#a monetary penalty makes sense to me to an extent | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

disaster-j · 3 years ago

Note

Hello! May I ask you something? You know the topic about privilege in Not Me ep. 3, right? There is this scene about "fair competitions only result from fair rules". So if I'm correct, it's also about justice, right? I want to understand more about justice in general and in this context because I have an assignment to make message about justice, but I'm having a hard time putting things into sentences and I realize I don't understand much about justice after all. If I'm talking about justice without understanding anything I would feel like a hypocrite because I'm not a suitable person to spread the message😔I hope this makes sense🥲Thanks in advance🤗

-🐝

Hi! That's a bit of a pickle huh. I'll do my best to give you my perspective on it but I highly recommend doing your own research into the topic if it's for an assignment.

So justice at it's core is the idea that all people should get what they deserve. In a just society those who cheat and commit crimes would get the punishments they deserve whereas good citizens would reap the societal benefits of their own good behaviour. The issue with this ideal is that our society isn't really built to uphold justice for all. Not everyone gets what they deserve, good or bad, some get a lot less while others get far more than could ever be justified.

When White says that thing about fairness he is talking about privilege and the unjust nature of society. The rules are created by those on top and hence they favour the upper classes. This goes for the most fundamental things like access to education, livelihood, housing but also for things we don't necessarily consider. Take for example laws that only have monetary penalties attached to them. If it's illegal to park somewhere but the penalty is a monetary fine of ₹2,000 then it's not really illegal to do so. It just costs ₹2,000. Two people could commit the same minor crime but face vastly different repercussions simply because one person could afford to pay a fine and get out of further punishment, while the other couldn't. The law seems fair on paper but fails in practice because it treats all individuals as equal when they never truly are.

All men cannot truly be equal in the eyes of the law until they are provided with equal opportunity to succeed in life. As long as class and wealth disparity exists to such an extent, there will always be people who have the power to bend the system in their favour.

Take the case Sean brought up during the impunity lecture for example, the one we believe is about his own father. The professor talks about Impunity, explaining how the rich and powerful use their money and connections to get away with whatever they want, but he insists that these practices are a thing of the past and the system that exists now is a fair one. Sean brings up the case from 2018 where Tawi used his connections to get out of the drug charges by pinning them on his driver. Even though it is clear as day that a single truck driver could have never had the means to run an operation of that size, Sean's father gets the death penalty is killed by the police and Tawi gets away with his crimes. Why? Because he pays his way out of trouble. The system hence failed to provide justice to the people because an innocent man died for someone else's crime while the perpetrator walks free. Similarly, the case with the forest is a more recent example of how Tawi uses his connections to get away with committing criminal and immoral acts. It's clear that he used unfair means to get the land and push out the natives to build his hollow trophy of a house. The gang set it on fire hoping that the spotlight on the case will urge the public to demand justice for all the people who lost their homes and livelihoods and Tawi would be punished for his crimes. But that doesn't happen. Tawi continues to walk free because he is not alone in this. There are too many people at the top whom he would take down with him if they were to try to enact any type of legal justice. So the courts fail because the ones who are meant to protect the common people end up colluding with the ones they should be protecting them from.

That's why the gang's vigilante acts are important. They do what the courts refuse to- punish Tawi. Make him pay for all the hurt he has caused. The hurt they inflict is nowhere near the amount of pain Tawi has caused, but it is a start.

At the end of the day, justice is about giving the people what they deserve. It's a noble idea on paper but because of the unfair nature of society, it is never guaranteed to those who need it most.

#not me the series #not me ask #not me analysis #hope this helps anon #and i hope i don't answer it too late #good luck with the assignment!

6 notes · View notes

blockchainex · 3 years ago

Text

What are tokens? What is the difference between Security Tokens and Utility Tokens?

According to the Blockchain Technology Association, beyond supply chain management and energy markets, blockchain technology is utilized in a number of other sectors, including healthcare and a range of other fields of endeavor. Blockchain technology is no longer considered innovative or creative in today's society, according to many experts. Using cryptography as a stand-alone technology is a very useful method for a number of applications. For example, in the case of decentralization and trustless networks, the approach has resulted in great innovations that are valuable in themselves. The fact that tokens are being utilized in cryptocurrency, particularly security and utility tokens, may appear irrational at first sight; nevertheless, this has proven to be a key factor in the worldwide appeal of cryptocurrency's global development.

As stated by a Blockchain expert, many people are surprised to learn that these tokens are now regarded a multi-million-dollar concept, and that many start-ups across the world use them to create money via crowdfunding campaigns and other cash-generating techniques. In a specific context, the meaning and function of these symbols must be defined before they can be properly described, and this must be done carefully. Therefore, all problems must be handled simultaneously rather than sequentially if we are to have a chance of a successful result.

What's the most effective way for me to become a blockchain technology specialist, and how can I accomplish it quickly? Continue reading this story for the rest.

