IN INDIA MAXIMUM NUMBER OF HUMAN TRAFFICING LIKE (CHILD & WOMAN) DONE IN THESE FOLLWING STATES
Andhra Pradesh
Bihar
Delhi
Goa
Karnataka
Maharashtra
Meghalaya & Assam
Rajasthan
Tamil Nadu &
Pondicherry
Uttar Pradesh
West Bengal
Friday, October 30, 2009
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
FACTS
IN DELHI EVERY DAY 2.5 L LITRE PETROL AND DISEL WASTE,DUE TO TRAFFIC JAMS AND ON RED LIGHT.MAXIMUM WASTE BY TWO WHELLERS AND IN SECOND BY CARS
Sunday, October 25, 2009
INDIA
Every year 1.4 lakh pepole Die in road accident,
And
In
Australia only 100 are maximum
now u can emagin indian road condition and traffic rules which are not obey by the peoples
And
In
Australia only 100 are maximum
now u can emagin indian road condition and traffic rules which are not obey by the peoples
Friday, October 23, 2009
The World’s Top Thinkers of 2009
F
ew management thinkers have the ability to come up with one winning idea after another. C.K. Prahalad is a rare exception. He has the remarkable ability to be ahead of the times. Look at any of his key ideas — be it core competence, co-creation or the bottom of the pyramid — Prahalad’s influence on the study and practise of management has been immense.
It is no wonder then that for the second time in a row, the Indian-born management guru has earned the distinction of being the most influential management thinker alive according to the Thinkers 50, a biennial ranking of the top 50 business and management thought leaders in the world, brought out by the UK-based Suntop Media. Prahalad first topped the Thinkers 50 in 2007, unseating the formidable strategy don Michael Porter. Malcolm Gladwell, the author of Tipping Point, Blink and the more recent Outliers, came in at No. 2, while Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman came in at No. 3.
Ratan Tata, surprise entrant in The Thinkers 50 ranking at No. 12
The 68-year-old Prahalad is on an exciting new journey these days. Having been an avid researcher for almost four decades now, Prahalad is looking for new knowledge at the intersection of various themes he has dealt with. “My research [these days] is focussed on innovation opportunities that lie at the intersection of inclusive growth [i.e. the bottom of the pyramid], sustainability, connectivity [a theme explored in the books The Future of Competition and The New Age of Innovation] and globalisation [again, a theme explored in The Multinational Mission]. This intersection will provide opportunities for new governance systems, and an ability to manage volatility,” says Prahalad. He believes that emerging countries like India can take a leadership role here if we focus on this new frontier.
Prahalad’s ascendance to the top of the list signals the growing influence of Indian management thinkers, a trend that first showed up in the 2007 ranking when four Indians — Prahalad, CEO coach Ram Charan, Tuck School of Business’ Vijay Govindarajan and Harvard Business School’s Rakesh Khurana — made it to the top 50.
This year, Indians have more to cheer about with a total of six Indians on the list. Apart from the original four, the two notable additions this year are senior leaders from India Inc.: Ratan Tata, CEO of Tata Industries, who makes his debut at No. 12, and Infosys co-founder Kris Gopalakrishnan, who comes in at No. 15. From the original lot, Ram Charan has moved up several slots from No. 22 to No. 13 while Govindarajan came down to No. 24 from 23 last year and upcoming leadership expert Rakesh Khurana moved up one slot to No 44.
The Indian brigade is making waves globally. For two years, Govindarajan handled the role of Chief Innovation Consultant at GE, a prestigious assignment for an academic. Says Govindarajan, “The GE assignment will shape my research agenda going forward. I want to push the thinking on the concept of reverse innovation — developing products in countries like China and India and marketing them globally.” His next book on reverse innovation will be out in 2010.
Khurana, on the other hand, after having explored the disastrous consequences of hiring “superstar CEOs” (the research that catapulted him to superstardom himself), is now focussing on the reform of MBA education, an area that is dominated by stalwarts like McGill University’s Henry Mintzberg and Stanford’s Jeffrey Pfeffer. His latest book, From Higher Aims to Hired Hands, explores the lacuna in management education. “My second area of focus is in the area of large institutional change, with a focus on leadership, globalisation, and addressing society’s most pressing global problems through the construction and reform of a new type of institutional leadership,” says Khurana.
Another Indian — London Business School’s Nirmalya Kumar — features in the list of ‘Thinkers shaping the future’, a bunch of people who aren’t on the ranking yet but have great potential going forward.
Apart from the growing influence of Indian thought leaders, this year’s Thinkers 50 shows some other interesting trends. This year’s ranking has 14 notable new entrants like Grameen Bank founder Muhammad Yunus (an impressive No. 6), Google’s Eric Schmidt, Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, Rotman School of Management’s Roger Martin, Wired’s Chris Anderson, Black Swan author Nassim Nicholas Taleb, economic historian Niall Ferguson and Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales.
The economic turbulence has had a bearing on the ranking, bringing to the forefront people such as Krugman and Stiglitz whose ideas now have even more takers. Also, as the ranking points out, “caring capitalists are the new heroes”, be it Prahalad’s idea of the Bottom of the Pyramid, Bill Gates’ concept of creative capitalism which borrows from Prahalad’s ideas to some extent, or Muhammad Yunus and the micro-credit revolution in Bangladesh which has spawned several new innovations.
Interestingly, 26 percent of the top 50 have entered the ranking for the first time. While people like Tom Peters, Jim Collins, Henry Mintzberg, Warren Bennis, Charles Handy and John Kotter still figure in the ranking, the newcomers are a welcome change. The world of management research could do with a fresh infusion of new ideas.
ew management thinkers have the ability to come up with one winning idea after another. C.K. Prahalad is a rare exception. He has the remarkable ability to be ahead of the times. Look at any of his key ideas — be it core competence, co-creation or the bottom of the pyramid — Prahalad’s influence on the study and practise of management has been immense.
It is no wonder then that for the second time in a row, the Indian-born management guru has earned the distinction of being the most influential management thinker alive according to the Thinkers 50, a biennial ranking of the top 50 business and management thought leaders in the world, brought out by the UK-based Suntop Media. Prahalad first topped the Thinkers 50 in 2007, unseating the formidable strategy don Michael Porter. Malcolm Gladwell, the author of Tipping Point, Blink and the more recent Outliers, came in at No. 2, while Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman came in at No. 3.
Ratan Tata, surprise entrant in The Thinkers 50 ranking at No. 12
The 68-year-old Prahalad is on an exciting new journey these days. Having been an avid researcher for almost four decades now, Prahalad is looking for new knowledge at the intersection of various themes he has dealt with. “My research [these days] is focussed on innovation opportunities that lie at the intersection of inclusive growth [i.e. the bottom of the pyramid], sustainability, connectivity [a theme explored in the books The Future of Competition and The New Age of Innovation] and globalisation [again, a theme explored in The Multinational Mission]. This intersection will provide opportunities for new governance systems, and an ability to manage volatility,” says Prahalad. He believes that emerging countries like India can take a leadership role here if we focus on this new frontier.
Prahalad’s ascendance to the top of the list signals the growing influence of Indian management thinkers, a trend that first showed up in the 2007 ranking when four Indians — Prahalad, CEO coach Ram Charan, Tuck School of Business’ Vijay Govindarajan and Harvard Business School’s Rakesh Khurana — made it to the top 50.
This year, Indians have more to cheer about with a total of six Indians on the list. Apart from the original four, the two notable additions this year are senior leaders from India Inc.: Ratan Tata, CEO of Tata Industries, who makes his debut at No. 12, and Infosys co-founder Kris Gopalakrishnan, who comes in at No. 15. From the original lot, Ram Charan has moved up several slots from No. 22 to No. 13 while Govindarajan came down to No. 24 from 23 last year and upcoming leadership expert Rakesh Khurana moved up one slot to No 44.
The Indian brigade is making waves globally. For two years, Govindarajan handled the role of Chief Innovation Consultant at GE, a prestigious assignment for an academic. Says Govindarajan, “The GE assignment will shape my research agenda going forward. I want to push the thinking on the concept of reverse innovation — developing products in countries like China and India and marketing them globally.” His next book on reverse innovation will be out in 2010.
Khurana, on the other hand, after having explored the disastrous consequences of hiring “superstar CEOs” (the research that catapulted him to superstardom himself), is now focussing on the reform of MBA education, an area that is dominated by stalwarts like McGill University’s Henry Mintzberg and Stanford’s Jeffrey Pfeffer. His latest book, From Higher Aims to Hired Hands, explores the lacuna in management education. “My second area of focus is in the area of large institutional change, with a focus on leadership, globalisation, and addressing society’s most pressing global problems through the construction and reform of a new type of institutional leadership,” says Khurana.
