainly expected for such an old book, re-exporting necessarily adds value to goods.
When the Crown took over from the Company, from 1861 a clever system was developed under which all of India’s financial gold and forex earnings from its fast-rising commodity export surplus with the world, was intercepted and appropriated by Britain. As before up to a third of India’s rising budgetary revenues was not spent domestically but was set aside as ‘expenditure abroad’.
So, what does this mean? Britain appropriated all of India's earnings, and then spent a third of it aboard? Not exactly. She is describing home charges see Roy (2019) again:
Some of the expenditures on defense and administration were made in sterling and went out of the country. This payment by the government was known as the Home Charges. For example, interest payment on loans raised to finance construction of railways and irrigation works, pensions paid to retired officers, and purchase of stores, were payments in sterling. [...] almost all money that the government paid abroad corresponded to the purchase of a service from abroad. [...] The balance of payments system that emerged after 1800 was based on standard business principles.India bought something and paid for it.State revenues were used to pay for wages of people hired abroad, pay for interest on loans raised abroad, and repatriation of profits on foreign investments coming into India. These were legitimate market transactions.
Indeed, if paying for what you buy is drain, then several billions of us are drained every day.
The Secretary of State for India in Council, based in London, invited foreign importers to deposit with him the payment (in gold, sterling and their own currencies) for their net imports from India, and these gold and forex payments disappeared into the yawning maw of the SoS’s account in the Bank of England.
It should be noted that India having two heads was beneficial, and encouraged investment per Roy (2019):
The fact that the India Office in London managed a part of the monetary system made India creditworthy, stabilized its currency, and encouraged foreign savers to put money into railways and private enterprise in India. Current research on the history of public debt shows that stable and large colonies found it easier to borrow abroad than independent economies because the investors trusted the guarantee of the colonist powers.
Against India’s net foreign earnings he issued bills, termed Council bills (CBs), to an equivalent rupee value. The rate (between gold-linked sterling and silver rupee) at which the bills were issued, was carefully adjusted to the last farthing, so that foreigners would never find it more profitable to ship financial gold as payment directly to Indians, compared to using the CB route. Foreign importers then sent the CBs by post or by telegraph to the export houses in India, that via the exchange banks were paid out of the budgeted provision of sums under ‘expenditure abroad’, and the exporters in turn paid the producers (peasants and artisans) from whom they sourced the goods.
Sunderland (2013) argues CBs had two main roles (and neither were part of a grand plot to keep gold out of India):
Council bills had two roles. They firstly promoted trade by handing the IO some control of the rate of exchange and allowing the exchange banks to remit funds to India and to hedge currency transaction risks. They also enabled the Indian government to transfer cash to England for the payment of its UK commitments.
The United Nations (1962) historical data for 1900 to 1960, show that for three decades up to 1928 (and very likely earlier too) India posted the second highest merchandise export surplus in the world, with USA in the first position. Not only were Indians deprived of every bit of the enormous international purchasing power they had earned over 175 years, even its rupee equivalent was not issued to them since not even the colonial government was credited with any part of India’s net gold and forex earnings against which it could issue rupees. The sleight-of-hand employed, namely ‘paying’ producers out of their own taxes, made India’s export surplus unrequited and constituted a tax-financed drain to the metropolis, as had been correctly pointed out by those highly insightful classical writers, Dadabhai Naoroji and RCDutt.
It doesn't appear that others appreciate their insight Roy (2019):
K. N. Chaudhuri rightly calls such practice ‘confused’ economics ‘coloured by political feelings’.
Surplus budgets to effect such heavy tax-financed transfers had a severe employment–reducing and income-deflating effect: mass consumption was squeezed in order to release export goods. Per capita annual foodgrains absorption in British India declined from 210 kg. during the period 1904-09, to 157 kg. during 1937-41, and to only 137 kg by 1946.
If even a part of its enormous foreign earnings had been credited to it and not entirely siphoned off, India could have imported modern technology to build up an industrial structure as Japan was doing.
This is, unfortunately, impossible to prove. Had the British not arrived in India, there is no clear indication that India would've united (this is arguably more plausible than the given counterfactual1). Had the British not arrived in India, there is no clear indication India would not have been nuked in WW2, much like Japan. Had the British not arrived in India, there is no clear indication India would not have been invaded by lizard people, much like Japan. The list continues eternally. Nevertheless, I will charitably examine the given counterfactual anyway. Did pre-colonial India have industrial potential? The answer is a resounding no. From Gupta (1980):
This article starts from the premise that while economic categories - the extent of commodity production, wage labour, monetarisation of the economy, etc - should be the basis for any analysis of the production relations of pre-British India, it is the nature of class struggles arising out of particular class alignments that finally gives the decisive twist to social change. Arguing on this premise, and analysing the available evidence, this article concludes that there was little potential for industrial revolution before the British arrived in India because, whatever might have been the character of economic categories of that period,the class relations had not sufficiently matured to develop productive forces and the required class struggle for a 'revolution' to take place.
Yet all of this did not amount to an economic situation comparable to that of western Europe on the eve of the industrial revolution. Her technology - in agriculture as well as manufacturers - had by and large been stagnant for centuries. [...] The weakness of the Indian economy in the mid-eighteenth century, as compared to pre-industrial Europe was not simply a matter of technology and commercial and industrial organization. No scientific or geographical revolution formed part of the eighteenth-century Indian's historical experience. [...] Spontaneous movement towards industrialisation is unlikely in such a situation.
So now we've established India did not have industrial potential, was India similar to Japan just before the Meiji era? The answer, yet again, unsurprisingly, is no. Japan's economic situation was not comparable to India's, which allowed for Japan to finance its revolution. From Yasuba (1986):
All in all, the Japanese standard of living may not have been much below the English standard of living before industrialization, and both of them may have been considerably higher than the Indian standard of living. We can no longer say that Japan started from a pathetically low economic level and achieved a rapid or even "miraculous" economic growth. Japan's per capita income was almost as high as in Western Europe before industrialization, and it was possible for Japan to produce surplus in the Meiji Period to finance private and public capital formation.
The circumstances that led to Meiji Japan were extremely unique. See Tomlinson (1985):
Most modern comparisons between India and Japan, written by either Indianists or Japanese specialists, stress instead that industrial growth in Meiji Japan was the product of unique features that were not reproducible elsewhere. [...] it is undoubtably true that Japan's progress to industrialization has been unique and unrepeatable
So there you have it. Unsubstantiated statistical assumptions, calling any number you can a drain & assuming a counterfactual for no good reason gets you this $45 trillion number. Hopefully that's enough to bury it in the ground. 1. Several authors have affirmed that Indian identity is a colonial artefact. For example seeRajan 1969:
Perhaps the single greatest and most enduring impact of British rule over India is that it created an Indian nation, in the modern political sense. After centuries of rule by different dynasties overparts of the Indian sub-continent, and after about 100 years of British rule, Indians ceased to be merely Bengalis, Maharashtrians,or Tamils, linguistically and culturally.
But then, it would be anachronistic to condemn eighteenth-century Indians, who served the British, as collaborators, when the notion of 'democratic' nationalism or of an Indian 'nation' did not then exist.[...]Indians who fought for them, differed from the Europeans in having a primary attachment to a non-belligerent religion, family and local chief, which was stronger than any identity they might have with a more remote prince or 'nation'.
Chakrabarti, Shubra & Patnaik, Utsa (2018). Agrarian and other histories: Essays for Binay Bhushan Chaudhuri. Colombia University Press Hickel, Jason (2018). How the British stole $45 trillion from India. The Guardian Bhuyan, Aroonim & Sharma, Krishan (2019). The Great Loot: How the British stole $45 trillion from India. Indiapost Monbiot, George (2020). English Landowners have stolen our rights. It is time to reclaim them. The Guardian Tsjeng, Zing (2020). How Britain Stole $45 trillion from India with trains | Empires of Dirt. Vice Chaudhury, Dipanjan (2019). British looted $45 trillion from India in today’s value: Jaishankar. The Economic Times Roy, Tirthankar (2019). How British rule changed India's economy: The Paradox of the Raj. Palgrave Macmillan Patnaik, Utsa (2018). How the British impoverished India. Hindustan Times Tuovila, Alicia (2019). Expenditure method. Investopedia Dewey, Clive (2019). Changing the guard: The dissolution of the nationalist–Marxist orthodoxy in the agrarian and agricultural history of India. The Indian Economic & Social History Review Chandra, Bipan et al. (1989). India's Struggle for Independence, 1857-1947. Penguin Books Frankema, Ewout & Booth, Anne (2019). Fiscal Capacity and the Colonial State in Asia and Africa, c. 1850-1960. Cambridge University Press Dalal, Sucheta (2019). IL&FS Controversy: Centre is Paying Up on Sovereign Guarantees to ADB, KfW for Group's Loan. TheWire Chaudhuri, K.N. (1983). X - Foreign Trade and Balance of Payments (1757–1947). Cambridge University Press Sunderland, David (2013). Financing the Raj: The City of London and Colonial India, 1858-1940. Boydell Press Dewey, Clive (1978). Patwari and Chaukidar: Subordinate officials and the reliability of India’s agricultural statistics. Athlone Press Smith, Lisa (2015). The great Indian calorie debate: Explaining rising undernourishment during India’s rapid economic growth. Food Policy Duh, Josephine & Spears, Dean (2016). Health and Hunger: Disease, Energy Needs, and the Indian Calorie Consumption Puzzle. The Economic Journal Vankatesh, P. et al. (2016). Relationship between Food Production and Consumption Diversity in India – Empirical Evidences from Cross Section Analysis. Agricultural Economics Research Review Gupta, Shaibal (1980). Potential of Industrial Revolution in Pre-British India. Economic and Political Weekly Raychaudhuri, Tapan (1983). I - The mid-eighteenth-century background. Cambridge University Press Yasuba, Yasukichi (1986). Standard of Living in Japan Before Industrialization: From what Level did Japan Begin? A Comment. The Journal of Economic History Tomblinson, B.R. (1985). Writing History Sideways: Lessons for Indian Economic Historians from Meiji Japan. Cambridge University Press Rajan, M.S. (1969). The Impact of British Rule in India. Journal of Contemporary History Bryant, G.J. (2000). Indigenous Mercenaries in the Service of European Imperialists: The Case of the Sepoys in the Early British Indian Army, 1750-1800. War in History
