Arbitrage in Forex explained Investing Post

Taking a break from FIRE to go backpacking

Hi everyone! Taken a few big life decisions lately and thought I would share them here as they have a lot to do with FIRE. I guess you could call me CoastFI.

Mid-30s DINK couple working in Mumbai, have been in India all my working life. No NRI story here! Spouse and I are both MBAs.

The personal bit
Have dreamed about taking a year off to go backpacking ever since I was 25. Given the corporate culture – was too afraid to do that till now. I have not yet reached my FIRE target the way I defined it 3 years ago. But I’ve decided to take a break and resign to go backpacking for a year.

Had dreamed of a few trips for years – plan on travelling from Bombay to Beijing completely overland – through trains and buses. This was not possible till 2018 when Myanmar opened up their visa policy. Also dream of doing the Camino Santiago – it is a 500 km pilgrimage that starts from France and ends in western Spain. Both these trips will take a few months minimum so there was no way I could do them while working in the corporate world. I also want to travel to South America.

I resigned from my job last week. My organization is trying to retain me by offering a new role. They have also offered to give me a 3 month sabbatical. Let’s see how it goes – I am not going to accept anything unless it is in writing. The sabbatical is being promised with too many conditions so I don’t think I am going to accept it – for example they are asking that I go on the sabbatical from April 2020 – unfortunately that means I won’t be able to do the Bombay to Beijing trip because it will be very bad weather in Myanmar at the time – so am going to wait and watch without having too high expectations. I will come back in a year and find a job. Got a call from a few recruiters and I explained my situation – they asked me to contact them once I am back so they can share any opportunities. My boss from my old company now works in E-com and has offered me a job on my return as well.

My spouse will continue to work here – they recently rejoined their old boss and mentor at a job that really excites them. Till a few months ago we planned on taking the trip together but now that they got this job offer we took the joint decision for me to take this trip solo. Maybe we will take a joint trip together at 40! My spouse is incredibly supportive and has always been. I’m very very grateful that I have them on my side.

The financial bit

We are at 35X of normal expenses (current expenses – some buffer for Mumbai rents) and 44X of LeanFire expenses (normal expenses – discretionary travel expenses). My target is 45X of normal expenses for final FIRE. I also want to save up for a medical emergency corpus for me and my spouse, as well as for my spouse's parents who are dependent on us. The split is about 65:35 between me : my spouse (mainly because I saved about 75% right from my first job). All our corpus is from our savings from our job – no inheritance, no side hustles, no off-site, nothing.

Most of our funds are in equity and debt funds, with a big chunk in VPF. Due to some past mistakes I have too much in debt (little more than 60%) and am slowly moving into equity. Not included in this corpus – my spouse also has a house in Tier 3 city bought for their parents (about 30 lacs).

No plans on buying a house – we have both my spouse’s house and my parent’s house (I am an only child). We are consciously childfree, so no kid’s marriage and education goals as well.

I plan on funding the trip mainly through my holdings in arbitrage funds (have a fair amount in this because I had invested in these pre-LTCG). I have got myself a NiYo card as it has zero forex fees. Will keep a few other cards as backup as well. I still have not found a good travel insurance which will cover me for such a long period. I also do not have clarity on how my VPF will be taxed in this period.

A very rough estimate yields a cost of about 1.5 lacs per month for my trip. It can go lower as well because a lot of my trip is overland and I am used to budget travel – however since I am solo, would not like to compromise on safety either. This will be a dent on our corpus – but since my spouse will continue to earn and save in this period, that’s not too bad.

I have personally always been a good student, Type A personality, very risk averse by nature. I can be a bit of a workaholic as well. Lately have decided to relax a bit, not be so hard on myself and enjoy life a little. This felt like the right time to do something I had dreamed about for more than a decade. I am honestly a bit nervous – what If I don’t enjoy it! What if I don’t get a good job on my return! But this is a good test run for FIRE. My HR jokingly asked me if this was a midlife crisis and I said that this was a midlife celebration instead!

I have been working towards FIRE from 2010. I may not be exactly there, but the time for me to take a new step is here. Wish me luck!
submitted by caffeinewasmylife to FIREIndia [link] [comments]

Making $2,000 a Month With Cryptocurrency - Triangular Arbitrage » NullTX

fintech #trading #algotrading #quantitative #quant #quants #forex #cryptos #bitcoin

Making $2,000 a Month With CryptocurrencyOn the road toward making $2,000 a month with cryptocurrency, one has to look well beyond traditional opportunities first and foremost. In the case of arbitrage trading, there are quite a few different options to explore. The triangular arbitrage opportunity can be extremely lucrative, although there are some caveats to take into account as well.The Triangular Concept Explained Unlike the direct arbitrage trading method, triangular arbitraging is a bit different. It will always involve exploring three different markets and up to three different exchanges. For example, one buys coin A on Exchange X, sends it to exchange Y for conversion to coin B, and sells that coin B on Exchange Z for even more profit. Both “steps” of the arbitrage process can yield individual gains which do not necessarily have to be equal in size. Is it Profitable? The main reason why speculators explore triangular opportunities is for the financial gain. Compared to dire.....
Continue reading at: https://nulltx.com/making-2000-a-month-with-cryptocurrency-triangular-arbitrage/
submitted by silahian to quant_hft [link] [comments]

Trump Didn’t Kill the Global Trade System. He Split It in Two.

This article is taken from the Wall Street Journal written about nine months ago and sits behind a a paywall, so I decided to copy and paste it here. This article explains Trump's policies toward global trade and what has actually happened so far. I think the article does a decent job of explaining the Trade War. While alot has happenedsince the article was written, I still think its relevant.
However, what is lacking in the article, like many articles on the trade war, is it doesn't really explain the history of US trade policy, the laws that the US administration is using to place tariffs on China and the official justification for the US President in enacting tariffs against China. In my analysis I will cover those points.

SUMMARY

When Trump entered the White House people feared he would dismantle the global system the US and its allies had built over the last 75 years, but he hasn't. He has realign into two systems. One between the US and its allies which looks similar to the one built since the 1980s with a few of quota and tariffs. As the article points out
Today, Korus and Nafta have been replaced by updated agreements(one not yet ratified) that look much like the originals. South Korea accepted quotas on steel. Mexico and Canada agreed to higher wages, North American content requirements and quotas for autos. Furthermore, the article points out Douglas Irwin, an economist and trade historian at Dartmouth College, calls these results the “status quo with Trumpian tweaks: a little more managed trade sprinkled about for favored industries. It’s not good, but it’s not the destruction of the system.” Mr. Trump’s actions so far affect only 12% of U.S. imports, according to Chad Bown of the Peterson Institute for International Economics. In 1984, 21% of imports were covered by similar restraints, many imposed by Mr. Reagan, such as on cars, steel, motorcycles and clothing. Protectionist instincts go so far in the US, there are strong lobby groups for both protectionist and freetrade in the US.
The second reflects a emerging rivalry between the US and China. Undo some of the integration that followed China accession to the WTO. Two questions 1) How far is the US willing to decouple with China 2) Can it persuade allies to join.
The second is going to be difficult because China's economic ties are greater than they were between the Soviets, and China isn't waging an ideological struggle. Trump lacks Reagan commitment to alliance and free trade. The status quo with China is crumbling Dan Sullivan, a Republican senator from Alaska, personifies these broader forces reshaping the U.S. approach to the world. When Mr. Xi visited the U.S. in 2015, Mr. Sullivan urged his colleagues to pay more attention to China’s rise. On the Senate floor, he quoted the political scientist Graham Allison: “War between the U.S. and China is more likely than recognized at the moment.” Last spring, Mr. Sullivan went to China and met officials including Vice President Wang Qishan. They seemed to think tensions with the U.S. will fade after Mr. Trump leaves the scene, Mr. Sullivan recalled. “I just said, ‘You are completely misreading this.’” The mistrust, he told them, is bipartisan, and will outlast Mr. Trump. both Bush II and Obama tried to change dialogue and engagement, but by the end of his term, Obama was questioning the approach. Trump has declared engagement. “We don’t like it when our allies steal our ideas either, but it’s a much less dangerous situation,” said Derek Scissors, a China expert at the American Enterprise Institute whose views align with the administration’s more hawkish officials. “We’re not worried about the war-fighting capability of Japan and Korea because they’re our friends.”
The article also points out unlike George Kennan in 1946 who made a case for containing the Soviet Union, the US hasn't explicitly made a case for containing the Soviets, Trump's administration hasn't, because as the the article explains its divided Michael Pillsbury a Hudson Institute scholar close to the Trump team, see 3 scenarios
Pillsbury thinks the third is most likely to happen, even though the administration hasn't said that it has adopted that policy. The US is stepping efforts to draw in other trading partners. The US, EU and Japan have launched a WTO effort to crack down on domestic subsidies and technology transfers requirement. US and Domestic concerns with prompted some countries to restrict Huawei. The US is also seeking to walloff China from other trade deals. However, there are risk with this strategy