Another Indian — London Business School’s Nirmalya Kumar — features in the list of ‘Thinkers shaping the future’, a bunch of people who aren’t on the ranking yet but have great potential going forward.
Apart from the growing influence of Indian thought leaders, this year’s Thinkers 50 shows some other interesting trends. This year’s ranking has 14 notable new entrants like Grameen Bank founder Muhammad Yunus (an impressive No. 6), Google’s Eric Schmidt, Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, Rotman School of Management’s Roger Martin, Wired’s Chris Anderson, Black Swan author Nassim Nicholas Taleb, economic historian Niall Ferguson and Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales.
The economic turbulence has had a bearing on the ranking, bringing to the forefront people such as Krugman and Stiglitz whose ideas now have even more takers. Also, as the ranking points out, “caring capitalists are the new heroes”, be it Prahalad’s idea of the Bottom of the Pyramid, Bill Gates’ concept of creative capitalism which borrows from Prahalad’s ideas to some extent, or Muhammad Yunus and the micro-credit revolution in Bangladesh which has spawned several new innovations.
Interestingly, 26 percent of the top 50 have entered the ranking for the first time. While people like Tom Peters, Jim Collins, Henry Mintzberg, Warren Bennis, Charles Handy and John Kotter still figure in the ranking, the newcomers are a welcome change. The world of management research could do with a fresh infusion of new ideas.
ICICI Venture Wants More Bank for its Buck
Under its new chief Vishakha Mulye, ICICI Venture is learning to strike a difficult balance between building an entrepreneurial culture and also tapping ICICI Bank’s vast network of relationships. The fate of the country’s biggest private equity firm could well depend on it
I
t has been six months since Vishakha Mulye took over as the CEO and managing director at one of India’s largest private equity fund, ICICI Venture. Things have kept her occupied. She is in the middle of raising a new fund. This is a Rs. 2,500-crore fund with an option to add another Rs. 1,500 crore if investor interest is strong. Then she has the task of rebuilding the team that was left weakened by the exit of senior executives like Renuka Ramnath, Shailesh Pathak and Shweta Jalan three months ago; and Bala Deshpande and Aluri Srinivasa last year.
Then there is the minor task of refining the investment strategy of the fund as well. But that’s one thing Mulye will find the easiest to tackle. “We will continue doing buyouts but we will also add growth investments. We think infrastructure will be big and then there will be opportunities when corporates hive off non-core assets,” says Mulye.
Image: Dinesh Krishnan
Vishakha Mulye, CEO and MD, ICICI Venture
But her most challenging task will be to recover the satellite of ICICI Venture that was trying to gather escape velocity and dock it firmly with the mother-ship of ICICI Bank.
No, ICICI Venture wasn’t trying to break away — not a chance. It is just that when ICICI Venture made a transition — sometime in 2004 — from being a venture capital firm to a large private equity investor, perceptions changed. Investors in the fund thought they were now dealing with a local heavyweight a la Blackstone. Perhaps, so did the team members. In the last five years, ICICI Venture has done the most number of buyout deals. This is to private equity what the Tour De France is to cycling: A test of skill, endurance and psychological strength to last the distance. Only the biggest and toughest attempt it because the risk of failure is high.
Renuka Ramnath, whom Mulye succeeded, knew that to get a seat at the buyout table she had to have a purse fatter than what parent ICICI Bank could afford. To get that increase in fund size, ICICI Venture raised a large amount of money from third-party institutional investors. Ramnath was seen as someone who had taken a firm that managed all of $225 million in 1998 to the $1.8-billion mark in 2008, did the toughest deals and most importantly was making money on those deals. So if it walked like Blackstone and roared like KKR, it had to be fed like those beasts, in terms of compensation. That’s when the gap between the perception and reality opened.
Investors in ICICI’s funds and employees thought the team deserved more of the profits the team was making. In private equity business, investors pay 2 percent in asset management fee and 20 percent of the profits to the team that manages money (known in industry parlance as carry). This is a steep charge but it is paid because most of the investment is in illiquid, unlisted companies which would be hard for an insurance company or a public sector bank to invest in directly. This 20 percent profit then gets divided differently if the private equity firm is an extension of a bank, is a standalone fund or belongs to an insurer. Theoretically, how the 20 percent is divided should be of no concern to investors; they should take their 80 percent and be done with it. But then there is a thing called as “the alignment of economic interests”. And this is not the first time that ICICI Bank has had to deal with this. It goes back a decade, to 1999.
At that time A.J.V. Jayachander and Nitin Deshmukh used to be the key guys at the fund. Though fund sizes were really small, the largest was $52 million, all the four funds of that time made some great investments in companies such as Big Bazaar, Naukri, and Biocon which were then in its infancy. When these companies went public, ICICI Venture laughed all the way to the bank. Its funds had an internal rate of return (IRR) of more than 45 percent on the capital it had deployed. That was the good part.
The sad part was that ICICI Venture in those times had no system of carry (a share of the profits for the key team members in the fund).
I
t has been six months since Vishakha Mulye took over as the CEO and managing director at one of India’s largest private equity fund, ICICI Venture. Things have kept her occupied. She is in the middle of raising a new fund. This is a Rs. 2,500-crore fund with an option to add another Rs. 1,500 crore if investor interest is strong. Then she has the task of rebuilding the team that was left weakened by the exit of senior executives like Renuka Ramnath, Shailesh Pathak and Shweta Jalan three months ago; and Bala Deshpande and Aluri Srinivasa last year.
Then there is the minor task of refining the investment strategy of the fund as well. But that’s one thing Mulye will find the easiest to tackle. “We will continue doing buyouts but we will also add growth investments. We think infrastructure will be big and then there will be opportunities when corporates hive off non-core assets,” says Mulye.
Image: Dinesh Krishnan
Vishakha Mulye, CEO and MD, ICICI Venture
But her most challenging task will be to recover the satellite of ICICI Venture that was trying to gather escape velocity and dock it firmly with the mother-ship of ICICI Bank.
No, ICICI Venture wasn’t trying to break away — not a chance. It is just that when ICICI Venture made a transition — sometime in 2004 — from being a venture capital firm to a large private equity investor, perceptions changed. Investors in the fund thought they were now dealing with a local heavyweight a la Blackstone. Perhaps, so did the team members. In the last five years, ICICI Venture has done the most number of buyout deals. This is to private equity what the Tour De France is to cycling: A test of skill, endurance and psychological strength to last the distance. Only the biggest and toughest attempt it because the risk of failure is high.
Renuka Ramnath, whom Mulye succeeded, knew that to get a seat at the buyout table she had to have a purse fatter than what parent ICICI Bank could afford. To get that increase in fund size, ICICI Venture raised a large amount of money from third-party institutional investors. Ramnath was seen as someone who had taken a firm that managed all of $225 million in 1998 to the $1.8-billion mark in 2008, did the toughest deals and most importantly was making money on those deals. So if it walked like Blackstone and roared like KKR, it had to be fed like those beasts, in terms of compensation. That’s when the gap between the perception and reality opened.
Investors in ICICI’s funds and employees thought the team deserved more of the profits the team was making. In private equity business, investors pay 2 percent in asset management fee and 20 percent of the profits to the team that manages money (known in industry parlance as carry). This is a steep charge but it is paid because most of the investment is in illiquid, unlisted companies which would be hard for an insurance company or a public sector bank to invest in directly. This 20 percent profit then gets divided differently if the private equity firm is an extension of a bank, is a standalone fund or belongs to an insurer. Theoretically, how the 20 percent is divided should be of no concern to investors; they should take their 80 percent and be done with it. But then there is a thing called as “the alignment of economic interests”. And this is not the first time that ICICI Bank has had to deal with this. It goes back a decade, to 1999.
At that time A.J.V. Jayachander and Nitin Deshmukh used to be the key guys at the fund. Though fund sizes were really small, the largest was $52 million, all the four funds of that time made some great investments in companies such as Big Bazaar, Naukri, and Biocon which were then in its infancy. When these companies went public, ICICI Venture laughed all the way to the bank. Its funds had an internal rate of return (IRR) of more than 45 percent on the capital it had deployed. That was the good part.
The sad part was that ICICI Venture in those times had no system of carry (a share of the profits for the key team members in the fund).