Dans la logique de mon post sur la vulgarisation du marché monétaire, voici une vulgarisation de la finance dans sa globalité. Avant de me lancer dans le vif du sujet, je tiens à clarifier des notions importantes qui pourraient porter à confusion et que je sais que je verrai dans les commentaires. Je vais aussi vous donner un peu mon opinion personnelle pour éviter tout malentendu dans la discussion, sautez cette partie si ça ne vous intéresse pas. Si la modération trouve que c'est trop hors-sujet, libre à elle de supprimer le post. J’ai entendu vos critiques dans les commentaires, j’avoue que j’ai vraiment trop simplifié certains passages, j’avais peur que le post soit trop long et trop technique, parfois au prix de la précision et de la rigueur, mea culpa. Cette fois-ci j’ai fait le choix de faire une synthèse des différents marchés financiers, qui régissent l’allocation des ressources financières dans notre société. Nombre d’entre vous ont dû entendre parler de certains d’entre eux, peut-être que vous participez à certains. Toutefois, comme dans mon autre post, je tiens à faire une précision importante. Les informations que je vous donne ici sont grandement insuffisantes pour que vous vous lanciez sur ces marchés, sans que cela s’apparente à une soirée au Monte Carlo pour votre portefeuille. Je ne vous incite aucunement à le faire, mon but étant uniquement d’éclairer ce qui se passe sur les marchés financiers, je n’ai aucune participation à quoi que ce soit, je ne suis pas rémunéré et je ne cherche pas à vendre ou à promouvoir quoi que ce soit. Je ne serai pas 100% exhaustif mais je ferai de mon mieux pour éclairer des sujets que vous pouvez parfois rencontrer dans la presse. Encore une fois, les questions et les remarques sont la bienvenue. Un marché financier est une notion très abstraite somme toute, il s’agît de l’ensemble des acteurs, des informations et des outils qui font que l’offre (d’actifs) et la demande (le capital) se rencontrent. Ce n’est pas à confondre avec une bourse, qui est un lieu physique (et maintenant virtuel) où se rencontrent l’offre et la demande, ou une place financière, qui est une ville qui regroupe un grand nombre de marchés financiers et d’acteurs majeurs. Quand votre tonton vous prête 10k EUR pour que vous lanciez votre site d’e-commerce, ou que vous déposez de l’argent à la banque, vous participez à un marché financier. Au fil de l’histoire, différents outils financiers ont fait leur apparition, parfois graduellement, parfois brusquement sous l’impulsion de génies/fous (souvent des mathématiciens) et ont conféré des propriétés particulières aux marchés financiers. Il s’agît entre autres de la capacité à : - Investitransférer le capital et les liquidités inutilisés - Transférer le risque entre participants - Echanger à l’international - Eviter qu’il y ait trop de disparités entre les prix dans le marché, et qu’ils suivent (plus ou moins bien) la valeur intrinsèque. Un marché efficace est par définition un marché qui reflète bien la valeur intrinsèque d'un investissement compte-tenu des informations disponibles. Des inefficacités peuvent surgir de coûts de transaction et/ou de frais d'agence élevés, de la faible liquidité des actifs ou encore à cause de barrières de toutes sortes. A mon humble avis, dans une économie de marché, il est dans l’intérêt public à ce que certains marchés soient efficaces pour que les inégalités économiques ne soient pas amplifiées et que toutes les classes sociales puissent y avoir accès, tant que cela ne se nuit pas indirectement à la société. Parlons maintenant de prix et de valeur intrinsèque. La valeur intrinsèque d’un actif ou d’un instrument financier est la valeur financière (et parfois non-financière) future qu’il procurera, compte tenu de l’incertitude qu’il y a autour de la capacité de l’actif à réaliser cette valeur à l’avenir. La valeur intrinsèque est subjective car elle dépend de l’acheteur, principalement de son aversion et de sa capacité à encaisser le risque, mais pas que, comme nous allons le voir. Le prix reflète entre autres l’offre et la demande de l’actif, plus précisément les informations qu’ont les acheteurs, leurs biais et les barrières à la transaction, c’est pour cela qu’il peut dévier, parfois fortement, de la valeur intrinsèque. La valeur intrinsèque est fondamentalement impossible à connaître, mais cela ne veut pas dire qu’il n’y a pas de modèles mathématiques ou qualitatifs pour tenter de l’estimer. Ce qu’on appelle un acteur rationnel c’est un participant qui va, compte tenu de son capital, de ses besoins de liquidité, de son horizon d’investissement et de son aversion au risque (qui est une caractéristique rationnelle) acheter les actifs dont le prix est en-dessous de la valeur intrinsèque qu’il leur assigne et vendre ceux dont le prix est au-dessus de cette valeur. Je ne crois pas qu’il y ait une façon non biaisée de présenter la finance alors je vais vous donner mon biais. Je crois personnellement en la finance comportementale et ce que je vais dire dans ce paragraphe est très controversé et mériterait toute une vie de recherche pour justifier (on peut en reparler dans les commentaires). Il faut savoir qu’il y a des paramètres anthropologiques (psychologiques, sociologiques, culturels, religieux et géographiques) qui viennent affecter les marchés, notamment leur efficacité, et les financiers et les régulateurs peuvent aborder le problème de plusieurs façons. Parfois on va trouver des intermédiaires qui vont faire fi de ces barrières, parfois on va tenter d’anonymiser les participants, parfois on va trouver un moyen de diffuser l’information à tous les participants, parfois on va réguler pour empêcher certains comportements nuisibles ou illégaux, ou bien on va créer des outils ou des stratagèmes pour contourner les barrières sans les effacer. La désintermédiation, la dérèglementation et le décloisonnement, ainsi que la volonté d’atteindre la concurrence pure et parfaite, ne sont pas toujours les meilleurs moyens d’avoir des marchés efficaces. Il faudrait que toutes les barrières socioculturelles, tous les biais psychologiques des participants des marchés disparaissent pour que cela puisse se faire, ce qui n’est évidemment ni souhaitable ni possible. Le début est un peu technique mais est crucial pour que vous compreniez la suite. Premièrement, je vais vous parler de la notion de marché primaire et de marché secondaire, qui détermine où est transféré le capital et le risque. Deuxièmement, je vais vous parler de l’organisation et de la régulation des marchés. Troisièmement, je vais vous parler de la classification des marchés en fonction des instruments financiers qui s’y échangent et dernièrement je vais vous parler de la classification des marchés en fonction des actifs qui s’y échangent. A – Les marchés primaires, secondaires, tertiaires et quaternaires. Le marché primaire est le marché qui fait rencontrer ceux qui vont fournir des actions ou des obligations de leur propre entreprise, des matières premières ou autres actifs, en échange de capital. Quand une entreprise ou un Etat lèvent des fonds ils participent sur ce marché, quand une société d’exploitation de pétrole brut vend ses barils elle y participe aussi. Quand vous prêtez de l’argent à votre pote, ou que vous achetez une maison neuve à un promoteur immobilier vous participez au marché primaire. En général, il s’agît d’un marché désorganisé où des particuliers et des entreprises se rencontrent par leurs propres moyens (bouche à oreille, publicité) et qui est très peu régulé, qu’on appelle gré-à-gré, que j’expliciterai bientôt. Ce marché est relativement risqué et peu transparent, en général votre seul recours juridique est le civil et si votre contrepartie fait faillite vous n’avez aucune garantie de pouvoir récupérer votre dû. Il demande de faire confiance à votre contrepartie, d’être compétent et parfois spécialisé dans ce domaine ainsi que d’être particulièrement critique des informations que l’on vous donne. Quand il est organisé, il s’agît le plus souvent d’une vente aux enchères entre participants agréés. Le marché secondaire est le marché où les actifs sont revendus entre investisseurs, ici le capital et le risque sont transférés d’un investisseur à un autre. Ce marché a plusieurs fonctions, il permet entre autres aux investisseurs de sortir du marché quand ils en ont envie, de standardiser et regrouper les actifs, d’actualiser le prix des actifs en fonction des événements et de permettre à un plus grand nombre d’investisseurs de détenir certains actifs qui leur serait parfois impossible d’obtenir faute de contacts ou de moyens. Si une action ou une obligation est échangée sur le marché secondaire, cela veut dire que l’entreprise sous-jacente a donné son accord à ce qu’elle renonce à choisir qui détient ses parts ou sa dette (à quelques exceptions près), elle n’est pas affectée directement par la transaction. Le marché secondaire est le plus souvent organisé et régulé, moyennant commission. Il est le plus souvent organisé dans un type d’enchère très particulier qu’on appelle bourse, ou bien d’un marché organisé par un courtier. Je parle brièvement du marché tertiaire et du marché quaternaire car vous pourrez peut-être en entendre parler, le marché tertiaire est le marché où les courtiers interagissent avec les grosses institutions (souvent des banques) et le marché quaternaire est le marché entre grosses institutions uniquement. Ce sont des marchés gré-à-gré. B – L’organisation et la régulation des marchés Le marché le plus basique est le marché gré-à-gré ou over the counter (OTC) en anglais. Comme je l’ai dit plus haut, ce marché n’est pas organisé, il est sans intermédiaires. Pour y participer il faut trouver des contreparties par ses propres moyens, chercher les informations par soi-même et surtout faire confiance à la personne en face, chose qui n’est pas toujours facile. C’est surtout sur ce marché que se manifestent les barrières anthropologiques et les biais psychologiques car il y a peu de moyens de réguler ce qui s’y passe ou d’être sûr des informations que l’on a. Bien évidemment il existe des lois et des garde-fous juridiques ou médiatiques, mais vous êtes libres de rédiger n’importe quel contrat légal sur ce marché. C’est d’ailleurs ici que vous verrez les instruments financiers les plus complexes comme les options exotiques ou les swaps. Sur le marché gré-à-gré on dit que la liquidité est faible, comme vous avez souvent affaire à des actifs uniques (startups, œuvres d’art, options exotiques) que très peu de personnes convoitent, ce qui fait qu’il est coûteux et long de trouver des acheteurs, et ce qui pousse les prix à la hausse. Je ne vais pas m’attarder dessus car il y a énormément à dire dessus, mais la vente aux enchères est une forme d’organisation des marchés. Vous y trouverez par exemple les obligations souveraines, les œuvres d’art ou bien, lors d’une introduction en bourse d’une entreprise, des actions sont attribuées aux premiers actionnaires via une enchère, ce qui permet de déterminer le prix initial de l’action en bourse. Si cela vous intéresse, regardez les différents types de vente aux enchères comme l’enchère anglaise ou l’enchère néerlandaise. Ici vous avez quelques intermédiaires qui rentrent en jeux comme le commissaire-priseur ou la banque d’investissement pour l’introduction en bourse, qui vont prendre leur commission en échange de la publicité qu’ils fournissent à votre actif et de la facilitation de la transaction – autrement dit de la liquidité. Il est à noter qu’un commissaire-priseur qui tient à sa réputation va exiger certaines contraintes et garanties sur l’actif, ce qui donne un début de régulation au marché financier. Dans le cas d’une introduction en bourse (Initial Public Offering ou IPO), les exigences sont draconiennes, les comptes