Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (76076)	7/6/2011 3:14:28 PM
From: RJA_	10 Recommendations Respond to of 219657

>>Sorry but you completely misunderstood my post. I don't think so, >>There is a long way between a "Burka" and dressing like a sloth or provocatively. I just exaggerated and extended the example a bit, linearly.... >>that is why many Jewish womans dress modestly and are not showing of their flesh and few if any are sexually attacked as a result There are quite a few reform and conservative Jewish young women in South Miami Beach and Southern California that show lots of skin, and in 99.9% of cases are not raped... and they do not expect to be. Modesty is in the eye of the beholder. In Saudi the view is quite different than So Cal... The definition of "Modesty" changes with time, location, circumstance & society. It is not fixed. It is never IMHO a justification for rape. "dressing like a sloth or provocatively" is totally a judgement call by an observer and is based on his society, location, up bringing, and whether or not he is smart enough and open enough to understand this. In some societies women do not wear tops. They are not raped because of it. This is not an issue of women's behavior. It IS an issue of Men's behavior and for some men in some societies, self control. The extension of your arguement blaming women for men's behavior can be found in some parts of Pakistan, where women have been stoned to death as adulterers because they were "justifiably" raped for showing a forearm outside a burka... just an extension of your logic... /end of rant.

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (76076)	7/6/2011 8:14:43 PM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 219657

the mongolians are astutely playing the percentages :0) perhaps the only deal where teams china, russia and usa would be 'working' together the coal can really only be used in china as russia has more than enough for its rapidly dwindling population, and i doubt america would need coking coal to be shipped from the wasteland of mongolia through siberia or n.e. china and across the pacific to seattle or houston on long beach california ;0) i expect shenhua to take the lead on digging, peabody to consult, and russia to keep china n usa honest, and mongolia to collect royalties israel would do well to convince egypt to adopt the mongolia method and invite consortium comprised of china, usa, and russia to run the gas pipe network to israel. just in ... en.21cbh.com "Mongolia’s Tavan Tolgoi, the world’s largest untapped source of coking coal ... ... the Mongolian government announced that it had selected Peabody Energy Corp. of the US, China Shenhua Energy Co. Ltd. (601088.SH, 1088.HK) and a Russian-Mongolia consortium out of 6 preferred bidders to develop the project. The deal gave Shenhua, China’s leading integrated energy company, a 40% stake in the venture; Peabody and the Russian-Mongolia consortium got 24% and 36%, respectively ...

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (76076)	7/7/2011 12:52:50 PM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 219657

Latin America safe from Europe’s debt crisis, Nomura says Posted by Joseph Cotterill on Jul 07 16:31. It’s a shame the internet doesn’t do smell-o-vision, as there’s a rich, warm waft of historical irony hanging over this post. It’s about Latin America being secure from Europe’s debt troubles, especially in terms of its exposure to Spanish banks should they go under. Veteran readers will remember that Spanish banks had a bit of trouble in the region’s own debt crisis in the early 2000s. Mostly Argentina, where they played the role French banks have been saddled with with Greece in the early 2010s, right up to leading on efforts at “voluntary” debt restructuring. But Brazil in 2002 was also a pretty hairy place in the wake of Argentina’s default, with the biggest IMF bailout in history (at that point) needed to help stabilise the real. Well it’s all rather different now. According to Nomura’s FX analysts Benito Berber and George Lei: It is more likely that LatAm helps stabilize BBVA and Santander in the event that they run into trouble in Europe, rather than these banks destabilizing LatAm. Roughly 45% of BBVA and Santander profits come from LatAm (Figures 2 & 3 [above, click to enlarge]). Therefore it is unlikely that these banks reduce their exposure in the region since that would seriously limit their growth prospects. However, we are concerned with extreme situations where capital repatriation from LatAm to Madrid is critical for the survival of the banks. In such a scenario, since local subsidiaries (Brazil, Mexico, Chile, Colombia and Peru) cannot reduce capital reserves below a certain level, we assume these subsidiaries would only lower their capital reserves up to one standard deviation above the legal minimum, to prevent potentially violating any regulatory requirements during periods of heightened volatility. We estimate the maximum potential capital repatriation amounts to US$28bn. This number seems low compared to the total amount of international reserves, which for these five economies amounts to US$505 bn. Therefore, even in the extreme case requiring recapitalization of the parent banks using LatAm funds as a source, we believe the impact on the respective currencies would be marginal. For example, Santander could repatriate $21bn from its Brazil operations, engaging about 7 per cent of the country’s reserves (which are much, much bigger than the $3bn held in its coffers back in 2002). Mexico is even better off with perhaps no more than 4 per cent of its reserves at threat of BBVA and Santander pulling money the other way. This isn’t to say that the Brazilian real couldn’t blow up under its own steam — for example the consumer credit mountain, which is clearly waiting to detonate quite savagely, and the heavy flows of foreign money into Brazilian assets which could suddenly reverse. But it simply underlines how small a problem Europe, or Spain, is towards the region. But still a country needing the biggest IMF bailout ever after its supposedly small and unimportant neighbour violently defaults? Brazil 2002 – Spain 2012? Not sure. We know that Brazil pulled through of course.