At the Crossroads
Vikram Akula's SKS Microfinance was one of the first to show that private capital could be harnessed to nurture sustainable livelihoods in villages. Today, the company is on the verge of becoming the largest MFI in the world, overtaking Grameen Bank. It is looking at a big bang IPO in 2010. But as the company scales up, can Akula find the perfect balance between profit motive and social commitment?
Walmart’s Passage to India
Even though Walmart is a late entrant into India, it has prised open an opportunity that nobody really applied their minds to. Instead of catering to the large Indian middle class like all other retailers, it is attempting a pure wholesale format at its first Indian store in Amritsar. It will be a one stop shop from where small kirana shop owners, hotels and restaurants, and even the Indian Army will get their supplies. It has already signed on close to 70,000 members, and sales are said to be almost 70 percent more than what had been budgeted.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Who Killed Change?
Change has been an organizational buzzword for a long time now. No matter where in the world you are, and no matter whether your business is a start-up or a large corporation, you're constantly trying to launch, or at least succeed with, change initiatives. Our continuous trysts with change teach us that it's an easy phenomenon to talk and write about but a very hard one to implement in any truly meaningful way. That's why two-thirds of all change initiatives sink without a trace, according to a study by the Center for Creative Leadership.
Article Controls
Agent Mike McNally, the dark-sedan-driving, cheap-cigar-smoking (and trying to kick the habit) detective in Who Killed Change? Solving the Mystery of Leading People Through Change, by Ken Blanchard, John Britt, Judd Hoekstra and Pat Zigar (William Morrow, 160 pp., $21.99), is out to find the culprits behind the failed change efforts at a corporation called ACME.
One by one, Agent McNally interviews 13 prime suspects. Each one stands for a key attribute that can make or break a change process in any organization. We relate easily to these unique characters doubling as real-life organizational qualities because is depicted in a light, lively and entertaining way. For example, Mr. Change Leadership Team likes to be known as Pecs. Pecs has biceps three times the size of a normal man's. He developed them by holding up "change" all the time. He also has pencil-thin legs. They resemble "poodle legs walking around with a pit bull's torso," reflecting how most organizations hold up change for its own sake but never pay real attention to actually taking it anywhere. The other suspects include Earnest Urgency, a bundle of raw nerves, and Victoria Vision, who wears rose-tinted glasses. The plot eventually reveals how each one of them played a role in sabotaging change.
What sets the book apart is the way it makes sharp and vivid and distinct the general forces that bring down almost every failed change effort. Agent McNally's interviews with his 13 suspects lay out these forces from a first-person perspective, and we get to know each character's' organizational role, relationships and expectations. He also acquaints us with the parts played by the leadership team and by the employees in general, and we get to see how all these pieces fit together in the context of managing--or murdering--change.
Agent McNally shares notes and reflections at the end of every chapter to help us see the picture from a neutral perspective--that of a management consultant. This assists us in understanding what really deserves attention and what must be discounted among the claims made by each of the suspects in their interviews. McNally's notes also raise ideas about the tough questions we each have to ask ourselves before we invest in an organizational change undertaking. (Ken Blanchard, the book's lead author, is the best-selling motivational speaker whose other books include The One Minute Manager.)
Britt and Blanchard's Who Killed Change presents a fabulous model of how and whyu change so often fails in corporate America today. We are using this text in several of our B-School courses. Dr Pa
Post a Comment
The central topic of the book, change management, has been written about many times before. What makes this book stand out is its unorthodox style of presentation and the way it brings out the intricacies involved in organizational change in an easy but engaging manner.
Article Controls
Agent Mike McNally, the dark-sedan-driving, cheap-cigar-smoking (and trying to kick the habit) detective in Who Killed Change? Solving the Mystery of Leading People Through Change, by Ken Blanchard, John Britt, Judd Hoekstra and Pat Zigar (William Morrow, 160 pp., $21.99), is out to find the culprits behind the failed change efforts at a corporation called ACME.
One by one, Agent McNally interviews 13 prime suspects. Each one stands for a key attribute that can make or break a change process in any organization. We relate easily to these unique characters doubling as real-life organizational qualities because is depicted in a light, lively and entertaining way. For example, Mr. Change Leadership Team likes to be known as Pecs. Pecs has biceps three times the size of a normal man's. He developed them by holding up "change" all the time. He also has pencil-thin legs. They resemble "poodle legs walking around with a pit bull's torso," reflecting how most organizations hold up change for its own sake but never pay real attention to actually taking it anywhere. The other suspects include Earnest Urgency, a bundle of raw nerves, and Victoria Vision, who wears rose-tinted glasses. The plot eventually reveals how each one of them played a role in sabotaging change.
What sets the book apart is the way it makes sharp and vivid and distinct the general forces that bring down almost every failed change effort. Agent McNally's interviews with his 13 suspects lay out these forces from a first-person perspective, and we get to know each character's' organizational role, relationships and expectations. He also acquaints us with the parts played by the leadership team and by the employees in general, and we get to see how all these pieces fit together in the context of managing--or murdering--change.
Agent McNally shares notes and reflections at the end of every chapter to help us see the picture from a neutral perspective--that of a management consultant. This assists us in understanding what really deserves attention and what must be discounted among the claims made by each of the suspects in their interviews. McNally's notes also raise ideas about the tough questions we each have to ask ourselves before we invest in an organizational change undertaking. (Ken Blanchard, the book's lead author, is the best-selling motivational speaker whose other books include The One Minute Manager.)
Britt and Blanchard's Who Killed Change presents a fabulous model of how and whyu change so often fails in corporate America today. We are using this text in several of our B-School courses. Dr Pa
Post a Comment
The central topic of the book, change management, has been written about many times before. What makes this book stand out is its unorthodox style of presentation and the way it brings out the intricacies involved in organizational change in an easy but engaging manner.
INDIA 10 RICHEST MAN
1-Lakshmi Mittal
2-Azim Premji
3-M & A Ambani
4-Kumar M Birla
5-Pallonji Mistry
6-Sunil Mittal
7-Shiv Nadar
8-Adi Godrej
9-Dilip Shanghvi
10-M & S Mohan Singh
2-Azim Premji
3-M & A Ambani
4-Kumar M Birla
5-Pallonji Mistry
6-Sunil Mittal
7-Shiv Nadar
8-Adi Godrej
9-Dilip Shanghvi
10-M & S Mohan Singh