For starters, what a Token is, and how it works are essential things to ask. The answer is: And the second question is, "What precisely works?" The reply is:

Tokens are defined as any monetary unit, utility or asset issued by a business in exchange for a specified amount of cash in exchange for a specified amount of money in exchange for a specified amount of money in exchange for a specified amount of money in exchange for a specified amount of money in exchange for a specified amount of money in exchange for a specified amount of money

Tokens are often produced in connection with public offers comparable to initial public offerings (IPOs), but differing in many respects from traditional public offerings. Tokens are often offered in connection with public offers as a simple method for investors to participate in public offerings. To demonstrate what this phrase means, Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs), also known in the conventional sense as token sales or crowdsales, as well as other kinds of token sales and crowdsales are examples of what the term means. Whether an initial coin offering (ICO), also known as a token sale or an initial coin offering, is the subject of our discussion (ICO). Most people know this phrase, and it is utilized in many circumstances. An initial public offering (IPO) rewards investors with stock shares for their money, whereas an initial coin offering (ICO) rewards investors with a cryptocurrency token for their money. When investors engage in an initial public offer (IPO), they get shares for their money (ICO).

A variety of token shapes and sizes are available, and they can be combined in a variety of ways to meet your specific requirements. Please contact us if you require additional information.

Tokens used for utility reasons and tokens used for security purposes are two types of tokens currently available on the market. Tokens used for usage are more frequent than tokens used for security reasons. Compared to security tokens, utility tokens are extensively used in daily life. Compared to security tokens, utility tokens are more widely used in daily life and are more generally accepted. To differentiate it from other kinds of tokens, a utility token is a form of token that, unlike other types of tokens, is used for a particular purpose and can be recognized from others. To define a utility token in the bitcoin ecosystem, describe what it is first. A utility token is any coin used to provide a service to the whole cryptocurrency community while utilizing cryptocurrency ecosystem resources.

Generally speaking, this is the type of token most frequently found in the cryptocurrency industry and is intended to fulfill some purpose inside the cryptocurrency ecosystem. He or she has a single, highly specialized function in the company. It should be stressed that Bitcoin is nothing more than a kind of money app or user token that provides future access to the products or services of a company, and that using Bitcoin is completely free. Consequently, utility tokens are not meant to be kept in perpetuity with the aim of gaining value over time through capital appreciation. This was an unexpected scenario result.

Consider the following two instances and draw conclusions: Security tokens are comparable to traditional financial assets to the extent that they represent a portion of third-party wealth and their value is decided by the gains or losses experienced by those third parties. It is essential to follow all applicable federal securities laws and regulations to finish the job as quickly and efficiently as feasible. Compliance with these requirements may result in serious repercussions, such as substantial penalties and project completion delays, among other implications if the project is not completed on time, as well as other consequences if the project is not completed on time.

What's the difference between a Token and a Security Token?

The intended purpose and functioning of these currencies are determined by the different blockchain systems on which they are constructed and operate, described more below. One of the most major distinctions between these tokens is their intended purpose and functioning, which is one of the most essential things to consider when comparing them. Besides their intended purpose and utility, one of the most major variances between the above tokens is determined by their intended purpose and functionality, which is also one of the most significant differences between the above tokens.

Dividends are paid to security tokens holders when the business that issued them makes a profit on the market where tokens are exchanged. If the business that issued the tokens earns profit on the market where they are exchanged, token holders may be able to pay dividends in the form of more coins. To function as investment vehicles, security tokens need to be generated, and holders of security tokens are entitled to incentives in the form of additional coins if their investment is successful.

When security tokens are bought or redeemed, security tokens holders are regarded as shareholders in the company that issued security tokens, which only further aggravates the problem. In the future, if a voting mechanism based on blockchain technology becomes accessible to investors, they may be able to participate in the decision-making process for a company's future operations. This is a very serious option to consider.

However, it is important to stress that if utility tokens are utilized in the decision-making processes of a company, it is crucial to emphasize that token owners are not given any authority or power by their own businesses. If you buy these tokens directly from the company, they are solely valid for usage in conjunction with the services they presently provide, unless otherwise stated. If you buy these tokens from a third party, they are only valid for usage with the services they presently provide to you.

The possibility that the value of either of these tokens will increase if their respective markets expand has perplexed a large number of people, and because they both offer a small amount of profit, many people are still unsure how to differentiate between them despite the fact that they are both digital assets and both cryptocurrencies.

#blockchain expert #blockchain technology

0 notes

jobsearchtips02 · 5 years ago

Text

Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair on Brexit, Boris Johnson and extra

CNBC Transcript: Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair Speaks With CNBC‘s Wilfred Frost At present On CNBC

Following is the unofficial transcript of a CNBC interview with Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair right this moment on CNBC. Following is a hyperlink to the total interview on CNBC.com:

Know extra about Russia than your folks:

Get our free e book on how the Soviet Union turned Putin’s Russia.

Q3 2019 hedge fund letters, conferences and extra

Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair on Brexit, Boris Johnson and US politics

All references should be sourced to CNBC.

Wilfred Frost: Simply speaking within the studio in regards to the election after all to what extent are you offended with the stay events that they gave up attempting to hunt a second referendum earlier than basic election and gave into the Prime Minister’s calls for for an election first?

Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair: Effectively what I feel was the improper factor to do. It will have been higher if we might had an election on the traditional election points, and a referendum on Brexit, however that’s not what occurred angers a little bit of a redundant emotion on this, the circumstances, however know that the issue that you have within the election is when you muddle up the Brexit query with who governs the nation which is a unique query, then clearly the the chance is that you just get a really sophisticated political scenario, you may have some people who find themselves passionately anti Brexit, however perhaps concern Jeremy Corbyn and Downing Avenue and different people who find themselves passionately professional Brexit.