ARTICLE

Trump Didn’t Kill the Global Trade System. He Split It in Two.

INTRODUCTION

My main criticism of this article is it tries like the vast majority of articles to fit US trade actions in the larger context of US geopolitical strategy. Even the author isn't certain "The first goes to the heart of Mr. Trump’s goal. If his aim is to hold back China’s advance, economists predict he will fail.". If you try to treat the trade "war" and US geopolitical strategy toward China as one, you will find yourself quickly frustrated and confused. If you treat them separately with their different set of stakeholders and histories, were they intersect with regards to China, but diverge. During the Cold War, trade policy toward the Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc was subordinated to geopolitical concerns. For Trump, the trade issues are more important than geopolitical strategy. His protectionist trade rhetoric has been fairly consistent since 1980s. In his administration, the top cabinet members holding economic portfolios, those of Commerce, Treasury and US Trade Representative are the same people he picked when he first took office. The Director of the Economic Council has changed hands once, its role isn't as important as the National Security Advisor. While State, Defense, CIA, Homeland Security, UN Ambassador, National Security Advisor have changed hands at least once. Only the Director of National Intelligence hasn't changed.
International Trade makes up 1/4 of the US economy, and like national security its primarily the responsibility of the Federal government. States in the US don't implement their own tariffs. If you add the impact of Treasury policy and how it relates to capital flows in and out of the US, the amounts easily exceed the size of the US economy. Furthermore, because of US Dollar role as the reserve currency and US control of over global system the impact of Treasury are global. Trade policy and investment flows runs through two federal departments Commerce and Treasury and for trade also USTR. Defense spending makes up 3.3% of GDP, and if you add in related homeland security its at most 4%. Why would anyone assume that these two realms be integrated let alone trade policy subordinate to whims of a national security bureaucracy in most instances? With North Korea or Iran, trade and investment subordinate themselves to national security, because to Treasury and Commerce bureaucrats and their affiliated interest groups, Iran and the DPRK are well, economic midgets, but China is a different matter.
The analysis will be divided into four sections. The first will be to provide a brief overview of US trade policy since 1914. The second section will discuss why the US is going after China on trade issues, and why the US has resorted using a bilateral approach as opposed to going through the WTO. The third section we will talk about how relations with China is hashed out in the US.
The reason why I submitted this article, because there aren't many post trying to explain US-China Trade War from a trade perspective. Here is a post titled "What is the Reasons for America's Trade War with China, and not one person mentioned Article 301 or China's WTO Commitments. You get numerous post saying that Huawei is at heart of the trade war. Its fine, but if you don't know what was inside the USTR Investigative report that lead to the tariffs. its like skipping dinner and only having dessert When the US President, Donald J Trump, says he wants to negotiate a better trade deal with other countries, and has been going on about for the last 35 years, longer than many of you have been alive, why do people think that the key issues with China aren't primarily about trade at the moment.

OVERVIEW OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE ORIENTATION

Before 1940s, the US could be categorized as a free market protectionist economy. For many this may seem like oxymoron, how can an economy be free market and protectionist? In 1913, government spending made up about 7.5% of US GDP, in the UK it was 13%, and for Germany 18% (Public Spending in the 20th Century A Global Perspective: Ludger Schuknecht and Vito Tanzi - 2000). UK had virtual zero tariffs, while for manufactured goods in France it was 20%, 13% Germany, 9% Belgium and 4% Netherlands. For raw materials and agricultural products, it was almost zero. In contrast, for the likes of United States, Russia and Japan it was 44%, 84% and 30% respectively. Even though in 1900 United States was an economic powerhouse along with Germany, manufactured exports only made up 30% of exports, and the US government saw tariffs as exclusively a domestic policy matter and didn't see tariffs as something to be negotiated with other nations. The US didn't have the large constituency to push the government for lower tariffs abroad for their exports like in Britain in the 1830-40s (Reluctant Partners: A History of Multilateral Trade Cooperation, 1850-2000).
The Underwood Tariffs Act of 1913 which legislated the income tax, dropped the tariffs to 1850 levels levels.Until 16th amendment was ratified in 1913 making income tax legal, all US federal revenue came from excise and tariffs. In contrast before 1914, about 50% of UK revenue came from income taxes. The reason for US reluctance to introduced income tax was ideological and the United State's relative weak government compared to those in Europe. After the First World War, the US introduced the Emergency Tariff Act of 1921, than the Fordney–McCumber Tariff of 1922 followed by a Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930. Contrary to popular opinion, the Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930 had a small negative impact on the economy, since imports and exports played a small part of the US economy, and the tariffs were lower than the average that existed from 1850-1914.
Immediately after the Second World War, when the US economy was the only industrialized economy left standing, the economic focus was on rehabilitation and monetary stability. There was no grandiose and ideological design. Bretton Woods system linked the US dollar to gold to create monetary stability, and to avoid competitive devaluation and tariffs that plagued the world economy after Britain took itself off the gold in 1931. The US$ was the natural choice, because in 1944 2/3 of the world's gold was in the US. One reason why the Marshall Plan was created was to alleviate the chronic deficits Europeans countries had with the US between 1945-50. It was to rebuild their economies so they could start exports good to the US. Even before it was full implemented in 1959, it was already facing problems, the trade surpluses that the US was running in the 1940s, turned to deficits as European and Japanese economies recovered. By 1959, Federal Reserves foreign liabilities had already exceeded its gold reserves. There were fears of a run on the US gold supply and arbitrage. A secondary policy of the Bretton woods system was curbs on capital outflows to reduce speculation on currency pegs, and this had a negative impact on foreign investment until it was abandoned in 1971. It wasn't until the 1980s, where foreign investment recovered to levels prior to 1914. Factoring out the big spike in global oil prices as a result of the OPEC cartel, it most likely wasn't until the mid-1990s that exports as a % of GDP had reached 1914 levels.
Until the 1980s, the US record regarding free trade and markets was mediocre. The impetus to remove trade barriers in Europe after the Second World War was driven by the Europeans themselves. The EEC already had a custom union in 1968, Canada and the US have yet to even discuss implementing one. Even with Canada it took the US over 50 years to get a Free Trade Agreement. NAFTA was inspired by the success of the EEC. NAFTA was very much an elite driven project. If the Americans put the NAFTA to a referendum like the British did with the EEC in the seventies, it most likely wouldn't pass. People often look at segregation in the US South as a political issue, but it was economic issue as well. How could the US preach free trade, when it didn't have free trade in its own country. Segregation was a internal non-tariff barrier. In the first election after the end of the Cold War in 1992, Ross Perot' based most of independent run for the Presidency on opposition to NAFTA. He won 19% of the vote. Like Ross Perot before him, Donald Trump is not the exception in how America has handled tariffs since the founding of the Republic, but more the norm.
The embrace of free trade by the business and political elite can be attributed to two events. After the end of Bretton Woods in 1971, a strong vested interest in the US in the form of multinationals and Wall Street emerged advocating for removal of tariffs and more importantly the removal of restrictions on free flow of capital, whether direct foreign investment in portfolio investment. However, the political class embrace of free trade and capital only really took off after the collapse of the Soviet Union propelled by Cold War triumphalism.
As mentioned by the article, the US is reverting back to a pre-WTO relations with China. As Robert Lighthizer said in speech in 2000
I guess my prescription, really, is to move back to more of a negotiating kind of a settlement. Return to WTO and what it really was meant to be. Something where you have somebody make a decision but have it not be binding.
The US is using financial and legal instruments developed during the Cold War like its extradition treaties (with Canada and Europe), and Section 301. Here is a very good recent article about enforcement commitment that China will make.‘Painful’ enforcement ahead for China if trade war deal is reached with US insisting on unilateral terms
NOTE: It is very difficult to talk about US-China trade war without a basic knowledge of global economic history since 1914. What a lot of people do is politicize or subordinate the economic history to the political. Some commentators think US power was just handed to them after the Second World War, when the US was the only industrialized economy left standing. The dominant position of the US was temporary and in reality its like having 10 tonnes of Gold sitting in your house, it doesn't automatically translate to influence. The US from 1945-1989 was slowly and gradually build her influence in the non-Communist world. For example, US influence in Canada in the 1960s wasn't as strong as it is now. Only 50% of Canadian exports went to the US in 1960s vs 80% at the present moment.

