Do You Search any stuff of Money?

Financial Market

2009-08-13T05:29:00.000-07:00

market in which funds are transferred from people who have an excess of available funds to people who have shortage.Financial markets such as the bond and stock markets are important in channeling funds from people who do not have a productive use for them to those who do, a process that results in greater economic efficiency.Activities in financial markets also have direct effects on personal wealth,the behavior of businesses and consumers,and the overall performance of the economy.

(From The Economics of Money,Banking,and Financial Markets,fifth edition,Frederic S Mishkin)

BANK DEAL AND CREDIT CARD DEAL

2009-06-22T20:58:00.000-07:00

All about free stuff of Bank in the world
klik :
FREE STUFF

Economic growth

2009-06-17T20:53:00.000-07:00

Economic growth is the increase in the amount of the goods and services produced by an economy over time.[1] It is conventionally measured as the percent rate of increase in real gross domestic product, or real GDP. Growth is usually calculated in real terms, i.e. inflation-adjusted terms, in order to net out the effect of inflation on the price of the goods and services produced. In economics, "economic growth" or "economic growth theory" typically refers to growth of potential output, i.e., production at "full employment," which is caused by growth in aggregate demand or observed output.

As an area of study, economic growth is generally distinguished from development economics. The former is primarily the study of how countries can advance their economies. The latter is the study of the economic aspects of the development process in low-income countries. As economic growth is measured as the annual percent change of gross domestic product (GDP), it has all the advantages and drawbacks of that measure.

GDP per capita is not the same thing as earnings per worker since GDP measures only monetary transactions for all final goods and services in country without regard to who receives that money. For example, in the US from 1990 to 2006 the earnings (adjusted for inflation) of individual workers, in private industry and services, increased by less than 0.5% per year while GDP (adjusted for inflation) increased about 3.6% per year over the same period.[2]
Source

Ahmadinejad's Achilles Heel: The Iranian Economy

2009-06-14T16:32:00.000-07:00

By Dr. Abbas Bakhtiar

Titus Livius (59 B.C.�A.D. 17) the Roman historian once said that men are only too clever at shifting blame from their own shoulders to those of others. These days Mr. Ahmadinejad, the man the West loves to hate, is in hot waters in Iran. He is blamed for almost everything that has gone wrong with Iran. Iranian newspapers and politicians of all colours are lining-up to criticize his leadership and economic policies. He is blamed for everything from shortage of dialysis machines in some clinics to high inflation and provocative speeches. Some politicians are even talking about impeaching not only some of his ministers, but also the president himself.

What a difference a year makes. It was in mid 2005 that Ahmadinejad won a land-slide victory (62%) in the presidential election. As a presidential candidate he had promised to improve the lives of the poor and the lower classes by "putting petroleum income on people's tables". His campaign motto was "it is possible and we can do it".

Son of a blacksmith, Ahmadinejad was the fourth child of a working class family with seven children. He was brought up in the rough and poor neighbourhoods of south Tehran. He is therefore familiar with the problems facing the poor families and has tried to fulfil his election promises to them by increasing the minimum wage (under pressure was later reversed), the pensions, consumer loans for low-income families, loans for small enterprises in underdeveloped regions, and other popular projects. He has also been travelling around the country approving construction projects and distributing largesse.

This lavish spending has increased the double digit inflation rate even more and has caused concerns among politicians and economists that his economic policies coupled with his hard-line stance on nuclear dispute and approach to foreign policy may damage the country. Some economists argue that while the country's economy is being pressured externally (sanctions), the government is spending money as though there were abundance of resources.

The Iranian senior economist Dr. Masoud Nili of Iran International points to an ever expanding government budget and increasing dependence on the oil revenues as a serious problem for the country. He argues that:

"in 1998, average oil price stood at 10.8 dollars per barrel and oil revenues grew fourfold in about 7 years. Meanwhile, state budget in 1998 was less than 71,000 billion rials, but Iran's budget for 2006 has been estimated at 600,000 billion rials; that is, while oil revenues have quadrupled over a 7-year period, state budget has increased eightfold during the same period.

Before 2002, government spent an average of 15 billion dollars in foreign exchange. The figure increased to 21 billion dollars in 2003, to 30 billion dollars in 2004, and to 36 billion dollars in 2005. It seems that the figure will reach 45 billion dol

The Third Economic Development Plan aimed at reducing government's dependence on oil revenues to less than 12 billion dollars, but it actually soared to more than 40 billion dollars in 2006. Therefore, the government's budget experienced such a great leap in 14 months from January 2005 to march 2006, when the government was determined to offer Majlis with a budget supplement. Considering this reality, one can conclude that the country witnessed one of its biggest financial developments in the Iranian year, 1385."[[1]]

As inflation is rapidly approaching critical levels, economists and politicians have began to sound the alarms. There are now open calls for impeachment of several government ministers and although not openly mentioned, the moderates and some conservatives would like nothing more than impeaching the president himself. The rallying cry for the opposition is "the economy"; a clever point of attack since they know that no president no matter how wise or prudent, can solve the existing economic problems of Iran without a comprehensive restructuring of the economy; something that many special interest groups and powerful economic entities are against. The following are some of the problems facing Iran.

Systemic Problems

Iran has a very young population. Almost 47 million of the nearly 70 million Iranians are bellow the age of 25. That is 67% of the population. Of this 47 million, 25 million are between 15 and 25 years old.

Theoretically, a country with abundant natural resources and a young educated workforce should have no problem in economically growing rapidly. Alas Iranian economy, like most other oil dependant economies, is to a very large extent government owned and controlled. Hence all the pressure on the economy automatically becomes political pressure on the government.

For instance, the inflationary policies of the current government is the direct result of the government's desire to reduce poverty and hence the growing inequality in Iran; which in itself is threatening not only the social fabric of the society but also the stability of the regime. In October 2006, the supreme leader of Iran Ayatollah Khamenei in a letter to the President and Cabinet demanded a reduction in the class gap. He stated that:

"Because of the class gap that has remained from former regime, now our country needs economic justice more than anything. The government should make profits more in this situation and move toward declared goals and mottos. The achievement of justice is too difficult and requires many preparations such as geographic and classic justice, justice in economic and cultural affairs, justice in substituting officials and granting responsibilities and justice in judgments. The execution of justice must be logically within the Islamic frame. According to article 44 and notes (A) & (B), the state should decrease its interferences in economy." [[2]]

But reducing poverty and the gap between the rich and poor in the current economic system is extremely difficult. In a normal liberal economic system the government's revenues come mostly from investments and taxes. Tax revenue is supposed to cover most of the government's budget. Tax coupled with social security is also an instrument of wealth distribution. But collecting taxes is something that requires a formal and transparent economy, not to mention information on who earns what. Iranian government can only collate information about what it's companies and some large corporations earn. The rest is a made up of series of guess works. For example, Bazzaries (Traditional merchants) seldom declare their true net worth or income to the authorities, and the authorities have no system of finding out the true income of these individuals and companies. Another problem is the informal economy. For example, major part of Tehran's economy, a city of almost 12-15 million people, runs on an informal, off-the-book system, making taxation extremely difficult. Then we have the various tax exempt charity foundations that are involved in almost all aspect of the economy.

Bonyads (Charity Foundations)

In Iran, by some estimates, the Bonyads (charity foundations) control over 30% of the economy and yet pay no taxes at all [[3]]. They are involved in everything from vast Soybean and cotton fields to hotels to soft drinks to auto-manufacturing to shipping lines to�.. These foundations represent vast economic empires that are neither taxed nor are directly under government control.

As charity organisations they are supposed to provide social services to the poor and the needy. Yet since there are over 100 of these organisations operating independently, the government doesn't know what, why, how and to whom this help and assistance is given. Lack of proper oversight and control of these foundations has also hampered the government's efforts in creating a comprehensive social security system in the country.

These organisations also compete with other private actors in the country. Private companies find it exceedingly difficult to compete with such large corporations, since they (Bonyads) have both the political and financial muscle to compete in any given market segment for as long as they like without considering the profitability of their ventures. These Bonyads, by their very presence, are hampering healthy economic competition and growth.