However you understand wish to vote for a Labor authorities so it is not a smart factor to do shall be completed it so would possibly as properly handled all these phrases

Frost: if Boris Johnson wins the bulk Do you settle for, he has a mandate to finish Brexit?

Blair: Effectively he will definitely declare that I imply I feel you might find yourself one of many explanation why that is so unsatisfactory is that you could be find yourself in a scenario the place he wins the bulk with 40% and even lower than 40% of the vote, and the mixed vote of the anti Brexit opposition events is extra, however you understand sure after all he’ll declare a mandate

Frost: However you disagree that he’ll have a mandate following the referendum 2017 election which delivered a mandate for Brexit.

Blair: Once more, frankly, it does not actually matter whether or not I feel it or not, I imply he’ll declare the mandate for it and you understand, folks will argue will labor’s not clearly saying it is towards Brexit and subsequently, if he wins the bulk Brexit will occur.

Frost: What’s a practical path to stay from, from right here and what probability do you placed on that.

Former UK Prime Minister: The lifelike path is the place you aren’t getting a conclusive outcome. Say the conservatives are the biggest get together and, after which it is determined to resolve Brexit by itself phrases. I imply the issue that you have with Brexit which is sophisticated to clarify however it’s crucial to grasp when you, if you wish to get into the, the, the difficulty of why brexit so troublesome is that there are two negotiations the primary negotiation with Boris Johnson is concluded different phrases of exit. and that features the Irish border downside that is been so troublesome.

However you’ve got now obtained an extra negotiation. As soon as we exit we then have an extra negotiation that can run till the tip of subsequent 12 months, which is about Britain’s future relationship with Europe notably its buying and selling relationship. And that is additionally going to be a really troublesome negotiation whether or not the precisely the identical dilemmas as we had over the Irish border.

So, the issue that you have, is that the British folks clearly are advised that you probably have the election that is the tip of Brexit a technique or one other, I am afraid shouldn’t be. Both means it should be the subsequent chapter

Frost: In your conversations with European leaders do you suppose they’re prepared and keen to welcome the UK again as a completely fledged member if if that eventuality materialized?

Blair: Effectively Britain’s Obtained the fitting to remain at any time limit earlier than we have legally left but when, if we’ve a conservative majority they usually do Brexit after which we’re out

Frost: on the subject of the election President Trump publicly backed for us Boris Johnson mentioned Jeremy, Jeremy Corbyn shall be dangerous for the nation in an interview with LBC. Final week, ought to the US President be doing that.

Blair: Effectively I feel I ought to think about Jeremy Corbyn was in all probability happy. As a result of when you’re when you’re this from a Labor Get together perspective or an anti conservative perspective, you understand, Donald Trump clearly is kind of a divisive determine right here in addition to again within the US and, you understand, his assault on Jeremy Corbyn I ought to suppose is not going to hassle Jeremy Corbyn very a lot. And now look ultimately with this stuff are determined by our citizens.

Frost: However do you suppose the US is as dependable a accomplice for the UK as, as maybe throughout your time as President.

Former UK Prime Minister: The issue is, you understand, I, I consider in two issues a robust transatlantic relationship between Europe and America, and a robust bilateral relationship between the UK and America. And if the, the UK is powerful with America makes our relationship with Europe higher and likewise if our relationship with Europe is powerful its one of many causes I am towards Brexit, it is a lot simpler to accomplice the US, so look what’s occurred in the previous few years is that there is been a weakening of that transatlantic Alliance. I imply there may be clearly a detailed relationship between the US president and the present British Prime Minister.

However, you understand, this stuff are usually not simply in regards to the private relationship you are going to discovered that on values on curiosity on a shared sense of the place individuals are going and I feel the fear on a regular basis. I feel in, not simply in in Europe however exterior is the place, the place does the US stand on this barely troublesome house between America first and America alone. So that is the that is, and I feel one of many issues that shall be very crucial.

As soon as we get our election out of the way in which as soon as we get Brexit resolved, is that we take a look at how we revive that transatlantic Alliance as a result of it is, it is massively vital that imply I’m continuously overwhelmed by the sense of how geopolitics is altering on the planet, how the rise of China goes to dominate the 21st century, and the need of Europe and America, together with the UK standing collectively and having a transparent view as to how we address that vast growth within the in our lifetime is I feel one thing that is so vital, it wants allies who consider in the identical fundamental democratic methods to remain collectively.

Frost: You constructed a really shut relationship with each presidents throughout your tenure and caught by President Clinton by means of thick and skinny together with throughout his personal impeachment proceedings, as impeachment proceedings loom massive for President Trump ought to, ought to that affect how shut a relationship that the UK Prime Minister builds with the US.

Former UK Prime Minister: I feel you have to allow us to politics look everybody’s politics is bizarre proper now. I imply, what occurs is, wherever you go wherever on the planet, and leaders begin speaking to one another you get into a contest as to who’s politics is loopy. I all the time say to folks I feel we’re forward, however you understand it is lots of people are competing to meet up with us. So, you understand no, no matter occurs in US politics lead again to the US, the connection between the UK Prime Minister and the US president ought to all the time be sturdy. I imply I you understand one factor I’ll by no means criticize Boris Johnson for, regardless that I disagree with them passionately about Brexit is having a detailed relationship with the US president That is crucial for each international locations.