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
THE WORLD BIGGEST COMPANIES TOP 100
Rank Company Country Industry Sales ($bil) Profits ($bil) Assets ($bil) Market Value ($bil)
1 General Electric United States Conglomerates 182.52 17.41 797.77 89.87
2 Royal Dutch Shell Netherlands Oil & Gas Operations 458.36 26.28 278.44 135.10
3 Toyota Motor Japan Consumer Durables 263.42 17.21 324.98 102.35
4 ExxonMobil United States Oil & Gas Operations 425.70 45.22 228.05 335.54
5 BP United Kingdom Oil & Gas Operations 361.14 21.16 228.24 119.70
6 HSBC Holdings United Kingdom Banking 142.05 5.73 2,520.45 85.04
7 AT&T United States Telecommunications Services 124.03 12.87 265.25 140.08
8 Wal-Mart Stores United States Retailing 405.61 13.40 163.43 193.15
9 Banco Santander Spain Banking 96.23 13.25 1,318.86 49.75
9 Chevron United States Oil & Gas Operations 255.11 23.93 161.17 121.70
11 Total France Oil & Gas Operations 223.15 14.74 164.66 112.90
12 ICBC China Banking 53.60 11.16 1,188.08 170.83
13 Gazprom Russia Oil & Gas Operations 97.29 26.78 276.81 74.55
14 PetroChina China Oil & Gas Operations 114.32 19.94 145.14 270.56
15 Volkswagen Group Germany Consumer Durables 158.40 6.52 244.05 75.18
16 JPMorgan Chase United States Banking 101.49 3.70 2,175.05 85.87
17 GDF Suez France Utilities 115.59 9.05 232.71 70.46
18 ENI Italy Oil & Gas Operations 158.32 12.91 139.80 80.68
19 Berkshire Hathaway United States Diversified Financials 107.79 4.99 267.40 122.11
20 Vodafone United Kingdom Telecommunications Services 70.39 13.30 252.08 93.66
21 Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Japan Banking 61.43 6.38 1,931.17 53.63
22 Procter & Gamble United States Household & Personal Products 83.68 14.08 138.26 141.18
23 CCB-China Construction Bank China Banking 42.98 9.45 903.35 119.03
24 Verizon Communications United States Telecommunications Services 97.35 6.43 202.35 81.04
25 Petrobras-Petróleo Brasil Brazil Oil & Gas Operations 92.08 14.12 120.68 110.97
26 Nippon Telegraph & Tel Japan Telecommunications Services 107.02 6.36 179.95 59.07
27 EDF Group France Utilities 89.46 4.73 278.76 71.53
28 IBM United States Software & Services 103.63 12.34 109.53 123.47
29 BNP Paribas France Banking 107.96 4.20 2,888.73 29.98
30 Bank of China China Banking 40.10 7.70 817.84 105.04
31 Telefónica Spain Telecommunications Services 80.70 10.57 129.16 85.56
32 Nestlé Switzerland Food, Drink & Tobacco 103.01 16.91 97.12 118.99
33 Sinopec-China Petroleum China Oil & Gas Operations 154.28 7.43 100.41 93.50
34 Crédit Agricole France Banking 107.75 5.90 2,064.17 21.91
35 Siemens Germany Conglomerates 108.76 8.05 128.46 44.18
36 Hewlett-Packard United States Technology Hardware & Equip 118.70 8.05 109.63 69.57
37 Intesa Sanpaolo Italy Banking 50.56 10.58 835.15 31.43
38 Bank of America United States Banking 113.11 4.01 1,817.94 25.29
39 Honda Motor Japan Consumer Durables 120.27 6.01 124.98 44.32
40 BBVA-Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Spain Banking 56.51 6.99 747.99 27.56
41 ArcelorMittal Luxembourg Materials 124.94 9.40 133.09 26.80
42 Johnson & Johnson United States Drugs & Biotechnology 63.75 12.95 84.91 138.29
43 ENEL Italy Utilities 82.92 7.37 177.21 31.00
44 UniCredit Group Italy Banking 83.72 8.70 1,482.98 18.37
45 Generali Group Italy Insurance 118.39 4.26 546.50 21.35
46 France Telecom France Telecommunications Services 74.50 5.67 125.32 58.92
47 Samsung Electronics South Korea Semiconductors 104.42 7.87 99.47 45.82
48 Deutsche Bank Germany Diversified Financials 124.78 9.47 2,946.88 14.40
49 Microsoft United States Software & Services 61.98 17.23 65.79 143.58
50 Pfizer United States Drugs & Biotechnology 48.30 8.10 111.15 83.03
51 Wells Fargo United States Banking 51.65 2.66 1,309.64 51.28
52 BHP Billiton Australia/United Kingdom Materials 59.47 15.39 72.40 96.65
53 StatoilHydro Norway Oil & Gas Operations 93.38 6.20 82.42 53.30
54 Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Japan Banking 46.06 4.62 1,114.89 25.56
55 China Mobile Hong Kong/China Telecommunications Services 47.09 11.49 76.42 175.85
56 Goldman Sachs Group United States Diversified Financials 53.58 2.32 884.55 42.06
57 RWE Group Germany Utilities 66.16 3.56 127.64 33.68
58 Roche Holding Switzerland Drugs & Biotechnology 42.75 8.41 69.77 98.47
59 Commonwealth Bank Australia Banking 34.98 4.58 467.83 28.01
60 Société Générale Group France Banking 99.25 2.80 1,572.73 17.77
61 Novartis Switzerland Drugs & Biotechnology 42.01 8.30 73.22 82.97
62 E.ON Germany Utilities 120.74 1.76 215.15 47.44
63 Deutsche Telekom Germany Telecommunications Services 85.89 2.07 162.51 52.96
64 Rosneft Russia Oil & Gas Operations 46.99 11.12 77.40 34.07
65 Mizuho Financial Japan Banking 42.29 3.12 1,545.23 21.46
65 Sanofi-aventis France Drugs & Biotechnology 38.40 5.36 96.01 67.84
67 National Australia Bank Australia Banking 41.87 3.58 515.83 21.90
68 Royal Bank of Canada Canada Banking 30.01 3.52 575.21 34.29
69 Cisco Systems United States Technology Hardware & Equip 39.58 7.49 61.36 85.05
69 Rio Tinto United Kingdom/Australia Materials 54.26 3.68 88.25 39.42
71 Tesco United Kingdom Food Markets 93.85 4.21 59.80 37.50
72 China Life Insurance China Insurance 26.20 5.32 127.83 83.26
73 Mitsubishi Corp Japan Trading Companies 60.43 4.64 117.84 20.89
74 Vale Brazil Materials 30.75 9.28 79.26 66.14
75 Munich Re Germany Insurance 64.20 2.09 291.87 24.29
76 Lukoil Russia Oil & Gas Operations 66.86 9.51 59.14 26.62
77 Barclays United Kingdom Banking 59.82 6.40 2,947.84 11.15
78 Banco Bradesco Brazil Banking 39.97 3.26 194.51 26.75
79 Unilever Netherlands/United Kingdom Food, Drink & Tobacco 56.44 7.00 48.75 58.24
80 BASF Germany Chemicals 86.77 4.06 69.41 25.62
81 Nokia Finland Technology Hardware & Equip 70.63 5.55 52.29 35.32
82 Sony Japan Technology Hardware & Equip 88.89 3.70 124.12 17.12
83 CVS Caremark United States Retailing 87.47 3.21 60.96 37.46
83 Daimler Germany Consumer Durables 133.43 1.88 180.08 21.21
85 United Technologies United States Conglomerates 58.68 4.69 56.47 38.53
86 Saudi Basic Industries Saudi Arabia Chemicals 40.62 5.87 72.39 31.44
87 Iberdrola Spain Utilities 35.09 3.98 114.81 32.42
88 Nissan Motor Japan Consumer Durables 108.46 4.83 119.00 14.14
89 Panasonic Japan Technology Hardware & Equip 90.87 2.82 71.85 28.93
90 MetLife United States Insurance 50.99 3.21 501.68 15.10
91 Westpac Banking Group Australia Banking 25.90 3.05 346.22 31.40
92 GlaxoSmithKline United Kingdom Drugs & Biotechnology 35.55 6.72 52.67 79.06
93 Morgan Stanley United States Diversified Financials 62.26 1.71 658.81 21.00
94 Telecom Italia Italy Telecommunications Services 41.97 3.08 117.81 23.82
95 Intel United States Semiconductors 37.59 5.29 50.72 70.86
96 Zurich Financial Services Switzerland Insurance 32.35 3.04 325.04 19.60
97 Mitsui & Co Japan Trading Companies 57.50 4.11 97.15 17.12
98 Comcast United States Media 34.26 2.55 113.02 37.62
99 AXA Group France Insurance 156.95 1.28 936.92 19.47
100 Bayer Group Germany Chemicals 45.85 2.55 71.39 36.97
1 General Electric United States Conglomerates 182.52 17.41 797.77 89.87
2 Royal Dutch Shell Netherlands Oil & Gas Operations 458.36 26.28 278.44 135.10
3 Toyota Motor Japan Consumer Durables 263.42 17.21 324.98 102.35
4 ExxonMobil United States Oil & Gas Operations 425.70 45.22 228.05 335.54
5 BP United Kingdom Oil & Gas Operations 361.14 21.16 228.24 119.70
6 HSBC Holdings United Kingdom Banking 142.05 5.73 2,520.45 85.04
7 AT&T United States Telecommunications Services 124.03 12.87 265.25 140.08
8 Wal-Mart Stores United States Retailing 405.61 13.40 163.43 193.15
9 Banco Santander Spain Banking 96.23 13.25 1,318.86 49.75
9 Chevron United States Oil & Gas Operations 255.11 23.93 161.17 121.70
11 Total France Oil & Gas Operations 223.15 14.74 164.66 112.90
