IMF admits disastrous love affair with the euro and apologises for the immolation of Greece

largarde_3537542b-large_trans++pJliwavx4coWFCaEkEsb3kvxIt-lGGWCWqwLa_RXJU8

The IMF’s chief Christine Lagarde is presiding over an organisation that is almost out of control

The International Monetary Fund’s top staff misled their own board, made a series of calamitous misjudgments in Greece, became euphoric cheerleaders for the euro project, ignored warning signs of impending crisis, and collectively failed to grasp an elemental concept of currency theory.

This is the lacerating verdict of the IMF’s top watchdog on the fund’s tangled political role in the eurozone debt crisis, the most damaging episode in the history of the Bretton Woods institutions.

For the complete article please click on the link below:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/07/28/imf-admits-disastrous-love-affair-with-euro-apologises-for-the-i/

Lies Politicians Tell Us

Clinton, Trump, the Obama Administration, and the media—all are guilty of obfuscation, deceit, and dishonesty.

Meltzer 3 Professor  Allan H. Meltzer: He is an American Economist and the Allan H. Meltzer professor of Political Economy at Carnegie Mellon University’s Tepper School of Business. He is the author of a large number of academic papers and books on monetary policy and the Federal Resrve Bank. Dr. Meltzer’s two volume books, “A History of the Federal Reserve”, are considered the most comprehensive history of the central bank.   He is considered one of the world’s foremost experts on the development and application of monetary policy. Currently he is also President of the Mont Pelerin Society. Dr. Meltzer originated the aphorism “Capitalism without failure is like religion without sin. It doesn’t work.”

Prof. Meltzer is a Distinguished Visiting Fellow at the Hoover Institution. This article is from his monthly column on Defining Ideas at the Hoover Institution.
It is posted in   http://www.hoover.org/research/

Most of us learn at some point that politicians tell lies. We expect them to stop once they hold office or to face the consequences. In the past, politicians that violated the public trust resigned, most notably President Richard Nixon. Other lesser officials have also been punished for abusing public trust. No longer. In campaigns, and in office, politicians and their aides or supporters deliberately lie about matters of importance.

Ben Rhodes, a National Security Adviser in the Obama administration, bragged recently about the lies officials told to support a major foreign policy decision—the nuclear agreement with Iran. That agreement permits Iran to possess nuclear weapons in about ten years. Rhodes publicly admitted that the Obama administration claimed that the new Iranian government was a moderating influence despite the fact that experts at the Central Intelligence Agency warned that the new government in Iran was not moderate. According to Rhodes, that false claim was critical for getting the deal approved by Congress. He and his colleagues suffered no consequence for having lied.

Continue reading Lies Politicians Tell Us

Startup valuations: All investors are not equal

FIRSTPOST TECH2 NEWS ANALYSIS

By Manish Saxena

Valuation of startups has always been an intriguing subject. What is even more intriguing is how the valuation figures of these startups (often called unicorns if the valuation crosses USD 1 billion) gets reported in public forums. Since successful startups frequently raise funds to grow, often the reported valuation figure for a particular startup is based on a simple extrapolation of the recent round of funding raised by the company. For example, if the company raises USD 100 MN for a 10% stake, it is generally perceived that the value of the entire company is 1 billion i.e. (100mn/10%). This is also often referred to as a fully diluted valuation. The fully diluted valuation assumes that all the shares of the company have equal rights and hence have equal value i.e. the value of 10% stake is representative of the remaining 90% stake. Though the fully diluted valuation seems intuitive and easy to understand, it does not take into account the preferences attached to the instrument through which the recent investor has invested in the company. These preferences lead to a very different value for different class of shares and hence the value of the entire company derived by simply dividing the amount invested with the stake acquired may not represent the true value of the start-up. This is particularly true in case the company is still in early stages and quite far from a possible IPO.

To read the entire article click on the link below:
http://tech.firstpost.com/startup/startup-valuations-all-investors-are-not-equal-326659.html