Subsidies

Another problem facing the government is the subsidies. Subsidies in general are either paid in cash (like food-stamp in US) or child support allowance in Norway, or are paid to the manufacturers of goods/services to reduce the actual prices of goods/services. In the former case, the subsidies are targeted at a particular group, such as unemployed or families with children. In the latter the subsidies cover the whole of the population. This means that a person, regardless of his/her financial situation will benefit from those subsidies.

One of the most pressing issues in Iran today is the mushrooming energy use and the amount of hard currency that is going into subsidies. The government imports over $7 billion dollars worth of petrol per year. Yet the price of a gallon of petrol is only 33 cents. This subsidy does nothing more than encourage smuggling of petrol to the neighbouring countries where prices are higher. It also removes any incentive for the consumers to save on their energy consumption. These subsidies also create an environment in which manufacturers become complacent and not only do not conserve energy in their production activities, but also do not try to build energy efficient appliances and machines; simply because their consumers do not pay attention to the product's energy consumption. Based on energy consumption, Iranian made cars, freezers, refrigerators, etc. will not be able to compete with the similar sized Japanese, American or European products.

Red Tape and Inefficiency

In Iran, if you want to do anything such as changing money at the bank or starting your own business or anything else for that matter, you have to fill-out many forms and spend hours going from office to office. Often a paper has to be signed by different individuals in different offices in different building in different areas of the town. One can easily spend several days trying to get different officials' signatures for anything from starting a business to getting a driving license.

Much of the government's information collection and processing is still paper-based and there are virtually mountains of files being kept in offices around the country. Computerisation is under-way, but for the time being millions of hours of people's time are being spent taking forms from offices to offices, increasing inefficiency, traffic and frustration.

Couple this kind of red tape with state owned industries and you get a sure way of turning billions into millions. Government run industries usually are less efficient than the privately owned industries. Couple this with political interference, nepotism, cronyism and general corruption and you get industries that produce goods and services of questionable quality at the highest possible prices. Since the losses are covered by the government, the pressure to improve is minimal. The losses are either covered through the budget or through loans by state owned banks. In other words, the funds that could have been made available for economic growth through the private sector, is tied-up in keeping inefficient and loss-making industries alive. For instance it is calculated that each year over one billion dollar worth of electricity is wasted due to the inefficiency of the Ministry of Energy.

"Some 30,000 Gigawatt hour electricity equal to the total electricity generation of some 30 Boushehr-like nuclear power plants is wasted annually in Iran. Some 18.5 percent of the electricity produced in Iran is wasted before it reaches to consumers due to technical problems and mismanagement in the Energy Ministry, a former supervisory body in the ministry told BAZTAB."[[4]]

Electricity wastage is not the only problem. Iranians use and waste water like never before. According to deputy head of Iran Water Resources Management Company for planning and economic affairs, Alireza Daemi, Iranians use almost double the amount of water as Europeans use. "It is no secret that water consumption level in Iranian metropolitan areas is higher than the average rate recorded for most developed cities in other parts of the world. For example, the per capita water consumption in European cities is 140 litres per day, while the related figure in Iran nears 300 litres. By raising public awareness on the cost of producing water, the government hopes to encourage people to rethink their consumption patterns. This is more like a cultural gesture. The UN Third-Millennium Development Goal for the water sector indicates that setting the value is one of the strategies for correcting water consumption models" Daemi further said that a major challenge for the government is to put in place optimum water consumption patterns in the household sector. "Potable water wastage in Iran is higher than the global rate, while the industrial sector is failing to properly manage its waste often allowing it to trickle down to rivers, causing irreparable damage to the environment." [[5]]

Corruption

Voltaire once said that when it's a question of money, everybody is of the same religion. When it comes to corruption Iranians are no different than Saudis, Egyptians, Americans or Norwegians. Religion of corruption is the same all over the world: money and power. Corruption is usually the result of three things, lack of transparency, lack of regulations or too many regulations. Paradoxically, you'll find all three conditions in Iran.

Transparency is vital in fighting corruption. In Norway for example, everyone's total declared income and taxes paid is available to the public. All government contracts are similarly open to scrutiny. Also at the end of every year, banks issue each of their customers an end of the year statement, detailing how much money they have in their account(s). The customer is required by law to declare that to the government. In such circumstances, it is very difficult for someone to earn anything without paying taxes or hiding how he/she earned that money in the first place. No one is exempt. I know how much the Norwegian prime minister earned last year and what his net worth is. Unless he uses dummy companies, keep cash under his mattress, or carry a suitcase of cash out of the country (not possible because of high security levels at the airports), he has no way of avoiding declaring his income. This and other rules and regulations limit the level of corruption in the country.

Norway is ranked 8th in Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index. Iran was ranked 105th out of 163. The most corrupt nation was Haiti (163rd). Iran's ranking or its Corruption Perception Index does not show any sign of improvement. In 2003 when Iran was first included in the list, it was ranked as the 78th out of 133 countries examined. In 2004 it was ranked the 87th out of 145. In 2005 it was ranked 88th out of 158 countries and in 2006 it occupied the unenviable 105th place.[[6]]

The lack of transparency is one of the most important problems facing Iran. Only through complete transparency in financial affairs of the government and Bonyads (charity foundations) that Iran can begin to clean itself of this scourge of corruption. Corruption increases inefficiencies and hampers economic growth. Corruption eats at the social fabric of the society, changing people's perception of important values such as honesty, loyalty and hard work.

Lack of financial regulations such as the ones described from Norway has allowed people to amass fortunes without anyone asking how these people have earned so much money in such a short time. Large sections of the economy (Bonyads) are beyond scrutiny. Other important sectors such as the traditional Bazzars are also opaque and often operate without proper supervision and regulations. There are virtually millions of people who do not pay taxes and hence operate outside the formal economy.

While lack of regulations has allowed individuals and chosen corporations to avoid taxes and scrutiny; the small private companies are being suffocated by myriad of paperwork and forms. In Iran, like in many other countries, it is the small companies that create the jobs and the economic growth. Yet they are being squeezed as never before. They have to deal with bureaucracy on one side and the competition from large, unregulated and supervised corporations on the other side. It is then not surprising to see that many choose to invest in real estate instead of manufacturing, transportation or farming. Getting necessary permissions, licences etc, is a nightmare. And god help you if you want to import components or raw materials necessary for your production.

Recently the Judiciary asked people (through advertisements) to report the wealth of the government officials to the said authority. [[7]] This financial scrutiny is based on the amended article 142 of the constitution, where the wealth of the Supreme Leader, the President, his cabinet members, other high officials and their families are to be examined by the judiciary both before and after their period in office. This is fine as long as the results are presented to the public.

Privatization

Iranian government is one of the biggest employers in Iran. It is involved in oil, gas, mining, construction, electricity generation, telecom, transportation and lots of other industries, many of which have not made any profits for a long time. These companies are a major burden on the government's budget and on the economy. Privatisation seems to have been accepted as a solution to the problem. That is until Ahmadinejad came to power.

Ahmadinejad's idea of privatisation was vastly different from the previous governments. He wants to distribute the shares of the companies equally between the people, while others would like to sell the companies to the highest bidders.

"The member of Tehran Chamber of Commerce (T.C.C.) representative board in an exclusive conversation with T.C.C. news site said: "The justice share is not a part of privatization. Maybe the result of division of 80 per cent of government share between people equally, is satisfactory but the people can not manage even 10 per cent of these shares because they have not expertise in management. So the government will manage the company again."

"The main purpose of privatization is the change of management to increase returns and create additional value in economy for more development", he added.

He said: "The government is against the privatization. The reason for delaying in this process is related to the reluctances of officials."

"The privatization is a double side process: the private sector that should invest in economy and purchase the companies, and government sector that should accept to delegate its properties. Now the government throws a monkey wrench into privatization process. The government must be restricted for investment and can only invest in especial field such as security and information ", he added." [[8]]

The problem with normal privatization in Iran is that majority of people do not have the money to participate in such auctions. Who has the money? The Bonyads and others who already have a stranglehold over the economy. Without proper laws and safeguards, privatization may lead to creation of huge monopolies in the country. We must not forget the Russian experience, where privatization was seen by the people as wholesale theft of the country's resources by a few individuals.