12 ICBC China Banking 53.60 11.16 1,188.08 170.83
13 Gazprom Russia Oil & Gas Operations 97.29 26.78 276.81 74.55
14 PetroChina China Oil & Gas Operations 114.32 19.94 145.14 270.56
15 Volkswagen Group Germany Consumer Durables 158.40 6.52 244.05 75.18
16 JPMorgan Chase United States Banking 101.49 3.70 2,175.05 85.87
17 GDF Suez France Utilities 115.59 9.05 232.71 70.46
18 ENI Italy Oil & Gas Operations 158.32 12.91 139.80 80.68
19 Berkshire Hathaway United States Diversified Financials 107.79 4.99 267.40 122.11
20 Vodafone United Kingdom Telecommunications Services 70.39 13.30 252.08 93.66
21 Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Japan Banking 61.43 6.38 1,931.17 53.63
22 Procter & Gamble United States Household & Personal Products 83.68 14.08 138.26 141.18
23 CCB-China Construction Bank China Banking 42.98 9.45 903.35 119.03
24 Verizon Communications United States Telecommunications Services 97.35 6.43 202.35 81.04
25 Petrobras-Petróleo Brasil Brazil Oil & Gas Operations 92.08 14.12 120.68 110.97
26 Nippon Telegraph & Tel Japan Telecommunications Services 107.02 6.36 179.95 59.07
27 EDF Group France Utilities 89.46 4.73 278.76 71.53
28 IBM United States Software & Services 103.63 12.34 109.53 123.47
29 BNP Paribas France Banking 107.96 4.20 2,888.73 29.98
30 Bank of China China Banking 40.10 7.70 817.84 105.04
31 Telefónica Spain Telecommunications Services 80.70 10.57 129.16 85.56
32 Nestlé Switzerland Food, Drink & Tobacco 103.01 16.91 97.12 118.99
33 Sinopec-China Petroleum China Oil & Gas Operations 154.28 7.43 100.41 93.50
34 Crédit Agricole France Banking 107.75 5.90 2,064.17 21.91
35 Siemens Germany Conglomerates 108.76 8.05 128.46 44.18
36 Hewlett-Packard United States Technology Hardware & Equip 118.70 8.05 109.63 69.57
37 Intesa Sanpaolo Italy Banking 50.56 10.58 835.15 31.43
38 Bank of America United States Banking 113.11 4.01 1,817.94 25.29
39 Honda Motor Japan Consumer Durables 120.27 6.01 124.98 44.32
40 BBVA-Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Spain Banking 56.51 6.99 747.99 27.56
41 ArcelorMittal Luxembourg Materials 124.94 9.40 133.09 26.80
42 Johnson & Johnson United States Drugs & Biotechnology 63.75 12.95 84.91 138.29
43 ENEL Italy Utilities 82.92 7.37 177.21 31.00
44 UniCredit Group Italy Banking 83.72 8.70 1,482.98 18.37
45 Generali Group Italy Insurance 118.39 4.26 546.50 21.35
46 France Telecom France Telecommunications Services 74.50 5.67 125.32 58.92
47 Samsung Electronics South Korea Semiconductors 104.42 7.87 99.47 45.82
48 Deutsche Bank Germany Diversified Financials 124.78 9.47 2,946.88 14.40
49 Microsoft United States Software & Services 61.98 17.23 65.79 143.58
50 Pfizer United States Drugs & Biotechnology 48.30 8.10 111.15 83.03
51 Wells Fargo United States Banking 51.65 2.66 1,309.64 51.28
52 BHP Billiton Australia/United Kingdom Materials 59.47 15.39 72.40 96.65
53 StatoilHydro Norway Oil & Gas Operations 93.38 6.20 82.42 53.30
54 Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Japan Banking 46.06 4.62 1,114.89 25.56
55 China Mobile Hong Kong/China Telecommunications Services 47.09 11.49 76.42 175.85
56 Goldman Sachs Group United States Diversified Financials 53.58 2.32 884.55 42.06
57 RWE Group Germany Utilities 66.16 3.56 127.64 33.68
58 Roche Holding Switzerland Drugs & Biotechnology 42.75 8.41 69.77 98.47
59 Commonwealth Bank Australia Banking 34.98 4.58 467.83 28.01
60 Société Générale Group France Banking 99.25 2.80 1,572.73 17.77
61 Novartis Switzerland Drugs & Biotechnology 42.01 8.30 73.22 82.97
62 E.ON Germany Utilities 120.74 1.76 215.15 47.44
63 Deutsche Telekom Germany Telecommunications Services 85.89 2.07 162.51 52.96
64 Rosneft Russia Oil & Gas Operations 46.99 11.12 77.40 34.07
65 Mizuho Financial Japan Banking 42.29 3.12 1,545.23 21.46
65 Sanofi-aventis France Drugs & Biotechnology 38.40 5.36 96.01 67.84
67 National Australia Bank Australia Banking 41.87 3.58 515.83 21.90
68 Royal Bank of Canada Canada Banking 30.01 3.52 575.21 34.29
69 Cisco Systems United States Technology Hardware & Equip 39.58 7.49 61.36 85.05
69 Rio Tinto United Kingdom/Australia Materials 54.26 3.68 88.25 39.42
71 Tesco United Kingdom Food Markets 93.85 4.21 59.80 37.50
72 China Life Insurance China Insurance 26.20 5.32 127.83 83.26
73 Mitsubishi Corp Japan Trading Companies 60.43 4.64 117.84 20.89
74 Vale Brazil Materials 30.75 9.28 79.26 66.14
75 Munich Re Germany Insurance 64.20 2.09 291.87 24.29
76 Lukoil Russia Oil & Gas Operations 66.86 9.51 59.14 26.62
77 Barclays United Kingdom Banking 59.82 6.40 2,947.84 11.15
78 Banco Bradesco Brazil Banking 39.97 3.26 194.51 26.75
79 Unilever Netherlands/United Kingdom Food, Drink & Tobacco 56.44 7.00 48.75 58.24
80 BASF Germany Chemicals 86.77 4.06 69.41 25.62
81 Nokia Finland Technology Hardware & Equip 70.63 5.55 52.29 35.32
82 Sony Japan Technology Hardware & Equip 88.89 3.70 124.12 17.12
83 CVS Caremark United States Retailing 87.47 3.21 60.96 37.46
83 Daimler Germany Consumer Durables 133.43 1.88 180.08 21.21
85 United Technologies United States Conglomerates 58.68 4.69 56.47 38.53
86 Saudi Basic Industries Saudi Arabia Chemicals 40.62 5.87 72.39 31.44
87 Iberdrola Spain Utilities 35.09 3.98 114.81 32.42
88 Nissan Motor Japan Consumer Durables 108.46 4.83 119.00 14.14
89 Panasonic Japan Technology Hardware & Equip 90.87 2.82 71.85 28.93
90 MetLife United States Insurance 50.99 3.21 501.68 15.10
91 Westpac Banking Group Australia Banking 25.90 3.05 346.22 31.40
92 GlaxoSmithKline United Kingdom Drugs & Biotechnology 35.55 6.72 52.67 79.06
93 Morgan Stanley United States Diversified Financials 62.26 1.71 658.81 21.00
94 Telecom Italia Italy Telecommunications Services 41.97 3.08 117.81 23.82
95 Intel United States Semiconductors 37.59 5.29 50.72 70.86
96 Zurich Financial Services Switzerland Insurance 32.35 3.04 325.04 19.60
97 Mitsui & Co Japan Trading Companies 57.50 4.11 97.15 17.12
98 Comcast United States Media 34.26 2.55 113.02 37.62
99 AXA Group France Insurance 156.95 1.28 936.92 19.47
100 Bayer Group Germany Chemicals 45.85 2.55 71.39 36.97
TOP 10 CELEBRITY IN THE WORLD
1-Angelina Jolie
2-Oprah Winfrey
3-Madonna
4-Beyoncé Knowles
5-Tiger Woods
6-Bruce Springsteen
7-Steven Spielberg
8-Jennifer Aniston
9-Brad Pitt
10-Kobe Bryant
2-Oprah Winfrey
3-Madonna
4-Beyoncé Knowles
5-Tiger Woods
6-Bruce Springsteen
7-Steven Spielberg
8-Jennifer Aniston
9-Brad Pitt
10-Kobe Bryant
HOW BILLIONAIRS GOTTEN POORER
The richest people in the world have gotten poorer, just like the rest of us. This year the world's billionaires have an average net worth of $3 billion, down 23% in 12 months. The world now has 793 billionaires, down from 1,125 a year ago.
After slipping in recent years, the U.S. is regaining its dominance as a repository of wealth. Americans account for 44% of the money and 45% of the list's slots, up seven and three percentage points from last year, respectively. Bill Gates lost $18 billion but regained his title as the world's richest man. Warren Buffett, last year's No. 1, saw his fortune decline $25 billion as shares of Berkshire Hathaway fell nearly 50% in 12 months. Mexican telecom titan Carlos Slim Helú maintains his spot in the top three but lost $25 billion.
After slipping in recent years, the U.S. is regaining its dominance as a repository of wealth. Americans account for 44% of the money and 45% of the list's slots, up seven and three percentage points from last year, respectively. Bill Gates lost $18 billion but regained his title as the world's richest man. Warren Buffett, last year's No. 1, saw his fortune decline $25 billion as shares of Berkshire Hathaway fell nearly 50% in 12 months. Mexican telecom titan Carlos Slim Helú maintains his spot in the top three but lost $25 billion.