BASIS OF THE US TRADE DISCUSSION WITH CHINA

According to preliminary agreement between China and the US based on unnamed sources in the Wall Street Journal article US, China close in on Trade Deal. In this article it divides the deal in two sections. The first aspects have largely to do with deficits and is political.
As part of a deal, China is pledging to help level the playing field, including speeding up the timetable for removing foreign-ownership limitations on car ventures and reducing tariffs on imported vehicles to below the current auto tariff of 15%. Beijing would also step up purchases of U.S. goods—a tactic designed to appeal to President Trump, who campaigned on closing the bilateral trade deficit with China. One of the sweeteners would be an $18 billion natural-gas purchase from Cheniere Energy Inc., people familiar with the transaction said.
The second part will involve the following.
  1. Commitment Regarding Industrial Policy
  2. Provisions to protect IP
  3. Mechanism which complaints by US companies can be addressed
  4. Bilateral meetings adjudicate disputes. If talks don't produce agreement than US can raise tariffs unilaterally
This grouping of conditions is similar to the points filled under the 301 investigation which serve the basis for initiating the tariffs. I have been reading some sources that say this discussion on this second group of broader issues could only be finalized later
The official justifications for placing the tariffs on Chinese goods is found under the March 2018 investigation submitted by the office of the President to Congress titled FINDINGS OF THE INVESTIGATION INTO CHINA’S ACTS, POLICIES, AND PRACTICES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, AND INNOVATION UNDER SECTION 301 OF THE TRADE ACT OF 1974. From this investigation the United States Trade Representative (USTR) place US Tariffs on Chinese goods as per Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. Here is a press release by the USTR listing the reasons for placing tariffs, and the key section from the press release. Specifically, the Section 301 investigation revealed:
In the bigger context of trade relations between US and China, China is not honoring its WTO commitments, and the USTR issued its yearly report to Congress in early February about the status of China compliance with its WTO commitments. The points that served as a basis for applying Section 301, also deviate from her commitments as Clinton's Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky paving the way for a trade war. Barshefsky argues that China's back sliding was happening as early as 2006-07, and believes the trade war could have been avoided has those commitments been enforced by previous administrations.
I will provide a brief overview of WTO membership and China's process of getting into the WTO.
WTO members can be divided into two groups, first are countries that joined in 1995-97, and were members of GATT, than there are the second group that joined after 1997. China joined in 2001. There is an argument that when China joined in 2001, she faced more stringent conditions than other developing countries that joined before, because the vast majority of developing countries were members of GATT, and were admitted to the WTO based on that previous membership in GATT. Here is Brookings Institute article published in 2001 titled "Issues in China’s WTO Accession"
This question is all the more puzzling because the scope and depth of demands placed on entrants into the formal international trading system have increased substantially since the formal conclusion of the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations in 1994, which expanded the agenda considerably by covering many services, agriculture, intellectual property, and certain aspects of foreign direct investment. Since 1994, the international community has added agreements covering information technology, basic telecommunications services, and financial services. WTO membership now entails liberalization of a much broader range of domestic economic activity, including areas that traditionally have been regarded by most countries as among the most sensitive, than was required of countries entering the WTO’s predecessor organization the GATT.
The terms of China’s protocol of accession to the World Trade Organization reflect the developments just described and more. China’s market access commitments are much more far-reaching than those that governed the accession of countries only a decade ago. And, as a condition for membership, China was required to make protocol commitments that substantially exceed those made by any other member of the World Trade Organization, including those that have joined since 1995. The broader and deeper commitments China has made inevitably will entail substantial short-term economic costs.
What are the WTO commitments Barshefsky goes on about? When countries join the WTO, particularly those countries that weren't members of GATT and joined after 1997, they have to work toward fulfilling certain commitments. There are 4 key documents when countries make an accession to WTO membership, the working party report, the accession protocol paper, the goods schedule and service schedule.
In the working party report as part of the conclusion which specifies the commitment of each member country what they will do in areas that aren't compliant with WTO regulations on the date they joined. The problem there is no good enforcement mechanism for other members to force China to comply with these commitments. And WTO punishments are weak.
Here is the commitment paragraph for China
"The Working Party took note of the explanations and statements of China concerning its foreign trade regime, as reflected in this Report. The Working Party took note of the commitments given by China in relation to certain specific matters which are reproduced in paragraphs 18-19, 22-23, 35-36, 40, 42, 46-47, 49, 60, 62, 64, 68, 70, 73, 75, 78-79, 83-84, 86, 91-93, 96, 100-103, 107, 111, 115-117, 119-120, 122-123, 126-132, 136, 138, 140, 143, 145, 146, 148, 152, 154, 157, 162, 165, 167-168, 170-174, 177-178, 180, 182, 184-185, 187, 190-197, 199-200, 203-207, 210, 212-213, 215, 217, 222-223, 225, 227-228, 231-235, 238, 240-242, 252, 256, 259, 263, 265, 270, 275, 284, 286, 288, 291, 292, 296, 299, 302, 304-305, 307-310, 312-318, 320, 322, 331-334, 336, 339 and 341 of this Report and noted that these commitments are incorporated in paragraph 1.2 of the Draft Protocol. "
This is a tool by the WTO that list all the WTO commitment of each country in the working paper. In the goods and service schedule they have commitments for particular sectors. Here is the a press release by the WTO in September 2001, after successfully concluding talks for accession, and brief summary of key areas in which China hasn't fulfilled her commitments. Most of the commitments made by China were made to address its legacy as a non-market economy and involvement of state owned enterprises. In my opinion, I think the US government and investors grew increasingly frustrated with China, after 2007 not just because of China's back sliding, but relative to other countries who joined after 1997 like Vietnam, another non-market Leninist dictatorship. When comparing China's commitments to the WTO its best to compare her progress with those that joined after 1997, which were mostly ex-Soviet Republics.
NOTE: The Chinese media have for two decades compared any time the US has talked about China's currency manipulation or any other issue as a pretext for imposing tariffs on China to the Plaza Accords. I am very sure people will raise it here. My criticism of this view is fourfold. First, the US targeted not just Japan, but France, Britain and the UK as well. Secondly, the causes of the Japan lost decade were due largely to internal factors. Thirdly, Japan, UK, Britain and France in the 1980s, the Yuan isn't undervalued today. Lastly, in the USTR investigation, its China's practices that are the concern, not so much the trade deficit.

