vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
"[Link 1] (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-12/two-chinese-provinces-falsified-economic-data-inspectors-say)  [Link 2] (https://www.ft.com/content/a5bf42e2-03cf-11e7-ace0-1ce02ef0def9)  [Link 3] (https://www.ft.com/content/0361c1a4-bcfe-11e6-8b45-b8b81dd5d080)  China has been cooking their books, just like the U.S. has been doing it the past few years.  Just google ""U.S. Central banks buying stocks and bonds"", then connect the numbers.   **Insider Information:** At my previous company we sold solar manufacturing equipment.  I went to said Chinese city that bought our equipment.  They were producing ton loads of solar panels, I asked one of the manager's where all of the panels were being sold (domestic, or international?).  To my surprise, he said they warehoused the panels they produced; because, there weren't enough customers.   And, why were they warehousing the panels?  Because, the Chinese government needed to show numbers that jobs were plenty, and manufacturing was still strong."
Maybe you can explain their position.  It seems to me they should be in favor of:  1. Universal healthcare (public or private) for the reduced uncertainty and increased mobility to the working class   2. Ending government subsidies of things like energy and farming, so that the markets will properly transition and adjust based on the economic realities rather than manipulated markets   3. Copyright reform to enable easier access to aged content by creators and the public at large, including the creation of new businesses 4. Infrastructure investments that fuel growth in the forms of market development and market access   5. Industry-based cooperatives for things like waste management (a la Germany) to preclude the need for the government to dictate the standards and practices, while actually dealing with the problem.  But as far as I have seen, they are opposed to all of these things.    For example, in [1] above, what I've seen is that business likes to have the upper-hand in the employer-employee equation; they like when employees can't up-and-leave because the children would lose health care.  But the same informational availabilities that enable capitalism to function to their benefit are stifled in that case, preventing the employment market from properly equalizing.    To put it another way, erecting barriers to entry to prevent people from competing with you sounds great, but it usually bites you, your investors, and everyone else in the ass because your products/services are stagnant and you aren't competing.  Why do the so-called fiscal conservatives seem to be okay with ass-biting externalities and artificial barriers to entry?
currency's central bank or treasury/finance department speeches that can announce a significant change in policy.  That includes: Particularly when it is a high level figure within the department such as the President or Prime Minister making the announcement. Macroeconomic stats:  GeoPolitical considerations, such as: Economic calendars, such as ForexFactory and MyFxBook track planned economic news releases.  Obviously, a coup d'etat or war declaration may not be well known in advance.
A counter-point is that a new middle class is trying to establish itself in China.  As with Japan and South Korea before, a rising middle class will themselves demand safe, well made consumer products (and the wages to pay for them).
I'm a US citizen living in Berlin, haven't filed UK taxes, but uktaxcalculators.co.uk says that on 63,000 a year with 3 deductions your net earnings will actually be 43,500. That's 3,625/month. Then what does it cost you each month for rent/utilities/etc. to put a house over your family's head? The rule of thumb they taught in my home-economics class was 35-40%, but that's not for Europe... you'll know what it costs. Let's say its 1,450 a month (40%) for rent and utilities and maybe insurance. That leaves 2,175. The next necessity after housing is food. My current food budget is about 5-6% of my after-tax salary. But that may not compare... the cost to feed a family of 3 is a fairly fixed number, and our salaries aren't the same. As I said, I am a US expat living in Berlin, so I looked at this cost of living calculator, and it looks like groceries are about 7-10% higher there around Cardiff than here in Germany. Still, I spend about 120 € per week on food. That has a fair margin in it for splurging on ice cream and a couple brewskies. It feeds me (I'm almost 2m and about 100 kilos) and my family of four. Let's say you spend 100£ a week on groceries. For budgeting, that's 433£ a month. (52 weeks / 12 months == 4.333 weeks/month) But let's call it 500£. That leaves 1,675. From here, you'll have to figure out the details of where your own money is going--that's why I said you should really start tracking your expenses somehow... even just for a short time. But for the purposes of completing the answers to your questions, the next step is to look at saving before you try spending anything else. A nice target is to aim for 10% of your after-tax pay going into a savings account...