THE BILLIONAIRS TOP 20
1-William Gates III
2-Warren Buffett
3-Carlos Slim Helú
4-Lawrence Ellison
5-Ingvar Kamprad
6-Karl Albrecht
7-Mukesh Ambani
8-Lakshmi Mittal
9-Theo Albrecht
10-Amancio Ortega
11-Jim Walton
12-Alice Walton
13-Christy Walton
14-S Robson Walton
15-Bernard Arnault
16-Li Ka-shing
17-Michael Bloomberg
18-Stefan Persson
19-Charles Koch
20-David Koch
2-Warren Buffett
3-Carlos Slim Helú
4-Lawrence Ellison
5-Ingvar Kamprad
6-Karl Albrecht
7-Mukesh Ambani
8-Lakshmi Mittal
9-Theo Albrecht
10-Amancio Ortega
11-Jim Walton
12-Alice Walton
13-Christy Walton
14-S Robson Walton
15-Bernard Arnault
16-Li Ka-shing
17-Michael Bloomberg
18-Stefan Persson
19-Charles Koch
20-David Koch
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Advantage & disadvantage of FDi
There are many advantages and disadvantages as well. Devaluation discourage the inflow of goods and services. As the importer in the devaluing currency have to pay more to the foreigners for a given quantity of imports they therefore shrink order. Devaluation has a very harmful effect on the economy of a developing country, if its exports have elastic ad its imports in-elastic demand. A developing country has to import a large number of strategic factors of production which are not available in the country for accelerating the rate of economic development.
The devaluing country cannot pay for all its costly imports and so it has to rely on foreign debts which have its own evil effects. The country can benefit from devaluation if the demands for its products are fairly inelastic. It can increase supply in response to a higher demand without increasing the price of the exported goods. The country then will be in a position to pay for the costly imports. The economic progress will not be adversely affected.
If due to devaluation exports of goods and services are increased and imports reduced the country will have a favourable balance of payment. If the devaluing country's exports of goods and services increase it will stimulate domestic employment.
Readers question: what are Advantages and Disadvantages of Devaluation?
Devaluation is the decision to reduce the value of a currency in a fixed exchange rate. The £ Sterling has been depreciating in value since the middle of last summer and provides a practical example.
Advantages of Devaluation
1. Exports become cheaper, more competitive to foreign buyers. Therefore, this provides a boost for domestic demand.
2. Higher level of exports should lead to an improvement in the current account deficit. This was important in the case of the UK who had a large current account deficit of over 3% of GDP in 2008
3. Higher exports and aggregate demand can lead to higher rates of economic growth.
Disadvantages of Devaluation
1. Is likely to cause inflation because:
• Imports more expensive
• AD increases causing demand pull inflation
• Firms / exporters have less incentive to cut costs because they can rely on the devaluation to improve competitiveness
2. Reduces the purchasing power of citizens abroad. e.g. more expensive to holiday in Europe.
3. A large and rapid devaluation may scare off international investors. It makes investors less willing to hold government debt because it is effectively reducing the value of their holdings.
Note It depends on:
• State of business cycle - In a recession a devaluation can help boost growth without causing inflation. In a boom a devaluation is more likely to cause inflation
• Elasticity of demand. A devaluation may take a while to improve current account because demand is inelastic in the short term.
ssess the likely implications of a devaluation in the dollar. (12)
Should we concerned about a rapid devaluation in the dollar?
Benefits of devaluation
Economic Growth
If the dollar becomes weaker, exports become cheaper leading to an increase in demand for US exports. This can help to increase AD and improve the rate of economic growth. This may be important, because problems in the US housing market are threatening the rate of economic growth. Falling house prices are potentially reducing consumer spending, therefore, a rise in exports could help to boost economic growth and prevent any move towards a recession.
Balance of Payments.
The US has a large current account deficit (7% of GDP) therefore a devaluation will help to improve and reduce the current account deficit. However, a devaluation alone is unlikely to solve the problem. Also, there is evidence that demand for exports and imports is relatively inelastic; therefore, any devaluation will have a small impact on the value of exports and imports. It is argued that the fundamental reason for a deficit is the low levels of domestic savings and consequently high levels of consumer spending.
Inflation
A devaluation may lead to increased inflationary pressures for 3 reasons:
1) Increase in exports causes rising AD and therefore could lead to demand pull inflation.
2) Imported goods will be more expensive. American consumers would definitely experience a rise in price for many imported manufactured goods and imports of raw materials could increase costs of business.
3) It is argued a devaluation reduces the incentive, for manufacturers and exporters, to cut costs and become more efficient.
However, the impact of a devaluation depends on the state of the economy. As previously mentioned, the US economy is slowing down; therefore inflationary pressures are subdued and therefore inflation is unlikely to occur.
Evaluate Impact of Foreign Direct Investment on Developing Countries.
• Foreign Direct investment will help to increase AD, and therefore, can increase the rate of economic growth. However, FDI is often a relatively small component of AD. Multinationals don't like to risk too much in developing countries.
• Foreign Direct investment can also help to increase productive capacity. This will shift AS to the right and enable higher rates of growth. Investment from abroad may also help improve the skills and technology of the local workforce; Foreign multinationals may help implement better work practices.
• However, FDI may require skilled labour which has to be brought in from abroad. Therefore, developing countries don't benefit that much.
• FDI may have strings attached; e.g. reciprocol spending.
• FDI may involve exploitation of natural environment. Foreign multinationals may not care about environment.
• Harod Domar model suggest savings and investment are important for determining the rate of economic growth.
The devaluing country cannot pay for all its costly imports and so it has to rely on foreign debts which have its own evil effects. The country can benefit from devaluation if the demands for its products are fairly inelastic. It can increase supply in response to a higher demand without increasing the price of the exported goods. The country then will be in a position to pay for the costly imports. The economic progress will not be adversely affected.
If due to devaluation exports of goods and services are increased and imports reduced the country will have a favourable balance of payment. If the devaluing country's exports of goods and services increase it will stimulate domestic employment.
Readers question: what are Advantages and Disadvantages of Devaluation?
Devaluation is the decision to reduce the value of a currency in a fixed exchange rate. The £ Sterling has been depreciating in value since the middle of last summer and provides a practical example.
Advantages of Devaluation
1. Exports become cheaper, more competitive to foreign buyers. Therefore, this provides a boost for domestic demand.
2. Higher level of exports should lead to an improvement in the current account deficit. This was important in the case of the UK who had a large current account deficit of over 3% of GDP in 2008
3. Higher exports and aggregate demand can lead to higher rates of economic growth.
Disadvantages of Devaluation
1. Is likely to cause inflation because:
• Imports more expensive
• AD increases causing demand pull inflation
• Firms / exporters have less incentive to cut costs because they can rely on the devaluation to improve competitiveness
2. Reduces the purchasing power of citizens abroad. e.g. more expensive to holiday in Europe.
3. A large and rapid devaluation may scare off international investors. It makes investors less willing to hold government debt because it is effectively reducing the value of their holdings.
Note It depends on:
• State of business cycle - In a recession a devaluation can help boost growth without causing inflation. In a boom a devaluation is more likely to cause inflation
• Elasticity of demand. A devaluation may take a while to improve current account because demand is inelastic in the short term.
ssess the likely implications of a devaluation in the dollar. (12)
Should we concerned about a rapid devaluation in the dollar?
Benefits of devaluation
Economic Growth
If the dollar becomes weaker, exports become cheaper leading to an increase in demand for US exports. This can help to increase AD and improve the rate of economic growth. This may be important, because problems in the US housing market are threatening the rate of economic growth. Falling house prices are potentially reducing consumer spending, therefore, a rise in exports could help to boost economic growth and prevent any move towards a recession.
Balance of Payments.
The US has a large current account deficit (7% of GDP) therefore a devaluation will help to improve and reduce the current account deficit. However, a devaluation alone is unlikely to solve the problem. Also, there is evidence that demand for exports and imports is relatively inelastic; therefore, any devaluation will have a small impact on the value of exports and imports. It is argued that the fundamental reason for a deficit is the low levels of domestic savings and consequently high levels of consumer spending.
Inflation
A devaluation may lead to increased inflationary pressures for 3 reasons:
1) Increase in exports causes rising AD and therefore could lead to demand pull inflation.