Frost: I spoke to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo a couple of weeks in the past and we had been speaking in regards to the notorious Trump Zelinski cellphone name, he mentioned quote, as not too long ago as yesterday I had a international chief, name me looking for to use stress to United States to get us to behave in a means that was in step with what they had been attempting to do it is the character of politics of energy of international interactions. Every nation attempting to behave and ship for its personal folks, figuring out what we all know from the transcript of the decision. Do you agree with the theme of what Secretary Pompeo mentioned that that’s the norm in worldwide relations.

Blair: Okay, so one factor I’ve realized over an extended interval time politics is to not get combined up in another person’s politics, I’ve obtained sufficient issues again right here at house, so we’ll depart all these questions round Ukraine and impeachment to American politics.

Frost: Okay, truthful sufficient. On the subject of the Eurozone. Do you might have any recommendation for Christina Lagarde as she takes the helm Do you embrace detrimental charges

Former UK Prime Minister: Im actually troubled by the idea of detrimental charges, I’ve obtained to say, and I feel the long run penalties are fairly critical I imply I feel one of many issues right this moment with the way in which our politics is developed, is that you’ve got this huge query round macro financial coverage, and the connection between financial coverage and monetary coverage, which is not actually explored by policymakers in in any nice depth however actually must be.

So I feel the long run implications of detrimental charges are immense. And I feel one of many issues you’ve got obtained as a policymaker right this moment, is you understand you possibly can take a look at the worldwide economic system. And whereas after I was beginning in politics 20 years in the past, most respected economists would let you know kind of the identical factor.

The massive problem for policymakers right this moment is that, you understand, respected economists are on two utterly and diametrically opposed sides of an argument, one will say properly look, financial easing you have to keep on detrimental charges that is no downside supplied which you can preserve the economic system shifting and different folks say no, this can be a long run, it is obtained enormous penalties and detrimental penalties for the economic system, and it is actually robust.

When you’re a policymaker to work out who is correct. I feel the one factor that’s clear although about Europe, is that it is nonetheless obtained two huge challenges structural reform of European economies.

And secondly, it is exhausting to see how you might have a single foreign money correctly grounded long run, until you might have successfully. The entire of the eurozone standing behind every nation inside that inside that single foreign money. And that I feel these two unresolved points are, what’s beneath lots of the issues in Europe.

Frost: Once you take a look at the way forward for the European Union in addition to the eurozone particularly do you concern the day when when Angela Merkel does determine to face down

Former UK Prime Minister: Effectively she is a big and mainly stabilizing affect in Europe however Germany, you understand it is it is politics is powerful and fairly sturdy and the purpose about Europe ultimately is there is a quite simple purpose for Europe right this moment me again in my father’s era, the explanation for Europe within the European Union was peace, however right this moment its energy, you understand, within the subsequent 20 years there’s going to be a prime desk with America, China, and presumably India, truly, due to the scale of its inhabitants.

Now, if Europe, and international locations like Germany, France, the UK wish to be at that prime desk, they have to have a block that is ready to sit on equal phrases, and the European Union’s obtained the biggest business market on the planet we might do this if we’re collectively.

It is one of many explanation why it is splitting Europe is senseless. So I feel, you understand, sure, I feel, for Europe after all when Angela Merkel goes it will likely be an enormous change in altering of the guard however you understand the the forces that preserve Europe collectively are basically geopolitical as a lot as financial right this moment.

Tony it has been a pleasure as all the time thanks a lot in your time. Thanks. Effectively, thanks, Tony.

from Job Search Tips https://jobsearchtips.net/former-uk-prime-minister-tony-blair-on-brexit-boris-johnson-and-extra/

0 notes

ultrasfcb-blog · 7 years ago

Text

Garth Crooks

The Premier League season is over, with Manchester Metropolis deservedly topped champions after sweeping all earlier than them in a record-breaking marketing campaign.

West Brom, Stoke Metropolis and Swansea are dealing with as much as relegation, whereas Arsenal enter life with out Arsene Wenger.

However who has made my staff of the season?

Goalkeeper – David de Gea (Man Utd)

The second Jose Mourinho persuaded David de Gea to remain at Manchester United, slightly than go away for Actual Madrid, you knew one thing was brewing. Neither have managed to win the title this season, however I would not guess towards them subsequent time period.

De Gea has as soon as once more seemed imperious in objective, and one participant within the United set-up who warrants the accolade ‘world class’. The problem for Mourinho is he has not been ready to assemble a defence worthy of his keeper.

Petr Cech had William Gallas, John Terry and Ricardo Carvalho to guard him when Mourinho was supervisor at Chelsea in 2004-05. That is why they gained the title and why United have not.

Do you know? De Gea gained the Golden Glove this season, maintaining 18 clear sheets within the Premier League. It is his highest tally in a single season within the competitors.

