Pensions: an impossible financing
The generation that will gradually be a pensioner leaves behind a legacy financial heavy. It has indeed lived on a debt (private and public) that it will be difficult to carry, and we withdraw the profits. In addition, she has abandoned the principle of capitalization pension, and has made a terrible bomb.
The increase in pensions and the number of pensioners is indeed financially daunting.This phenomenon is neither specifically French or European, but global. Even the Chinese came to the conclusion that their policy of restricting births per couple has a child puts them in an impossible situation: there will not be enough young people to carry the weight of the elderly in a society where it is culturally intolerable to abandon the elderly.
Faced with this impasse, defending the status quo is suicidal: all measures that we do not want to take today will affect tomorrow and accelerate the bankruptcy of the pension system. The only way to reassure pensioners present and future is to build a system that has run, reaches a (re) find a balance that is sorely lacking.
It is within this context that the decrease of the pensionable age should be examined: the mythical age pension (that does not exist in the U.S.) is in itself an absurdity. While it may be a law, it is not necessary to make it a requirement. The demographics and pension systems have to take his (pre) pension averages that are well below 60 years (against 65 originally meant). Moreover, your longevity has increased by 15 years.
These two figures are arithmetically an astonishing result: each worker who began his career today should, if nothing changes, put 40% of his salary every month in a pension account to maintain their standard of living during the years of pension. Absurd, is not it?
Pose to the generation that follows us a load of pension this level it is irresponsible to: Is this really the result of our work to place our excesses on our children and grandchildren? Are we becoming selfish to this point? The young generation should revolt against this system. And even if they make an effort, they have no means to support our pensions.
The only responsible approach is therefore to accept that we are healthier than our parents and how to share the burden of future generations that we have heavily loaded our excesses is willing to work a few more years. C ‘ is the heart of the debate.
The Euro is doomed? The question 3,000,000,000,000
To read comments from authorities of all kinds, you’d think the Euro is sentenced to death more or less slow. Some media is already writing his obituary and economists, mainly Anglo-Saxon already explained why the Euro will not survive this crisis. Rarely has so much nonsense has been written or said about the Euro. Note that some of the statements of European political leaders do not help, as they maintain a confusion of genres.
If we focus on the financial markets, two considerations are important. Firstly, the size of currency movements on the forex market every day reaches 3,000,000,000,000 Euros per day. A speculator or a group of speculators who would influence prices would therefore need at least 30 billion euros to represent 1% of these volumes.
The second is that the bulk of these movements comes from international trade or investment in assets of another currency area: it is buying and selling of currencies by firms or institutions that have set invoices on a daily basis in foreign currencies: just look at the oil market, which generates massive flows between dollars and euros every day to prove it. These actors anticipate exchange rate movements. They therefore operate cash and futures. Concerns will inevitably create movements that are called “leads and lags” that affect the course of the currency.
On the role of hedge funds, it is ridiculous in these markets. With $ 2,000 billion of capital invested and 80% of their assets in stocks and bonds without currency risk. The “speculative” currency should not exceed 10% of these assets. Although they exchanged all of these alternative asset every day, they would not reach 1% of movements.
Why Has the Euro reaches $ 1.56 at the top last year? Because the U.S. dollar was collapsing and confidence in the U.S. economy and finance was the lowest. Nobody said or claimed that the course was the reference. Viewed from the perspective of our exporters, the high euro was a problem: they sell in dollar properties with a significant portion of costs is in euros, their margins weakened, even disappeared. The exchange rates were due to factors other than foreign trade.
While it is clear that the crisis management of the euro by the European authorities is far from exemplary, it should return to some key considerations. Those who, today, rush by short selling or otherwise of euros for dollars at current prices will gnaw their fingers in the coming months.
It is time to step back. The Euro will not disappear, it is the motto of more than 200 million Europeans and return to the old currency requires both a consensus can not countries in the Eurozone, a change of treaties that nobody (except, as an be Angela Merkel, who seems more and more lost in the European context. The mechanics would at least five years to implement.
The Euro is not a first speculative instrument. It’s the motto of 16 economies that have significant power and at least 80% of trade is internal or al’Eurozone to Europe. All European countries seem to have finally found the political strength of austerity measures are needed to stop living beyond our means. Even the United States and Japan come through. In my contacts in Asia this week, I reassured my interlocutors by saying that Europe finally make the right decision after trying all other solutions.
The search for a preventive mechanism of these crises is by its very nature, complex. But this crisis has demonstrated full-scale budget that complacency leads to disaster. It is more a European leader who may be unaware that the Eurozone needs to have the structure and mechanisms necessary preventive and curative. More importantly, the countries of the Eurozone have become aware of a sense of common purpose that, even if it is difficult to live, is inevitable. The slightest threat weakest overall.
Not just the euro is not condemned, but there is a currency of investment of a tremendous value.
I jealously guard my euros.
Justification for the choice of the (house) Bank
What are the reasons for or against the election of a bank? Why is this one (house) bank? any more speculation and unrealistic promise of interest. So many tried to bank it now even with a new name. So why customers run on this bank – or to another? Good question.
What bank customers want ?
Personally I am of the opinion that most people understand that three asterisks behind making a percentage of the number of superfluous in itself again. For bottom line is one of the bank’s profits for an offer that bank. The calls have the economic principle of performance – even without passion.