2) Imported goods will be more expensive. American consumers would definitely experience a rise in price for many imported manufactured goods and imports of raw materials could increase costs of business.
3) It is argued a devaluation reduces the incentive, for manufacturers and exporters, to cut costs and become more efficient.
However, the impact of a devaluation depends on the state of the economy. As previously mentioned, the US economy is slowing down; therefore inflationary pressures are subdued and therefore inflation is unlikely to occur.
Evaluate Impact of Foreign Direct Investment on Developing Countries.
• Foreign Direct investment will help to increase AD, and therefore, can increase the rate of economic growth. However, FDI is often a relatively small component of AD. Multinationals don't like to risk too much in developing countries.
• Foreign Direct investment can also help to increase productive capacity. This will shift AS to the right and enable higher rates of growth. Investment from abroad may also help improve the skills and technology of the local workforce; Foreign multinationals may help implement better work practices.
• However, FDI may require skilled labour which has to be brought in from abroad. Therefore, developing countries don't benefit that much.
• FDI may have strings attached; e.g. reciprocol spending.
• FDI may involve exploitation of natural environment. Foreign multinationals may not care about environment.
• Harod Domar model suggest savings and investment are important for determining the rate of economic growth.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
May
MAY BE…
Maybe. . we were supposed to meet the
wrong people before meeting the right
one so that, when we finally meet the
right person, we will know how to be
grateful for that gift.
Maybe . . . it is true that we don't
know what we have until we lose it,
but it is also true that we don't know
what we have been missing until it
arrives.
Maybe . . . the brightest future will
always be based on a forgotten past;
after all, you can't go on
successfully in life until you let go
of your past mistakes, failures and
heartaches.
Maybe . . you should hope for enough
happiness to make you sweet, enough
trials to make you strong, enough
sorrow to keep you human, and enough
hope to make you happy.
Maybe . . . the happiest of people
don't necessarily have the best of
everything; they just make the most of
everything that comes along their way.
Maybe .. . . the best kind of friend is
the kind you can sit on a porch and
swing with, never say a word, and then
walk away feeling like it was the best
conversation you've ever had.
Maybe . . . happiness waits for all
those who cry, all those who hurt, all
those who have searched, and all those
who have tried, for only they can
appreciate the importance of all the
people who have touched their lives.
May be . . you should do something nice
for someone every single day, even if
it is simply to leave them alone.
Maybe . . . there are moments in life
when you miss someone -- a parent, a
spouse, a friend, a child -- so much
that you just want to pick them from
your dreams and hug them for real, so
that once they are around you
appreciate them more.
Maybe … giving someone all your love
is never an assurance that they will
love you back. Don't expect love in
return; just wait for it to grow in
their heart; but, if it doesn't, be
content that it grew in yours.
Maybe .. . . you should dream what you
want to dream; go where you want to
go, be what you want to be, because
you have only one life and one chance
to do all the things you dream of, and
want to do.
Maybe. . we were supposed to meet the
wrong people before meeting the right
one so that, when we finally meet the
right person, we will know how to be
grateful for that gift.
Maybe . . . it is true that we don't
know what we have until we lose it,
but it is also true that we don't know
what we have been missing until it
arrives.
Maybe . . . the brightest future will
always be based on a forgotten past;
after all, you can't go on
successfully in life until you let go
of your past mistakes, failures and
heartaches.
Maybe . . you should hope for enough
happiness to make you sweet, enough
trials to make you strong, enough
sorrow to keep you human, and enough
hope to make you happy.
Maybe . . . the happiest of people
don't necessarily have the best of
everything; they just make the most of
everything that comes along their way.
Maybe .. . . the best kind of friend is
the kind you can sit on a porch and
swing with, never say a word, and then
walk away feeling like it was the best
conversation you've ever had.
Maybe . . . happiness waits for all
those who cry, all those who hurt, all
those who have searched, and all those
who have tried, for only they can
appreciate the importance of all the
people who have touched their lives.
May be . . you should do something nice
for someone every single day, even if
it is simply to leave them alone.
Maybe . . . there are moments in life
when you miss someone -- a parent, a
spouse, a friend, a child -- so much
that you just want to pick them from
your dreams and hug them for real, so
that once they are around you
appreciate them more.
Maybe … giving someone all your love
is never an assurance that they will
love you back. Don't expect love in
return; just wait for it to grow in
their heart; but, if it doesn't, be
content that it grew in yours.
Maybe .. . . you should dream what you
want to dream; go where you want to
go, be what you want to be, because
you have only one life and one chance
to do all the things you dream of, and
want to do.
Please read this article by giving 10 minutes from your busy life. Really good*
The President of India Dr A. P. J. Abdul Kalam 's Speech in Hyderabad.
Why is the media here so negative?
Why are we in India so embarrassed to recognize our own strengths, our achievements? We are such a great nation. We have so many amazing success stories but we refuse acknowledge them--- Why?
We are the first in milk production.
We are number one in Remote Sensing Satellites.
We are the second largest producer of wheat.
We are the second largest producer of rice.
Look at Dr Sudarshan, he has transformed the tribal village into a self-sustaining, self-driving unit.
There are millions of such achievements but our media is only obsessed in the bad news and failures and disasters.
I was in Tel Aviv once and I was reading an Israeli newspaper. It was the day after a lot of attacks, and bombardments and deaths had taken place. The Hamas had struck. But the front page of the newspaper had the picture of a Jewish gentleman who in five years had transformed his desert into an orchard and a granary. It was this inspiring picture that everyone woke up to. The gory details of killings, bombardments, deaths, were inside in the newspaper, buried among other news.
In India we only read about death, sickness, terrorism, crime.
Why are we so NEGATIVE?
Another question: Why are we, as a nation so obsessed with foreign things? We want foreign TVs, we want foreign shirts. We want foreign technology.
Why this obsession with everything imported. Do we not realize that self-respect comes with self-reliance? I was in Hyderabad giving this lecture,when a 14-year old girl asked me for my autograph. I asked her what her goal in life is. She replied: I want to live in a developed India. For her, you and I will have to build this developed India. You must proclaim. India is not an under-developed nation; it is a highly developed nation.
Do you have 10 minutes? Allow me to come back with a vengeance.
Got 10 minutes for your country? If yes, then read on; otherwise, the choice is yours.
YOU say that our government is inefficient.
YOU say that our laws are too old.
YOU say that the municipality does not pick up the garbage.
YOU say that the phones don't work, the railways are a joke,
The airline is the worst in the world, mails never reach their destination.
YOU say that our country has been fed to the dogs and is the absolute pits.
YOU say, say and say. . . What do YOU do about it?
Take a person on his way to Singapore . Give him a name - YOURS. Give him a face - YOURS. YOU walk out of the airport and you are at your international best. In Singapore you don't throw cigarette butts on the roads or eat in the stores. YOU are as proud of their Underground links as they are. You pay $5 (approx. Rs. 60) to drive through Orchard Road (equivalent of Mahim Causeway or Pedder Road ) between 5 PM and 8 PM. YOU come back to the parking lot to punch your parking ticket if you have over stayed in a restaurant or a shopping mall irrespective of your status identity . . . In Singapore you don't say anything, DO YOU?
YOU wouldn't dare to eat in public during Ramadan, in Dubai .
YOU would not dare to go out without your head covered in Jeddah .
YOU would not dare to buy an employee of the telephone exchange in London at 10 pounds ( Rs. 650) a month to, 'see to it that my STD and ISD calls are billed to someone else.'
YOU would not dare to speed beyond 55 mph (88 km/h) in Washington and then tell the traffic cop, 'Jaanta hai main kaun hoon (Do you know who I am?). I am so and so's son. Take your two bucks and get lost.'
YOU wouldn't chuck an empty coconut shell anywhere other than the garbage pail on the beaches in Australia and New Zealand
Why don't YOU spit Paan on the streets of Tokyo ? Why don't YOU use examination jockeys or buy fake certificates in Boston??? We are still talking of the same YOU.
YOU who can respect and conform to a foreign system in other countries but cannot in your own. You who will throw papers and cigarettes on the road the moment you touch Indian ground. If you can be an involved and appreciative citizen in an alien country, why cannot you be the same here in India ?
Once in an interview, the famous Ex-municipal commissioner of Bombay , Mr Tinaikar , had a point to make. 'Rich people's dogs are walked on the streets to leave their affluent droppings all over the place,' he said. 'And then the same people turn around to criticize and blame the authorities for inefficiency and dirty pavements. What do they expect the officers to do? Go down with a broom every time their dog feels the pressure in his bowels? In America every dog owner has to clean up after his pet has done the job. Same in Japan. Will the Indian citizen do that here?' He's right. We go to the polls to choose a government and after that forfeit all responsibility.