REASONS FOR TRUMPS UNILATERAL APPROACH

I feel that people shouldn't dismiss Trump's unilateral approach toward China for several reasons.
  1. The multilateral approach won't work in many issues such as the trade deficit, commercial espionage and intellectual property, because US and her allies have different interest with regard to these issues. Germany and Japan and trade surpluses with China, while the US runs a deficit. In order to reach a consensus means the West has to compromise among themselves, and the end result if the type of toothless resolutions you commonly find in ASEAN regarding the SCS. Does America want to "compromise" its interest to appease a politician like Justin Trudeau? Not to mention opposition from domestic interest. TPP was opposed by both Clinton and Trump during the election.
  2. You can't launch a geopolitical front against China using a newly formed trade block like the TPP. Some of the existing TPP members are in economic groups with China, like Malaysia and Australia.
  3. China has joined a multitude of international bodies, and at least in trade, these bodies haven't changed its behavior.
  4. Dealing with China, its a no win situation whether you use a tough multilateral / unilateral approach. If the US endorse a tough unilateral approach gives the impression that the US is acting like the British during the Opium War. If you take a concerted Western approach you are accused of acting like the 8 Powers Alliance in 1900.
  5. Trump was elected to deal with China which he and his supporters believe was responsible for the loss of millions manufacturing jobs when China joined the WTO in 2001. It is estimate the US lost 6 Million jobs, about 1/4 of US manufacturing Jobs. This has been subsequently advanced by some economists. The ball got rolling when Bill Clinton decided to grant China Most Favored Nation status in 1999, just a decade after Tiananmen.
  6. China hasn't dealt with issues like IP protection, market access, subsidies to state own companies and state funded industrial spying.
To his credit, Trump has said his aim was not to overthrow authoritarian governments, and that even applies to the likes of Iran. The Arab spring scared Russia and China, because the US for a brief moment placed the spread of democracy over its security interest.

UNDERSTANDING HOW THE US MAKES DECISIONS REGARDING CHINA

At this moment, China or the trade war isn't an area of great concern for the American public, among international issues it ranks lower than international terrorism, North Korea and Iran's nuclear program.
According to the survey, 39 percent of the country views China’s growing power as a “critical threat” to Americans. That ranked it only eighth among 12 potential threats listed and placed China well behind the perceived threats from international terrorism (66 percent), North Korea’s nuclear program (59 percent) and Iran’s nuclear program (52 percent). It’s also considerably lower than when the same question was asked during the 1990s, when more than half of those polled listed China as a critical threat. That broadly tracks with a recent poll from the Pew Research Center that found concern about U.S.-China economic issues had decreased since 2012.
In looking at how US conducts relations foreign policy with China, we should look at it from the three areas of most concern - economic, national security and ideology. Each sphere has their interest groups, and sometimes groups can occupy two spheres at once. Security experts are concerned with some aspects of China's economic actions like IP theft and industrial policy (China 2025), because they are related to security. In these sphere there are your hawks and dove. And each sphere is dominated by certain interest groups. That is why US policy toward China can often appear contradictory. You have Trump want to reduce the trade deficit, but security experts advocating for restrictions on dual use technology who are buttressed by people who want export restrictions on China, as a way of getting market access.
Right now the economic concerns are most dominant, and the hawks seem to dominate. The economic hawks traditionally have been domestic manufacturing companies and economic nationalist. In reality the hawks aren't dominant, but the groups like US Companies with large investment in China and Wall Street are no longer defending China, and some have turned hawkish against China. These US companies are the main conduit in which China's lobby Congress, since China only spends 50% of what Taiwan spends lobbying Congress.
THE ANGLO SAXON WORLD AND CHINA
I don't think many Chinese even those that speak English, have a good understanding Anglo-Saxon society mindset. Anglo Saxons countries, whether US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Ireland are commerce driven society governed by sanctity of contracts. The English great philosophical contributions to Western philosophy have primarily to do with economics and politics like Adam Smith, John Locke, David Hume and Thomas Hobbes. This contrast with the French and Germans. Politics in the UK and to a lesser extent the US, is centered around economics, while in Mainland Europe its religion. When the Americans revolted against the British Empire in 1776, the initial source of the grievances were taxes.
Outside of East Asia, the rest of the World's relationship with China was largely commercial, and for United States, being an Anglosaxon country, even more so. In Southeast Asia, Chinese aren't known for high culture, but for trade and commerce. Outside Vietnam, most of Chinese loans words in Southeast Asian languages involve either food or money. The influence is akin to Yiddish in English.
Some people point to the Mao and Nixon meeting as great strategic breakthrough and symbol of what great power politics should look like. The reality is that the Mao-Nixon meeting was an anomaly in the long history of relations with China and the West. Much of China-Western relations over the last 500 years was conducted by multitudes of nameless Chinese and Western traders. The period from 1949-1979 was the only period were strategic concerns triumphed trade, because China had little to offer except instability and revolution. Even in this period, China's attempt to spread revolution in Southeast Asia was a threat to Western investments and corporate interest in the region. During the nadir of both the Qing Dynasty and Republican period, China was still engaged in its traditional commercial role. Throughout much of history of their relations with China, the goals of Britain and the United States were primarily economic,
IMAGINE JUST 10% OF CHINA BOUGHT MY PRODUCT
From the beginning, the allure of China to Western businesses and traders has been its sheer size I. One of the points that the USTR mentions is lack of market access for US companies operating in China, while Chinese companies face much less restrictions operating in the US.
This is supported by remarks by Henry Paulson and Charlene Barshefsky. As Paulson remarked
Trade with China has hurt some American workers. And they have expressed their grievances at the ballot box.
So while many attribute this shift to the Trump Administration, I do not. What we are now seeing will likely endure for some time within the American policy establishment. China is viewed—by a growing consensus—not just as a strategic challenge to the United States but as a country whose rise has come at America’s expense. In this environment, it would be helpful if the US-China relationship had more advocates. That it does not reflects another failure:
In large part because China has been slow to open its economy since it joined the WTO, the American business community has turned from advocate to skeptic and even opponent of past US policies toward China. American business doesn’t want a tariff war but it does want a more aggressive approach from our government. How can it be that those who know China best, work there, do business there, make money there, and have advocated for productive relations in the past, are among those now arguing for more confrontation? The answer lies in the story of stalled competition policy, and the slow pace of opening, over nearly two decades. This has discouraged and fragmented the American business community. And it has reinforced the negative attitudinal shift among our political and expert classes. In short, even though many American businesses continue to prosper in China, a growing number of firms have given up hope that the playing field will ever be level. Some have accepted the Faustian bargain of maximizing today’s earnings per share while operating under restrictions that jeopardize their future competitiveness. But that doesn’t mean they’re happy about it. Nor does it mean they aren’t acutely aware of the risks — or thinking harder than ever before about how to diversify their risks away from, and beyond, China.
What is interesting about Paulson's speech is he spend only one sentence about displaced US workers, and a whole paragraph about US business operating in China. While Kissinger writes books about China, how much does he contribute to both Democrats and the Republicans during the election cycle? China is increasingly makING it more difficult for US companies operating and those exporting products to China.