Privatization is the best solution for Iran, but it can only be done after a systemic revision of laws. Anti-monopoly laws have to be strengthened and some large state owned companies have to be broken into parts before privatization.

Government must also strengthen its social security services before any large scale privatisation can take place. Any privatisation will definitely lead to large scale lay-off of part of the work-force which can lead to social upheaval. The country is already suffering from high unemployment and under-employment. Any sudden increase without social safety net (such as unemployment benefits, retraining programs, etc) may well result in large scale protest against the government.

Prior to any privatization, government owned companies have to be turned into limited liability companies with government as the majority share-holder. These companies should then be managed like other private companies. When the proper social security system along with anti-monopoly laws are in place, then the shares of these companies can be sold to the public. It would not be a bad idea for the government to have a closer look at the Nordic system of privatization.

Conclusion

Iran with its tremendous natural resources and a young educated population has the potential to become an economic power house for the whole region. It has the potential to grow at 8 to 10 percent per year for the next two decades. Yet, year after year it grows at a mediocre rate and even that growth is dependent on the price of oil. The country suffers from lack of transparency, lack of regulations where it counts and over regulation and heavy bureaucracy where it isn't needed. In other words, Iran suffers from systemic problems that can not be addressed piecemeal. The current high inflation, unemployment, underemployment and corruption are symptoms of these systemic problems.

Ahmadinejad's economic policies certainly can be blamed for the current increasing inflation and unemployment. But he can not be blamed for everything that has gone wrong in Iran. Factionalism, push and pull from special economic interest groups, pervasive corruption, smuggling, bad management of state owned companies, badly planned subsidies, lack of comprehensive social security and health plan, lack of proper system for economic information collection and taxation are just a few of the problems that have existed long before Ahmadinejad became president.

The first step in the right direction is to improve the economic data collection system of the country. It is vitally important for the government to know who (individuals and corporations) earns what. Only through access to this information can the government create a workable taxing system. Only through this can the government begin to reduce corruption, target subsidies, reduce inequality and plan for the future.

The next step is to create a comprehensive social security system where people do not have to rely on charity foundations. These foundations have to be sold-off and the proceeds included in a social security fund for the country; other wise over time, these entities will become so powerful that they will become the effective rulers of the country.

The Iranian economy is now in stable condition going towards critical. As long as United States is threatening Iran, and with Iraq as an example of what can happen, people are willing to accept any kind of hardship. But once that threat is removed, people will demand an improvement in their standard of living, something that current economic system is unable to deliver. In the current economic environment, increasing salaries only increases inflation and unemployment.

The last three Iranian presidents have tried to tweak the system in various ways to optimise it without any success. They all had learned men advising them on the best way to manage this sick economy. Yet none succeeded. It is perhaps time for learning from others. The current learned people in Iran may be masters of squeezing all that is possible out of the current economic system, but that is not enough. It is time to change the economic system and try new things. It is perhaps time to become a learner again, for as Eric Hoffer (writer) once said "in times of change, learners inherit the Earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists."

About the Author: Dr. Abbas Bakhtiar lives in Norway. He is a management consultant and a contributing writer for many online journals. He's a former associate professor of Nordland University, Norway.

Copyright Abbas Bakhtiar, all rights reserved.

CARBON TRADING: GODAAN TREND BISNIS MILYARAN DOLLAR

2009-05-22T09:17:00.000-07:00

Dalam kurun waktu kurang dari lima tahun, carbon trading atau perdagangan karbon sudah memutar milyaran dollar AS di pasar karbon. Sebuah tren bisnis baru dengan semangat menjaga lingkungan atau upaya cuci dosa?

Perdagangan karbon muncul setelah Protokol Kyoto yang melibatkan 169 negara mengikat secara hukum di tahun 2005. Perjanjian ini mewajibkannegara industri mengurangi emisi Gas Rumah Kaca (GRK) mereka sebanyak 5,2% di bawah kadar yang mereka lepaskan pada tahun 1990 dalam kurun waktu 5 tahun (mulai 2008-2012).

Setelah melalui perdebatan panjang, Protokol Kyoto menyetujui tiga mekanisme lentur untuk membantu negara industri menekan emisi, yaitu: Implementasi Bersama (Joint Implementation/JI), Perdagangan Emisi (Emission Trading/ET) dan Mekanisme Pembangunan Bersih (Clean Development Mechanism/CDM)

Di bawah peraturan Protokol Kyoto inilah pasar karbon terbesar di dunia lahir. Secara sederhana, laju emisi gas rumah kaca yang dihasilkan, bisa diturunkan dengan cara membeli kredit karbon atau membayar proyek yang mengurangi, menetralisir atau menyerap emisi gas rumah kaca, melalui lembaran sertifikat semacam surat berharga yang beredar di pasar karbon. Karbon disini merujuk kepada enam gas rumah kaca yang dianggap mempunyai peran besar dalam pemanasan global, yaitu karbondioksida (CO), metana (CH), nitrogen oksida (NO), hidrofluorokarbon (HFCs), perfluorokarbon (PFCs) dan sulfur hexaflourida (SF6).

Sejak upaya penurunan emisi gas rumah kaca menjadi kewajiban, bisnis karbon tumbuh menjadi sebuah komoditas baru yang sangat menjanjikan. Tingginya permintaan kredit karbon dari negara industri diikuti dengan tren kampanye pemanasan global yang telah menggaet Nobel dan Piala Oscar, membuat sertifikat karbon ini laris manis.

Mulai dari perusahaan-perusahaan di negara Eropa yang terikat perjanjian, bank besar macam HSBC yang menyatakan diri ‘carbon neutral’ dengan mengalokasikan 7 juta dolar AS dalam pasar karbon, sampai Grup Rolling Stones yang membeli kredit secara sukarela demi menjaga image.

Sebuah agen perjalanan di Inggris bahkan menciptakan kalkulator online yang bisa menghitung berapa banyak CO2 yang kita hasilkan selama perjalanan dengan pesawat. Kalkulator ini terhubung dengan salah satu pusat manajemen karbon yang menggelitik niat baik penumpang untuk mengganti emisi mereka dengan harga 4,5 poundsterling per ton karbon.

Barclays Capital, salah satu perusahaan investasi terbesar di Inggris, menyatakan bahwa perdagangan karbon bisa menjadi perdagangan terbesar di dunia dengan ET sebagai segmen tercepatnya. Transaksi mereka sudah mencapai 30 milyar dollar AS. Kini mereka menargetkan 1 triliun dollar AS dalam 10 tahun mendatang.

Deutsche Bank menyatakan bahwa usaha mencegah pemanasan global sudah menjadi sebuah kesempatan investasi megatren yang menggoda. “Percaya atau tidak, pasar-pasar investasi telah diciptakan dan investasi ini akan tumbuh secara signifikan sampai 20-30 tahun yang akan datang,” kata Mark Fulton, Kepala Strategic Planning and Climate Change Strategist Deutsche Bank. Bank ini sudah menarik 6 milyar euro dalam transaksi karbon dan memprediksi transaksi sebesar 60 milyar euro per tahun akan menguasai pasar karbon Eropa di tahun 2013.

Para pemain besar perdagangan karbon itu pun memancangkan kaki di Indonesia. Tapi karena Indonesia adalah negara berkembang, mekanisme perdagangan karbon ala Protokol Kyoto yang bisa diterapkan adalah melalui CDM atau Mekanisme Pembangunan Bersih (lihat boks). EcoSecurities misalnya, yang dinyatakan sebagai perusahaan carbon trading terbaik 2006, membuka kantor cabangnya di Indonesia tahun lalu. “Idenya adalah memberi nilai moneter dalam usaha perbaikan lingkungan,” kata Agus P. Sari, Country Director Ecosecurities Indonesia. “Konservasi lingkungan dianggap biaya dan beban selama ini. Dengan mekanisme CDM, pengelolaan lingkungan menjadi aset berharga.”

Ecosecurities bekerjasama dengan peternakan sapi AustAsia Lampung Bekri. Limbah kotoran sapi dibuatkan instalasi pengolahan dengan sistem bilas ke kolam fermentasi yang diperkirakan menurunkan emisi 25.000 ton CO2e per tahun, atau setara dengan 25.000 lembar sertifikat karbon. Pemilik peternakan sudah terikat penjanjian untuk menjual sertifikat dengan harga kesepakatan. Sertifikat ini akan dijual lebih tinggi di pasar karbon oleh Ecosecurities.