We sit back wanting to be pampered and expect the government to do everything for us whilst our contribution is totally negative. We expect the government to clean up but we are not going to stop chucking garbage all over the place nor are we going to stop to pick up a stray piece of paper and throw it in the bin.
We expect the railways to provide clean bathrooms but we are not going to learn the proper use of bathrooms.
We want Indian Airlines and Air India to provide the best of food and toiletries but we are not going to stop pilfering at the least opportunity.
This applies even to the staff who is known not to pass on the service to the public. When it comes to burning social issues like those related to women, dowry, girl child! and others, we make loud drawing room protestations and continue to do the reverse at home. Our excuse?
'It's the whole system which has to change, how will it matter if I alone forego my son's right to a dowry.' So who's going to change the system? What does a system consist of ? Very conveniently for us it consists of our neighbour's, other households, other cities, other communities and the government. But definitely not me and YOU.
When it comes to us actually making a positive contribution to the system we lock ourselves along with our families into a safe cocoon and look into the distance at countries far away and wait for a Mr Clean to come along and work miracles for us with a majestic sweep of his hand or we leave the country and run away. Like lazy cowards hounded by our fears we run to America to bask in their glory and praise their system. When New York becomes insecure we run to England. When England experiences unemployment, we take the next flight out to the Gulf. When the Gulf is war struck, we demand to be rescued and brought home by the Indian government. Everybody is out to abuse and rape the country. Nobody thinks of feeding the system. Our conscience is mortgaged to money.
=============================================
Dear Indians, The article is highly thought inductive, calls for a great deal of introspection and pricks one's conscience too. I am echoing J. F. Kennedy's words to his fellow Americans to relate to Indians.
'ASK WHAT WE CAN DO FOR INDIA
AND DO WHAT HAS TO BE DONE TO MAKE INDIA
WHAT AMERICA AND OTHER WESTERN COUNTRIES ARE TODAY'
Lets do what India needs from us.
Forward this mail to each Indian for a change instead of sending Jokes or junk mails.
Thank you
I humbly request you to forward this to every Indian. JAI HIND.
The President of India Dr A. P. J. Abdul Kalam 's Speech in Hyderabad.
Why is the media here so negative?
Why are we in India so embarrassed to recognize our own strengths, our achievements? We are such a great nation. We have so many amazing success stories but we refuse acknowledge them--- Why?
We are the first in milk production.
We are number one in Remote Sensing Satellites.
We are the second largest producer of wheat.
We are the second largest producer of rice.
Look at Dr Sudarshan, he has transformed the tribal village into a self-sustaining, self-driving unit.
There are millions of such achievements but our media is only obsessed in the bad news and failures and disasters.
I was in Tel Aviv once and I was reading an Israeli newspaper. It was the day after a lot of attacks, and bombardments and deaths had taken place. The Hamas had struck. But the front page of the newspaper had the picture of a Jewish gentleman who in five years had transformed his desert into an orchard and a granary. It was this inspiring picture that everyone woke up to. The gory details of killings, bombardments, deaths, were inside in the newspaper, buried among other news.
In India we only read about death, sickness, terrorism, crime.
Why are we so NEGATIVE?
Another question: Why are we, as a nation so obsessed with foreign things? We want foreign TVs, we want foreign shirts. We want foreign technology.
Why this obsession with everything imported. Do we not realize that self-respect comes with self-reliance? I was in Hyderabad giving this lecture,when a 14-year old girl asked me for my autograph. I asked her what her goal in life is. She replied: I want to live in a developed India. For her, you and I will have to build this developed India. You must proclaim. India is not an under-developed nation; it is a highly developed nation.
Do you have 10 minutes? Allow me to come back with a vengeance.
Got 10 minutes for your country? If yes, then read on; otherwise, the choice is yours.
YOU say that our government is inefficient.
YOU say that our laws are too old.
YOU say that the municipality does not pick up the garbage.
YOU say that the phones don't work, the railways are a joke,
The airline is the worst in the world, mails never reach their destination.
YOU say that our country has been fed to the dogs and is the absolute pits.
YOU say, say and say. . . What do YOU do about it?
Take a person on his way to Singapore . Give him a name - YOURS. Give him a face - YOURS. YOU walk out of the airport and you are at your international best. In Singapore you don't throw cigarette butts on the roads or eat in the stores. YOU are as proud of their Underground links as they are. You pay $5 (approx. Rs. 60) to drive through Orchard Road (equivalent of Mahim Causeway or Pedder Road ) between 5 PM and 8 PM. YOU come back to the parking lot to punch your parking ticket if you have over stayed in a restaurant or a shopping mall irrespective of your status identity . . . In Singapore you don't say anything, DO YOU?
YOU wouldn't dare to eat in public during Ramadan, in Dubai .
YOU would not dare to go out without your head covered in Jeddah .
YOU would not dare to buy an employee of the telephone exchange in London at 10 pounds ( Rs. 650) a month to, 'see to it that my STD and ISD calls are billed to someone else.'
YOU would not dare to speed beyond 55 mph (88 km/h) in Washington and then tell the traffic cop, 'Jaanta hai main kaun hoon (Do you know who I am?). I am so and so's son. Take your two bucks and get lost.'
YOU wouldn't chuck an empty coconut shell anywhere other than the garbage pail on the beaches in Australia and New Zealand
Why don't YOU spit Paan on the streets of Tokyo ? Why don't YOU use examination jockeys or buy fake certificates in Boston??? We are still talking of the same YOU.
YOU who can respect and conform to a foreign system in other countries but cannot in your own. You who will throw papers and cigarettes on the road the moment you touch Indian ground. If you can be an involved and appreciative citizen in an alien country, why cannot you be the same here in India ?
Once in an interview, the famous Ex-municipal commissioner of Bombay , Mr Tinaikar , had a point to make. 'Rich people's dogs are walked on the streets to leave their affluent droppings all over the place,' he said. 'And then the same people turn around to criticize and blame the authorities for inefficiency and dirty pavements. What do they expect the officers to do? Go down with a broom every time their dog feels the pressure in his bowels? In America every dog owner has to clean up after his pet has done the job. Same in Japan. Will the Indian citizen do that here?' He's right. We go to the polls to choose a government and after that forfeit all responsibility.
We sit back wanting to be pampered and expect the government to do everything for us whilst our contribution is totally negative. We expect the government to clean up but we are not going to stop chucking garbage all over the place nor are we going to stop to pick up a stray piece of paper and throw it in the bin.
We expect the railways to provide clean bathrooms but we are not going to learn the proper use of bathrooms.
We want Indian Airlines and Air India to provide the best of food and toiletries but we are not going to stop pilfering at the least opportunity.
This applies even to the staff who is known not to pass on the service to the public. When it comes to burning social issues like those related to women, dowry, girl child! and others, we make loud drawing room protestations and continue to do the reverse at home. Our excuse?
'It's the whole system which has to change, how will it matter if I alone forego my son's right to a dowry.' So who's going to change the system? What does a system consist of ? Very conveniently for us it consists of our neighbour's, other households, other cities, other communities and the government. But definitely not me and YOU.
When it comes to us actually making a positive contribution to the system we lock ourselves along with our families into a safe cocoon and look into the distance at countries far away and wait for a Mr Clean to come along and work miracles for us with a majestic sweep of his hand or we leave the country and run away. Like lazy cowards hounded by our fears we run to America to bask in their glory and praise their system. When New York becomes insecure we run to England. When England experiences unemployment, we take the next flight out to the Gulf. When the Gulf is war struck, we demand to be rescued and brought home by the Indian government. Everybody is out to abuse and rape the country. Nobody thinks of feeding the system. Our conscience is mortgaged to money.
=============================================
Dear Indians, The article is highly thought inductive, calls for a great deal of introspection and pricks one's conscience too. I am echoing J. F. Kennedy's words to his fellow Americans to relate to Indians.
'ASK WHAT WE CAN DO FOR INDIA
AND DO WHAT HAS TO BE DONE TO MAKE INDIA
WHAT AMERICA AND OTHER WESTERN COUNTRIES ARE TODAY'
Lets do what India needs from us.
Forward this mail to each Indian for a change instead of sending Jokes or junk mails.
Thank you
I humbly request you to forward this to every Indian. JAI HIND.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