financiers, les cadres dirigeants de l’entreprise et les actionnaires actuels sont scrutés à la fois par l’Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF) en France, et les analystes financiers. La bourse est une forme d’enchère très spécifique. Elle rassemble des traders qui travaillent pour des courtiers ou des sociétés de gestion d’actifs et fonctionne avec une enchère dite continue/dirigée par ordres et est chapeautée par l’AMF en France. Les traders donnent des ordres de vente et d’achat – soit ils donnent un prix et achètent ou vendent tout ce qui est à un prix meilleur ou égal, soit ils spécifient une quantité et achètent ou vendent peu importe le prix, il existe aussi des ordres plus complexes où l’on spécifie un prix, une quantité et une date limite, entre autres. La bourse génère des profits en prenant une commission sur chaque ordre et à chaque fois qu’une nouvelle entreprise rentre sur le marché s’il s’agît d’une bouse d’actions. Ici il n’y a pas un prix unique pour un actif, il y a le prix de la demande (ask) et le prix de l’offre (bid) – il faut proposer un prix égal ou supérieur à l’ask pour pouvoir acheter l’actif et un prix inférieur ou égal au bid pour pouvoir le vendre. Un des effets de cette structure de marché (qui peut paraître contre-intuitif pour ceux habitués au marché gré-à-gré) est que plus on veut acheter une grande quantité de l’actif, plus il va falloir proposer un prix élevé, et inversement plus l’on veut en vendre, plus il va falloir baisser son prix. La bourse crée un peu plus de symétrie entre les acheteurs et les vendeurs, ce qui n’existe pas dans le marché gré-à-gré où l’avantage est déterminé largement par le contrôle qu’ont les acheteurs et les vendeurs sur le marché et l’information en circulation. Le rapport de force ne disparaît pas entièrement mais est artificiellement atténué. Cela fait aussi que si beaucoup d’acheteurs et vendeurs sont intéressés par un actif et que beaucoup d’ordres circulent, statistiquement la différence entre le bid et l’ask sera plus faible, c’est pour cela qu’on mesure traditionnellement la liquidité d’un actif en bourse par la différence entre le bid et l’ask, qu’on appelle le « bid-ask spread », par la moyenne du bid et de l’ask. En exigeant une forte transparence, en attirant des analystes financiers, les autorités des marchés et les médias, la bourse est un peu moins risquée que le marché gré-à-gré, permet d’avoir une meilleure idée de la valeur intrinsèque et surtout une bien meilleure liquidité, bien sûr à un prix. Bien sûr, le risque propre aux rendements futurs de l’investissement n’est pas vraiment affecté et jouer en bourse reste relativement risqué, voir même à espérance négative dans le cas du marché des changes. Sans rentrer sans les détails, la bourse permet parfois d’effectuer la vente à découvert (short-selling), c’est quand vous empruntez un actif à quelqu’un qui le détient, moyennant commission, pour le vendre immédiatement, le racheter plus tard (en espérant que les prix ont fortement baissé) et le rendre à son propriétaire après – cette pratique permet dans de nombreux cas d’ajuster des prix trop élevés lorsque pour x ou y raison les détenteurs ne les vendent pas alors que le prix est surélevé. Traditionnellement une bourse se tient dans un lieu physique mais maintenant c’est largement effectué virtuellement. La dernière structure de marché majeure est le marché organisé par un courtier – souvent une banque d’investissement. Ici le courtier achète une grosse quantité d’actifs sur la bourse en tant que broker et la revend au détail à ses clients en tant que dealer, ses traders sont là pour répondre à la demande des clients au meilleur prix possible et à liquider le surplus. Le courtier peut prendre une commission sur les ordres, fixer son propre bid-ask en fonction de ses stocks disponibles et empocher la différence. Dans certains cas il peut prêter de l’argent à ses clients pour qu’ils achètent ses produits et encaisser les intérêts du prêt ou encore proposer les services d’analystes financiers qui vont faire des recommandations aux clients (a.k.a full service). Ces marchés restent contrôlés par l’AMF en France vu le contrôle qu’a le courtier sur son marché, le but étant que ses prix suivent ceux de la bourse. Le courtier gère son propre risque et met des limites (comme le margin call) pour éviter que ses clients ne fassent faillite – il est perdant si cela se produit, surtout s’il a prêté de l’argent à son client, il a surtout intérêt à ce que son client continue d’effectuer des ordres car c’est comme cela qu’il se rémunère, parfois au détriment du client. C – marché au comptant, marché à terme et marché dérivé Le marché au comptant, en anglais « spot » est le marché où les échanges ont lieu en temps direct – si accord il y a, l’actif et le capital sont échangés au moment de la transaction. Sans aucun autre instrument il n’offre pas beaucoup de flexibilité, il ne permet pas de manipuler facilement le risque auquel on s’expose, car en achetant un actif on prend à 100% le risque du sous-jacent et on est totalement soumis aux aléas des prix. Le marché à terme est un peu différent. Ici on s’engage dans des contrats spécifiques où l’on se met d’accord sur un prix et où l’échange de capital et d’actif s’effectue à une date postérieure, peu importe le prix du marché à ce moment. Le terme utilisé pour dire qu’on rentre dans un contrat à terme est prendre une position. Ici on a un transfert d’une partie du risque de l’acheteur de l’actif (on dit qu’il est en position longue) au vendeur (on dit qu’il est en position courte). En effet, celui en position longue préfère fixer le prix futur et ne pas prendre le risque que les prix baissent et celui en position courte prend le risque d’acheter quelque chose qui en vaudra moins à la date de l’échange. Cela permet à certains investisseurs de couvrir, par exemple, leur risque de change s’ils savent qu’à une certaine date ils voudront échanger une certaine somme de monnaie contre une autre et à d’autres qui ont une plus grande capacité à encaisser le risque de spéculer. Ces contrats ont d’autant plus de valeur que le sous-jacent est volatile. Vu qu’on a vu le marché gré-à-gré et la bourse, je vais parler des différences entre les deux sur le marché à terme. Sur le marché à terme gré-à-gré, les contrats à terme sont appelés « forwards », vous pouvez les personnaliser comme vous voulez, avec vos prix, vos quantités, vous négociez ça. Cependant, si votre contrepartie fait faillite avant l’exécution du contrat, vous n’avez aucun moyen d’effectuer la transaction et vous n’avez aucun moyen de sortir de ce contrat si vous-mêmes vous avez des difficultés à remplir vos obligations. Si vous êtes un agriculteur qui vend sa récolte de l’année prochaine avec ce type de contrat, vous avez intérêt à faire en sorte que vous produisez assez pour l’exécuter ou que vous pouvez acheter ce qui vous manque si vous n’y parvenez pas le jour de la livraison. Sur le marché à terme en bourse c’est un peu différent, ici les prix, les quantités, les obligations contractuelles et modalités de livraison sont fixés à l’avance par l’offre et la demande et ne sont pas négociables, avec ce qu’on appelle les contrats « futures ». L’avantage des futures est que si vous pensez qu’il y a un risque que vous ne puissiez apporter votre partie du contrat (le capital ou l’actif), vous pouvez vous dégager de votre obligation contractuelle en cédant votre position à quelqu’un en capacité de le faire – si vous avez de la chance, plus de participants pourront exécuter votre position maintenant, ce qui normalement devrait rendre votre position attirante et on vous achètera votre contrat. Si au contraire, nombre comme vous ne peuvent exécuter ce contrat (mauvaises récoltes à cause de la météo par exemple), vous aurez du mal à le céder et vous serez peut-être obligé de payer quelqu’un pour qu’il l’exécute à votre place. Par ailleurs, les participants sont obligés d’avoir un apport en capital pour rentrer dans un future et si par hasard votre contrepartie fait faillite, la chambre de compensation (ou clearing house) vous remboursera, ce qui élimine le risque de contrepartie. Autre particularité du contrat à terme, vous pouvez conserver la rente de votre actif tant que la date d’exécution n’est pas venue, mais vous devez toujours payer les frais de stockage, livraison ou autres, ce qui est bien sûr pris en compte dans le prix. Le marché des dérivés est vraiment là où le risque est transféré et manipulé. Ici on échange ce qu’on appelle des options/warrants, des contrats d’échange (swaps), des pensions livrées (repurchase agreements ou « repo »), les couvertures de défaillance (credit default swaps, CDS) entre autres. N’ayez crainte on va attaquer chacun de ces termes. D’abord, sur le marché des dérivés en bourse on a les options dite « vanilla ». Une option, contrairement à un contrat à terme, donne le droit et non l’obligation, d’acheter ou de vendre un actif à un moment donné à un prix donné et on effectue une transaction financière pour rentrer dans ce contrat, proportionnelle au risque que transféré d’une partie à l’autre. Le droit d’acheter l’actif est appelé « call » et le droit de le vendre est appelé « put », le prix convenu est appelé « strike price ». Si le jour venu votre strike price est plus intéressante que le prix de l’actif à ce moment-là, on dit que votre option est « in the money » (ITM), si votre option est moins intéressante on dit qu’elle est « out of the money » (OTM) et si elle est aussi intéressante que le prix actuel, on dit qu’elle est « at the money » (ATM). Si votre option vous donne seulement la possibilité d’exercer votre droit à une date donnée, on dit qu’elle est de style européen, si vous pouvez l’exercer à n’importe quel moment jusqu’à la date convenue on dit qu’elle est de style américain. Plus le prix de l’actif sous-jacent est volatile, et plus il est facile d’exercer l’option (par exemple si elle est de style américain), plus il y a de fortes chances que l’option soit in-the-money, plus la valeur de l’option augmente, car le détenteur transmet beaucoup de risque à sa contrepartie. Vous trouverez aussi en bourse de commerce des options sur la météo, pour vous protéger en cas de mauvaises récoltes par exemple. L’intérêt de ces options est qu’elles peuvent facilement créer de gros effets de levier étant donné qu’une option vaut typiquement 2-10% de l’actif sous-jacent, puis comme c’est échangé en bourse on peut s’en débarrasser rapidement si on ne peut pas les exercer faute de moyens ou d’actif. Pour les matheux intrigués je conseille en introduction le modèle de Black-Scholes. Sur le marché gré-à-gré on va retrouver tous les contrats divers et variés susmentionnés. Une warrant est une option non-échangeable émise par une banque en série limitée. Ensuite on a les options exotiques, qui sont tout un tas d’options avec des règles particulières. Pour vous donner des exemples on a des options pour échanger des actifs (pourquoi pas du blé contre une action Google ?), les options style asiatique qui vous donnent le droit d’acheter un actif à son prix moyen sur une période donnée (pour vous protéger de la volatilité) ou les options style parisiennes qu’on ne peut exercer que si le prix du sous-jacent est dans certains clous pendant une certaine période (pour vous protéger de la manipulation des cours). Le swap ou contrat d’échange est quand deux parties se mettent d’accord pour faire plusieurs contrats à terme à répétition, nous allons en voir des exemples plus tard. Je m'attarde un peu sur le repo car c'est très discuté dans les actualités récemment. J'y ai fait référence dans mon post sur la monnaie. Un repo est une transaction spot (actif contre capital) plus un contrat forward pour que l'actif soit racheté à une période future. C'est une façon pour une institution financière d'emprunter de l'argent à une autre (souvent pour une très courte période, parfois 24h), comme la banque centrale, sans que l'autre partie ne prenne quelconque risque, tant est que l'actif échangé soit fiable, comme un bon du trésor. La banque centrale injecte des liquidités temporairement, elles reviennent dans ses coffres le jour