Saat ini sedikitnya ada 24 proyek berbasis CDM yang telah disetujui Komnas CDM dan telah diverifikasi serta divalidasi badan validator independen yang ditunjuk PBB.

Proyek-proyek ini menyangkut sektor energi alternatif seperti kompor tenaga matahari yang diajukan PT. Petromat Agrotech, biogas yang diolah PT. Indotirta Suaka Bulan dari kotoran babi, listrik yang dihasilkan dari pengelolaan sampah kota Pontianak yang dilakukan PT. Gikoko Kogyo Indonesia atau proyek pembangkit listrik mikrohidro yang diinvestasikan PT. Indonesia Power dan PT. Fajar Futura. Dari proyek-proyek CDM ini, Indonesia bisa meraup laba antara 81,5 juta sampai 1,26 milyar dollar AS.

Indonesia juga giat melirik pasar karbon sukarela atau voluntary carbon market, untuk proyek-proyek yang tidak bisa masuk ke pasar dengan skema CDM. Seperti yang dilakukan Kabupaten Manilau-Kalimantan Timur dan Yayasan Borneo Tropical Rain Forest, yang memasukkan kawasan hutan lindung seluas 325.041,6 hektar pada kesepakatan dengan Global Eco Rescue, dengan harga 1 euro per hektar.

Kabar gembira? Tunggu dulu. Carbon trading memang menggoda. Namun perlu diingat bahwa mekanisme ini diciptakan untuk memperbaiki efek pemanasan global, bukan sekedar bisnis yang ujung-ujungnya duit, apalagi membuat diri merasa bersih setelah mencuci dosa dengan cara membayar.

Dikutup dari : Suara Baru, Edisi November-Desember 2007

How Free Should a Free Market Be?

2009-04-27T22:16:00.000-07:00

For nearly a generation, the United States has driven growth by deregulating markets, lowering tax rates and promoting trade. Across wide swaths of the economy — from airlines to banks to energy to telecommunications — Washington stood aside, believing less regulation would produce broad prosperity, even at the cost of greater income inequality.

Now, with Washington setting aside $700 billion to bail out financial companies, the economy weakening daily and the Democrats likely to enlarge their majorities in Congress, it may seem that the United States is shifting away from faith in markets and distrust of government.

In Europe, some political leaders, including conservatives like President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, have declared the death of laissez-faire economics. “A certain idea of globalization is drawing to a close with the end of a financial capitalism that imposed its logic on the whole economy,” Mr. Sarkozy said last month. “The idea that the markets are always right was a crazy idea.”

What about America? In one sense, the present crisis would seem likely to continue the retreat from the free-market ideas associated with Ronald Reagan and President Bush suggested by the passage of the Medicare drug benefit plan in 2003 and the failure of Mr. Bush’s proposal to privatize Social Security in 2005, the centerpiece of his vision of an “ownership society.” Then, in 2006, Democrats took Congress for the first time in 12 years.

Whoever becomes president in January, lawmakers will be under pressure to strengthen financial regulation and give more resources to agencies like the Food and Drug Administration, which have appeared overwhelmed in recent years. Some critics of the bailout legislation complain, for instance, that at the same time that it empowers the Treasury Department to buy hundreds of billions in troubled debt from financial firms, it fails to fortify oversight of the nation’s financial system.

But Americans are fundamentally suspicious of government in a way that Europeans are not, a cultural and political difference that stretches back centuries. Anyone expecting a major expansion of Washington’s powers after November — whether under a Barack Obama or John McCain administration — may be disappointed.

Americans are certainly weary of Mr. Bush, whose approval rating fell to 22 percent in the most recent poll by CBS News, the lowest rating for any president since Harry S. Truman in 1952. But this poll, and others, also show that whatever their anger at Mr. Bush and Wall Street, Americans are not necessarily ready to embrace liberal ideals such as stronger unions, significantly higher and more progressive taxes, and new trade barriers.

A deep, long-lasting recession could change that dynamic, just as the inflation and severe recessions of the 1970s fueled the last major ideological shift in American politics with the election in 1980 of Mr. Reagan, a fervent apostle of lower taxes, free markets and deregulation.

But for now, the United States economy is far stronger than it was in the 1970s. The credit crunch, swooning stock market and rising unemployment are frightening, but economists are still predicting a relatively mild recession. The unemployment rate, for example, has risen from 4.4 percent in March 2007 to 6.1 percent at the end of September, but it is far below the post-World War II peak of 10.8 percent in November 1982. And while the Standard & Poor’s 500 index of big stocks has fallen by nearly 30 percent since its peak in 2007, it had dropped nearly 50 percent between 2000 and 2002.

The relatively mild recessions of 1990 and 2001 did not shake Americans’ faith in free-market principles, said Robert D. Reischauer, president of the non-partisan Urban Institute. Mr. Reischauer directed the Congressional Budget Office between 1989 and 1994, when Democrats controlled Congress. Similarly, this recession will probably not produce a major shift, unless it turns out to be much longer and more severe than economists expect, Mr. Reischauer said.

“We’re basically a conservative country,” he said. “And one would expect that to be the case when one has as much stuff as we have to conserve.”

Doug Schoen, a Democratic strategist and pollster who worked for President Bill Clinton for six years, said that should Mr. Obama win next month, he should not mistake his election for a mandate for sharply higher taxes on the wealthy or major government expansion. “The polling I’ve done shows that people are anti-Republican, not pro-left, not pro-redistribution,” he said. “They’re ever more skeptical of Washington.”

For example, in the poll by CBS News released earlier this week, 44 percent of Americans said businesses now faced “too much” or “the right amount” of regulation, compared to 43 percent who said they faced too little. In a New York Times/CBS News Poll in September, 42 percent said Mr. Bush’s tax cuts, which overwhelmingly benefit the wealthy, should be made permanent, while 36 percent said they should be allowed to expire over the next several years.

Most strikingly, 34 percent described themselves as conservative, compared to only 20 percent as liberal. Those figures have hardly changed since September 2000, when 32 percent described themselves as conservative and 20 percent as liberal.

Newt Gingrich, the former Republican speaker of the House, said the financial crisis has benefited Mr. Obama and Democratic Congressional candidates. But Mr. Gingrich added that if Mr. Obama is elected and presses too hard for liberal policies, Democrats may be repudiated by voters in 2010, just as they were in 1994, two years after Mr. Clinton was elected president and offered proposals for national health insurance and higher energy taxes that failed in Congress.

By ALEX BERENSON

Gannett Restricting Employees from Social Network Use?like facebook or twitter?

2009-04-27T04:14:00.000-07:00

Update: The original title of this article was "USA Today Publisher Restricting Employees from Using Social Networks?" USA Today called WebProNews requesting a change because it made it look like USA Today itself was discouraging social media use, which is apparently not the case.

"I can't speak for the posting on Gannett Blog, but I can say that we at USA TODAY have been working extensively on our social networking efforts," says USA Today Communications Manager Alexandra Nicholson. "USA TODAY was the first national newspaper to offer reader comments, and we continue to expand our community tools by allowing readers to communicate with each other directly, add 'friends' through USATODAY.com and through social networking tools like Facebook Connect. Additionally USA TODAY has recently launched a series of moderated communities targeted specifically to our readers, this includes a recent MMA community launch.

Get the most from your free mortgage quote

2009-04-17T21:23:00.000-07:00

There are dozens of Web sites that offer free mortgage quotes, but only a fraction of them are reputable. Often, they are just firms trying to turn a quick buck or are taking advantage of people with predatory mortgages. This site is intended to serve as a guide for those who want a free mortgage quote from reputable providers, without all the hassles.

Debt Management - Harrington Brooks helps with debt management services. The consultants will try to negotiate with creditors on your behalf so that you can make affordable monthly payments and clear your debt.

Feedback

This site is a work in progress, and we welcome your feedback. Email us at info@freemortgagequoteguide.com with questions or comments.