Defenders – Kyle Walker (Man Metropolis), Lewis Dunk (Brighton), Nicolas Otamendi (Man Metropolis), Ashley Younger (Man Utd)

Kyle Walker: When Kyle Walker left Tottenham Hotspur for Manchester Metropolis for £50m I assumed Blues boss Pep Guardiola had all of the sudden gone to the ‘darkish facet of the moon’. Once I noticed Walker make his Premier League debut for his new membership at Brighton, I knew then that Metropolis had spent over the percentages however had been positive of precisely what they had been shopping for.

Walker has fulfilled his function and tasks brilliantly on this Metropolis facet and acquired his reward as a consequence – it is known as a Premier League title.

Do you know? Walker has offered six Premier League assists this season, his highest in a single marketing campaign.

Lewis Dunk: I’ve watched this lad within the Championship and I’ve watched him once more within the Premier League and I am unable to consider it is the identical participant. The expansion within the house of a season has been fairly extraordinary.

It will have been very straightforward for me to have chosen Jan Vertonghen (who has had one other good season for Spurs) however Dunk has needed to be excellent week in, week out. With out that stage of efficiency, Brighton would have sunk with out hint.

If any of the large six have any sense in any way they need to get their chequebook out instantly. He is price £30m of anybody’s cash within the present monetary local weather.

Do you know? Dunk made extra blocks than every other Premier League defender this season (56).

Nicolas Otamendi: I can by no means make up my thoughts about Otamendi. I’ve seen him play brilliantly for Metropolis after which all of the sudden be an entire catastrophe. I need to say his calamities have been much less frequent this season. He had a superb first half to Metropolis’s league marketing campaign and deputised for Vincent Kompany brilliantly throughout an important interval for the membership.

Defeats by Liverpool within the Champions League weren’t his most interesting hours, however general he has proved to be a gradual affect in a Manchester Metropolis staff whose emphasis as at all times been on assault not defence. Fortunate for him.

Do you know? Otamendi made extra profitable passes than every other Premier League participant this season (2,825).

Ashley Younger: I assumed this lad was completed at Manchester United however that could not have been farther from the reality. United have transformed yet one more winger into a really competent full-back. First Antonio Valencia, now Ashley Younger.

The England worldwide was starting to create a fame for himself when it was alleged he would go on the lookout for penalties within the days when he was a winger. He seems to have tailored his sport and targeting turning into a everlasting fixture in United’s defensive line-up.

His performances have additionally earned him a recall into the England set-up at 32 years of age. Not unhealthy for a participant I had written off.

Do you know? Younger made extra Premier League appearances (30) and begins (28) this season than he had in any of his earlier seven campaigns with United.

Midfielders – Kevin de Bruyne (Man Metropolis), Fernandinho (Man Metropolis), David Silva (Man Metropolis)

Kevin de Bruyne: Of all of the gamers I’ve watched this season, I’ve loved no-one greater than Kevin de Bruyne. It’s unlucky for De Bruyne that Mohamed Salah has had such a beautiful season, on the ‘award-winning’ expense of the Belgium worldwide.

De Bruyne lifting the Premier League title with Metropolis will compensate to a big extent, however not utterly – that is the best way it goes in soccer generally.

To play the sport with such grace and win matches on such a daily foundation with out an oz. of ruthlessness deserves some recognition. Choosing De Bruyne for my Workforce of the Season is the most effective I can do.

Do you know? The Belgian completed the season with essentially the most assists (16) and probabilities created (106) within the Premier League.

Fernandinho: There’s a one in each title-winning staff. Claude Makelele did it for Actual Madrid, Esteban Cambiasso did it for Inter Milan, and Fernandinho has performed it on two events for Manchester Metropolis.

These are gamers who settle for that their capability doesn’t evaluate with Zinedine Zidane, Wesley Sneijder or Kevin de Bruyne however who will run via brick partitions for his or her staff and marvel what the fuss is all about once you pat them on the again and inform them simply how fantastic they’ve been.

The Brazilian is the lynchpin for Metropolis and the primary participant Guardiola would have pencilled in his staff each week. Fernandinho has had a powerful season and wins one other Premier League title for his efforts.

Do you know? Granit Xhaka (2,709) was the one midfielder to finish extra passes within the Premier League this season than Fernandinho (2,679)

David Silva: What a beautiful servant David Silva has turned out to be for Manchester Metropolis. Together with the superb Yaya Toure and Vincent Kompany, they’ve offered a platform upon which legacies are made.

How Silva has accomplished a title-winning season with the family issues he has to deal with is a sworn statement to the resilience and dedication of the person himself.

He is an excellent participant and, from what I can collect, a good higher father.

Do you know? The Spaniard had a hand in 20 Premier League objectives this season (9 objectives, 11 assists). Solely in 2011-12 (21) was he concerned in additional in a single marketing campaign.

Forwards – Mohamed Salah (Liverpool), Harry Kane (Tottenham), Sergio Aguero (Man Metropolis)

Mohamed Salah: What this lad has performed for Egyptian soccer, to not point out social cohesion, can’t be quantified. What I can let you know is there isn’t a higher place on the planet than Liverpool Soccer Membership to understand the skills of Mohamed Salah. He has had essentially the most fantastic season.

I am not completely positive what I’ve loved extra – the striker bearing down on the opposition with such blistering tempo and leaving defenders in his wake, or his wonderful ice-cool finishes. A refrain of “Mo Salah, Mo Salah, Mo Salah” ringing round Anfield isn’t far behind, by the best way.