suivant. Ce n'est pas comme le Quantitative Easing où l'actif est définitivement acheté par la banque centrale et l'argent est injecté durablement dans le système. La banque centrale fait des repo pour imposer pratiquement par la force les taux qu'elle veut transmettre au reste de l'économie, surtout lorsque les banques commerciales ne se font plus confiance et font grimper leurs taux au-delà des limites définies par la banque centrale. Les couvertures de défaillance servent à rembourser les détenteurs d'obligations lorsque l'entreprise sous-jacente fait défaut (c'est un contrat d'assurance). Synthèse de l'organisation et de la classification des marchés D – Les marchés selon les types d’actifs Le marché monétaire (que j’ai couvert en détail dans mon post précédent) est le marché où les liquidités excédentaires sont prêtées pour une période courte aux entreprises, particuliers ou Etats qui en ont besoin, moyennant une rente nommée intérêt. je vous renvoie à mon post sur le sujet Le marché de la dette long-terme est là où se financent les participants qui veulent des fonds pour une période supérieure à deux ans, moyennant intérêts. On appelle le marché où s’échange entre investisseurs la dette long-terme le marché obligataire. On a des obligations de différents types en fonction des intérêts versés ou des options attachées à l'obligation. Une obligation a un principal et un coupon (l'intérêt versé périodiquement). Une obligation sans coupon est un zéro-coupon et au lieu de verser un intérêt, on prête initialement une somme au débiteur qui est inférieure au principal qu'il doit rendre à la fin du contrat. Le principal peut être remboursé progressivement comme pour une dette immobilière (amortissement) ou en totalité d'un coup à la fin du contrat (bullet bond). Le coupon peut être à taux fixe ou variable. Si c'est variable ce sera en général le LIBOR + une petite prime de risque/liquidité ou bien une grosse prime - le LIBOR. Comme on peut revendre des obligations sur le marché secondaire, leur prix va varier en fonction du risque que le débiteur fasse défaut et des taux. Si les taux en vigueur aujourd'hui sont meilleurs que celui de votre obligation, sa valeur relative décroît. C'est pour cela que les obligations d'Etat ont un risque de prix sur le marché secondaire et ne sont pas sans risque, le risque de défaut n'est pas le seul risque d'une obligation. Une des propriétés vertueuses des obligations est la convexité, en termes simples, une obligation peut plus facilement prendre de la valeur si les taux baissent, qu'elle ne peut en perdre si les taux augmentent. On trouvera sur le marché des dérivés des couvertures de défaillance (CDS), des repo et des swaps pour échanger des taux fixes contre des taux variables, ainsi que des mortgage-backed-securities (MBS) qui regroupent de nombreux crédits immobiliers d'une banque régionale ou des collateralized-debt-obligations (CDO) qui regroupent des crédits et d'autres instruments financiers pour produire un actif complexe avec un risque personnalisé (souvent très élevé). Ce sont les CDO, les MBS et les CDS qui ont causé la crise de 2008 comme les agences de notation n'ont pas fait leur rôle et ont sous-estimé le risque de ces produits. Le marché action est le marché où s’échangent les parts des entreprises. Une action représente la valeur résiduelle des profits (ou de la liquidation) d’une entreprise une fois que tous les créanciers (l’Etat compris) sont payés. Certaines actions ont des droits de votes, d’autres non. Elles versent une rente appelée dividendes, qui sont variables en fonction des résultats de l’entreprise ainsi que de ses besoins en capital. Une définition alternative d’une action est une dette à durée indéterminée/illimitée. En bourse on va calculer la valeur intrinsèque de l'action en faisant la somme des dividendes futurs qu'on espère plus le prix de cession espéré divisisés par un taux qui représente le risque de l'investissement et le retour minimum qu'on attend en échange. Alternativement on calcule la valeur liquidative des actifs de l'entreprise moins sa dette si on pense qu'elle va faire faillite. Plus un dividende est éloigné dans le temps, moins il comptera dans la valeur intrinsèque, puis si l'on estime que le risque est élevé, les dividendes lointains ne comptent quasiment pas. Si on pense que le marché est efficace, deux autres méthodes populaires existent, la première est appelée les multiples. En gros on regarde les entreprises comparables et on calcule ler prix divisés par leurs revenus par exemple, puis on multiplie les revenus de l'entreprise qu'on analyse par ces multiples pour avoir une idée de sa valorisation relative. Sinon, on regarde à quel point l'action varie en même temps que le restedu marché. Si l'action varie moins fortement que le marché, on lui donne une valeur plus grande, inversement si elle varie plus fortement on baisse sa valeur car on considère que c'est une action risquée. Hors bourse, il y a plusieurs méthodes. Si l'entreprise est toute nouvelle on va surtout valoriser la compétence des entrepreneurs pour estimer le risque, si l'entreprise gagne déjà de l'argent mais ne verse pas de dividendes on va regarder ses flux de trésorerie et son EBITDA. On classifie les actions en fonction des secteurs industriels, du prix par rapport aux revenus nets, flux de trésorerie et aux dividendes (Value et Growth) ainsi qu'en fonction de leur capitalisation boursière. On trouvera ici nos options, mais aussi des indices boursiers qui font la moyenne des rendements (en terme de prix et de dividendes) d'un groupe d'actions, soit à part égale pour chaque entreprise, soit pondérée par leur capitalisation boursière ou leurs prix par action individuelle. Ces indices sont suivis par des fonds indiciels, qui peuvent être soit des fonds mutuels (achetés en gré-à-gré) ou des ETF (achetés en bourse/courtiers). On trouvera ici nos options, nos warrants, des equity swaps (échange de dividendes par exemple) ou des total return swaps (pour les ETF synthétiques, voir mon post sur le sujet). On notera que le marché action et le marché obligataire forment le marché dit des capitaux. Le marché des changes (Foreign Exchange ou tout simplement ForEx en anglais) est le marché qui fait jonction entre les différentes économies et permet de convertir une monnaie en une autre – la monnaie ne verse pas de rente mais est sujette à l’inflation/déflation de l’économie qu’elle représente. L’offre et la demande d’une monnaie est déterminée par l’attractivité de l’économie – si beaucoup d’investisseurs étrangers veulent y investir, la demande pour la monnaie va croître et sa valeur relative va s’apprécier, ou bien si des ressortissants d'un pays veulent renvoyer des liquidités chez eux. Alternativement certaines monnaies sont fixées à d’autres monnaies ou, rarement aujourd’hui, fluctuent en fonction du prix de certaines matières premières et de la quantité d'icelles possédée par la banque centrale par rapport à la demande de la monnaie. Dans le cas des cryptomonnaies, en plus de la demande et l'offre de monnaie, on valorise aussi la qualité des services, la capacité de calcul allouée et coût pour effectuer les transactions. Ici on peut faire des swaps de monnaie, en gros simuler le coût d'un échange de monnaie sans s'échanger réellement la monnaie. Ca permet de couvrir le risque de change sans passer par le marché classique. Le marché alternatif est composé de plusieurs marchés comme le marché des matières premières (représenté par les bourses de commerce) où s’échangent métaux précieux, l'énergie, le pétrole et blé entre autres, le marché des fonds d’investissement à stratégies alternatives type private equity/venture capital/hedge fund avec des stratégies impossibles à réaliser pour des particuliers seuls, le marché de l’immobilier – où la rente est appelée loyer, le marché des œuvres d’art, du vin et j’en passe et des meilleurs. Sur les matières premières on va aussi trouver des indices de prix (commodity indexes), des futures sur l'or, des options sur la météo et des forwards sur des matières exotiques. L'immobilier est classé en plusieurs catégories comme le résidentiel, le commercial et les bureaux, les actifs peuvent être détenus en direct ou à travers des fonds privés ou cotés. En résumé Voilà une synthèse de la finance aujourd'hui. J'ai omis des sujets comme la FinTech car cela sort du propos, mais, tant est que la modération l'accepte, je vais publier une brève histoire de la finance qui comprendra cela. J'ai fait exprès d'aborder certains sujets sans trop les creuser, notamment les bulles financières, car je préfère répondre à des questions précises plutôt que de me lancer dans une explication qui va perdre tout le monde. Je n'ai pas eu le temps de faire tous les graphiques et schémas que je voulais mais si vous en voulez en particulier ce sera avec plaisir. Si vous voulez des sources pour des éléments particuliers hésitez pas, j'ai toute une bibliographie d'articles et de livres. Merci à ceux qui m'ont encouragé à écrire ce post.
COSS exchange was taken offline on January 7th 2020 with immediate notice to all users. The plan was to begin migration to a white label platform after proceeding with account-level snapshots. The migration was halted mid-way as COSS entered and finalised acquisition negotiations, followed by audits of the existing technology, user data and wallets. With the audits completed, the new management decided to do away with the old exchange platform and introduce a much more advanced engine for its users. This is the platform which goes online this week with many added features including derivatives with up to 100x leverage, as well as an Exchange Swap Engine for instant conversions.
We apologise for the downtime — unconditionally.
The decision to shut down the exchange was not in our control and we, unfortunately, were handed over a shut exchange. We have done our best to re-enable the exchange for all users quickly and assure you that such missteps will be avoided at all costs in the future. The new COSS is a group of investors, professional traders, and financial technology specialists. Who strongly believes in the original vision of COSS — a one-stop platform for modern digital assets whose success is dependent on and shared with all its users — a unique approach to decentralised finance.
The idea is in line with the original concept of creating a shared ‘digital economy’ instead of mirroring a system where the traditional institutional lenders and service providers benefit while the people pay fees to use and access their own assets.
The investment group has appointed a board of directors and is currently assessing nominations for the role of CEO. The board will leave the day-to-day operations to the CEO and their team with a clear mandate — to restore and build COSS the brand for success. Rune and the previous technology, operations and marketing teams will no longer be involved with COSS. We appreciate their work in the past and wish them all the best for future endeavours. Satyarth will continue to remain on board with us and support the community management, marketing and PR team.
New Technology Partner
The new management has carefully evaluated several options to ensure COSS has a stable, scalable and continuously improving technology platform. We have partnered with XHUB — a financial and trading technology company. The XHUB team has vast experience in working with brokers, hedge funds, and proprietary trading firms. XHUB maintains one of the largest cryptocurrency liquidity and order routing systems in the industry, and a trading platform which has been exclusively and extensively used in-house by large trading firms. The XHUB technology team will extend its support to COSS API consumers and encourage them to keep building trading applications for the community. Consumers will have access to extensive historical and real-time market data which will allow them to create advanced strategies supported by back-testing.
A general roadmap of the board’s vision for the immediate future is included below. We remain focused on ensuring that COSS provides a reliable trading platform for retail and professional traders alike.