How To Get The Best Commercial Insurance Quotes In The United Kingdom

2009-04-05T11:21:00.001-07:00

COMMERCIAL insurance is a competitive market in the United Kingdom with hundreds of insurance providers vying for business. In such a situation, how will you go about getting the insurance your business requires at the best price? Well, there is no rule of thumb in this, but the following sources can be helpful.

UK Commercial: This is an internet-based service that provides commercial and business insurance quotes. It provides a long list of sectors, and you have to click on the sector relevant to you. This opens up a page providing useful information pertaining to your sector. It also provides a form for you to fill and submit online. Once you have done this, a commercial insurance representative will revert to you with quotes and advice.

Quoteline Direct: This service provider is authorized and regulated by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) and has been in business for more than 30 years. Some of the most reputed commercial insurance companies converge on this online resource. These companies offer cover against risks faced by small businesses, wholesalers, and manufacturers. You select your business category, and complete and submit an online form to get an accurate quote.

Insurance Expert: Here, you have to enter your post code to get a list of commercial insurance brokers in, or nearest to, your area. The list will include their telephone numbers, street address and a roadmap to their office. You can browse for brokers on the basis of your specific trade. Then, you contact the broker/s of your choice and negotiate directly with them.

Insurance Now: This is a place where independent insurance intermediaries meet. It has a business insurance directory plus information for your guidance. You can get a customized quote if your business is one of the following: construction, building, consultants, surveyors, entertainment, leisure, general trades, health, beauty, professional and retail. It also provides links to intermediary agencies.

UK Net Guide: This has 14 sections, of which one is money and finance. A sub-section of 'money and finance' is insurance. From here, you can obtain instant business and commercial insurance quotes. It also lists 75 commercial insurance and brokers whom you can get in touch with.

To conclude, there are many ways of going about getting the best quotes for your business and commercial insurance needs. The rule is: don't take any one insurance service provider's quote. Get at least three quotes and choose for the best. Insurance is a highly regulated industry; so there is little chance that anyone can cheat you if you exercise the minimum caution such as getting deals in writings and paying only by cheque.

Webmaster
http://www.insurancesos.co.uk

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Sabyasachi_Ganguly

Commercial Insurance Quotes

2009-04-05T11:11:00.000-07:00

Insurance Quotes, Save Money When Shopping Online

In times of a recession threat, everyone is looking for ways to save money. And insurance premiums are one area you can cut costs immediately. However, most people don't shop their insurance because of the time and hassle.

Well not any more, with the advent of the internet you can simply go to your pc, open a browser, go to a search engine like Google and perform a search for the Commercial Insurance Quotes or what ever insurance type you are looking for. The search engine will return results of numerous websites where as you can log on to and request multiple insurance quotes by completing one simple form.

You can read about many different types of business insurance or personal insurances such as workers compensation, business auto, commercial property, general liability , personal auto, home owners, individual life insurance and health insurance.

Many have insurance terminology / definition sections so you can better understand the language used within an insurance policy. Find links to other insurance related resources categorized by state, websites like the specific states Department of Insurance.

Visitors can surf around the easy to navigate site and after determining what type of insurance they need, they can simply click the "Get Quoted" button found on each page, complete the short form and submit their insurance quote request, it's really that easy. Agents and Brokers will contact the visitor with quotes as requested.

All the time and hassle that used to be required when shopping insurance has now been done away with. No more sitting on the phone, calling from place to place to get multiple quotes so you can compare and be sure you are not over paying.

You simple submit one short form and wait for multiple quotes to be sent to you via email or fax, however you request. done at your convenience, from your home or office computer any time of day, 7 days a week.

Please keep in mind that when submitting insurance quote requests via the internet, ultimately, real people will be providing you with the services you requested and that it will take a little time (up to 72 hours) before an agent or broker contacts you, so please be patient. For example, if you request an insurance quote on Friday evening, unless there is an agency open on Saturday or Sunday, you most likely will not hear from anyone until Monday.

Dean A. Markham, Global Marketing Strategies, Internet Marketing, Online Business Promotion - http://www.ebiz-strategies.com internet business money making strategies.

Check us out - All Insurance Quotes http://www.iquoted.us commercial insurance quotes.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Dean_Markham

China to tighten regulation of loan guarantee service: State Council

2009-04-04T03:19:00.000-07:00

Iflove Press Center proudly presents, China to tighten regulation of loan guarantee service: State Council. Hot news highly recommended by Emily Cici the Lovely Girl. Updated Date:2009-2-10 13:23:59 - within the China News category, from the News channel - Iflove News Spokesman.

Hello dear , here you'll have the chance to peruse the beautiful verses by and enjoy the new sentiment from our professional reporters and correspondents. China News news coverage specially reporting by Iflove Press Centre, with great thanks to Jenny Eastwood from Golden Sea, Western Atlantic. A News story, for a smarter and clever you to read and study. You'll learn Chinese and Western culture, and the latest news of USA and the world, covering politics, finance, sports, games and travel. OK now, coming next, review the artile: China to tighten regulation of loan guarantee service: State Council

Iflove Press Center: News > China News > China to tighten regulation of loan guarantee service: State Council: BEIJING, Feb. 9 (Xinhua) -- China will establish a ministry-level joint meeting on the management and supervision of loan guarantee services, according to a circular from the general office of the State Council (cabinet) Monday.

The joint meeting will formulate policies to promote the development of loan guarantee services, set up a management and supervision system for such services and direct local governments to undertake supervision and risk management.

The government ordered local governments to take measures in line with local conditions to ease financing difficulties for small and medium-sized enterprises, the circular said.

Many borrowers in China use the services of guarantors, who charge fees for their participation.

The meeting will make regulations that cover how loan guarantors are established, how much they can lend and how they will be supervised. The regulations should be submitted to the State Council for approval.

The joint meeting is being organized by the China Banking Regulatory Commission, with the National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the Ministry of Finance, the People"s Bank of China (central bank),the State Administration for Industry and Commerce and the Legislative Affairs Office of the State Council.

How Philadelphia’s Bailout Model Influences Obama’s Plan: Who Will it Help?

2009-04-03T08:50:00.000-07:00

by: Patricia Payne

If you are having trouble keeping your home out of foreclosure, and your lender is offering you no help in restructuring your mortgage, you may qualify for court mediation. Through the new national economic stimulus plan, judges can act as a mediator between you and your lender to arrange a win/win solution – which will allow you to keep your home, while your mortgage company continues making money on their investment.

Obama’s Plan, Derived from the City of Brotherly Love

Before newly elected President Barack Obama pushed through an economic stimulus plan in Congress, which included $75 billion in funds to help prevent foreclosure on millions of American homes, the City of Brotherly Love implemented a similar plan to aid the city’s residents suffering eminent foreclosure. The Philadelphia Mortgage Foreclosure Protection Program (MFPP) was enacted in 2008 by Mayor Michael Nutter. The hope was to offer a number of initiatives to battle the many foreclosures that were occurring in the city.

How the Philadelphia Bailout Plan Worked

The MFPP stipulated that all homes in foreclosure approaching a sheriff’s sale stage would be considered for loan modification. The government intervention paid to appropriately train 100 pro bono attorneys who were willing to donate their time to help Philadelphia residents find ways to keep their homes. The resulting meetings between homeowners and lenders either found ways to modify the loan so that the borrower could keep the home, or “gracefully exit” by a smooth foreclosure transition.

What was the outcome? Though about 20% of homeowners who went through the intermediation process ended up losing their homes due to insufficient income, credit issues, or other financial failings, many more homeowners and lenders worked together to find a solution to keep the mortgage current and homeowners in their homes.

Translating Philadelphia’s Success to the Entire Nation

These statistics were attractive to then President-Elect Obama when Nutter approached him with the details of the Philadelphia plan in December 2008. Obama’s economic team modeled the current judicial intervention after the successful Philadelphia MFPP. Not only does the model work within the national stimulus plan, but other cities around the country are following suit with similar plans. Boston, Pittsburgh, and even the entire state of New Jersey are enacting plans to help homeowners find ways to keep their homes and prevent foreclosure through judicial intervention.

Now with the stimulus plan signed into law by President Obama in February 2009, the availability of help to hold back the tide of foreclosure proceedings is a breath of fresh air to millions of American homeowners. Through a national call center, homeowners can contact representatives that can set up a plan to get lenders and borrowers together to work out a deal in front of a judge. The mortgage bailout plan includes incentives for lenders to negotiate, restructure the existing mortgage, and continue to service it without default.

