competition in focus magazine

 competition in focus magazine

competition in focus magazine Foreign Exchange Market is a market where traders buy and sell currencies with the hope of making a profit when the values of the currencies change in their favor. People are making vast amounts of money from Forex trading. The Forex Market has a big potential for everyone, ranging from large corporate firms to ordinary, everyday people like you and me. arihant magazine It is a very exciting trade with a huge money-making potential. Just imagine yourself sitting comfortably in your pajamas at your computer… you turn on the internet and make a few quick transactions and by the time that you get up to get a cup of coffee, you are several hundred dollars rich! Would you like that? I would!! I can hear you say, “Wait a minute!!  This sounds just like another one of those confusing markets like stocks, options or traditional futures, so what makes this market any different focus magazine?”

 competition in focus magazine

pratiyogita kiran English

 pratiyogita kiran English

pratiyogita kiran English 5) The leverage is considerable. In fact, you don' t need a lot of money to trade forex, it is recommended to start with $2000, but you can start with $300, then if you have a proved strategy, your investment will grow consequently, as you can trade up to 200 times your investment. You can trade 100,000- unit currency lots with as little as 1% margin, or $1,000. there is no comparison with the stock market where you need a big amount of money to start, if you want to see real profits. And beside that, you need to post  50% margin. pratiyogita kiran monthly magazine free download 6) Price Movements Are Highly Predictable. Price movement or highly volatile in the forex, however, the foreign currencies market is moving in trends, and you can identify these trends - as they repeat in cycle- with the technical analysis. 7) No commission fees. Unlike the stock market, brokers don' t take commission on transaction. To trade forex, you don' t need to have a lot of money to start; you can trade at any time, from anywhere, with a Internet connection, you will not have an order pending because of lack of liquidity, you will not have to work all during the day. The forex market has many advantages over the other traditional investments, and for sure, it will give you more freedom, and more money pratiyogita kiran ebook.

 pratiyogita kiran English

Banking service chronicle

 Banking service chronicle

Banking service chronicle Monthly Magazine by bsc academy-subscribe published this is article page no 57 this will have a downward affect on the price of oil as the need for it decreases. many market analysts also believe the oil price of investments is also higher then its true costs. it is an overheated market that may be waiting for a crash. they believe that it wont be long before people start taking their money out because they believe it cant go much further. when people take out their money this is when big changes in the market are going to be seen. $100 is a psychological barrier for most people. oil prices have never been this high in history and most people simply cant imagine a time when oil will be this high. therefore when the $100 threshold is met people may naturally become uneasy and begin to sell their oil shares which could free up the markets and temporarily reduce the costs banking service chronicle monthly magazine.

 Banking service chronicle

Banking service chronicle

 Banking service chronicle

Banking service chronicle Monthly Magazine by bsc academy-subscribe published this is article page no  57 oil has been rising for the past 10 years as the world has come to the understanding that there is only a limited supply and national economies are tied to it. to many people the rise in oil price is a good bet because of its limited nature. it may be possible that oil will take a dive in price as it comes close to $100 per barrel as people begin to feel uneasy. it is possible that people have made so much money on oil stock futures options and other investments that people or large investment houses may dump their investments and take the winnings. if this happens even a small decline could trigger and en masse exodus from the market forcing a quick downward trend on the price per barrel of oil causing the market to crash. a market crash could be as much as a 40% decline in the price per barrel. there are a number of forces around the world that may make a dip in the market in the near future. the middle east may become more stable in the near future as the ending to the iraq war becomes more likely. even though there is no guarantee that the country will become stable it is a possibility it may become this way as one side beats out the other. it isnt likely to have an immediate affect. since companies have found the oil market to be so lucrative they have been scouring the world over for new deposits. in their interest they have been able to find these new deposits and in a couple of years will be able to tap them which will put more money into the market. when this oil goes into the market the demand will decrease because world wide production has increased. since oil prices have been on the rise over the past decade countries have been investing in alternative fuel sources. for example in the united states ethanol plants have been springing up all over the pace cars are expected to increase efficiency and he government is trying to cut dependency on foreign oil banking service chronicle monthly magazine.