Put that each one collectively and there can’t be a greater place on the planet for a participant of Salah’s class to play his soccer.

Do you know? Salah’s 32 objectives is essentially the most by a participant in a 38-game season.

Harry Kane: This has been one other magnificent season from Harry Kane, nevertheless it will possibly’t be completely snug for Kane or his team-mates to take a look at one other empty trophy cupboard. Elsewhere, John Stones, Kyle Walker and Raheem Sterling all have titles, and Jordan Henderson, Trent Alexander-Arnold, Nathaniel Clyne are getting ready for the Champions League last.

It will be sheer folly for me or anybody else to disregard the apparent. This lad can not wait round eternally watching his England team-mates obtain what he might do fairly simply elsewhere.

It is why Luka Modric, Gareth Bale and Teddy Sheringham all left Tottenham. It will be a crying disgrace if Kane is compelled to do the identical.

Do you know? Kane turned the primary Spurs participant to attain 40+ objectives in all competitions in a single season since Clive Allen in 1986-87 (49).

Sergio Aguero: Common readers of my Workforce of the Week will know the way a lot I consider Sergio Aguero. Of all of the strikers in my Workforce of the Season, Aguero is the one who has joined the ranks of soccer greatness.

Throughout his time within the Premier League there isn’t a different striker who has scored as many objectives over so many seasons, or held so many titles.

His objectives blasted Manchester Metropolis into an unassailable lead on the high of the desk earlier than harm took its toll and Leroy Sane took over. We’ve got eventually honoured this nice Premier League participant within the PFA staff awards, and the least I can do is honour him in mine.

Do you know? Aguero’s objective towards Napoli in November made him Metropolis’s all-time highest goalscorer.

Supervisor of the season – Rafael Benitez

I used to be requested just lately who had been my high three managers this season. And not using a second’s hesitation I mentioned Rafael Benitez, Sean Dyche and Chris Hughton – in that order.

I by no means anticipated Burnley to qualify for Europe, for Brighton to outlive a season within the Premier League, or for Newcastle to complete with 44 factors, guaranteeing security with video games to spare having began the season with seven Championship gamers within the staff.

Anybody who has watched Newcastle United this season can have noticed Benitez and his boys refusing to compromise one iota on the model of soccer their followers need to see.

I want I might say the identical for Jose Mourinho and Manchester United. If Newcastle have misplaced a sport they’ve performed so with their dignity intact. They’ve taken the opposition on attempting to play.

There have been occasions after they have been outplayed, even outclassed, however they’ve by no means turned their backs on giving their followers 100%, which you must do when taking part in for the Magpies.

That’s the reason Newcastle followers love Benitez, as a result of they’ve seen the Spaniard flip their staff from a Championship squad into a reputable Premier League outfit.

Give Benitez the sources and he would do what Kevin Keegan didn’t do, and win Newcastle a trophy. Do not give him the sources to compete with the easiest and he’ll go away – and fairly rightly.

Now it is your flip

You have seen my picks this week. However who would you go for?

BBC Sport – Football ultras_FC_Barcelona

ultras FC Barcelona - https://ultrasfcb.com/football/3895/

#Barcelona

#Football

0 notes

nicholemhearn · 7 years ago

Text

How Economic Freedom Indexes Misunderstand Sound Money and Inflation

Institutions matter. Economists of the classical period knew that well. In recent years, economists have increasingly included institutional variables in their empirical work. The economic freedom indexes from the Fraser Institute and the Heritage Foundation have been among the most widely used institutional indicators.

The purpose of an economic freedom index, according to Heritage, is to “document the positive relationship between economic freedom and a variety of positive social and economic goals.” Many studies support that claim, finding that countries with high economic freedom scores are, in fact, more prosperous and dynamic than those that are less free. However, not all aspects of economic freedom turn out to be equally important. In earlier posts, I have been critical of the components of the economic freedom indexes that focus on the size of government and regulation. Here, I take on those that focus on price stability—the Fraser “Sound Money” component and the Heritage “Monetary Freedom” component.

I find that these price stability components add little to our understanding of economic freedom. Furthermore, because they incorporate an exaggerated fear of even moderate inflation, an attempt to achieve maximum price stability, as defined by these indicators, would be less likely to bring prosperity than to undermine it.

Is price stability an institution or a policy outcome?

The first problem with the Fraser and Heritage price stability indicators is that they do not really measure economic freedom in the sense that it underlies other components of the indexes. Robert Lawson, a senior member of the team that publishes Fraser’s Economic Freedom of the World reports, once wrote that an economic freedom index is, or should be, only that—“not an index of economic growth policies, efficient government provision of public goods, macroeconomic stabilization policies, or ideal income distribution policies.” If so, then the sound money indicators, as indexes of the success of monetary policy, are just what an economic freedom index should not be.

Measures of inflation and money growth account for three-quarters of the data that go into the Fraser Sound Money indicator and four-fifths of the Heritage Monetary Freedom indicator. Rather than measuring the freedom of individuals to work, produce, consume and invest as they see fit, they measure the performance of central banks. To be sure, if we are going to have central banks, we want them to do a good job, but conceptually, good central banking and economic freedom are different things.