"The answer from littleadv perfectly explains that the mere exchange ratio doesn't say anything. Still it might be worth adding why some currencies are ""weak"" and some ""strong"". Here's the reason: To buy goods of a certain country, you have to exchange your money for currency of that country, especially when you want to buy treasuries of stocks from that country. So, if you feel that, for example, Japanese stocks are going to pick up soon, you will exchange dollars for yen so you can buy Japanese stocks. By the laws of supply and demand, this drives up the price. In contrast, if investors lose faith in a country and withdraw their funds, they will seek their luck elsewhere and thus they increase the supply of that currency. This happened most dramatically in recent time with the Icelandic Krona."
qe is a money making machine (printing press) - once the economy becomes frail, weak, all they have to do is just print. qe is putting plenty of money to a basket full of holes - truly very few will benefit and so many will going to suffer. this is inequality. disparity is very disturbing (counter to a good economy). qe is experimental - (trial and error, testing) probability never done before. qe is good at the start (year 2008) - after spending, investing, releasing, trillions and trillions of mighty precious dollars - big companies, millions of jobs were blessed, saved, rescued, erstwhile salvaged. and like magic - america the wealthiest and most powerful country in the universe is now going to act again (today!!!) to spend, invest, release again (and again and again and again . . .) trillions and trillions of mighty precious dollars for the economy to keep moving, (my God!!! what an “abnormal cycle of the economy”). qe is a wild guess (absolutely speculative) - before only big businesses, huge companies are at stake. today it is now the whole country is at risk. not yet talking of the whole wide-world (with special mention - to my dearest, my beloved country - the philippines). this is certainly, absolutely contagion, domino effect. no one, not one will ever be spared. qe is very contagious - before only america needs to be saved to be salvaged. today all countries is in distress (suffering), badly needs a rescue. qe is keeping inflation very low - yes!!! absolutely for today but not for tomorrow. the medicine that they used during the 2008 economic slump is luckily still moving. meaning still working. but once this medicine starts to slowdown and begins to die down. you may call all the saints above. and the (true) inflation you are looking for, searching for will surely and definitely come into your midst. inflation will going to kill us all.
I feel something needs to be addressed The last 100 years have been a period of economic prosperity for the US, so it's no surprise that stocks have done so well, but is economic prosperity required for such stock growth? Two world wars. The Great Depression. The dotcom bust. The telecom bust. The cold war. Vietnam, Korea. OPEC's oil cartel. The Savings and Loans crisis. Stagflation. The Great Recession. I could go on.  While I don't fully endorse this view, I find it convincing: If the USA has managed 7% growth through all those disasters, is it really preposterous to think it may continue?
As I stated above only 50% of the Bahamian economy is tourism, that's a large portion still but not the 90% you claimed it to be so your credibility is suspect at best and it doesn't matter what their economy is reliant on were are talking about income taxes here and they have a strong enough economy and infrastructure for it to be considered a successful tax free country. Everyone country is reliant on something to keep their economy afloat so to diminish how their system works based on that is ridiculous at best. Tourism is almost always a strong economic policy especially for a beautiful nation of islands.
Long term taxation cannot by itself surpress GDP if those same taxes are being used on goods and services. It can surpress growth, and cause a fall off if people are leaving the area or closing businesses but at some point it'll hit an equilibrium point.  GDP does include government spending after all.
I feel like the economics based on slave labor should have a name but I can't think of one.  It's not really capitalist because that would require a voluntary trade and slave labor is not voluntary.  But in economic theory slavery can be powerful.  The Nazi's really surprised the allied planners with how effective their use of slave labor really was.
"Sorry, i always use my phone when using reddit and i'm also not a native speaker. Basically what i tried to say is;  The reason the whole world using this economic system is because when people divide their work force and everyone specializes on one thing they are much better at it, gain more experience, become more efficient and basically it is just more productive.   Thats why everyone has a job.  But jobs has few downsides, most prominent one being making all these repetitive tasks, one can lose their purpose. This is the situation for the poor community. People who do not earn a lot of money and doesn't have a good statue can be depressed by going to same place everyday, doing the same thing for 40-50 years,  for....???The reason is, everyone is doing repetitive tasks, even if it is something you love (personally i would hate my hobbies if i had to do them everyday not for enjoyment but for money) but some are being rewarded much more.   My goal of telling all these is, this is not a perfect economic system but it is the most efficient one today. People need motivation if they are going to do the same thing all the time. The motivation could be different than money and statue but it is much easier to convince the masses these are important so the machine could work.  Only a fool with no regard to history would tell this is the best economic system and it will never change since world is always changing, 5 years ago top10 companies were banks and investment companies now they are tech/internet. My belief is that for now the system is structured and will stay the same until; •War ,which changes the economy. War economy needs other stuff compared to what we are producing normally. Motivation also changes in these times, it's not money anymore but for ""your countries sake"" and ""pride"". •Different political system which is unusual to most since it is the economic change in classes which makes the political system to change."