 Banking service chronicle

Banking service chronicle

 Banking service chronicle

Banking service chronicle Monthly Magazine by bsc academy-subscribe published this is article page no 56 the great communicator was just another republican crook! bill clinton and john kennedy did not have that much experience. abraham lincoln ran after two years in the house woodrow wilson after two years as governor and franklin d. roosevelt & jimmy carter after four years as governor. perhaps dr. martin luther king summed it up best in his the drum major instinct sermon delivered at ebenezer baptist church atlanta georgia february 4 1968 - he said everybody can be great because everybody can serve.... you only need a heart full of grace a soul generated by love. and you can be that servant qualities that are thoroughly lacking in the republican base - the self-chosen people of faith. if the democrats nominate hillary clinton a very polarizing democrat the republican smear spigots will spill out of control and flood the whole country to an extent that the katrina calamity will look like a storm in a teacup. on the other hand an obama nomination would fuel vicious racial and below the belt nyangau attacks from the right wing like the slime being spewed by republican troglodytes against black democrat harold ford jr. in the tennessee or by incumbent senator george macaca allen in virginia. i wonder if senator obama has the stomach for such personal and racist attacks -- a gop staple! colin powell assessed these circumstances in 2000 and chickened out and subsequently dimmed his star serving in this ham-fisted administration for four years before being pushed out in favor of yes-woman condoleezza rice. it is rumored that he feared political assassination. will obama follow through or is his potential candidacy just hype? it is time for america to put its racist legacy behind it to re-assess its future and take a closer look at this rising star for i think barack obama is ready -- to cleanse the maligned soul of america banking service chronicle monthly magazine.