Instead, it seems to me that the natural meaning of economic freedom, as applied to monetary matters, ought to be the freedom to use and exchange whatever kind of money one wants for whatever purpose. To their credit, neither Fraser nor Heritage entirely neglects that notion of monetary freedom. Fraser’s Sound Money includes a subcomponent, weighted at 25 percent, that measures the extent of restrictions on ownership of foreign currency bank accounts. The Heritage Monetary Freedom indicator gives a weight of up to 20 percent to a measure of the extent of price controls. If I were to try to build a better measure of monetary freedom, I would begin by including both of those, but I would not stop there.

Why not, for example, include a measure of central bank independence, much as both the Fraser and Heritage indexes include measures of judicial independence in evaluating the quality of legal institutions? There is a large literature linking central bank independence to the desired policy outcome of price stability. (This IMF working paper discusses measurement issues and provides links to previous literature.) In a similar vein, it might make sense to rate central banks on their use of policy rules. Many economists have argued that using policy rules to constrain or even fully replace central bank discretion can improve price stability. (A recent conference sponsored by the Boston Fed provides a detailed airing of the case for policy rules and contained discretion.)

Another indicator for possible inclusion would be the presence or absence of black markets for foreign currency, and, where black markets exist, the spread between the official and black-market exchange rates. (Fraser does include a measure of black-market exchange rates, although it appears as a subcomponent of the Freedom of Trade category rather than of Sound Money.) The multiple official exchange rates for different types of transactions that some countries maintain also represent limitations on freedom.

Finally, we might try to measure the degree to which a country’s monetary system is open to competing forms of money—a subject that Larry White, among others, has written about at length. An up-to-date treatment would want to cover regulatory limits on the use of cryptocurrencies.

A greater emphasis on these and other institutional variables, and less on the rate of inflation itself, would make the monetary components of the Fraser and Heritage indicators more consistent with the conceptual framework that underlies their other components.

An exaggerated fear of inflation

Setting aside the conceptual question of whether sound money is a form of freedom, an institution, or simply good macroeconomic policy, we come to the second major problem with the Fraser and Heritage price stability measures. By enshrining zero percent inflation as the ideal, both of them reflect an exaggerated fear of even moderate inflation that is not supported by the preponderance of evidence.

To understand why, we need to dig into some technical details, starting with Fraser’s Sound Money. This indicator has four subcomponents: the growth rate of the M1 money stock (currency plus checkable deposits) relative to the growth of real GDP; the standard deviation of inflation over the previous five years; the rate of inflation in the most recent year; and a measure of the right to own foreign currency bank accounts. The raw data for each subcomponent are converted to a scale of 0 to 10, with higher numbers representing greater price stability, and then averaged to get the full Sound Money indicator.

Of the four subcomponents, M1 growth appears to be a holdover from Milton Friedman’s personal involvement in the early stages of Fraser’s Economic Freedom of the World project. Few, if any, economists today consider holding M1 growth equal to the long-run rate of real GDP growth to be a reasonable target for monetary policy. One of the main reasons is that the difference between the rate of money growth and the rate of real economic growth equals the rate of inflation only if M1 velocity (the ratio of nominal GDP to the money stock) is constant. In practice, however, velocity can be highly variable. For example, from 2005 to 2008, when velocity was rising, the Fraser money growth index averaged an excellent 9.7 even though inflation averaged 3.2 percent. From 2009 to 2014, when velocity was falling, inflation slowed to 1.6 percent but the Fraser money growth index, perversely, fell to 8.45, its lowest level in the 45 years for which it has been calculated.

Beyond the problems with M1 growth, there are problems with the way Fraser’s Sound Money indicator measures inflation itself. The inflation subcomponent is based on the rate of CPI inflation in the most recent year, but manipulates the raw data extensively. First, the distribution of inflation rates is truncated at 50 percent per year. All countries that experience hyperinflation, no matter how rapid, are assigned the same score. Next, any deflation, that is, any negative rate of inflation, is converted to its absolute value. Finally, the data are converted to a scale of 0 through 10. This procedure can be summarized by the formula

FINFi = (50 – |пi|)/5

where FINFi is the Fraser inflation score for country i and пi is the raw inflation rate. By this method, then, an inflation rate of 0 percent becomes a perfect 10, a rate of either +2 percent or -2 percent gives a score of 9.6, and any inflation rate of 50 percent or higher earns a zero.

This procedure exaggerates the harm done by moderate rates of inflation in three ways. First, it assumes a priori that the optimal rate of inflation is zero. Second, by arbitrarily truncating the distribution at an inflation rate of 50 percent, it makes the scores of countries with moderate inflation look worse than they otherwise would. (For example, if the maximum permitted value of inflation were 100 percent rather than 50 percent, the score for a country with 2 percent inflation would be 9.8 rather than 9.6.) Third, by using absolute values of inflation rates, it implicitly assumes that a rate of +2 percent inflation is just as harmful as deflation of -2 percent, something that few economists believe to be the case. (See here for a full discussion of deflation and its effects.)