If you are a homeowner behind on your mortgage payment, be sure to take advantage of the help created by the trailblazers in Philadelphia. With the help of a judicial intervention, you could keep your home and your mortgage.

This article is intended for general information. Always seek sound financial and legal advice before making any financial decision.

How Do I Handle an Upside Down Home Loan?

2009-04-03T08:49:00.000-07:00

by: Patricia Payne

Homeowners across the country are finding that their home values are plummeting. Some are so low that their actual present home value is less than what they actually owe on their mortgage. In this scenario, their mortgage is considered to be “upside down.” If you are in a similar situation where you are upside down and have negative equity in your mortgage, there are options for you.

How an Upside Down Loan Arises

First, how does a home enter into a negative equity situation? Usually this happens when homes have a high leverage. This means that you, as an owner, have loans that equal almost or as much as 100% of your home’s value.

Most lenders are capable of approving high-leverage loans on homes because of the assumption that real estate, on average, continues to appreciate about 3% to 5% every year. Note that the average appreciation is calculated over many years, during which there will be periods of appreciation and small periods of deflation. Over the last few years, we have seen a dramatic depreciation of home values. Though some home values have dropped, it is expected that they will once again see appreciated value within a few years.

What Should You Do with a Negative Equity Loan?

If you are a current homeowner with depreciated property value and an upside down equity in your mortgage, should you just walk away and let your home be repossessed and foreclosed by the lender?

The best strategy for any homeowner is to continue making your mortgage payment no matter how hard it is financially. This keeps you in good standing with your lender and prevents your credit history from becoming marred.

You could also refinance. Interest rates have been dropping every month as the Federal Reserve continues to lower the federal interest rate near zero. This is a good time for a homeowner to get a great interest rate on a new loan that can help drop monthly payments to more affordable levels. However, refinancing a home in an upside down status may require additional monies up front in order to lower the loan balance to match the current home appraisal value. If you can provide these funds, you could save hundreds of dollars on your mortgage payment with a new refinance.

However, if you are in an extreme financial crisis and cannot meet your monthly mortgage obligation, is it best to just let your home foreclose? A foreclosure will be a part of your credit record for the next 8 to 10 years and can prevent you from obtaining another home loan during that time. Your credit rating can also affect your ability to obtain credit cards, personal loans, an apartment rental agreement, and even a job.

If there is absolutely no way to continue making payments and you must get out of your mortgage, ask your lender to agree to a “short sale.” A short sale is where your lender allows you to sell your home for whatever market price you can get, and they will agree to write off the negative balance after you give them the proceeds from the sale. Though you walk away from your home and get nothing in equity value, you end up owing your lender nothing and your credit history is safe.

Walking away from your home is one of the most difficult decisions you have to make. Be sure to talk with your lender to discuss your options before you allow foreclosure to affect you.

This article is intended for general information. Always seek sound financial and legal advice before making any financial decision.

How to Protect Your Mortgage Against Potential Job Loss

2009-04-03T08:48:00.000-07:00

by: Patricia Payne

Are you one of the millions of Americans who fear that company cutbacks may cause you to lose your job? With the national unemployment rate at the highest in 26 years, touching 8.1% in March of 2009, it is expected that millions of more Americans will lose their jobs this year before the economy gets better.

Though you may not be able to predict the stability of your job, what can you do now to protect your income and mortgage if a layoff occurs for you?

Contribute to Savings

Many individuals and families with good jobs and a mortgage do not have an emergency savings account set in place. What a tragedy that can be if a sudden loss of regular income occurs! To protect yourself and your family from a financial crisis, you should have a savings account set up with at least three, and ideally six, months of living expenses. That means you should look at your monthly budget and determine what basic costs you will incur, such as your house payment, groceries, car payment, etc.

If you have a little savings or no savings at all, start now. Open a savings account at your bank that you contribute money into each month. The more you can cut back now and put into savings, the better you will feel if you are suddenly laid off from work.

Buy Mortgage Insurance

Mortgage insurance is available that can help you pay your mortgage while you are unemployed. However, don’t confuse mortgage insurance with Private Mortgage Insurance (PMI). PMI is a type of insurance you may be required to pay for each month with your regular mortgage payment. PMI protects your lender and pays them the balance of your loan in the event you default. This is for the sole benefit of your lender and doesn’t help you prevent foreclosure.

Find an insurance agent that sells mortgage insurance. The type of policy you need is one that will take over all or a portion of your mortgage payment should you become disabled or find yourself unemployed due to layoffs. Premiums may be high, but the alternative could be a more expensive foreclosure if you are out of a job.

Find a Layoff Insurance Program

Many financial groups in many states offer “layoff insurance.” This type of income loss protection can help you pay your mortgage if you become financially unable to meet your mortgage obligation. However, you will usually be required to pay premiums for at least six to 12 months before you can file a claim. There may be other restrictions as well, such as a cap limit on the amount that the group will pay each month (i.e. meeting the principal and interest payment only and no tax escrow), and a limit on how long they will make your payment.

Groups that offer this benefit are not insurance companies, and thus, are not regulated by state insurance commissions in terms of financial reserves. Beware of groups who offer this type of benefit but are financially unable to pay claims.

This article is intended for general information. Always seek sound financial and legal advice before making any financial decision.

What Are the Options For Loan Restructuring If You Lose Your Job?

2009-04-03T08:46:00.000-07:00

by: Patricia Payne

National jobless figures released in March 2009 have revealed that the national unemployment rate stands now at 8.1 percent – which is the highest it has been in 26 years. Among those recently laid off or unemployed are millions of homeowners who still have to meet a monthly mortgage obligation, regardless of their job status. But is there something that a mortgage lender can do to help the unemployed during this economic crisis?

Mortgage lenders are usually willing to work with a borrower during a financial hardship, and all one has to do is ask. Rather than face the extreme expense of foreclosure on a home, a mortgage lender may offer some type of temporary adjustment, moratorium, forbearance, or even a permanent loan modification to help keep a borrower’s loan current and out of default.

Interest Only Payments

One option a lender has is to agree that a borrower may make interest-only payments for a temporary time period. Depending on how long you have been paying on an amortized mortgage, you could save hundreds per month by paying only the accrued interest on your principal balance. If you just acquired a 30-yr mortgage last year, however, don’t expect to save much since most of your monthly payment still applies mostly to interest.

Forbearance

A mortgage lender may opt to simply grant you forbearance on your required monthly mortgage payment for a limited time, usually three to six months. However, with this option, you can be sure that interest will still accrue and be added to your principal balance. By agreeing to forbearance, you will probably add more payments to the back end of your mortgage.

Full Loan Modification

If you qualify, you could even reduce your permanent mortgage payment through a loan modification with a lower interest rate, extended term, etc. Understand, however, that in order to qualify for a lower monthly payment modification, you must be able to meet the underwriting requirements and have a regular income that affords you to make that monthly obligation. Unemployed individuals and families with no regular income may not qualify for a full loan modification.

Following Citigroup’s Footsteps

Lenders could follow the leadership of Citigroup Inc., who in March of 2009 announced that it was helping suffering homeowners who have lost their jobs. Citigroup determined to temporarily lower mortgage payments to around an average of $500 for qualified borrowers who have recently suffered a job loss and are two months or more behind on their mortgage payment. While qualified homeowners are paying the lower monthly payment, all interest and penalties will be waived. The mortgage payment reduction is only good for three months, but should give jobless homeowners a good head start in getting back on their feet.

Unemployment has hit millions of Americans. The residual effects of getting laid off and not having a job means additional stress of meeting mortgage obligations. If you have lost your job, be sure to contact your lender right away so they can begin working with you on a solution.

This article is intended for general information. Always seek sound financial and legal advice before making any financial decision.

Do You Qualify for the New Mortgage Refinance or Loan Modification Program? Find Out!

2009-04-03T08:44:00.000-07:00

by: Russell Benjamin

Making Home Affordable is a new government program designed to help keep people in their homes by lowering monthly mortgage payments for qualifying homeowners. The plan is projected to help somewhere between 7 and 9 million homeowners all across the United States by either refinancing or modifying their mortgage. Do you qualify for the Making Home Affordable program?