COSS will relaunch the exchange platform and enable full trading on supported pairs
Current COSS account holders will be sent new login credentials via email and an invitation to begin trading
COS holders will be allocated 100% of the fees generated by the exchange until the FSA dashboard is completed and launched
Balance transfers from previous exchange platform are initiated by the account login. This begins the final-phase of the account audit.
Withdrawal of audited portfolios / balances will be available within 48 hrs of the account portfolio transfer
REST and Websocket access to market data
REST access to account and trade endpoints
Websocket access to account end points
FIX Engine quote and trade functional release
Mobile Trading App (iOS, Android)
Beta release of the full-featured mobile app
Full public launch of the trading app
Listing Policy Release
Compliant with all regulatory requirements
API Community Development
GitHub community to showcase public projects
Budget allocated for development competitions
Mobile Wallet App (v2) (iOS, Android)
Release of the full-featured wallet/payment and proximity peer to peer payment app
Release full scale derivative trading platform for Windows, iOS and Android
Cryptocurrency arbitrage between popular exchanges
Forex, Commodities and Indices with institutional enterprise grade liquidity
Expert Advisors, MQL5, back testing and bot trading
Leverage trading will be reduced as the final step for licensing
Vendor and Payments API
Release of web and mobile payment processing for merchants
Roadmap will be updated in the first and third quarter every year, and will cover plans for that period. Relaunch FAQ The exchange will be operational on 4th March, 2020. To adhere to existing anti-money laundering, counter-terrorism financing and know your customer regulations, existing users will need to complete level-1 KYC. This can be done with a single government-issued photo identity document. Final phase account audit clearance is subject to KYC approval. COS token trading will be available on the COS_USD pair. More pairs will be added as trading activity improves. Maker and taker fees will be set at 0.05% and 0.1% respectively. Trading fee discount and negative maker fees will be discontinued. An updated COS holding based fee tier system may be introduced in the future. The Fee Split Allocation (FSA) dashboard is under development. However, FSA will be tracked and accrue from day one. COS held in private wallets will need to be re-identified and linked to your new user accounts once the dashboard is launched. We will initiate a delisting procedure for some assets. A complete list of pairs and the withdrawal process for the same will be released at a later date. Crypto deposits will remain at 0 fees. A fee schedule for crypto withdrawals will be published on the website. Fiat deposits will be available via Epay and transfers from Epay wallet to COSS will be at 0 fees. Deposits through credit and debit cards will be introduced at 4% fees. We will add more fiat options including withdrawals in the coming weeks. Thank you for all your support and feedback. We are expecting a rush to access COSS accounts and will complete verification for all applicants as quickly as possible. We apologise for any unforeseen delays during the process. You can reach us on [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) in case you require any further assistance.
Immediate Aftermath : The more data we collect and analyze, the clearer the picture becomes.
This is the updated first part of the list that has recorded the notable events as the world deals with the COVID-19 pandemic. [2nd Part] ― The LINKS to events and sources are placed throughout the timeline. ------------------------ The More Data We Collect and Analyze, the Clearer the Picture Becomes. Someone threw a stone in a pond a long way away. And we're only just feeling the ripples. — Fukuhara from Giri/Haji, Netflix series ------------------------ On Jan 30, Italian PM announced that Italy had blocked all flights to and from China. While Italy has banned people from air-travelling to China, however according to IATA data, there's no measurement implemented for air-travellers from China into Italy till the Mar 07. Especially for Chinese people who have EU passports. On Jan 31, the US announced the category-I travel restrictions, barring all foreigners who have been in China for the past 14 days, with measures including the refusal of visas and mandatory quarantine. • "Because the US focused on China and didn't expect the infected people's entry from Europe and the Middle East, the Maginot Line was breached from behind. And so little of credible data at the beginning made the US government to miscalculate its strategic response to the virus." — Dr. Zhang Lun, currently a visiting scholar at Harvard (economics & sociology), during the interview with ICPC on Mar 29. Also on Jan 31, the WHO changed its tune and declared the coronavirus outbreak a Global Public Health Emergency of international concern (PHEIC).
Decisions on a PHEIC always involve politics .... West African countries discouraged a declaration in 2014 after they were hit by the largest Ebola virus outbreak on record, mainly because of concern about the economic impact.
------------------------ On Feb 02, regarding the US category-I travel restrictions, Kamala Harris, the former Democratic presidential candidate, declared on Twitter:
Since 2017, Trump’s travel bans have never been rooted in national security—they’re about discriminating against people of color. They are, without a doubt, rooted in anti-immigrant, white supremacist ideologies. This travel ban is no different.
On Feb 03, criticizing Trump for his travel restrictions continues. Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying (华春莹), a Peking University professors James Liang (梁建章), New York Times, the Nation, OBSERVER, the Boston Globe, Yahoo, and Daily Kos were saying, it's a "panicky" decision and "racist" or it's "cruel and callous," he's stoking fear for political gains, and the president is "inappropriately overreacting." And professors Liang even said the US ban "will hurt goodwill and cooperation [with China] in the future."          Also on Feb 03, Mr. Tedros of the WHO said there's no need for travel ban measure that "unnecessarily interfere with international travel and trade" trying to halt the spread of the virus.
China's delegate took the floor ... and denounced measures by "some countries" that have denied entry to people holding passports issued in Hubei province - at the centre of the outbreak - and to deny visas and cancel flights.
Also on Feb 03, China is expected to gradually implement a larger stimulus packages (in total) than a USD $572 billion from 2008. — We'd never find out but my guess is that the fund will probably go to Shanghai clique. On Feb 04, The FDA has given emergency authorization to a new test kit by the CDC that promises to help public health labs meet a potential surge in cases.
The speed ... pushing through a new diagnostic test shows just how seriously they’re taking the potentially pandemic threat of 2019-nCoV. It’s also a sign that the world is starting to learn how to deal with an onslaught of new pathogens.
Also on Feb 04, the Wuhan Institute of Virology and China's Academy of Military Medical Sciences (AMMS, Chief Chen Wei belongs to) have jointly applied to patent the use of Remdesivir. Scientists from both institutes said in a paper published in Nature’s Cell Research that they found both Remdesivir and Chloroquine to be an effective way to inhibit the coronavirus. On Feb 06, Jamestown Foundation, a Washington-based research & analysis unit, noted that with State Council of PRC praising his performance of containing the pandemic situation, the council expanded Li Keqiang's political control over Politburo Standing Committee of CCP. (Li Keqiang = Communist Youth League = Shanghai clique) Also, on Feb 06, as the US evacuation planes leave China, the wave of the US evacuees have arrived who are met by the CDC personnel at the quarantine sites for screening, and those who were suspected of infection will be placed under quarantine for 14 days. Also, on Feb 06, a CDC-developed lab test kit to detect the new coronavirus began shipping to qualified US laboratories and international ones. — However, on Feb 12, the CDC said some of the testing kits have flaws and do not work properly. The CDC finally ended up shipping the working test kits for mass testings on Feb 27. This was three weeks later than originally planned. On Feb 07, China National Petroleum has recently declared Force Majeure on gas imports. They are trying to create a breathing room for their foreign exchange reserves shortage. China's foreign exchange reserves fell to mere USD $3.1 trillion in Oct. 2019. On the same day, Bloomberg reported that PetroChina has directed employees in 20 countries to buy N95 face masks and send them home in China. The goal is to get 2 million masks shipped back. You can also find YouTube videos that show Overseas Chinese are scouring the masks at the Home Depot to ship them to China (the video in Korean). Also Chris Smith is pissed. On Feb 09, Trump renews his national emergency on its southern border, and Elizabeth Goitein from the Brennan Center for Justice, published an opinion article on New York Times titled "Trump Has Abused This Power. And He Will Again if He’s Not Stopped." On Feb 10, Dr. Tedros said that an advance three-person team of the WHO arrived in Beijing for a joint mission to discuss with Chinese officials the agenda and questions. Then, the joint mission of about 10 international experts will soon follow, he said. — Those WHO experts ended up visiting Chinese epicentre for the first time on Feb 24. On Feb 12, the US targets Russian oil company for helping Venezuela skirt sanctions. The US admin seemingly tried to secure leverage against Russia after noticing something suspicious was up. On the same day, Trump told Reuters "I hope this outbreak or this event (for the US) may be over in something like April." — Dr. Zhong Nanshan (钟南山), China's top tier SARS-hero doctor, also said "the peak of the virus (for China) should come in mid to late February, followed by a plateau or decrease," adding that his forecast was based on on mathematical modelling and data from recent events and government action. On Feb 13, Tom Frieden who is a former US CDC chief and currently the head of public health nonprofit Resolve to Save Lives, said:
As countries are trying to develop their own control strategies, they are looking for evidence of whether the situation in China is getting worse or better. [But] We still don't have very basic information. [since the WHO just entered China] We hope that information will be coming out.
On the same day, the CDC reports that the 15th case in the US was confirmed. The patient was a part of group who were under a federal quarantine order at the JBSA-Lackland base because of a recent trip to Hubei Province, China. By Feb 13, China hasn't accepted the US CDC's offer to send top experts, and they haven't released the "disaggregated" data (specific figures broken out from the overall numbers) even though repeatedly been asked. On Feb 14, CCP's United Front posted an article on its official website, saying (Eng. text by Google Translation):
Fast! There is no time difference to raise urgently needed materials! Some Overseas Chinese have used their professions in the field of medicine in order to purchase relevant materials Hubei province in short of supply (to send them to China). .... Some Overseas Chinese took advantage of the connection resources, opened green transportation channels through our embassies and consulates abroad, and their related enterprises, and quickly sent large quantities of medical supplies (to China), making this love relay link and cooperation seamless.
On Feb 18, Reuters reports that 3M is on the list of firms eligible for China loans to ease coronavirus crisis.
There is no indication from the list that loans offered will necessarily be sought, or that such firms are in any financial need. The Bank of Shanghai told Reuters it will lend 5.5 billion yuan ($786 million) to 57 firms on its list.
On Feb 21, Xi Jinping writes a thank-you letter to Bill Gates for his foundation’s support to China regarding COVID-19 outbreak. On Feb 24, China was rumoured on Twitter to delay the phase one trade deal implementation indefinitely which includes the increase of China's purchasing American products & services by at least $200 billion over the next two years. Also on Feb 24, S&P 500 Index started to drop. Opened with 3225.9 and closed 3128.2. By the Mar 23, it dropped to 2208.9. Also on Feb 24, China's National Health Commission says the WHO experts have visited Wuhan city for the first time, the locked-down central Chinese city at the epicentre, inspecting two hospitals and a makeshift one at a sports centre. On Feb 26, IF the picture that has been circulated on Twitter were real, then chief Chen Wei and her team have developed the first batch of COVID-19 vaccine within time frame of a month. On the same day, the CDC's latest figures displays 59 people in the US who have tested positive for COVID-19. Also on Feb 26, the Washington Post published an article that says:
.... the WHO said it has repeatedly asked Chinese officials for "disaggregated" data — meaning specific figures broken out from the overall numbers — that could shed light on hospital transmission and help assess the level of risk front-line workers face. "We received disaggregated information at intervals, though not details about health care workers," said Tarik Jasarevic of the WHO. — The comment, in an email on Feb 22 to the Post, was one of the first instances that the WHO had directly addressed shortcomings in China's reporting or handling of the coronavirus crisis.