The Heritage Monetary Freedom indicator uses a somewhat different method, but one that similarly exaggerates the harm done by moderate inflation and understates the risks of deflation. Like Fraser, Heritage uses absolute values to convert deflation to an equivalent rate of inflation. Rather than truncating the distribution of observed inflation rates, Heritage reduces the statistical impact of extreme hyperinflation values by basing its score on the square root of observed inflation rates, multiplied by a constant. Rather than the most recent year’s inflation, it uses a three-year weighted average of inflation rates, and rather than a scale of 0 to 10, it uses a scale of 0 to 100, with higher values indicating less inflation. The full procedure is given by the formula

HINFi = (100 – 6.33*√п*i) – CONTROLS

where HINFi is the Heritage inflation score for country i and п*i is a weighted average of the absolute values of the last three years’ inflation rates, and CONTROLS is a penalty of up to 20 points depending on the pervasiveness of price controls.

The effect of this formula is to reduce the scores of countries with moderate inflation rates by even more, in comparison to those with zero inflation, than does the Fraser method. For example, raising the inflation rate from zero to 2 percent lowers the Heritage inflation score from 100 to 91 (assuming no price controls), compared to a smaller relative reduction from 10 to 9.6 using the Fraser formula.

Rather than making a priori assumptions that idealize zero inflation, penalize moderate inflation, and understate the risks of deflation, it would make more sense to look at the actual effects of inflation as revealed by empirical studies. There is an abundant literature to draw on.

Probably the most extensively studied question is the relationship between price stability and economic growth. (See here and here for recent surveys of the literature.) The question is not simply one of whether inflation is good or bad for growth. Three frequent findings suggest that a more nuanced view is appropriate.

Many studies find a nonlinear relationship, in which inflation up to a certain rate is associated with higher growth and with lower growth after that.

The optimal level of inflation—that is, the rate associated with the highest growth rates—appears to be lower in more developed economies.

Country-specific effects are strong. Both the optimal inflation rate and the degree of harm from excess inflation vary according to circumstances.

Some of the studies that reached these conclusions were done years ago, raising the question of whether they continue to hold for the period leading up to the global financial crisis and the recovery from it. For a quick-and-dirty check, I examined the most recent ten years of IMF data on inflation and growth. The findings were generally consistent with those of past studies:

Nonlinear formulations of the inflation-growth relation produced significantly better fits than linear formulations.

The relationship of inflation to growth varied according to income level. The rate of inflation associated with the best growth performance was lower for countries in the highest income quartile than for middle- and lower-income countries.

Although there was a statistically significant relationship between growth and inflation overall, the fit was far from tight. As in previous studies, country-specific factors accounted for a large part of the cross-country variations in growth.

In addition to the literature on the relationship between inflation and growth, there are many studies of the relationship between inflation and unemployment, both in the short run and the long run. One strand of that literature suggests that there is a “backward bending Phillips curve.” The idea is that there is some moderate, positive rate of inflation that produces the lowest minimum unemployment rate that can be sustained without accelerating inflation. Proponents of this view emphasize behavioral factors, especially downward rigidity of nominal wages. The most widely cited paper proposing a backward-bending Phillips curve was published in 1996 by George A. Akerlof, George L. Perry, and William T. Dickens. Thomas Palley has proposed a simpler version of their model that reaches the same conclusion.

In short, whereas the Fraser and Heritage price stability indicators assign the highest possible scores to countries with zero inflation, economists who have studied the effects of inflation in the real world have found, more often than not, that a moderately positive rate produces better results.

Conclusions

Taking all of the above into account, I reach the following conclusions regarding the price stability components of the Fraser and Heritage economic freedom indexes:

Conceptually, the idea of measuring economic freedom in the first place is motivated by the hypothesis that good institutions produce good outcomes. In my view, explorations of that hypothesis are best conducted using economic freedom indicators that focus on institutional quality. Including indicators of policy outcomes, such as inflation rates, only confuses matters.

The price stability components of Fraser and Heritage economic freedom indexes, which assign the highest possible scores to countries with zero inflation, reflect an exaggerated fear of the effects of moderate inflation. By using the absolute value of inflation rates in their indicators, they also understate the detrimental effects of deflation.

These conclusions have important implications both for researchers and for policymakers.

Researchers should treat the price stability components of the Fraser and Heritage indexes with caution. The results of any statistical tests that use the economic freedom indexes as a whole should be checked against tests that disaggregate those indexes into their principal components. The results of statistical tests that use the Sound Money and Monetary Freedom indicators as independent variables should be checked against results that use raw inflation data, instead, or using tests that strip out price stability data altogether. Researchers interested in exploring the relationship between macroeconomic performance and the quality of monetary institutions should consider augmenting the Fraser and Heritage data with additional institutional indicators, such as measures of central bank independence, the use of monetary policy rules, freedom to use competing forms of money, and exchange rate regimes.

At the same time, policymakers should be cautioned against using the Sound Money or Monetary Freedom indexes as performance benchmarks. There is little evidence to support these indexes’ implicit assumptions that zero is the optimal rate of inflation or that a given rate of deflation is no more damaging than the same rate of inflation. Far from promoting freedom and prosperity, any attempt to maximize the soundness of money as defined by Fraser or monetary freedom as defined by Heritage would be more likely to place economies in a low-growth, high-unemployment straitjacket.

The post How Economic Freedom Indexes Misunderstand Sound Money and Inflation appeared first on Niskanen Center.

from nicholemhearn digest https://niskanencenter.org/blog/how-economic-freedom-indexes-misunderstand-sound-money-and-inflation/

#nicholemhearn digest