Latest, worldwide is focus on secure energy underscores the need for re-evaluating all power alternatives, mainly the ones that are clean and renewable. because despite the fact that the worldwide economy is popping out of a current recession, oil prices are climbing and the call for alternative renewable assets is constantly developing. Indeed, the alternative energy marketplace is one of the few markets that have visible substantial increase at some stage in the recent recession of the ultimate two years. Brazil Renewable Energy resources are assets of strength that are continuously replenished. One thing is clear; the need for more efficient use of energy with the integration of renewable strength sources is present.
By numbers I assume you mean monetary amounts... the article doesn't define the separation that way...  &gt;In one of these countries live members of what Temin calls the “FTE sector” (named for finance, technology, and electronics, the industries which largely support its growth). These are the 20 percent of Americans who enjoy college educations, have good jobs, and sleep soundly knowing that they have not only enough money to meet life’s challenges, but also social networks to bolster their success.
"Other things equal is sometimes referred to as ""ceteris paribus"" - the scenario where you compare two currencies (or things) under the assumption that all other factors that could effect those currencies (earthquakes, revolutions, currency crises ect) are not ocurring. Its like using a control group in a lab. ""Real interest rates"" means the rate of that countries interest rate, accounting for inflation. ""Proportional to the strength of its home currency"" is referring to how countries with higher rates of interest tend to have stronger currencies (relative to other currencies) because foreign investment/capital will flood into the country seeking those higher rates of return - excess demand for the currency will cause it to appreciate. So this is also true in reverse, as capital will tend to leave a country will ultra-low interest rates."
"Well I doubt that the gay consultant from a notable New York family married to a Puerto Rican dancer and living in San francisco would have a son in Kentucky. If he had a previous marriage, it is supposed to say so in a NY Times wedding announcement by the way  ""Knopf"" is probably a fairly common German name.  David Knopf at Kraft Heinz does not appear to have any family connection to his job. Kraft Heinz is owned by 3G, a Brazilian private equity firm founded by that country's richest man, Jorge Paulo Lemann. The 3G group owns various large companies around the world. Knopf graduated from high school in Louisville in 2006, summa at Princeton in 2010, two years at Goldman Sachs, then joined 3G and rose to CFO at their subsidiary Kraft Heinz in 5 years. I think it looks like he is primarily responsible for his own success, and there is no evidence otherwise"
qe is good at the start (year 2008) - after spending, investing, releasing, trillions and trillions of mighty precious dollars - big companies, millions of jobs were blessed, saved, rescued, erstwhile salvaged. and like magic - america the wealthiest and most powerful country in the universe is now going to act again (today!!!) to spend, invest, release again (and again and again and again . . .) trillions and trillions of mighty precious dollars for the economy to keep moving, (my God!!! what an “abnormal cycle of the economy”). qe is a wild guess (absolutely speculative) - before only big businesses, huge companies are at stake. today it is now the whole country is at risk. not yet talking of the whole wide-world (with special mention - to my dearest, my beloved country - the philippines). this is certainly, absolutely contagion, domino effect. no one, not one will ever be spared. qe is very contagious - before only america needs to be saved to be salvaged. today all countries is in distress (suffering), badly needs a rescue. qe is keeping inflation very low - yes!!! absolutely for today but not for tomorrow. the medicine that they used during the 2008 economic slump is luckily still moving. meaning still working. but once this medicine starts to slowdown and begins to die down. you may call all the saints above. and the (true) inflation you are looking for, searching for will surely and definitely come into your midst. inflation will going to kill us all. qe is a wrong medicine - temporary patch or band.aid qe is phoney - it is just an easy money and definitely not a hard earned (labor generated) money. qe is a gamble - trillion dollars is at stake. if we are lucky the dying person or the economy will live. if we are not lucky the dying person will die, the economy will going to collapsed, and still we have to pay all the “debts” as long as we live. qe is domineering - the economy today is at the mercy of ""qe"".
Could you please tell me how the election result undermines my point, that I live a very good life, thanks to social redistribution, which you initially questioned?  Further, Vienna voted completely contrary to the country as a whole. Being one of the cities with the most publicly financed projects for social redistribution (very big point: social housing in order to reduce rental costs).   Seems they are not as unhappy as the people living on the countryside, who fear the dangerous migrants (fun fact, most foreigners in Austria live in Vienna, those who voted least for the anti-migrant parties...)  Another fun fact - Vienna has been voted [8 years in a row for the city with the highest quality of life](https://www.forbes.com/sites/civicnation/2017/10/12/a-catamount-post-mortem-what-does-it-actually-take-to-engage-students/#14ba4c061f3b). A city with a social democrat/environmentalist government for years. Doesn't seem to be that bad huh?