On Feb 27, after missteps, the CDC says its test kit is ready and the US started to expand testing. On Feb 28, China transferred more than 80,000 Uighurs to factories used by global brands such as Apple, Nike, & Volkswagen & among others. Also on Feb 28, the WHO published the official report of the WHO-China joint mission on coronavirus disease 2019. (PDF) On Feb 29, quoting Caixin media's investigation published on the same day, Lianhe Zaobao, the largest Singapore-based Chinese-language newspaper, published an article reporting the following:
Dr. Li Wenliang said in the interview with Caixin media; [in Dec 2019] another doctor (later turned out to be Dr. Ai Fen) examined and tried to treat a patient who exhibited SARS-like symptoms which akin to influenza resistant to conventional treatment methods. And "the family members who took care of her (the patient) that night also had a fever, and her other daughter also had a fever. This is obviously from person to person" Dr. Li said in the interview."
------------------------ On Mar 01, China's State Council super tighten up their already draconian internet law. On the same day,Princelings published an propaganda called "A Battle Against Epidemic: China Combating COVID-19 in 2020" which compiles numerous state media accounts on the heroic leadership of Xi Jinping, the vital role of the Communist Party, and the superiority of the Chinese system in fighting the virus. Starting on Mar 03, the US Fed has taken two significant measures to provide monetary stimulus. It's going to be no use as if a group of people with serious means are manipulating the markets to make sure MM will have liquidity concerns when they need it most. On Mar 04, Xinhua News, China's official state-run press agency posted an article "Be bold: the world should thank China" which states that
If China retaliates against the US at this time, it will also announce strategic control over medical products, and ban exports of said products to the US. ... If China declares today that its drugs are for domestic use only, the US will fall into the hell of new coronavirus epidemic.
On Mar 05, Shanghai Index has recovered the coronavirus loss almost completely. On Mar 07, Saudi's Ahmed bin Abdulaziz and Muhammad bin Nayef were arrested on the claims of plotting to overthrow King Salman. — Ahmed bin Abdulaziz is known to have very tight investment-interest relationship with Bill Gates, Bill Browder, Blackstone, & BlackRock: One common factor that connects these people is China. On Mar 08, the Russia–Saudi oil price war has begun. The ostensible reason was simple: China, the biggest importer of oil from Saudi and Russia, was turning back tankers while claiming that the outbreak forced its economy to a standstill. On Mar 10, the Washington Post published the article saying that the trade group for manufacturers of personal protective equipment urged in 2009 "immediate action" to restock the national stockpile including N95 masks, but it hasn't been replenished since. On Mar 11, the gentleman at the WHO declares the coronavirus outbreak a "Global Pandemic." He called on governments to change the course of the outbreak by taking "urgent and aggressive action." This was a full twelve days after the organization published the official report regarding the situation in China. On Mar 13, the US admin declared a National Emergency and announced the plan to release $50 billion in federal resources amid COVID-19. Also on Mar 13, China's Ministry of Commerce states that China is now the best region for global investment hedging. On Mar 15, Business Insider reports that Trump tried to poach German scientists working on a coronavirus vaccine and offered cash so it would be exclusive to the US. The problem is the official CureVac (the German company) twitter account, on Mar 16, 2020, tweeted the following:
To make it clear again on coronavirus: CureVac has not received from the US government or related entities an offer before, during and since the Task Force meeting in the White House on March 2. CureVac rejects all allegations from press.
On Mar 16, the fan club of European globalists has published a piece titled, "China and Coronavirus: From Home-Made Disaster to Global Mega-Opportunity." The piece says:
The Chinese method is the only method that has proved successful [in fighting the virus], is a message spread online in China by influencers, including many essentially promoting propaganda. ... it is certainly a message that seems to be resonating with opinion leaders around the world.
On the same day, unlike China that had one epicentre, Wuhan city, the US now overtakes China with most cases reporting multiple epicentres simultaneously. Also on Mar 16, the US stocks ended sharply lower with the Dow posting its worst point drop in history. But some showed a faint hint of uncertain hope. On Mar 17, according to an article on Chinese version of Quora, Zhihu, chief Chen Wei and her team with CanSino Biologics officially initiated a Phase-1 clinical trial for COVID-19 vaccine at the Wuhan lab, Hubei China, which Bloomberg News confirmed. — Click HERE, then set its time period as 1 year, and see when the graph has started to move up. Also on Mar 17, China's state media, China Global TV Network (CGTN), has produced YouTube videos for Middle Eastern audiences to spread the opinion that the US has engineered COVID-19 events. Also on Mar 17, Al Jazeera reported that the US President has been criticized for repeatedly referring to the coronavirus as the "Chinese Virus" as critics saying Trump is "fueling bigotry." • China's Xinhua News tweeted "Racism is not the right tool to cover your own incompetence." • Tucker Carlson asked: "Why would America's media take China's side amid coronavirus pandemic?" • Also, Mr. Bill Gates: "We should not call this the Chinese virus." On Mar 19, for the first time, China reports zero local infections. Also on Mar 19, Al Jazeera published an analysis report, titled "Coronavirus erodes Trump's re-election prospects." On Mar 22, Bloomberg reports that China's mobile carriers lost 21 million users during this pandemic event. It's said to be the first net decline since starting to report monthly data in 2000. On Mar 26, EURACTV reports that China cashes in off coronavirus, selling Spain $466 million in supplies. However, Spain returns 9,000 "quick result" test kits to China, because they were deemed substandard. — Especially the sensibility of the test was around 30 percent, when it should be higher than 80 percent. ------------------------ On Apr 03, Germany and other governments are bolstering corporate defenses to address worries that coronavirus-weakened companies could be easy prey for bargain hunting by China's state owned businesses. On Apr 05, New York Times says "Trump Again Promotes Use of Unproven Anti-Malaria Drug (hydroxychloroquine)." On Apr 06, a Democratic State Rep. Karen Whitsett from Detroit credits hydroxychloroquine and President Trump for "saving her in her battle with the coronavirus." On Apr 07, the US CDC removed the following part from its website.
Although optimal dosing and duration of hydroxychloroquine for treatment of COVID-19 are unknown, some U.S. clinicians have reported anecdotally different hydroxychloroquine dosing such as: 400mg BID on day one, then daily for 5 days; 400 mg BID on day one, then 200mg BID for 4 days; 600 mg BID on day one, then 400mg daily on days 2-5.
------------------------ ☞ If there were ever a time for people not to be partisan and tribal, the time has come: We need to be ever vigilant and attentive to all kinds of disinformation & misinformation to see it better as well as to be sharp in our lives. — We really do need to come together. ☞ At first, I was going to draw up a conspiracy theory-oriented list focused on Team-Z, especially Mr. Gates. However, although it's nothing new tbh, recently many chats and discussions seem overflowing with disinformation & misinformation which is, in my opinion, particularly painful at a time like this. Hence, this post became a vanilla list that's just recorded the notable events. — We all are subject to misinformation, miscalculation, and misjudgment. But the clearer the picture becomes the better we can identify Funkspiel. ------------------------ ☞ Immediate Aftermath pt.2.a ------------------------ ☞ Feasible Timeline of the Operation ------------------------ ☞ Go Back to the Short Story. ----
The world has become more connected; more people or corporates need to send money abroad for many reasons. If you live and working away from the home, time will definitely come when you have to make transfer to abroad to support your loved ones and other reasons. Outward Remittance is basically the same as an international money transfer. Many of the sender /customers live overseas and send their hard money to support their loved ones. For example, Parents do a wire transfer to University or their son/daughter’s account for the purpose of their education. To help them, please visit your nearest branch of Orient exchange or go to the website www.orientexchange.in Some of the tips to be followed for good convenience: The right place to Approach · Telegraphic transfers or process of sending money are made through ADII RBI license holders or banks or money changers. · Customers should remember that you just can not trust any individuals with the responsibility of sending money. · Experts recommend choosing a better exchange house /bank that has the international footprint which makes your money transfer easier and secure. Mode of transfer You need to choose the option to send money. One is Wire transfer and another is Demand draft. Wire transfer is done via SWIFT i.e. Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications. A swift transfer is the most secure and standard system which can be done by banks to their correspondents with each other. A demand draft can be sent abroad physically and takes a little bit of time to get cleared. In most of the time remittance will be received by the beneficiary bank in 48 hrs. Process of application Primarily, the customer has to send their documents /upload either online or visit the office or request for home verification of KYC and other relevant documents. The requirement of documents may slightly vary with the purpose behind sending the money. There is a limit set by RBI to individuals who remitting money abroad. RBI has placed an annual cap of $ 250000 to the individuals · Rate fixing: Customer can book their forex rate by paying 2% of the transaction value or they may pay after verification of documents. · Fees/charges: Many banks are involved in a single outward remittance through the SWIFT network. The customer is liable to pay extra fees. Two to three intermediary banks may handle the transfers so they can add their own charges. In addition to that own bank & receipt bank charges are also included in what you pay. Duration: Remitter to receiver ‘s account A swift transfer is transferring money between multiple banks before the funds credited to the seller’s /beneficiary account. This process will be completed from 1 to 5 working days depending on the countries where you transfer. What details are must for outward remittance transfer? *Beneficiary Details : Name of the beneficiary & Address of the Beneficiary *Payee Bank details : 1) SWIFT CODE: Swift code is known as Bank ID /SWIFT CODE/Identifier code. Each financial institution is having its own unique swift code. Swift code usually has 8 to 11 digit or characters. For Ex: BANK OF AMERICA transfer, SWIFT CODE is “ BOFAUS3N” 2) Beneficiary bank name 3) Beneficiary Bank Address and branch name 4) Beneficiary Bank Account Number 5) Currency wise bank details are additionally required: i) AED – IBAN ii) GBP – IBAN, Sort Code iii) CAD – Transit Number iv) AUD – BSB Code v) EUNZD/THB/SEK/SGD – IBAN Attention on the exchange rate: Customers always think about the best way to send Wire transfer at a cheap cost. In the current market scenario, customers should know that most of the banks or money exchangers don’t use the real exchange rate. Instead of that, add more margin on top of live rates. So, customers pay more or beneficiary to receive less. To avoid these hidden charges try using online services that provide you the live /real exchange rates on all wire transfers, Currency Exchange, forex card etc….
So here is the core element of what I believe, drives US foreign policy (Wars/Conflicts/Sanctions) and also domestic policy. I tried to trim my draft down so it's not a TLDR, but not leave out any critical information or citations/sources. This is pulled directly from this brief article: Petrodollar "KEY TAKEAWAYS
Petrodollars are dollars paid to oil-producing countries for oil.