 Banking service chronicle

banking services chronicle august 2020

 banking services chronicle august 2020

Published this article : banking services chronicle august 2020  Hollywood celebrities were cropping up so often on TV talk shows last week that you would have thought it was Oscar time. They were grieved of course over the tragic death of Princess Diana. But they were also eager to gripe about the paparazzi whose aggressive tactics may have played a role in her death. Elizabeth Taylor called them murderers. Tom Cruise recounted how he and his wife Nicole Kidman had been chased by photographers through the very same Paris tunnel. Everyone from George Clooney to Whoopi Goldberg chimed in boycotts were advocated legislation proposed. Some stars reportedly even want to investigate the private lives of tabloid editors to give them a taste of their own medicine. There was a self-serving side to all this of course. Hollywood stars would like nothing better than to cow the press into docility thus clearing the way for nonstop coverage of their thriving careers happy home lives and unflagging concern for the spotted owl. Yet in this instance Hollywood perfectly tapped into the public mood. The week of mourning that followed Dianas death also saw an outpouring of revulsion at paparazzi tactics prompting a fresh round of self-appraisal by publications that use their photos and tacitly at least condone their excesses. Paparazzi--the celebrity photographers who trail stars looking for shots of them in unguarded moments--have been around for decades dogging the tracks of people like Elizabeth Taylor and Jacqueline Onassis. But the game has grown increasingly fierce in recent years as media outlets devoted to celebrities have proliferated and new technology such as digital photo transmission has come into use. And lately the absence of wars and other world crises (as well as skimpier budgets for covering foreign news) has forced many photojournalists to do celebrity work just to make a living. Theres big money to be made. Two weeks before Dianas death the Globe tabloid ran eight pages of photos of her and Dodi Fayed on their vacation off the island of Sardinia and boasted in a note to readers of paying $210000 for them It was a big payday for photog Mario Brenna who stands to make as much as $3 million worldwide. Lured by such sums paparazzi are resorting to ever more aggressive tactics--sometimes even provoking confrontations with stars in order to catch their temper tantrums on film. About a year ago there was a real increase in invasive kinds of pictures says Valerie Virga photo editor for the National Enquirer people really going over the edge to get the picture--climbing roofs scaling buildings super-super long lenses into peoples backyards. Weve turned down hundreds of pictures over the last year for that reason. U.S. photographers blame their European counterparts for upping the ante. They are ruthless says Scott Downie the owner of Celebrity Photo an agency that covers official show-biz events. Those who came here in the 80s laughed at us as babies You dont know how to get a good photo. Were here to get them in a private moment not in diamonds at an event. Yet every paparazzo is familiar with the pressures. Its a collective hysteria says Mark Saunders who has covered Diana for the past five years. Its the adrenaline flowing and that desperate need to get a photograph. Ive seen [U.S. photographers] in action outside John Kennedy Jr.s house. If America wants a tragedy on the same scale just allow that to continue. Saunders says Dianas death confirmed a decision he made six months ago--to get out of the paparazzi game altogether. But most other paparazzi and the agencies that hire them and peddle their photos to magazines were incommunicado or unrepentant last week. I feel no responsibility legal or moral says Goksin Sipahioglu director of the Paris-based Sipa agency. Of course Im sad because someone we all adored is dead. But when you become Princess Di you are a public person. In a telling irony several of the agencies representing photographers detained by French police after the accident would not release photos of them to the press. And some agencies supplying pictures of Dodi and Diana to magazines last week specifically asked that they not be given the usual credit line. Yet editors of publications that rely on paparazzi are taking a fresh look at how far their intrusive tactics should be allowed to go. Shortly after the accident Steve Coz editor of the National Enquirer publicly vowed not to buy any photos taken at the scene while claiming that his tabloid had instituted a policy a year ago of not using so-called stalkerazzi pictures. (The Enquirer issue on the newsstands when Diana was killed however featured several candid shots of the princess with Fayed trumpeted by the cover line DI GOES SEX-MAD. The issue was pulled by a number of newsstands after her death.) Dan Schwartz editorial director of the more freewheeling Globe also promised to toughen standards. Were going to become more conservative about our assessment of what will offend people because we have to he said. Peoples consciousness of what is paparazzi and what isnt has been raised. Mainstream publications are hardly exempt from the debate. Dozens of publications including TIME and Newsweek used paparazzi shots to illustrate their stories on the tragedy last week. A news photo of Dianas two sons glimpsed inside a car after her death--a shot that could easily be regarded as intrusive--ran even in the sober New York Times. Though editors and publishers say clear-cut rules are hard to set the tragedy has heightened their sensitivity to the issue. You have to exercise judgment when you know competitive forces are going to exercise less judgment and less taste says Mort Zuckerman publisher of the New York Daily News. In a letter to readers in this weeks PEOPLE (published by Time Inc.) managing editor Carol Wallace writes that decisions on whether or not to use paparazzi photos are made on a case-by-case basis weighing the news value of a picture against a story subjects right to peace and privacy. Such self-policing is unlikely to satisfy the paparazzis sharpest critics. California legislators like Tom Hayden are planning to introduce legislation to curb paparazzi exploits such as requiring photographers to maintain a certain distance from their subjects. Such laws however might have a tough time passing constitutional muster because of the threat they pose to freedom of the press. (Not to mention the freedom of any grandmother at Disney World to snap pictures of a famous person who passes by.) Legal experts point out moreover that most abuses can be dealt with by current criminal laws (against trespassing and assault for example) or by civil lawsuits as Jacqueline Onassis brought when she won injunctions against photographer Ron Galella. Both legislation and self-regulation have been tried overseas with mixed results. A French law enacted in 1970 allows the courts to punish press actions that are deemed an assault on intimacy or privacy. Actress Isabelle Adjani used the law to win a judgment against the tabloid Voici in 1995 for running photos taken without her permission. Still French paparazzi are widely perceived to be among the worlds most brazen. In Britain meanwhile the Press Complaints Commission established in 1991 has drawn up a code of practice to prevent invasive press tactics. Though hard to enforce the rules have succeeded in removing at least some paparazzi shots from the raucous British tabloids. The campaign against paparazzi has its dangers. Almost by definition journalism involves some measure of intrusion--investigating matters that the subject would rather not be publicized. In covering Hollywood moreover journalists must battle a sophisticated armada of publicists who seek to manage every jot and tittle of media coverage of their client. The paparazzi have become more aggressive because celebrities and their publicists have got so controlling says Steve Sands a New York City-based celebrity photographer. Nor are the stars above using the paparazzi for their own purposes. When the Kennedy family gathered for a family outing in Hyannis Port Mass. two weeks ago photographers snapped pictures of the happy clan playing touch football. Far from shooing away the nosy cameras the family clearly welcomed the coverage as a chance to let the world see their togetherness in the wake of recent family troubles. Then there are the people who buy the newspapers and watch the TV shows that keep the paparazzi in business. These consumers of celebrity news got lectured last week by those same celebrities for not curbing their appetites. They may yet listen. But for now they are too busy paying their last respects to the biggest celebrity of all. banking services chronicle august 2020