"I am guessing that when you say ""FRENCH40"" and ""GERMAN30"" you are referring to the main French and German stock market indices.  The main French index is the CAC-40 with its 40 constituent companies. The main German index is the DAX, which has 30 constituents.  The US30 is presumably the Dow Jones Index which also has 30 constituents. These are stock market indices that are used to measure the value of a basket of shares (the index constituents).  As the value of the constituents change, so does the value of the index. There are various financial instruments that allow investors to profit from movements in these indices.  It is those people who invest in these instruments that profit from price movements.  The constituent companies receive no direct benefit or profit from investor trading in these instruments, nor does the government."
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-21/ecb-sees-trump-administration-as-key-risk-to-global-economy) reduced by 68%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; The European Central Bank cited the government of U.S. President Donald Trump as a key reason why the risks to the global economy remain tilted to the downside.  &gt; &amp;quot;Since the U.S. election, pressures for more inward-looking policies have risen,&amp;quot; it said.  &gt; &amp;quot;In particular, there is significant policy uncertainty surrounding the intentions of the new U.S. administration regarding fiscal and, especially, trade policies, the latter entailing potentially significant negative effects on the global economy.""   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6imebn/ecb_sees_trump_administration_as_key_risk_to/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~149467 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **policy**^#1 **U.S.**^#2 **economy**^#3 **global**^#4 **ECB**^#5"
The US only returned to recession post WW-II due to scaling back wartime activities. Basically the economy slumps when you stop building a million bombs. It was only on paper though; it wasn't perceived as a major recession by Americans alive at the time.
The few short years of economic pain from the devaluation will produce a better and growing economy over the long run.   My thought with their devaluing of the currency is that more foreign capital would flow in and be used for investment which would lead to economic growth.
Its still the case though. Most of the economy exists as either stocks, bonds, or debt. Bonds are stable so the wealthy stockpile there just in case, stocks are where they earn new wealth, and the debt just is everywhere. Real estate is basically just their flash cash.
I'm assuming you're in Germany or Europe based on your question, but here's an American's perspective that should pertain you you as well: Once you have a steady income and an emergency fund large enough to keep you from going bankrupt, then start learning about retirement and investment options.
Bank lending, insurance and derivatives: all dependent on Europe. Metals and shipping: tiny niche industries that have relatively few tax payers actually sitting in London.  Sorry buddy, but without Europe London is just a regional financial centre that mostly services the UK economy with a few niche international areas that don't bring in that much business.
I wouldn't want to have a house no matter where I live. So I am more than OK with always living in an apartment. We live in a really nice place right now.  My husband is pretty up-to-date on how the country is running and he would be telling me if he were at all concerned about the state of things. Which he isn't... at least not anymore than when I first met him.  So, while I am sure that I will always be middle class... I am OK with that. And perhaps Americans do earn 20% more than Germans but they also pay a lot more for things that Germans do not pay as much for.  Edit: Also, my husband's grandfather was one of the leading historians in germany until he died in 2009. His grandparents were very well off. His parents were poor while he grew up. My husband is on his way to being a partner in an expanding business (he does programming) and his brother is a Pharmacist.  By this time in a year or so from now the amount of money my husband earns will double.
""I'm talking about steel, I'm talking about aluminum, I'm talking about real estate--when you don't have market forces driving investment, when you don't have bad investments allowed to fail, you end up with resources allocated in a way that ultimately chokes the future of economic growth,"" Mr. Lew said at the Peterson Institute for International Economics on Thursday. The IMF zeroed in on a measure called current credit overhang, a widely followed international indicator of potential crises. The deviation of China's credit growth from its long-term trend has surged from zero during the financial crisis to up to 27%. Last year, banks' balance sheets grew to 286% of gross domestic product. ""More is needed, especially to curb excess credit growth, reduce the opacity of credit products, and ensure sound interbank funding structures,"" said Peter Dattels, deputy director of the fund's monetary and capital-markets department. China's policy makers are caught in a deepening trap, economists say. Dealing with the debt problem would require the country to start deleveraging. But slower credit growth is bound to hamper the overall economy. That could backfire by making it harder for companies to repay existing debt. Clamping down on credit would also raise the prospect of political unrest in a country that has grown accustomed to very rapid growth. Faced with such unappetizing prospects, the country's leaders have largely eschewed credit restraint in the hope that they will be able to deal with its economic problems over time. Part of the problem is the complicated and poorly disclosed structure of the country's swollen banking system, economists say. ""The increasing complexity, opaqueness of the shadow banking, both on the asset side, but even more on the funding side where a lot of the funding is short term, is not stable,"" Markus Rodlauer, the IMF's Asia-Pacific deputy director, told reporters on Thursday. ""It's still of a size that is manageable, but the trajectory is dangerous, and needs to be contained."" China's appetite for steel and aluminum, which shrank abruptly in the past year or so, is of vital interest to commodity-exporting economies such as Russia and Brazil.