The emergence of the petrodollar dates back to the early 1970s when the U.S. reached an agreement with Saudi Arabia to standardize the sale of oil based on the U.S. dollar.
Petrodollar recycling creates demand for U.S. assets when dollars received for oil sales are used to buy investments in the United States.
Recycling of petrodollars is beneficial to the greenback because it promotes non-inflationary growth.
A move away from petrodollars could potentially increase borrowing costs for governments, companies, and consumers if sources of money become scarce."
This list of facts should make clear just how dependent US currency is on the global oil economy. Which brings us to something called The Triffin Dilemma . "By "agreeing" to have its currency used as a reserve currency, a country pins its hands behind its back. In order to keep the global economy chugging along, it may have to inject large amounts of currency into circulation, driving upinflationat home. The more popular the reserve currency is relative to other currencies, the higher itsexchange rateand the less competitive domestic exporting industries become. This causes atrade deficitfor the currency-issuing country, but makes the world happy. If the reserve currency country instead decides to focus on domestic monetary policy by not issuing more currency then the world is unhappy." "Reserve Currency ParadoxBecoming a reserve currency presents countries with a paradox. They want the "interest-free" loan generated by selling currency to foreign governments, and the ability to raisecapitalquickly, because of high demand for reserve currency-denominated bonds. At the same time they want to be able to use capital andmonetary policyto ensure that domestic industries are competitive in the world market, and to make sure that the domestic economy is healthy and not running large trade deficits. Unfortunately, both of these ideas – cheap sources of capital and positivetrade balances– can't really happen at the same time." Obviously, the US and global economy is a complex system with many moving parts but I think, just this small amount of information begins to clarify the bigger picture. It seems as though most people have accepted the idea that we have engaged in bad faith wars in the name of stealing oil, which is true on some level, but we are not actually trying to seize the oil, we are trying to force the entire world to participate in OUR oil economy in a way that benefits us the most. Which leads me to the final part of this post. The Non-Alignment Movement (NAM) is a collection of approximately 120 nations that have joined together, starting back during the cold war, in an effort to remain independent and not be pressured in to choosing sides between the US and Russia. Many of these countries, such as Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and most recently, Venezuela and Syria, have either dropped the petrodollar or made efforts to trade in other currencies. If this list looks familiar, it's because we have invaded, occupied and/or attempted regime change backed by MSM reporting of human rights violations or threat of nuclear proliferation. Obviously, we have pretty solid evidence that most of these claims were completely false. One of the main focuses of NAM these days, has been to conduct trade and handle the oil on their land, any way they see fit and they have been mounting a pretty strong coalition in response to the insanely harsh sanctions that we have tried to levy. Article About NAM and US Sanctions . This is essentially economic terrorism and unfortunately, most people, including myself, are not quite able to grasp just how de-stabilizing these sanctions are but it is slowly becoming clear to the public that we have been carrying out this policy of global dominance for decades. The Trump WH and John Bolton just happen to be much more open about their motives: In January, White House National Security Advisor John Boltonissueda veiled threat on Twitter:My advice to bankers, brokers, traders, facilitators, and other businesses: don’t deal in gold, oil, or other Venezuelan commodities being stolen from the Venezuelan people by the Maduro mafia. We stand ready to continue to take action. On his Twitter account, Trumpinsisted, “We have only one real currency in the USA, and it is stronger than ever, both dependable and reliable. It is by far the most dominant currency anywhere in the World, and it will always stay that way. It is called the United States Dollar!” I realize that this may not be the most exciting topic, considering the kind of news we have been peppered with recently, but I think it is important for people to consider. It seems pretty clear that almost all of our military operations around the world have everything to do with giant oil companies, defense contractors and the petrodollar and have nothing to do with spreading democracy or freeing civilians from oppressive regimes. Our allegiance with Saudi Arabia makes a lot more sense and our insane obsession on Russia also starts to take focus. Russia is also a member of NAM and is basically the biggest country that has chosen to defy the US. And since we can't push them around like a weaker country, we rely on a constant fear-mongering campaign by our media outlets. Following the NAM summit, Venezuelan Economy Minister Tareck El Aissamiannouncedhis country’s establishment of a payment system to meet obligations to Russia that will be covered with rubles. The developments have sent the US establishment into a frenzy. Still working on part 2, but hope some people will find this informative....
Just 2 more Conspiracy Theories that turned out to be True
(i couldn't post in the previous one , word limit )
1.Big Brother or the Shadow Government
It is also called the “Deep State” by Peter Dale Scott, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley. A shadow government is a "government-in-waiting" that remains in waiting with the intention of taking control of a government in response to some event. It turned out this was true on 9/11, when it was told to us by our mainstream media. For years, this was ridiculed as a silly, crazy conspiracy theory and, like the others listed here, turned out to be 100% true. It is also called the Continuity of Government. The Continuity of Government (COG) is the principle of establishing defined procedures that allow a government to continue its essential operations in case of nuclear war or other catastrophic event. Since the end of the cold war, the policies and procedures for the COG have been altered according to realistic threats of that time. These include but are not limited to a possible coup or overthrow by right wing terrorist groups, a terrorist attack in general, an assassination, and so on. Believe it or not the COG has been in effect since 2001.After 9/11, it went into action. Now here is the kicker, many of the figures in Iran Contra, the Watergate Scandal, the alleged conspiracy to assassinate Kennedy, and many others listed here are indeed members of the COG. This is its own conspiracy as well.
The CIA and Its Allies in Control of the United States and the World is a book written by Air Force Col. L Fletcher Prouty, published in 1973. From 1955 to 1963 Prouty was the "Focal Point Officer" for contacts between the CIA and the Pentagon on matters relating to military support for "black operations" but he was not assigned to the CIA and was not bound by any oath of secrecy. (From the first page of the 1974 Printing) It was one of the first tell-all books about the inner workings of the CIA and was an important influence on the Oliver Stone movie JFK. But the main thrust of the book is how the CIA started as a think tank to analyze intelligence gathered from military sources but has grown to the monster it has become. The CIA had no authority to run their own agents or to carry out covert operations but they quickly did both and much more. This book tells about things they actually did and a lot about how the operate. In Prouty's own words, from the 1997 edition of The Secret Team: This is the fundamental game of the Secret Team. They have this power because they control secrecy and secret intelligence and because they have the ability to take advantage of the most modern communications system in the world, of global transportation systems, of quantities of weapons of all kinds, and when needed, the full support of a world-wide U.S. military supporting base structure. They can use the finest intelligence system in the world, and most importantly, they have been able to operate under the canopy of an assumed, ever-present enemy called "Communism." It will be interesting to see what "enemy" develops in the years ahead. It appears that "UFO's and Aliens" are being primed to fulfill that role for the future. To top all of this, there is the fact that the CIA, itself, has assumed the right to generate and direct secret operations. "He is not the first to allege that UFOs and Aliens are going to be used as a threat against the world to globalize the planet under One government."
The Report from Iron Mountain
The Report from Iron Mountain is a book, published in 1967 (during the Johnson Administration) by Dial Press, that states that it is the report of a government panel. According to the report, a 15-member panel, called the Special Study Group, was set up in 1963 to examine what problems would occur if the U.S. entered a state of lasting peace. They met at an underground nuclear bunker called Iron Mountain (as well as other, worldwide locations) and worked over the next two years. Iron Mountain is where the government has stored the flight 93 evidence from 9/11.A member of the panel, one "John Doe", a professor at a college in the Midwest, decided to release the report to the public. The heavily footnoted report concluded that peace was not in the interest of a stable society, that even if lasting peace, "could be achieved, it would almost certainly not be in the best interests of society to achieve it." War was a part of the economy. Therefore, it was necessary to conceive a state of war for a stable economy. The government, the group theorized, would not exist without war, and nation states existed in order to wage war. War also served a vital function of diverting collective aggression. They recommended that bodies be created to emulate the economic functions of war. They also recommended "blood games" and that the government create alternative foes that would scare the people with reports of alien life-forms and out of control pollution. Another proposal was the reinstitution of slavery. U.S. News and World Report claimed in its November 20, 1967 issue to have confirmation of the reality of the report from an unnamed government official, who added that when President Johnson read the report, he 'hit the roof' and ordered it to be suppressed for all time. Additionally, sources were said to have revealed that orders were sent to U.S. embassies, instructing them to emphasize that the book had no relation to U.S. Government policy. Project Blue Beam is also a common conspiracy theory that alleges that a faked alien landing would be used as a means of scaring the public into whatever global system is suggested. Some researchers suggest the Report from Iron Mountain might be fabricated, others swear it is real. Bill Moyers, the American journalist and public commentator, has served as White House Press Secretary in the United States President Lyndon B. Johnson Administration from 1965 to 1967. He worked as a news commentator on television for ten years. Moyers has had an extensive involvement with public television, producing documentaries and news journal programs. He has won numerous awards and honorary degrees. He has become well known as a trenchant critic of the U.S. media. Since 1990, Moyers has been President of the Schumann Center for Media and Democracy. He is considered by many to be a very credible outlet for the truth. He released a documentary titled, The Secret Government, which exposed the inner workings of a secret government much more vast that most people would ever imagine. Though originally broadcast in 1987, it is even more relevant today. Interviews with respected top military, intelligence, and government insiders reveal both the history and secret objectives of powerful groups in the hidden shadows of our government. Here is that documentary: vid For another powerful, highly revealing documentary on the manipulations of the secret government produced by BBC, click here. The intrepid BBC team clearly shows how the War on Terror is largely a fabrication. For those interested in very detailed information on the composition of the shadow or secret government from a less well-known source, take a look at the summary available here.
2. The Federal Reserve Bank
The fundamental promise of a central bank like the Federal Reserve is economic stability. The theory is that manipulating the value of the currency allows financial booms to go higher, and crashes to be more mild. If growth becomes speculative and unsustainable, the central bank can make the price of money go up and force some deleveraging of risky investments - again, promising to make the crashes more mild. The period leading up to the American revolution was characterized by increasingly authoritarian legislation from England. Acts passed in 1764 had a particularly harsh effect on the previously robust colonial economy. The Sugar Act was in effect a tax cut on easily smuggled molasses, and a new tax on commodities that England more directly controlled trade over. The navy would be used in increased capacity to enforce trade laws and collect duties. Perhaps even more significant than the militarization and expansion of taxes was the Currency Act passed later in the year 1764.
"The colonies suffered a constant shortage of currency with which to conduct trade. There were no gold or silver mines and currency could only be obtained through trade as regulated by Great Britain. Many of the colonies felt no alternative to printing their own paper money in the form of Bills of Credit."