 banking services chronicle august 2020

banking services chronicle april 2021 pdf

 banking services chronicle april 2021 pdf

Published this article : banking services chronicle april 2021 pdf  DO touch that dial to avoid fake news Government agencies corporations industry groups and other large organizations contaminate the airwaves with fake news. These organizations produce pre-packaged news segments called VNRs or Video News Releases. These segments look like real news. In fact VNRs are little more that propaganda pieces for their producers. Stations have routinely used these fake news segments since at least the 1980s usually without disclosing their source. There is nothing inherently wrong with the government and other social actors creating interesting audio or video pieces to communicate with the public. The problem is that these propaganda pieces do not properly identify the source. They are made to look and feel like independent news casts with government/corporate actors pretending to be reporters. Government attempts to regulate fake news There have been a few efforts to control this phenomenon. The Government Accountability Office ruled in February 2005 that government-sponsored TV news reports are covert propaganda unless their source is apparent to viewers. The Senate introduced the Truth in Broadcasting Act (S. 967) in 2005 into committee. This act would require all pre-packaged government-produced audio and video news releases to include a clear disclaimer that the government was the original source. This act would not apply to VNRs produced by corporations industry groups or charitable foundations. As of this writing the full Senate has yet to vote on the bill and the no one has introduced a companion bill in the House of Representatives. Media is controlled by only FIVE corporations Looking at the amount of programming available you might think that there is a wide variety of choice. There are literally hundreds of TV stations with options to choose from sports news cartoons history painting and more. On the surface the amount of options appears staggering. However only five major corporations control the majority of the media. These five huge corporations—Disney Time Warner Bertelsmann of Germany Murdochs News Corporation and Viacom (formerly CBS)—own not only most of the television stations but now own most of the newspapers magazines books and radio stations in the United States as well. Television puts your logical brain to sleep There is a reason peoples eyes glaze over and they assume a zombie-like stare when they are watching TV. Their brains are in a hynotic alpha brainwave state. In the Mulholland experiment 10 children watched their favorite television program while the researchers monitored their brainwave patterns. The researchers expected that the children would show a preponderance of beta waves. This would indicate that they were involved and responding to their favorite programs. Instead they stayed in alpha. They just sat back. They stayed almost the whole time in alpha. That meant that while they were watching they were not reacting not orienting not focusing just spaced out said Dr. Eric Peper. Similarly in the early 1980s researchers in Australia found that the left-brain sort of went to sleep once TV was switched on but the right brain was busy storing information in its memory bank. What these studies show is that the right side of the brain may be dutifully absorbing all the images from your television screen but the left side is lulled into a stupor by the televisions flicker. This makes analysis of the images difficult. It also makes it difficult to remember exactly what you have been watching. Furthermore the research suggests that the left side of the brain may remain in a stupor even after you turn the TV off. What is a concerned citizen to do? How to dig for real news 1) The first step is to start reading instead of watching your news. Television generally takes a lot of time to get across a little bit of information. With reading you can absorb information much faster. A five minute story on the news can be read online or in the newspaper generally in less than a minute. The spare time can be used to analyze the story. 2) The next step in developing a good picture of the world is to get several good news sources. Begin with a mainstream newspaper or website to simply get an idea of the basic issues that are at stake. Then select a couple of alternative news sources outside the mainstream. I am not going to recommend a particular source because I do not wish to become engaged in liberal/conservative partisan discussions. These distinctions start to fall away once you start to analyze the news for yourself anyway. 3) The next step is simply to start critically viewing the material that you read. Does it make logical sense? Are there inconsistencies? Does the story change from one day to the next? Are there any patterns to events?   This step is essential.  Put that left brain into hyper-drive.  Question the news you read whatever the source. 4) Finally if there are inconsistencies or notable patterns it is time to start researching. Whenever possible it is best to go to the source of an issue. For example if the government passes a new law about security dont waste time watching or reading the petty analyses of pundits. Find a copy of the law! Do not rely on someone else to give an interpretation. The internet makes it much easier to find source documents. In short the good news is that you do not need TV news to become informed about the world. banking services chronicle april 2021 pdf