CONTINUED

submitted by weilim to IntlScholars [link] [comments]

Brain Dump on Getting Out of the Army - Updated

I originally made this exact post around two years ago when I first started at my current employer. It may just be me but I feel like I’ve started to see more frequent posts about getting out of the Army lately so I figured I’d update my post and repost.
For context, I was an active duty Officer. I did four years at Bragg in the lovely 82nd Airborne and got out as a CPT at the four year mark. I spent almost 70 days on terminal leave watching game of thrones and started as a management consulting Associate at a Big 4 firm (Deloitte, KPMG, PwC, EY) on my ETS date. I don’t have a beautiful Harvard MBA. I don’t have an amazing name brand undergrad. I understand that this advice may not be as applicable for everyone depending on what you want you to do. Some of this unsolicited advice is good for everyone but somethings are more specific to industries that are historically harder to break into (consulting, banking, etc.)
I worked very hard at creating a seamless transition from the Army into corporate America and I learned a lot during the 12 months I focused on transitioning. I care about our Veterans and their success post-military should you decide to get out. I wanted to dump some of my thoughts here and things I’ve learned in the hopes I can help some of you. I am going to be very blunt because there are a lot of misconceptions surrounding getting out. I look forward to your shit talking in the comments.
I have friends, Officer and Enlisted, that have followed the same path and took the same steps that I did. I have Enlisted friends in Ivy League MBA programs, friends at Wharton, JPMorgan Chase, Deloitte, Goldman Sachs, Google, Facebook, big time consulting firms, engineering firms, etc. I also have friends both Officer and Enlisted that didn’t do shit to plan ahead and are feeling the burn.
I’ll leave you with the best analogy I’ve heard about getting out of the military. In the Army, you don’t do anything of value without extensive preparation. The 3 shop kills themselves during the MDMP process refining the plan, the companies and platoons do rock drills, walk-through talk-throughs, PCCs and PCIs, comms checks, weapons checks, blah blah blah. That pattern of preparation and attention to executing a plan doesn’t change when you start to get out. You develop a strategy, target employers, networking contacts, you think through your answers to hundreds of interview questions, you rehearse your elevator pitch and your answer to “tell me about yourself”. Getting out of the Army isn’t the time to start slacking on preparation.
I could ramble on about this topic forever but I won’t. If you have questions, shoot me a note. If you want to tell me to fuck off, I’ll lovingly accept that too.
Edit: sounds like there is a lot of interest in consulting. I'd encourage you to check out Consulting to read people bitching about the industry the way everyone here bitches about the army, just with a tad more elitism.
submitted by standardnameline to army [link] [comments]

GVT: Diversification through Consolidation

Through consolidation, GVT is a portal to financial freedom and diversification!
Let me explain.. In any field, the primary shakers and the first movers are the ones who disrupt the markets and take their share. The early bird gets the worm. GVT is the early bird! The worm, of course, being a share of the International Brokerage market. What is most exciting is that we, as a community, will get to actively partake in the evolution of a potentially paradigm shifting project!
Consolidating your entire portfolio into GVT may seem like a risky maneuver to some, but to those who understand the project we know this: This seeming consolidation is a portal to even greater diversification. With the emergence of GVT markets and the investment platform itself.. your funds could be diversified into other coins... Where GVT markets software will automatically take advantage of arbitrage opportunities for you... Or your funds could be diversified into entirely different commodities; stocks, forex, etc...
Let's all hope the maxim rings true "Consolidate to get wealthy, Diversify to stay wealthy"
Good luck to you all!
I would like to use this thread as an forum to discuss many of GVT's potential benefits.. What sets this project apart?
Thoughts?
submitted by TheVoidWelcomes to genesisvision [link] [comments]

Making $2,000 a Month With Cryptocurrency - Triangular Arbitrage - NullTX

fintech #trading #algotrading #quantitative #quant #quants #forex #cryptos #bitcoin

Making $2,000 a Month With Cryptocurrency - Triangular ArbitrageOn the road toward making $2,000 a month with cryptocurrency, one has to look well beyond traditional opportunities first and foremost. In the case of arbitrage trading, there are quite a few different options to explore. The triangular arbitrage opportunity can be extremely lucrative, although there are some caveats to take into account as well.The Triangular Concept ExplainedUnlike the direct arbitrage trading method, triangular arbitraging is a bit different. It will always involve exploring three different markets and up to three different exchanges. For example, one buys coin A on Exchange X, sends it to exchange Y for conversion to coin B, and sells that coin B on Exchange Z for even more profit. Both “steps” of the arbitrage process can yield individual gains which do not necessarily have to be equal in size. Is it Profitable?The main reason why speculators explore triangular opportunities is for the financial gain...... Continue reading at: https://nulltx.com/making-2000-a-month-with-cryptocurrency-triangular-arbitrage/
submitted by silahian to quant_hft [link] [comments]

I want to talk about Bitcoin scams

EDIT: I edited the name out of a screencap. sorry about that.
pardon the wall of text but this is super important to me.
i am a hardcore bitcoin evangelist and my entire facebook friend list probabaly associates me with bitcoin because i spend a great deal of time educating people and discussing it on social media. my background is computer network engineering and web developing; i've studied bitcoin for a few years now.
first i wanna talk about USI Tech.
not long ago i was asked to invest some bitcoin via a company called USI Tech. at the time, USI Tech's only relation to bitcoin was that they sold cryptic "bitcoin packages" that would return 140% over 140 days. that means if i gave them 1 BTC today, they would give me 1% of a bitcoin for 140 days, meaning that after 100 days, my initial investment would be recovered, and then all i get to do is wait for those 40 days to see my profit.
when i was first recruited, it was before they rebranded themselves. this was just a few weeks ago. prior to this rebranding, there was no indication from the company regarding exactly how they were able to provide that kind of return on investment. at the time their only product other than these "bitcoin packages" was a license that provided access to a very special very secretive robot that harnessed artificial intelligence to yield apparently handsome returns via speculative arbitrage in the foreign exchange market. there are zero trades attributed to this "robot" and in fact there is zero evidence of a robot at all. they do have software for their customers that apparently track gains however there is zero correlation between these numbers and their apparent source.
since their rebranding, they are now marketing these "bitcoin packages" as having generated income via cloud mining. keep in mind that USI Tech does not sell hashrate, nor even techinically access to remote hardware; USI Tech sells "bitcoin packages" however how these packages specifically relate to hashrates accessed on remote hardware, or cloud mining, is not at all explained. in fact, here on their website they say that details will be released and then reference a date that has already passed..
to be blunt, cloud mining is a meme. mining cryptocurrency for a profit is generally difficult even for the big boys in China. that bitcoin could be worth more in the future than it is now is the reason why miners mine; the energy spent mining bitcoin costs more than the value of those mined bitcoins.
how does USI Tech not only mine so successfully that they themselves can be profitable, but so that customers who purchase this mining remotely can be successful to the tune of 140% over 140 days?
also they are in pre-sale for their own ICO,
also they have zero registration documents filed with the SEC,
also the names that used to be on their masthead, Ralf Gold and Joao Severino, were involved in past scams,
also their business is registered in Dubai, just like almost every single forex ponzi,
also like i said there is zero proof that they trade anything at all, anywhere.
i really thought i knew my shit. is there a more experienced bitcoin user that can point to any situation where that sort of profitibility can be achieved by cloud mining?
if the question seems rhetorical for the high bitcoin minds on this sub, then maybe i've done my duty by exposing USI Tech's dubious claims and raising suspicion which brings me to my next point:
secondly i wanna talk about the tactics used by this company to fool people.
primarily i should say that USI Tech operates a multilevel marketing structure that rewards recruitment through commission. it is not a coincidense that ponzi schemes use MLM structures to grow; ponzis require a continuous flow of new investment in order to work. to be blunt, MLM is a predatory business approach that exploits people's hope and greed. all MLM use the same tactic of targeting people's desperation to earn passive income.
USI Tech takes advantage of a population of people who are desperate to invest in a technology they do not comprehend. this is how they can get away with selling something that there is no evidence of. people now have a very dire desire to be involved in bitcoin because they have seen the news. people that do not know enough about investments, let alone cryptography, are aching to enter the space before all the potential is claimed.
there is much fertile potential to scam people who don't know that hyperbole like "smart contracts made off-chain that return high yield arbitration via intelligent algorithms backed by authenticated crypto-asset bonds.." is all bullshit. in most cases, even if they could, there is no code to review, no whitepaper to digest, and in the case of USI Tech, not even satisfacory rhetoric to substantiate anything being sold by these scammers.
earlier today, i went into a facebook group called USI TECH BITCOIN TEAM SUCCESS, and i asked a question. i said "i'm interested in joining USI Tech, and as a programmer and bitcoin nerd, i want to know the details of their mining operation." immediately the reaction was two-fold. promptly some were chiming in with agreeable sentiments like 'i've also wondered' and 'yes there is a lack of transparency', and others were already indignant with stuff like 'they said they are working on transparency give them a break' and 'troll detected, usi tech is not a scam because look i made money'.
okay fair enough the conversation was started and i was pretty quickly banned from the group. i had a dozen or so people in my ear at this point asking me what happened, people that have invested real money in this company. i spent hours discussing this with some of them. i had a conversation with the group's admin, here it is. he basically says that he doesn't want to upset people that have found a way to make money, and that my questions should be directed somewhere else.
i've sent exhaustive emails pondering specifics to USI Tech to no avail.
in conclusion, bitcoin has provided rich new opportunities for scamming people.
let me be clear: yes money can be made in a ponzi scheme. the operative to earning money in a ponzi is to know when to discontinue reinvestment. by all means, partake in the ponzi even, so long as you know what you are contribtuing to. the number one argument that people will make in favor of the ponzi they're in is
"but i made money".
it is our duty as crypto-enthusiasts to spread responsible education regarding bitcoin. i say to people "if you are interested in bitcoin, invest in bitcoin, because that is where the actual innovation is".
TL;DR: fuck bitcoins ponzis like USI Tech, stay alert, stay safe.
submitted by beartowitness to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Brain Dump On Getting Out Of The Army