The result was a true free market of currency - each bank competed, exchange rates fluctuated wildly, and merchants were hesitant to accept these notes as payment. Of course, they didn't have 24-hour digital Forex markets, but I'll hold off opinions on the viability of unregulated currency for another time. England's response was to seize control of the colonial money supply - forbidding banks, cities, and colony governments from printing their own. This law, passed so soon after the Sugar Act, started to really bring revolutionary tension inside the colonies to a higher level. American bankers had learned early on that debasing a currency through inflation is a helpful way to pay off perpetual trade deficits - but Britain proved that the buyer of the currency would only take the deal for so long... Following the (first) American Revolution, the "First Bank of the United States" was chartered to pay off collective war debts, and effectively distribute the cost of the revolution proportionately throughout all of the states. Although the bank had vocal and harsh skeptics, it only controlled about 20% of the nation's money supply. Compared to today's central bank, it was nothing. Thomas Jefferson argued vocally against the institution of the bank, mostly citing constitutional concerns and the limitations of government found in the 10th amendment. There was one additional quote that hints at the deeper structural flaw of a central bank in a supposedly free capitalist economy.
"The existing banks will, without a doubt, enter into arrangements for lending their agency, and the more favorable, as there will be a competition among them for it; whereas the bill delivers us up bound to the national bank, who are free to refuse all arrangement, but on their own terms, and the public not free, on such refusal, to employ any other bank" –Thomas Jefferson.Basically, the existing banks will fight over gaining favor with the central bank - rather than improving their performance relative to a free market.
The profit margins associated with collusion would obviously outweigh the potential profits gained from legitimate business. The Second Bank of the United States was passed five years after the first bank's charter expired. An early enemy of central banking, President James Madison, was looking for a way to stabilize the currency in 1816. This bank was also quite temporary - it would only stay in operation until 1833 when President Andrew Jackson would end federal deposits at the institution. The charter expired in 1836 and the private corporation was bankrupt and liquidated by 1841.While the South had been the major opponent of central banking systems, the end of the Civil War allowed for (and also made necessary) the system of national banks that would dominate the next fifty years. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) says that this post-war period of a unified national currency and system of national banks "worked well."  Taxes on state banks were imposed to encourage people to use the national banks - but liquidity problems persisted as the money supply did not match the economic cycles. Overall, the American economy continued to grow faster than Europe, but the period did not bring economic stability by any stretch of the imagination. Several panics and runs on the bank - and it became a fact of life under this system of competing nationalized banks. In 1873, 1893, 1901, and 1907 significant panics caused a series of bank failures. The new system wasn't stable at all, in fact, many suspected it was wrought with fraud and manipulation. The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis is not shy about attributing the causes of the Panic of 1907 to financial manipulation from the existing banking establishment.
"If Knickerbocker Trust would falter, then Congress and the public would lose faith in all trust companies and banks would stand to gain, the bankers reasoned."
In timing with natural economic cycles, major banks including J.P. Morgan and Chase launched an all-out assault on Heinze's Knickerbocker Trust. Financial institutions on the inside started silently selling off assets in the competitor, and headlines about a few bad loans started making top spots in the newspapers. The run on Knickerbocker turned into a general panic - and the Federal Government would come to the rescue of its privately owned "National Banks.
"During the Panic of 1907, "Depositors 'run' on the Knickerbocker Bank. J.P. Morgan and James Stillman of First National City Bank (Citibank) act as a "central bank," providing liquidity ... [to stop the bank run] President Theodore Roosevelt provides Morgan with $25 million in government funds ... to control the panic. Morgan, acting as a one-man central bank, decides which firms will fail and which firms will survive."
How did JP Morgan get so powerful that the government would provide them with funding to increase their power? They had key influence with positions inside the Administrations. They had senators, congressmen, lobbyists, media moguls all working for them. In 1886, a group of millionaires purchased Jekyll Island and converted it into a winter retreat and hunting ground, the USA's most exclusive club. By 1900, the club's roster represented 1/6th of the world's wealth. Names like Astor, Vanderbilt, Morgan, Pulitzer and Gould filled the club's register. Non- members, regardless of stature, were not allowed. Dignitaries like Winston Churchill and President McKinley were refused admission. In 1908, the year after a national money panic purportedly created by J. P. Morgan, Congress established, in 1908, a National Monetary Authority. In 1910 another, more secretive, group was formed consisting of the chiefs of major corporations and banks in this country. The group left secretly by rail from Hoboken, New Jersey, and traveled anonymously to the hunting lodge on Jekyll Island. In fact, the Clubhouse/hotel on the island has two conference rooms named for the "Federal Reserve." The meeting was so secret that none referred to the other by his last name. Why the need for secrecy? Frank Vanderlip wrote later in the Saturday Evening Post,
"...it would have been fatal to Senator Aldrich's plan to have it known that he was calling on anybody from Wall Street to help him in preparing his bill...I do not feel it is any exaggeration to speak of our secret expedition to Jekyll Island as the occasion of the actual conception of what eventually became the Federal Reserve System."
At Jekyll Island, the true draftsman for the Federal Reserve was Paul Warburg. The plan was simple. The new central bank could not be called a central bank because America did not want one, so it had to be given a deceptive name. Ostensibly, the bank was to be controlled by Congress, but a majority of its members were to be selected by the private banks that would own its stock. To keep the public from thinking that the Federal Reserve would be controlled from New York, a system of twelve regional banks was designed. Given the concentration of money and credit in New York, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York controlled the system, making the regional concept initially nothing but a ruse. The board and chairman were to be selected by the President, but in the words of Colonel Edward House, the board would serve such a term as to "put them out of the power of the President." The power over the creation of money was to be taken from the people and placed in the hands of private bankers who could expand or contract credit as they felt best suited their needs. Why the opposition to a central bank? Americans at the time knew of the destruction to the economy the European central banks had caused to their respective countries and to countries who became their debtors. They saw the large- scale government deficit spending and debt creation that occurred in Europe. But European financial moguls didn't rest until the New World was within their orbit. In 1902, Paul Warburg, a friend and associate of the Rothschilds and an expert on European central banking, came to this country as a partner in Kuhn, Loeb and Company. He married the daughter of Solomon Loeb, one of the founders of the firm. The head of Kuhn, Loeb was Jacob Schiff, whose gift of $20 million in gold to the struggling Russian communists in 1917 no doubt saved their revolution. The Fed controls the banking system in the USA, not the Congress nor the people indirectly (as the Constitution dictates). The U.S. central bank strategy is a product of European banking interests. Government interventionists got their wish in 1913 with the Federal Reserve (and income tax amendment). Just in time, too, because the nation needed a new source of unlimited cash to finance both sides of WW1 and eventually our own entry to the war. After the war, with both sides owing us debt through the federal reserve backed banks, the center of finance moved from London to New York. But did the Federal Reserve reign in the money trusts and interlocking directorates? Not by a long shot. If anything, the Federal Reserve granted new powers to the National Banks by permitting overseas branches and new types of banking services. The greatest gift to the bankers, was a virtually unlimited supply of loans when they experience liquidity problems. From the early 1920s to 1929, the monetary supply expanded at a rapid pace and the nation experienced wild economic growth. Curiously, however, the number of banks started to decline for the first time in American history. Toward the end of the period, speculation and loose money had propelled asset and equity prices to unreal levels. The stock market crashed, and as the banks struggled with liquidity problems, the Federal Reserve actually cut the money supply. Without a doubt, this is the greatest financial panic and economic collapse in American history - and it never could have happened on this scale without the Fed's intervention. The number of banks crashed and a few of the old robber barons' banks managed to swoop in and grab up thousands of competitors for pennies on the dollar. See:
Every exchange has its own clearing house. Exchange members have to clear their trades through the clearing house at the end of the trading session. They also need to fulfill the margin requirements posed by the clearing house. By acting as an intermediary for leveraged financial instruments, the clearing house assumes quite a bit of risk. It ... that's essentially what a dealing desk is. since retail forex isn't technically futures in the most technical and specific of terms (i.e. no standardized contracts, no expiration dates, no real market closes) they don't need to have a clearing house. they are essentially their own clearing house. although, now that i think about it, IF they use a liquidity provider, that can be considered a ... .forex - the official domain name for everything forex. .forex, the domain created specifically for the foreign exchange industry The Foreign Exchange Clearing House “Life is really simple, but we insist on making it complicated.” ― Confucius. FXCH is a new approach to Spot-FX clearing. Our settlement technology is remarkable in its simplicity. Our goal is simple: cut out superfluous steps in the trade clearing process, thereby leaving out unnecessary associated costs. Tendermint Blockchain Partners Spot-FX central ... Forex And Foreign Exchange Trading. by admin 12/10/2020. written by admin 12/10/2020. The fact that foreign exchange trading has been such a global operation means that macroeconomic activities all over the world play a larger role in forex than ever before. Forex is a real global marketplace, with buyers and sellers from all parts of the globe engaging in trillions of dollars of trade every ... Futures Clearing House Example Assume that a trader buys a futures contract. At this point, the clearinghouse has already set the initial and maintenance margin requirements. Foreign Exchange Clearing House Ltd (or “FXCH”) Address (UK): 145 - 157 St John St, London, EC1V 4PY, United Kingdom Address (Dominica): 8 Copthall, RoseauSt. George, 00152 Commonwealth of Dominica Tel: +44 34 5025 5546 Email: [email protected] Website: www.forex-swiss.com. How to protect yourself . We strongly advise you to only deal with financial firms that are authorised by us, and ... FXCH Forex Broker — Forex broker information for FXCH, find the latest trader's reviews for FXCH, get the details and information about advantages and disadvantages of this Forex broker. Forex exchange clearing house ltd. Estes oferecem aos operadores do mercado ferramentas efetivas de hedge contra divisas. Uma câmara de compensação é uma instituição financeira formada para facilitar o intercâmbio. REITOS, títulos negociados em bolsa. Há muito tempo, não havia moedas, só trocas trocas simples de mercadorias por bens. A questão é reproduzida aqui sob. Futuros ... UK Clearing House is a London based forex broker offering a variety of currency pairs and other CFDs. The broker is regulated by the UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and is authorized to offer financial services in all the countries of the European Economic Area (EEA) – the EU member states plus Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein.
Once a trade has been executed by two counterparties either on an exchange, or in the OTC markets, the trade can be handed over to a clearing house, which then steps between the two original ... How Much I Made First Month Trading Forex Zero to Making $100k Per Month at 18 My Story: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4XpoPsy8sc In this video I do an ... T+2 Clearing Mechanism of Stock Market by CA Rachana Phadke Ranade - Duration: 14:51. Study At Home Recommended for you. 14:51. Forex Trading for Beginners - Duration: 8 ... VIP EAP Mentorship Program - https://eaptrainingprogram.com/video-sales-page Time Stamps: What is a pip? - 10:40 What is the value of a pip? 27:00 What is le... LINK FOR THE RECOMMENDED ROUTINE https://photos.app.goo.gl/hqBuekG3Lja89NeS7 Link to our FOREX FX GOAT channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrHhlXS8YWkUl... A clearing house - is a central location or central processing mechanism through which financial institutions agree, to exchange payment instructions. The in... The recent string of stock broker collapses, Anugrah being the latest one, has put a spotlight on the multiple levels of failure which has let such frauds pa...