 banking services chronicle april 2021 pdf

banking services chronicle reasoning book

 banking services chronicle reasoning book

Published this article : banking services chronicle reasoning book  Where are the last vestiges of Afghanistans Taliban leaders hiding? Are they cowering in caves near the Pakistani border? Perhaps they own a condo complex in Karachi. More likely they are on a Dude Ranch in Americas Heartland. Remember 1994? Religious fundamentalists overtook Afghanistan and trounced on that nations women with a vengeance. Being draped in a burga and beaten in the streets was standard fair. Most doctors were banned from treating women and voting – no way! Is history repeating itself? Last week in South Dakota religious fundamentalists passed a measure making it a felony for doctors to perform any abortion except to save the life of a pregnant woman. No exceptions are made in cases of rape or incest. There was no state wide vote. Déjà vu! Help for victims of religious extremism in Afghanistan was slow to come. Ultimately refugee camps sprang up along the borders and womens rights organizations broadcasted messages of support into the occupied country via short wave radio. Response to occupied South Dakotas oppression is already being mounted. Refugee camps are springing up along borders with Dakotas more open-minded neighbors such as Mormonville Nebraska and Laramie Wyoming. Citizens of Redecktown Missouri are collection CB radios to airdrop around Mount Rushmore. South Dakotas female population has had a mixed reaction to this Red States recent horrific legislation. When Republican Kellie Clueless was asked her opinion of legislative leaders forcing their will on the intimate lives of free American women she said Ah um da. Antiabortion activist Betty Sue Backwoods was interviewed in the bikini wax isle at a Sioux Falls Wal Mart. Betty Sue was quoted as saying I think Rep. Roger W. Hunt is a stone-cold fox and I thank God he puts my religion over everyone elses beliefs. Thats what makes America what it is to day. Then she tossed her six children into the cart and sprinted off to check the balance on her EBT card. Surprisingly one well known Democrat supported the bill outright. Dr Wantmoremoney owner of the Back Alley Abortion and Penicillin Clinic in Pine Nut SD made several lucrative donations across party lines to illustrate his new found love of Catholicism and loathing of the US Constitution. As the controversy rages Americas sons and daughters die and kill in Iraq. For what? To protect America from religious fanatics hell-bent on destroying individual freedoms this country was founded on. At least that is what we are told. Yet the US Army has not even begun reconnaissance operations around Deadwood. Meanwhile in Pierre Governor Mike rounds added his input. In the history of the world the true test of a civilization is how well people treat the most vulnerable and most helpless in their society. The sponsors and supporters of this bill believe that abortion is wrong because unborn children are the most vulnerable and most helpless persons in our society. I agree with them Rounds said in a statement. When asked if perhaps a pregnant 12-year-old girl raped by her uncle might be a touch more vulnerable than a pin-sized glob of splitting embryonic cells Rounds responded by trying to sell this reporter a new auto insurance policy. The policy came complete with the new SD mandated Terrorist Assault Vehicle Insurance attachment for an additional $10.00 per month. My own government now has a 78 Yugo better protected than my uterus. As for the money that will be wasted fighting this rights-slapping legislation to the Supreme Court the legislature has laid out a plan sell off more of the Black Hills to special interest corporations in order to finance this loosing battle. Yes it would appear the missing Taliban have been found. Religious fanaticism is alive and well in South Dakota. Privacy individuality and freedom are D.O.A. Perhaps National Guard troops should be searching Jewel Cave in the Black Hills for Osama Bin Laden. It is suspicious that Governor Mike Rounds and Mr. Bin Laden have never been seen together in public. Could they be one in the same? With each mystery answered a new question arises. For example when wearing our denim burgas would South Dakotas legislators prefer we women place rodeo buckles on the inside or out. banking services chronicle reasoning book

 banking services chronicle reasoning book