Don’t worry, this post isn’t going to be like that other recently transitioned O-3 douche that came on here “drunk” spouting about the 1% and his awesome (fake) job on Wall Street.
I am a recently separated CPT after 4 years, served all 4 years in the 82nd ABN. I currently work as a management consultant in a Big 4 firm. I worked very hard at creating a seamless transition from the Army into corporate America and I learned a lot during the 12 months I focused on transitioning. I care about our Veterans and their success post-military should you decide to get out. I wanted to dump some of my thoughts here and things I’ve learned in the hopes I can help some of you. I am going to be very blunt because there are a lot of misconceptions surrounding getting out. I look forward to your shit talking in the comments.
1- First things first, preparing to transition is a 2nd full time job. You can save your “officers don’t do shit so no wonder you had so much time to focus on getting out” If you give a fuck, you’ll find the time. I promise I would have rather hung out with my kid and wife after work instead of studying interview questions and trolling through LinkedIn for potential contacts. A successful out will require a lot of work and effort and is taxing. Remember this, the Army doesn’t give a shit about you once you hit your final out. It is your responsibility and your responsibility alone to ensure your success.
2- If you think for second your military experience is going to carry you into your next job and every company is going to want to hire you, gov or private, you’re more wrong. Listen, I appreciate your service. Your potential employer appreciates your service. They don’t appreciate it so much to hand you a job. Their interest is in the success of that business. If you are not value-added to the bottom line, you don’t get the job. I had this asshole ACAP instructor that literally said “Fortune 500 companies want you because you’re a vet. They want to hire you. You just have to help them find your resume by posting it online.” THIS IS BULLSHIT AND NOT HOW IT WORKS (see next point). This is especially true for Officers. No one gives a shit you are a CPT/MAJ/1SG/SGM. You are no better than an E-5 that is prepared and can smoke the shit out of an interview.
3- You need to develop a well thought out strategy of how you want to approach your post service employment. This should start nearly a year out. I started 12 months from my transition date. Your strategy should include: IDing your strengths and what you bring to the table. I’m really happy you can hump your 240 better than anyone else in your weapons squad. I am also very happy you can make stupidly complex OPORDs. If you don’t know how to properly articulate your skills, your resume will be shit, your interviewing will be shit, and most of all your success as a job searcher will be shit. ID your weaknesses and shortfalls. Best way to do this is to find live job postings that interest you and look at the requirements posted. What do you meet and what do you not? This is a great way to check and see if this is a realistic position to pursue. If you don’t meet a requirement, is it something that you can change. Project management certification? Sure, you can go get that. 15+ years experience at a hedge fund implementing forex arbitrage strategy? Probably not. Create a list of target employers. What companies interest you? Why do they interest you? Is it because they advertise that they have ping-pong tables in the break room (wrong reason) or is it because you are interested in their work and your skills and experiences translate well? (good reason). Your target employers will drive the next point and I personally think the most important point.
4- NETWORK.NETWORK.NETWORK. I can’t say it enough. Networking is the single most vital point of your entire transition in securing post-service employment. This point is hard for a lot of people but if you care about what you’re going to do after the Army, get the fuck over it. For a lot of people networking is synonymous with slimy cold calls where you are interested in getting something for yourself and it is an awkward and uncomfortable process. It doesn’t have to be this way. Think of it this way. What sounds better? Emailing someone you’ve never talked to 7 days before your final out asking for them pass along your resume because you like their company and stuff. OR does it sound better to email someone 12 months out from your transition because you are interested in learning more about their experiences and career field and this leads to a mentomentee relationship that develops over months’ time so THEY want to help you find a job. THEY are willing to reach out on your behalf. It is also a hell of a lot less awkward when you ask them to pass along your name because you have an established relationship. Set up informational interviews, send out your resume to your contacts to be reviewed. Ask a civilian to take your resume into their workplace and have their coworkers highlight everything they don’t understand and then give it back so you know what military terminology you need to clarify. Participate in LinkedIn groups for transitioning military. At one point, I had so many contacts and so many of my target companies, I had to use a spreadsheet to organize their contact information, the last time we talked, what we talked out, and when we were going to talk next. I would develop the relationships over long periods of time so when it came time for them to act on my behalf, it wasn’t an inappropriate request. I had created buy-in. They had a vested interest in my success and wanted to go out on a limb for me. Whether it was for some self-serving reason and they liked to feel better about themselves or they genuinely cared, it didn’t matter. They were helping me. I was leveraging that connection.
5- Lastly, utilize the resources available to you and veterans. I'm not going to explain them all but if you want more info, ask. LinkedIn, HireOurHeroes, American Corporate Partners, ACP AdvisorNet, Military MOJO, Veterans Mentor Network, company specific veteran hiring initiatives (GE, Goldman Sachs, Pepsi, Coke, Bank of America, Deloitte, etc).
I could ramble on about this topic forever but I won’t. If you have questions, shoot me a note. If you want to tell me to fuck off, I’ll lovingly accept that too.
Edit: removed my analogy of how wrong you are if you assume someone will hand you a job because your a veteran. Now back to originally scheduled programming...
submitted by standardnameline to army [link] [comments]

