China HAS to print to keep the yuan at parity with the USD. China has already stopped buying US debt and are diversifying it's holdings. If China took all fo the trade deficit, which is close to 300b yearly, and bought US treasuries with it, it may supress the valuation of the yuan. Since it's not the case and the yuan strength is not fixed to US trade but it's global trade, the yuan would still likely appreciate significantly.
So in fact China must print yuan to sustain parity with USD otherwise the yuan would rise in value. It's holdings of foreign debt and currency only bolster the stance that the yuan is undervalued.
The only direction the yuan has gone in the last 10 years is up. When the Chinese alter the USD peg. The yuan is not floating.
The issue is that if any one country becomes a manufacturing powerhouse, with the economics of a trade surplus, it is almost a given that the trade balance will correct itself.
You don't get the point of this leglislatiob. Trade normally corrects itself through currency strength. The Chinese artificially supress their currency. This causes a the continuation of a trade deficit which will eventually destroy the economy of the country running the deficit.
It's not as simple as manifacturing will go somewhere else, what problem does it solve. No, not that simple. Sorry.
A trade deficit is one of the biggest economic problems a nation can experience and literally means that all of the currency will eventually leave the country.
Ie. The US has a 500b trade deficit. Each year 500b leaves this country. The reason we're able to grow GDP is because the government sells bonds to fun a deficit. If the trade deficit is 500b and we sell 1t worth of bonds we still have a net income of 500b. The trade deficit doesn't matter to the current economy.
The problem is you can't sell bonds forever and the country is going bankrupt sustaining increasing debt payment and increased trade deficits.
This country will go bankrupt if it continues to run a trade deficit. There's nothing you can do to prevent it except to tax imports to balance the trade against countries that devalue their currency.
Their business model is people sitting on the computer nurturing virtual farms and buying cows. Are you serious? Their business targets the least productive segment of humanity and leeches off of their stupidity.
The fast that they have negative q/q userbase growth and q/q profits is pretty serious. Their market is ripe for competition and their userbase will continue to be cannibalized.
The HP board is clearly an inept circlejerk. Whitman is waiting for her bukakke initiation. The only outcome of this board is to drive the stock to 0. It's sad when Whitman looks like the smartest person in the room.
The comments are highly disturbing. I don't know how old these people are but the fanboyism is rampant. Of course, you would expect it, given it's Google+ and the only reason to use it is to dislike Facebook.
I don't like either company. To me, both Facebook and Google+ and all social media is a waste of time. Instead of being a productive citizen, people are wasting their lives looking at the lives of others. It's pretty sad if you ask me.
But the worst part about it is the crony fabboyism in the article. The other part is that the comparison to yahoo is not apt. Yahoos problem is that it doesn't have enough market share. Facebooks problem is turning market share into profit. They're hardly the same. The vision argument seems like an excuse for not understanding the actual problems of the products or services.
Eliminating oil subsidies won't cause the price of oil to go to 8$ a gallon. This person has almost no understanding of economics. Oil is subsidizetoxins in the Unoted States with respect to production, which is relatively small in terms of global supply. The price is governed by international supply and demand. The reason gasoline is 8$ a gallon in Europe, which is where I assume he derives his 8$ figure from, is because of gasoline taxes. The countries that subsidize the price of oil are oil rich nations and China. They do this to control any upheaval and inflation wrt food and other products that require petroleum as a means of transport. They are also generally authoritarian regimes, ie. Iran, Venezuala and China.
Google is losing future revenue from Android. Amazon is forking it, basically eliminating Googles services, including the App store, and replacing the services with their own. I'm sure Google sees the writing on the wall. Android will further fragment, much worse than the fragmentation thus far.
Baidu is forking Android which means Google is basically out of the worlds biggest cell phone market. Not too mention that their reputation in China was so tarnished that we wouldn't assume Google to grab market share. Apple seems primed to compete in China with the iPhone against Baidus Android fork. But there seems to be no doubt that Googles out.
It's appears to be in Googles interest to create their own cell phone with closed source additions on top of Android, leaving the other major handset manufacturers without the code. But to also provide handset manufacturers with a version of Android that is second tier, but that provides revenue through the Google app store and services.
I'm certain many of you have no formal experience in the sciences, ie. biological sciences. It is unfortunate, since in my opinion it is the basis of an education. It is the basis of the understanding of the world.
As such, one may want to inform you that over the last few years there has been considerable progress in evolutionary biology. We have discovered various genes that are statistically significant with intelligence. We have discovered evidence that certain hominids bred with indigenous european hominids (ie. neanderthals). And that certain humans have no neanderthal admixture (Africans).
The IQ debate has been a consistent force in pseudo-intellectual circles. I'm sure many of you wish to voice an opinion on it, that it isn't hereditary. This viewpoint has pretty much fallen out of fashion and has been replaced with a more practical understanding of the biology.
Humans aren't the same, and genes make us different. To understand why we're different you have to understand evolutionary biology, and selective pressures. Selective pressures exist on the organism as a consequence of the environment to select for the most fit organism in that environment. When you alter an environment, you alter the selective pressures on survival. This is why we have diversity.
The fact is that genes code for certain functions in the body. Speed would be a result of numerous genes - probably both nuclear and mitochondrial - that regulate muscle contraction and energy metabolism. Other genes code for neural pathways, dopamine transport systems, energy metabolism.
No two humans are the same. We're both our genes, and the expression of our genes. When people say that IQ or speed is not fully hereditary, that it's environmental, what they are inferring is that we express our genes differently based on our environment. The truth is that your environment is causing your genes to produce less optimal speed or intelligence, by altering the expression(1 or 0 in computer terms) of those genes. Genes can be turned on and off depending on different signaling pathways and interactions between them.
To claim that every 100m champion in the last 18 years has won because of coaching is the profoundly stupid and intellectually dishonest.
To claim there is no genetic selection for speed is profoundly stupid and intellectually dishonest.
Evolutionary biology is a reflection of your environment. To believe that different environments don't produce different selective pressures is profoundly stupid and intellectually dishonest. To believe this, we must dismiss all evolutionary theory that has been put forth in the last 200 years.
The sad fact is that evolutionary biology, with genome analysis, it arriving at facts that humans have been avoiding in recent history. These facts indicate that a large percent of your ability is due to heredity. This does not mean that all of your ability is due to heredity, but it does mean a significant portion is. And it's inescapable. As science advances, this fact will become more evident.
But, one has to understand that the best work the hardest, since, at the top, genes are comparable in terms of ability. But it also means that I will never be the fastest person on earth, regardless of how hard i try.
Umm.. Yes it is.
The market thinks it's a bad decision. If you disagree, buy the stock. A stock doesn't drop 20% for no reason. Overpaying for a software company and dropping webos, tr maker thinks it's a BAD decision.
Nobody cares or feels sorry for Google. The days of viewing Google as an underdog and as a comapany with any moral sense are long gone. Remember "do no evil?" Do you know what it was replaced with?
"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."
Do you know what I say to that? Fuck you. Fuck you and your lying bullshit. Not, "you shouldn't be telling people what you do privately", but, "you shouldn't be doing it in the first place".
I'm sick, sick of Google apologetics. Are you people really that fucking dumb? Do you feel it's in your benefit for Google to dominate search, social, and phone?
I welcome competition and I fear one corporation becoming a harbor of all information.
I'm pretty sure you're wrong. Opera is a niche browser. Any browser with significant market share will reflect a more broad population, by deductive reasoning. A more broad population will be closer to the IQ mean of a population.
Safari, which is second lowest by market share shows the second highest iq. You should be able to figure out why you're wrong.
It's not as easy as it sounds.