There are a few simple questions that will help determine if you are eligible to participate in the Making Home Affordable program. There are two different parts to the Making Home Affordable program, the mortgage refinance and the loan modification.

The Making Home Affordable refinance program targets homeowners who are current on their mortgages, but are currently unable to refinance to a lower rate due to a drop in the value of their home. This plan targets those homeowners who have loans held by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac and whose owe approximately the same or less than the current home value. Here is a quick set of questions to see if you qualify for the Making Home Affordable refinance program:

1. Is your home your primary residence?

2. Do you have a Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac loan? If you are not sure, you can find out if you have a Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae loan.

3. Are you current on your mortgage payments? Current means that you have not been more than 30 days late on your mortgage payment over the past 12 months.

4. Do you believe that the amount you owe on your first mortgage is about the same or less than the current value of your house?

If you answered yes to all four of these questions, then you may be eligible for the Making Home Affordable refinance program. You can find out more about the mortgage refinance program at http://www.makinghomemortgageaffordable.com.

If you answered no to any of these questions, then you will want to find out if you qualify for the second part of the Making Home Affordable - the loan modification plan. This plan is for homeowners who can no longer afford their mortgage payments due to an increase in interest rates, a decrease in their income, or a financial hardship such as medical expenses. This plan works for those who are current on their mortgage, or those who are behind on their mortgages. Here are four basic questions that will help to determine if you may be eligible for the loan modification plan:

1. Is your home your primary residence?

2. Is the amount you owe on your first mortgage equal to or less than $729,750?

3. Are you having trouble paying your mortgage? For example, have you had a significant increase in your mortgage payment OR reduction in your income since you got your current loan OR have you suffered a hardship that has increased your expenses (like medical bills)?

4. Did you get your current mortgage before January 1, 2009?

If you answered yes to all four of these questions, then you may be eligible for the Making Home Affordable loan modification program. Find out more about the Making Home Affordable loan modification program at http://www.makinghomemortgageaffordable.com. If you answered no to any of these questions, then you still have some options available for avoiding a foreclosure.

You can find out more by visiting the Making Home Mortgage Affordable website, the number one informational resource on the Making Home Affordable program.

Romania gets IMF emergency loan

2009-03-30T23:06:00.000-07:00

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and other lenders have agreed in principle to provide Romania 20bn euros (£18.4bn; $27bn) in aid.

The IMF will lend 12.95bn euros, the European Union will provide 5bn euros and the World Bank will lend 1bn euros.

The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) is to invest up to 1bn euros in Romania over two years.

Romania is the third EU nation to be given IMF aid recently, after loans were given to Latvia and Hungary.

The latest IMF economic program has been agreed by its staff mission, but needs approval from the executive board and management.

Similarly the World Bank needs to agree its part of the deal and the European Commission must approve its contribution.

'Perception'

The IMF said core measures under the plan are aimed at "strengthening fiscal policy further to reduce the government's financing needs and improve long term sustainability, thus preparing Romania for eventual entry into the eurozone".

BBC correspondent Oana Lungescu said: "In just a few months, Romania's economic fate has turned.

"From a country which last year registered the EU's highest growth rate, it is now shedding thousands of jobs mainly in the car and steel sectors, and facing the collapse of a property boom."

Following the IMF announcement, Ionut Dumitru of Raiffeisen Bank said: "This is very good news for Romania because the sum covers entirely the financing gap."

"I expect the first impact of it would be an improvement of foreign investors' perception towards the country."

The EBRD said about half of its loan would be dedicated to the financial sector, with the remainder invested across the broader economy, including in the corporate, energy and energy efficiency and national and municipal infrastructure sectors.

BBC.uk

Europe won't boost stimulus on U.S. demand

2009-03-28T01:08:00.001-07:00

Wednesday 25 March 2009 09:28:35 - Breaking News - Source: Reuters Reuters

PARIS (Reuters) - Europe is not prepared to boost spending beyond stimulus measures that have already been announced, even if it is requested to do so by the United States, Eurogroup head Jean-Claude Juncker said on Wednesday.

"The European stimulus plans are strong, they are demanding and they are significant in terms of volume and quality," Juncker, who chairs the group representing finance ministers of the euro zone, told Europe 1 radio.

"There is no question that, upon the demand of the United States, that we would increase it," he said.

In an article published around the world on Tuesday, U.S. President Barack Obama called on leading economies to enact robust stimulus spending, repair credit markets and extend aid to poor countries when Group of 20 leaders meet in London late next week.

Juncker, who is also prime minister of Luxembourg, said total spending on stimulus measures and assistance to the stricken banking sector amounted to around three percent of European gross domestic product.

The stimulus packages of European countries had been coordinated though perhaps not as much as they could have been, but there had been no blatant contradictions among member states, he said.

Juncker's comments came as IMF chief economist Olivier Blanchard told French daily Les Echos that there was still room for countries to boost spending to combat the crisis and that countries like France could do more.

Governments should in theory be rolling out as many economic stimulus measures as possible while also respecting budgetary concerns over the medium term so as not to spook financial markets, Blanchard said.

Turning to the G20 meeting, Juncker said government leaders were obliged to come out with concrete steps and rules to ensure that no area within the financial sphere could evolve without surveillance.

European leaders had the mandate to tell the United States that while there should be economic stimulus, there should also be a new global financial framework, he said.

On prospects for global growth, Juncker said he envisaged a tentative recovery from around the end of 2010.

"I think that the recovery will not return before the end of 2010 or the start of 2011, but the consequences of the crisis will be felt for many years," said Juncker.

(Reporting by James Mackenzie and Tamora Vidaillet, editing by Mike Peacock)

More economic stimulus on Rudd's World Bank agenda

2009-03-28T01:03:00.000-07:00

26th March 2009, 6:30 WST

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is set for talks with the president of the World Bank, Robert Zoellick, in Washington DC.

Mr Rudd will discuss the global financial crisis and plans for the reform of financial regulatory systems, further coordinated economic stimulus among developed nations and a restructure of the International Monetary Fund ahead of next week’s G20 summit of leading economies in London.

Only into his third day of his two-week trip, Mr Rudd wasted no time beginning the day with a visit to the Pentagon where he held talks with US Defence secretary Robert Gates on a range of issues including the war in Afghanistan, nuclear non-proliferation and the US-Australia alliance.

Mr Rudd also met US Energy secretary Steven Chu to discuss climate change policy in the lead up to the next United Nations meeting on the issue in Copenhagen in December.

The prime minister also journeyed back up to Capitol Hill overnight for talks with the US Senate leadership and former US presdiential candidate McCain.

Mr McCain expressed sympathy over the injury of three Australian soldiers overnight in Afghanistan.

“We thank them for their service and their sacrifice, and we never show our gratitude enough, thank you for your country’s contribution,” Mr McCain said.

Mr Rudd thanked Mr McCain for his comments and said it had been a “tough time back home” as it was for all countries involved in Afghanistan.

Mr McCain said he believed that President Barack Obama would soon be unveiling a new strategy that he hoped would bring success in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Mr Rudd will head to New York tomorrow for a series of meetings with business and finance leaders.

WASHINGTON
with AFP

US sperm bank offers stimulus deals

2009-03-28T00:53:00.000-07:00

One of the oldest banks of its kind in the United States, Xytex International, on Tuesday rolled out a stimulus package for customers who are hurting in these tough economic times.

Xytex is a sperm bank, and it's offering up to 200 dollars off a vial of sperm to clients wishing to start or add to their family, but need a little help.

"We're all feeling the effects of the economy and, especially for families seeking reproductive options, every dollar counts," Xytex spokeswoman Danielle Moores told AFP.

So, Xytex is offering deals on vials from "select" donors, who come a bit cheaper than the usual "standard" donor.

"Select donors are a new level of donor which we introduced to try to help our clients who are interested in third-party reproduction but, with the tough economy, are having a little bit of trouble purchasing a regular donor," Moores told AFP.

Select donors, explained Moores, are men from whom Xytex has "many, many vials because they're very successful donors or able to stop in several times a week or -- for whatever reason, we have a huge inventory," and it is being made available in a sort of clearance sale.

Xytex prefers to call it the balancing effect of supply and demand.