[uncensored-r/Bitcoin] I want to talk about Bitcoin scams

The following post by beartowitness is being replicated because the post has been silently greylisted(for 2.5 hours).
(It was approved by the mods at: 2017-11-04T01:26:17.000Z)
The original post can be found(in censored form) at this link:
np.reddit.com/ Bitcoin/comments/7amu9s
The original post's content was as follows:
EDIT: I edited the name out of a screencap. sorry about that.
pardon the wall of text but this is super important to me.
i am a hardcore bitcoin evangelist and my entire facebook friend list probabaly associates me with bitcoin because i spend a great deal of time educating people and discussing it on social media. my background is computer network engineering and web developing; i've studied bitcoin for a few years now.
first i wanna talk about USI Tech.
not long ago i was asked to invest some bitcoin via a company called USI Tech. at the time, USI Tech's only relation to bitcoin was that they sold cryptic "bitcoin packages" that would return 140% over 140 days. that means if i gave them 1 BTC today, they would give me 1% of a bitcoin for 140 days, meaning that after 100 days, my initial investment would be recovered, and then all i get to do is wait for those 40 days to see my profit.
when i was first recruited, it was before they rebranded themselves. this was just a few weeks ago. prior to this rebranding, there was no indication from the company regarding exactly how they were able to provide that kind of return on investment. at the time their only product other than these "bitcoin packages" was a license that provided access to a very special very secretive robot that harnessed artificial intelligence to yield apparently handsome returns via speculative arbitrage in the foreign exchange market. there are zero trades attributed to this "robot" and in fact there is zero evidence of a robot at all. they do have software for their customers that apparently track gains however there is zero correlation between these numbers and their apparent source.
since their rebranding, they are now marketing these "bitcoin packages" as having generated income via cloud mining. keep in mind that USI Tech does not sell hashrate, nor even techinically access to remote hardware; USI Tech sells "bitcoin packages" however how these packages specifically relate to hashrates accessed on remote hardware, or cloud mining, is not at all explained. in fact, here on their website they say that details will be released and then reference a date that has already passed..
to be blunt, cloud mining is a meme. mining cryptocurrency for a profit is generally difficult even for the big boys in China. that bitcoin could be worth more in the future than it is now is the reason why miners mine; the energy spent mining bitcoin costs more than the value of those mined bitcoins.
how does USI Tech not only mine so successfully that they themselves can be profitable, but so that customers who purchase this mining remotely can be successful to the tune of 140% over 140 days?
also they are in pre-sale for their own ICO,
also they have zero registration documents filed with the SEC,
also the names that used to be on their masthead, Ralf Gold and Joao Severino, were involved in past scams,
also their business is registered in Dubai, just like almost every single forex ponzi,
also like i said there is zero proof that they trade anything at all, anywhere.
i really thought i knew my shit. is there a more experienced bitcoin user that can point to any situation where that sort of profitibility can be achieved by cloud mining?
if the question seems rhetorical for the high bitcoin minds on this sub, then maybe i've done my duty by exposing USI Tech's dubious claims and raising suspicion which brings me to my next point:
secondly i wanna talk about the tactics used by this company to fool people.
primarily i should say that USI Tech operates a multilevel marketing structure that rewards recruitment through commission. it is not a coincidense that ponzi schemes use MLM structures to grow; ponzis require a continuous flow of new investment in order to work. to be blunt, MLM is a predatory business approach that exploits people's hope and greed. all MLM use the same tactic of targeting people's desperation to earn passive income.
USI Tech takes advantage of a population of people who are desperate to invest in a technology they do not comprehend. this is how they can get away with selling something that there is no evidence of. people now have a very dire desire to be involved in bitcoin because they have seen the news. people that do not know enough about investments, let alone cryptography, are aching to enter the space before all the potential is claimed.
there is much fertile potential to scam people who don't know that hyperbole like "smart contracts made off-chain that return high yield arbitration via intelligent algorithms backed by authenticated crypto-asset bonds.." is all bullshit. in most cases, even if they could, there is no code to review, no whitepaper to digest, and in the case of USI Tech, not even satisfacory rhetoric to substantiate anything being sold by these scammers.
earlier today, i went into a facebook group called USI TECH BITCOIN TEAM SUCCESS, and i asked a question. i said "i'm interested in joining USI Tech, and as a programmer and bitcoin nerd, i want to know the details of their mining operation." immediately the reaction was two-fold. promptly some were chiming in with agreeable sentiments like 'i've also wondered' and 'yes there is a lack of transparency', and others were already indignant with stuff like 'they said they are working on transparency give them a break' and 'troll detected, usi tech is not a scam because look i made money'.
okay fair enough the conversation was started and i was pretty quickly banned from the group. i had a dozen or so people in my ear at this point asking me what happened, people that have invested real money in this company. i spent hours discussing this with some of them. i had a conversation with the group's admin, here it is. he basically says that he doesn't want to upset people that have found a way to make money, and that my questions should be directed somewhere else.
i've sent exhaustive emails pondering specifics to USI Tech to no avail.
in conclusion, bitcoin has provided rich new opportunities for scamming people.
let me be clear: yes money can be made in a ponzi scheme. the operative to earning money in a ponzi is to know when to discontinue reinvestment. by all means, partake in the ponzi even, so long as you know what you are contribtuing to. the number one argument that people will make in favor of the ponzi they're in is
"but i made money".
it is our duty as crypto-enthusiasts to spread responsible education regarding bitcoin. i say to people "if you are interested in bitcoin, invest in bitcoin, because that is where the actual innovation is".
TL;DR: fuck bitcoins ponzis like USI Tech, stay alert, stay safe.
submitted by censorship_notifier to noncensored_bitcoin [link] [comments]

Price Increase & Decrease (YES you read that right!) for Affected Countries

Full data available here.
Prices listed are for the Android version. iOS prices will be similar but may not be entirely the same since Apple uses a different pricing matrix.
Countries in bold see a price increase; countries not in bold see a price decrease.
Country Currency OLD 50 Gems OLD 86 Gems OLD Per Gem NEW 50 Gems New 86 Gems New Per Gem Change
Croatia HRK 289 479 5.569767 275 459 5.337209 -4.18%
Egypt EGP 319.99 529.99 6.162674 549.99 949.99 10.9998 +78.49%
Kazakhstan KZT 11990 19990 232.4419 9990 16990 197.5581 -15.01%
Latvia EUR 36.99 59.99 0.697558 29.99 49.99 0.581279 -16.67%
Malaysia MYR 144.99 244.99 2.848721 129.9 199.9 2.324419 -18.40%
Nigeria NGN 4812.92 8021.53 93.2736 9500 15900 184.8837 +98.22%
Pakistan PKR 2894 4819 56.03488 3000 5000 58.13953 +3.76%
Philippines PHP 1700 2850 33.13953 1490 2490 28.95349 -12.63%
Qatar QAR 130 215 2.5 109.99 184.99 2.149811 -14.01%
Vietnam VND 795000 1350000 15697.67 699000 1099000 12779.07 -18.59%
Now before anyone starts crying bloody murder over Nigeria and Egypt, let me try to explain the drastic price increases.
Strong downward macroeconomic pressure on Nigeria's currency, the Naira, meant that the Nigerian Central Bank was unable to protect its currency's pegged value to the Dollar. On June 20 this year, the Central Bank abandoned the pegged value, allowing the Naira to float and plummet ~40%.
Similarly, the Egyptian government devalued the Egyptian Pound on November 3, abandoning its previous peg of 8.8 XUSD.
Hence the new prices are in line with forex trends, albeit late. Remember the Ukrainian loophole? Arbitrage opportunities often arise when merchants fail to adjust overseas prices accordingly in a timely fashion. Maybe KLab hired a new intern to read the newspapers?
All the other price changes listed here are also in line with current forex trends. Of course KLab never seems to want to lower the prices in countries where love gems are overpriced, e.g. Australia.
submitted by -NINCOMPOOP- to SchoolIdolFestival [link] [comments]

No conspiracy theory needed to explain the short squeeze during the Bitmex' scheduled maintenance

Bitcoin is more resilient than stocks, because stocks are traded on 1-2 exchanges (sometimes only 1), but Bitcoin is traded on many exchanges, like fiat currencies (Forex).
I think that the Bitmex downtime had some role (when it was offline arbitrage bots was offline too, causing liquidity to decrease and make short squeeze more probable), but most journalists and "Bitcoin analysts" will exaggerate it.
If Bitmex did not went down to maintenance, it's very probable that the short squeeze would happened anyway. Short positions to long positions ratio on Bitfinex were at record high (see "BTCUSDSHORTS-BTCUSDLONGS" on TradingView).
No conspiracy theory is needed to explain the short squeeze. It's obvious for all market participants that the best time for short squeeze is when the liquidity is low and short positions on Bitfinex (one of the major spot exchanges allowing shorting on margin) are at record high.
This is why "smart money" started to open long positions around the time when liquidity is expected to be low (Bitmex scheduled maintenance) and short positions at record high level.
submitted by tedjonesweb to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