Also, I am convinced that most people know that there are currently no interest in it about 2 percentage points, as banks can earn even this is not reasonable. What more, must generate even more – with more risk. Where this can lead, we had just witnessed, and fear every day with the speculations with Greece and the euro.
However I now believe in the fact that the greed in man any reason eliminated. Because a product is better because the larger number in the advertisement or the monthly fee but is significantly lower than for annual payment.
Reasons for the selection of the Bank
YouGovPsychonomics AG, an international institute for market research, sought by the survey responses found. The results are surprising but clear – and not again. It results follow in part:
- Free account
- good conditions
- Easily accessible outlets
- Many ATMs
- Reputation
- high service quality
- personal contact
It should nevertheless be crucial, what is really needed. Dear 0.5% less yield on a real product like a great lifethat you do not need. Objectivity, should dominate everything else in my opinion. This will give would go today.
UPDATE: According to a poll by Gallup Germany is growing distrust of personal banking adviser. Thus believe even 26% that the bank does not consider what it promises. It therefore seems logical that only 14% feel attached to the bank and will consider no change.
Why the taxation of banks has little chance of being approved at G20
The European Union in a burst taxing announced its decision to tax the banks. In any case, this is the decision of the leading duo Merkel-Sarkozy. They try to have a European position “as united as possible” to the G20. This is a very beautiful idea that the public is entertained and it will not fail to cover its applause.
Unfortunately vain.
The taxation of banks across the EU is a puzzle … Chinese. Each country has found its way to tax that transaction, which employees who dividends. A European tax (which will in any event perceived by nation states) is impossible. The trouble grew out of uniformity. ” No risk of this document it. There is no chance that this tax is uniform, either in amount or in kind.
But what is the purpose of this tax? Nothing to do with banks. This is to show fiscal discipline and to draft a common economic management. Nothing like that to impose discipline on others rather than to ask the question of state expenses. It would therefore be “to ensure equitable sharing of burdens and create incentives to limit systemic risk.” What a great idea: remove the banks will not bring revenue to limit systemic risks, but their contribution to the economy.
If only these “samples” were intended to increase contributions to the mechanisms of deposit guarantees, it might be useful for something, but our central bankers are sure to collect these ducats hard cash to cover their expenses.
As for trying to impose it worldwide, it is pure illusion. Why Japan, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, India and some other they impose such taxes when their banking industry has done nothing wrong? We therefore assume that our leaders have forgotten that the financial crisis “world” is in fact the financial crisis enriched the North Atlantic.
As the United States, they have already acted and received a contribution, like Britain: it is not renewable. We do not know also if the tax st European renewable. It’s all part of the details that take care experts.
All this would be laughable if it does not show once again that Europe takes the wrong forum. To resolve its fiscal problems between Europe: will this bold Swiss cabbage (which recently approved the “transmission of information within the IRS) and other Monaco. From here to export this tax, there is not.
In fact, our partners in the G20 would love to hear how Europe has let deteriorate ratios Maastricht so nearly universal, how it took him six months to act, not without seriously disrupting global markets and on behalf of how confident they should believe that Europe-to-five-Presidents will have the leadership to prevent another crisis like the one it crosses. Diversion, it’s good. Take the other for fools, is a serious mistake.
I had dinner Sunday evening with the charge of economic planning in India: it is Europe that is troubling, not the taxation of banks. And he wondered how Europe can find the ability to renew itself and to impose fiscal discipline.
Daring to hope that the European delegation will provide more convincing explanations as an explanation for its global partners a global tax on banks is not justified in most of them.
The positives and negatives of payment protection insurance
There are a lot of different names associated with Payment Protection Insurance, PPI and Loan Protection Insurance are just a few. Basically, Payment Protection Insurance covers the policy holder if they become unable to work if they have been made redundant, have had an accident, or they have developed an illness. When looking at PPI policies, it is important to remember that they are all going to offer different positives and negatives as they are all different. It is not uncommon for Payment Protection Insurance to be sold alongside a credit card or a loan. If a person wishes to buy PPI on it’s own then this is still an option.
Mis-sold Payment Protection Insurance is a major problem with this type of policy. There are many reasons as to why this happens, most commonly because the customer does not understand what they are buying, or they did not know that they purchased the policy. There are also many other disputes surrounding Payment Protection Insurance, so much so that the selling of such policies has come under investigation by the Office of Fair Trading.
Fortunately, there are many other points that make a good argument for the positive side of Payment Protection Insurance. PPI is good for those in debt who are at risk of losing their job, for example. It can help greatly if you are in debt and at risk of having no source of income, and provide some much needed reassurance that as a policyholder, you will be protected. The most obvious advantage to having PPI is that you only have to make small payments in order to be protected.
There are, however, a few different things that need to be kept in mind when it comes to Payment Protection Insurance policies. For example, as with all insurance providers, the competition is fierce, so it would be wise to consider all options. This means that one provider may be able to offer you a much better deal than another, and one may have some benefits that another cannot offer you. This is why it is a good idea to make sure that you fully weigh out all of the different options that are available to you. By doing some thorough research you can make sure that you are not only getting a good deal, but also that you are not being mis-sold a policy that you do not want, and do not need.