"Select donors haven't reached the end of their shelf-life, they're just over-produced," Moores said.

Select donor units run between 250 and 350 dollars, representing a savings of between 135 and 235 dollars on comparable vials from a standard Xytex donor, which start at 385 dollars and go up to 585 dollars.

Xytex is also offering deals on ART donors -- not as in Picasso or Jasper Johns but as in "assisted reproductive technology." These run between 290 and 390 dollars.

"These are vials that are available for patients who are undergoing either IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), which can be very costly procedures," said Moores.

"For ICSI, you really only need one sperm which is injected into the egg. So we can offer these donors at a lower cost because there's a lower quality commitment, but it works for these patients because they need fewer cells anyway," Moores said.

"It's a way to offer another option at a slightly better price to help someone undergoing IVF or ICSI to have a family," she said, stressing that while prices have been cut, Xytex has not scrimped on its usual rigorous medical, psychological and genetic screenings for donors.

=News,Yahoo.coom=

Dissecting Bank Plan for a Way to Profit

2009-03-25T04:24:00.000-07:00

Up and down Wall Street, bankers and traders sharpened their pencils on Tuesday as they began the complex financial calculus of the latest bank rescue plan. Their goal: to find ways to profit from it.

In skyscrapers across Manhattan, banking executives assessed how best to use the new Treasury proposal to sell billions of dollars of their troubled assets. Traders at giant investment houses and small hedge funds debated whether to buy them.

And on a day when the Treasury secretary, Timothy F. Geithner, said he was seeking government authority to regulate or take control of nonbank financial institutions like insurance companies, insurance executives wondered whether they might use the program to ease their industry’s financial stress.

“Even though they are called toxic assets, some of them are not toxic, and those are the ones that we are going to be ferreting out,” said Sherry Reeser, a spokeswoman for the California State Teachers’ Retirement System, which sees a buying opportunity in the so-called public-private investment program.

But no one on or off Wall Street seemed any closer to answering the fundamental question hanging over these investments: What is this stuff really worth?

Nor was there any consensus about an even more sobering question that confronts not only the financial industry but ordinary Americans: Will this be the plan that finally works?

“It’s a wait-and-see attitude,” said Paul Graham, chief actuary of the American Council of Life Insurers.

The proposal, which was announced officially on Monday, has provoked many responses and questions. Can banks that received government bailouts use taxpayer money to bid on toxic assets, in the hope of making a profit? Would that be bad, given that the point of the exercise is to stir up a bit of greed and animal spirits, the lack of which has been holding the economy back?

Can banks sell some assets and then use the proceeds, leveraged by generous government financing, to buy more of the same? Might investment houses be tempted to overpay, if doing so buoys the value of their own investments? In the end, it will be the taxpayer who will be largely footing the bill.

For the Obama administration, the challenge is to strike a balance between the potentially competing interests of investors and taxpayers. Some wonder if the proposal tips too far in favor of investors.

Internet blogs were full of economists scratching their heads over how to game the plan and come out ahead of the government. Others, like Joseph E. Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize-winning economist, in an interview with Reuters, called the program “very badly flawed” and said it offered “perverse incentives” that amounted “to robbery of the American people.”

Despite such reservations, Goldman Sachs sent out a note to whip up investor interest in the government’s rescue plans, while BlackRock, the big money management firm, was considering the practicalities of starting, of all things, a mutual fund so everyday investors could buy into banks’ toxic assets.

But Bert Ely, a prominent banking consultant, said investors would be cautious because many crucial details were still missing — the size and terms of loans they would receive from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, for example, and the amount of equity they would be allowed to put in, and whether banks would be allowed to walk away if they did not like the price at auction.

“Today we know a lot more than we did yesterday, right?” Mr. Ely said. “I am being facetious!”

Many questioned the auction mechanism to sell toxic assets off from banks’ balance sheets. Price, most experts agree, is the biggest sticking point. The banks want to sell high. Potential investors want to buy low.

Banking executives said that their institutions would not want to unload assets at fire-sale prices, a step that would compel banks to raise large amounts of additional capital. The gap is likely to be the widest for certain loans because of the way banks account for them.

Because of the way they account for the assets on their books, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley — Wall Street giants that converted themselves into banks last year in an effort to ride out the financial storm — may be more willing to sell assets than some commercial banks.

Under accounting rules, banks must carry securities on their books at market prices. Most financial firms have already marked down these assets to prices that might be low enough to lure buyers.

But banks need not carry ordinary loans at market value. Instead, they are allowed to hold them at their higher values until they are repaid. So, for many commercial banks, selling loans now, at distressed prices, would almost certainly lead to large losses. Such losses might raise questions about how some banks will fare in a so-called stress test that federal regulators are in the process of applying to about 20 lenders.

“I don’t see how they are going to get the banks to sell,” said an executive at a large bank, who asked not to be named, given the delicate nature of the Treasury plan. “There are going to be substantial write-downs taken to get them off the books.”

Federal regulators said privately that, in some cases, they might pressure banks to sell.

Mr. Graham, of the American Council of Life Insurers, said pricing was also a crucial issue for insurance companies. Insurance companies have a long time horizon, he said, so they can hold impaired bonds through market downturns.

For all the uncertainties, some big investors like BlackRock and Wilbur L. Ross Jr., a prominent figure in distressed investing, said they were willing to take the plunge. Pension funds also represent a large source of purchasing power, and Ms. Reeser, of the California State Teachers’ Retirement System, viewed the program positively.

The fund, known as Calstrs, had already reduced the part of its portfolio dedicated to stocks by 5 percent, to free up money for this type of purchase, she said.

Institutional investors like insurance companies represent huge blocks of capital, and the success of the public-private investment program will depend in part on how eager they are to get involved as purchasers of the toxic assets.

“Insurers account for 10 percent of all invested assets in the United States today,” said Robert P. Hartwig, president of the Insurance Information Institute. They would be interested in the program because of its partial government guarantee and their ability to find out what the structured assets consisted of, he said.

“There is some significant upside potential here,” he said. “But you have to balance that against the fact that insurers are very conservative investors.”

The problem, he said, is that companies have to maintain cash flows that match their payout obligations, and it was by no means clear that, in a pinch, they could get their cash out of the toxic assets.

(Eric Dash and Michael J. de la Merced contributed reporting.)

Allianz Indonesia achieves premium income of IDR 3.7 Trillion in 2008

2009-03-25T03:51:00.001-07:00

Allianz Utama Indonesia and Allianz Life Indonesia reported a joint Gross Written Premium (GWP) of IDR 3.7 trillion, positive profits and strong Solvency in 2008. Both companies also experienced a significant increase of its Customer base and Agency force.

Despite the challenging financial situation PT Asuransi Allianz Utama Indonesia (“Allianz Utama”) and PT Asuransi Allianz Life Indonesia (“Allianz Life”) achieved a joint GWP of IDR 3.7 trillion in 2008, an increase from previous year’s GWP of IDR 3.4 trillion. Together, both companies are insuring more than 1 million customers and are supported by more than 12.000 agents nationwide.

“Allianz Indonesia has again grown profitably and is in a very solid financial condition. Our strong solvency ratio of 306% for Allianz Life and 162% for Allianz Utama and our robust profits (IDR 128.8 billion for Allianz Life and IDR 43.8 billion for Allianz Utama) prove that we are a financially solid and stable partner for our customers. We are a very committed partner and we are in a very good position to provide long-term protection to all our customers, also in more tough times,” said Jens Reisch, President Director of Allianz Life Indonesia.

Car Insurance

2009-03-25T01:11:00.000-07:00

Asuransi Mobil atau Car Insurance merupakan jaminan terhadap keamananan mobil.banyak pengendara di dunia tidak memperhatikan ini padahal ini teramat penting sehubungan dengan semakin membanjirnya kendaraan di Indonesia.

Car Insurance merupakan bentuk penjamin bagi cacatnya mobil dan terjadinya kecelakaan.
beberapa car insurance,selain auto insurance lainnya di indonesia adalah :

1. asuransi Jasindo (http://www.jasindo.co.id/en/)
2. pojok asuransi indonesia (http://pojokasuransi.com/content/category/5/21/40/)

Semoga bermanfaat