#liqnet

LIQNET A CRYPTOCURRENCY EXCHANGE WITH THE UNIQUE LIQUIDITY POOLING TECHNOLOGY
LIQNET SPECIFICS
THE LEN MECHANISM (LIQUIDITY EXCHANGE NETWORK) LEN (Liquidity Exchange Network) is what makes our exchange unique. This mechanism allows collecting and aggregating buy/sell orders through APIs of 1,2...n exchanges located anywhere in the world and forming a unified order book.LIQNET is a cryptocurrency exchange that uses a unique liquidity gathering mechanism. Find out how it works today in our review.What Is LIQNET?
LIQNET, found online at LIQNET.com, gathers liquidity from other exchanges and allows traders to access this liquidity through a single dashboard. You can take advantage of arbitrage opportunities between exchanges. Or, you can simply use LIQNET to access more liquidity.
The system revolves around the united limit order book, or LOB. You access this order book through the professional LIQNET interface. LIQNET was announced on April 24, 2018. The company is expecting to launch a token sale in May or June 2018.
How Does LIQNET Work?
LIQNET revolves around its limit order book, or LOB, and its LEN mechanism. The Liquidity Exchange Network, or LEN, mechanism prevents liquidity fragmentation by pooling bids and orders from different exchanges. Instead of accessing liquidity from a single cryptocurrency exchange, you can access liquidity from multiple exchanges using the same professional LIQNET dashboard. The main benefit of this higher liquidity is that traders can enjoy a lower bid/ask spread. LEN collects and pools orders from exchange customers like you. Then, it connects those orders with orders from other platforms, creating a single depth of market panel. Orders are collected and then made available for trading to all LIQNET exchange customers.
Using the public APIs of cryptocurrency exchanges, LEN polls them for purchase and sale bids, forming a single depth of market panel for its customers and allowing traders to find the best prices at minimal spread.
You can access LIQNET through your desktop browser or a mobile app.
LIQNET Features & Benefits
LIQNET emphasizes all of the following features and benefits:
No Slippage: High liquidity allows users to reduce or fully eliminate the costs of slippage. Expenses Reduction: The higher the market liquidity is, the smaller the bid/ask spread will be, which thereby lowers the cost of trading.
Trust: LIQNET’s liquidity “reflects the presence of a mass of people whose actions are much easier to predict than the actions of a single person,” explains the official website, which means that a single entity can’t dominate the trading market. Decentralization: LIQNET claims to be built on a decentralized system because their physical hardware is located in two different data centers, including centers in France and Canada. This isn’t what we typically mean by “decentralization”, although we understand what LIQNET is getting at.
Security: LIQNET holds customers’ funds in multiple locations, including hot wallets, multi-signature wallets, and cryptocurrency exchanges. This reduces the risk of theft. Multiple Trading Options: LIQNET supports direct trading from the financial chart and scalping trades (including post limit and stop orders right from the order book). Multiple Order Types: LIQNET supports stop order trades, stop limit trades, TP & SL trades, trailing stop trades, Iceberg, IFD, OCO, IFDOCO, valid till day/time trades, AON, IOC, and FOK trades.
Financial Charts: LIQNET provides a suite of analysis tools. Users can also customize their dashboard with 100+ different trading indicators. Multiple Currency Pairs: Right now, LIQNET lists just four cryptocurrency pairs, including LTC/BTC, ETH/BTC, BCH/BTC, and PPC/BTC. However, they allow users to deposit more currencies, including bitcoin, Litecoin, USD, Ethereum, Bitcoin Cash, DASH, and Peercoin (PPC).
LIQNET Fees A number of cryptocurrency exchanges aggregate liquidity from across different exchanges. So what makes LIQNET special? What kind of fees can you expect to pay? Here are some of the notable fees as listed on the LIQNET fees page: Trading Fees: 0.2% taker fee, 0.1% maker fee Deposit Fees: 0 (0% deposit fees on all deposit options, including bitcoin, Litecoin, USD, Ethereum, Bitcoin Cash, DASH, and Peercoin). Withdrawal Fees: 0.0001 BTC, 0.01 LTC, 0.01 USD, 0.01 ETH, 0.01 BCH, 0.01 DASH, and 0.01 PPC.
The LIQNET ICO LIQNET is expecting to launch a crowdsale in May / June 2018. That crowdsale will consist of a closed pre-sale and an open ICO. Further details of the token sale have not yet been announced. LIQNET has partnered with Como Capital to launch their ICO. It’s unclear how LIQNET tokens will work. However, tokens launched by other cryptocurrency exchanges typically provide a discount on trading fees. You might only pay 0.1% or 0.5% trading fees when paying with LIQNET’s tokens, for example.Who’s Behind LIQNET? LIQNET was created by a team of finance, law, and technology professionals with a proven track record in traditional investments and forex trading.
Key members of the team include Roman Shirokov (CEO), Evgeny Tarasenko (CTO), and Vyacheslav Kasatkin.
LIQNET was incorporated in 2015. The company is registered to an address in Singapore (10 Maxwell Road, Singapore).
LIQNET Conclusion LIQNET is a cryptocurrency exchange that aggregates liquidity from a number of different exchanges across the internet. The goal is to reduce the bid/ask spread while offering users the highest liquidity across multiple order types and markets. Right now, LIQNET is in the early stages of launch. The exchange is not yet available online, although a desktop and mobile app are preparing to launch in the near future.
submitted by Sl1mXgod to u/Sl1mXgod [link] [comments]

Arbitrage trading in forex explained. Arbitrage represents an opportunity for low-risk profit. However, to make the most of an arbitrage trading strategy, there are various technical points that you should know. Find out more about arbitrage and how it works. Forex news Euro Exchange rate Interest Interest rates Forward contract. Callum Cliffe Financial writer, London. What is arbitrage ... Arbitrage trading in forex explained. Arbitrage represents an opportunity for low-risk profit. However, to make the most of an arbitrage trading strategy, there are various technical points that you should know. Find out more about arbitrage and how it works. Forex Arbitrage Euro Exchange rate Interest Interest rates. Callum Cliffe Financial writer, London. What is arbitrage? Before talking ... Forex Arbitrage Explained. Arbitrage is a forex trading strategy whereby traders take advantage of price discrepancies between remarkably similar financial instruments in different markets. In this case, a trader would buy an instrument and simultaneously sell an equivalent size of the same instrument in another market. The trading strategy is made possible by the fact that products that are ... Arbitrage in Forex explained. Arbitrage in trading is a situation where a trader can take advantage of pricing inefficiencies and enter a position where there is a locked in profit and no risk at all. I slightly talked about arbitrage in options trading a while back in my article about the Box Spread. But I wanted to find out about it in Forex. There are a couple ways, but this one is the ... Arbitrage in Forex explained. Arbitrage in trading is a situation where a trader can take advantage of pricing inefficiencies and enter a position where there is a locked in profit and no risk at all. I slightly talked about arbitrage in options trading a while back in my article about the Box Spread. But I wanted to find out about it in Forex. There are a couple ways, but this one is the ... Forex arbitrage is the strategy of exploiting price disparity in the forex markets. It may be affected in various ways but however it is carried out, the arbitrage seeks to buy currency prices and sell currency prices that are currently divergent but extremely likely to rapidly converge. The expectation is that as prices move back towards a mean, the arbitrage becomes more profitable and can ... Forex Arbitrage Trading System Explained . Forex arbitrage trading systems have been around for a long time as they offer a low-risk profit opportunity if executed correctly. The main idea is to profit from price differences across exchanges by quickly identifying mispricings. A trader buys the underpriced instrument while immediately selling the overpriced instrument, keeping the difference ...

[index] [22751] [15474] [10097] [26979] [20257] [2122] [5659] [13734] [10493] [25311]

http://binaryoptiontrade.seitolljodh.tk