Search results

The political system in America was founded on democracy. Those ideal values that we hold true are increasingly threatened by the influence of money in our political system. The neo-political practice has become standard in modern American politics. Through the current system, where competition is highly encouraged, we have come to expect politicians to accept unlimited sums of money to win an election. This mindset has undermined the value of democracy in America, raising several questions --How many politicians accept money from PAC's and Super PAC's? Have their views changed after accepting money? Are they representing the will of their donors over the will of the people? Without further introspection we face an ethical dilemma of prioritizing money over people. Do we really value money so much that we attach a price tag to people's livelihoods? As the bourgeois say, "What can't money buy?" This presentation will look at the use of money in politics, specifically campaign finance. Also, it will discuss the ethical dilemma that politicians face and the choices they have to make. Finally, it will discuss possible solutions that we could enact to alleviate the problem.

In the future economic system, as suggested by TOP Tax system, that total money supply (real money and debt money/loan money) to be necessary for circulation in banks should be at the minimum level of 100% and at maximum level 110% of the value of GDP of the country. Out of this total money supply in the economic system, 99.7% of the money will be in dematerialised (non physical) form in the accounts of citizens, Governments and companies. Only small portion of money, equalling just 0.3% of the total money in the economic system, will be in physical form i.e. currency notes or coins. All high valued paper currency notes will be demonetised. This record was migrated from the OpenDepot repository service in June, 2017 before shutting down.

In the Western interpretation of democracy, governments exist in order to manage relations of property, with absence of property ownership leading to exclusion from participation in governance and, in many cases, absence of equal treatment before the law. Democratizing money will therefore ensure equal opportunity to the ownership of property, and thus full participation in the democratic governance of society, as well as equal access to the banking system, which finances the creation of capital via the creation of money. If the divergence between capital and labor-between rich and poor-is explained by the monopoly access of capitalists to finance, then reducing this divergence is crucially dependent on the democratization of money. Though the role of money and finance in determining inequality between capital and labor transcends any particular understanding of the process by which the creation of money leads to inequity, specific proposals for the democratization of money will depend on the explanation of how money comes into existence and how it supports capital accumulation.

The aim of this paper is to offer a general overview of money transfers in Italy and Europe focusing specifically on the migrant community. This is of particular interest because it's in that community where money transfers are most prevalent. This shows the money transfer system as a tool that could guarantee the financial inclusion of migrants but at the same time being used in a distorted and unlawful manner. After a brief introduction focused on working principles and legal frameworks, the paper will go deeper in evaluating money transfer data. This data, which comes from various legal authorities, will show the extent to which different migrant communities who reside in Italy are able to carry out illicit activity using money transfers. It will also highlight the existence of legislative inconsistencies through a case by case approach. This paper shows the reason why people find it relatively easy to use money transfers to launder money, or in a more broader sense, take part on other illicit financial operations such as financing terrorism. This work will examine recent Italian criminal cases concerning the unlawful use of money transfers. This paper is the original work of the author and has not been submitted elsewhere for publication.

This paper examines the question of what kind of money will govern the 21st century by examining the developments which characterise this landscape. On the basis of a review of the available literature and evidence, it is clear that certain technological innovations, such as the movement towards electronic money, will undoubtedly change how we operate. However, the conclusion in this paper is less sanguine regarding the prospects of a global currency, regional monetary unions, or states' exit from or central banks' control of money. This paper also sees poor prospects for cryptocurrencies at the moment, given their focus on the decentralisation and politicisation of money, because money requires a backstopping force, making it inherently political. Finally, this paper considers how regulators may seek to ensure that money in its digital form is not taken advantage of and applied in malevolent activities. The study used correlation to establish the level of association among variables. A multiple regression analysis was used to draw an econometric model explaining the relationship between the independent and dependent variables. The following variables were used as independent variables: monetary aggregate (M1), harmonised index of consumer prices (HICP), Euro Interbank Offered Rate (EURIBOR), US dollar/euro, and the USD value of Bitcoin. Multiple regression predicted that when inflation rises, the money supply will decrease. M1 includes cash in circulation, current deposits, and other than demand deposits. The study concludes that price increases encourage people to keep their money in longer-term deposits, including in cryptocurrency. Additionally, an increase in EURIBOR and US dollar/euro reduces the supply of money. Otherwise, an increase in the price of bitcoin in the economy would increase the overall money supply.

This paper begins by defining, and distinguishing between, money and finance, and addresses alternative ways of financing spending. We next examine the role played by financial institutions (e.g., banks) in the provision of finance. The role of government as both regulator of private institutions and provider of finance is also discussed, and related topics such as liquidity and saving are explored. We conclude with a look at some of the new innovations in finance, and at the global financial crisis, which could be blamed on excessive financialization of the economy.

This paper examines the question of what kind of money will govern the 21st century by examining the developments which characterise this landscape. On the basis of a review of the available literature and evidence, it is clear that certain technological innovations, such as the movement towards electronic money, will undoubtedly change how we operate. However, the conclusion in this paper is less sanguine regarding the prospects of a global currency, regional monetary unions, or states' exit from or central banks' control of money. This paper also sees poor prospects for cryptocurrencies at the moment, given their focus on the decentralisation and politicisation of money, because money requires a backstopping force, making it inherently political. Finally, this paper considers how regulators may seek to ensure that money in its digital form is not taken advantage of and applied in malevolent activities. The study used correlation to establish the level of association among variables. A multiple regression analysis was used to draw an econometric model explaining the relationship between the independent and dependent variables. The following variables were used as independent variables: monetary aggregate (M1), harmonised index of consumer prices (HICP), Euro Interbank Offered Rate (EURIBOR), US dollar/euro, and the USD value of Bitcoin. Multiple regression predicted that when inflation rises, the money supply will decrease. M1 includes cash in circulation, current deposits, and other than demand deposits. The study concludes that price increases encourage people to keep their money in longer-term deposits, including in cryptocurrency. Additionally, an increase in EURIBOR and US dollar/euro reduces the supply of money. Otherwise, an increase in the price of bitcoin in the economy would increase the overall money supply.

The study explores the political choices and confl icts inherent in the "technical" specifi cations of any monetary system and some of the social scientifi c implications of the prevailing forms of money in the widest possible sense of the terms. As a constantly evolving social relation, no single theory of money is likely to capture its tremendous capacity for self-transformation. It is argued that the precise manner in which the prevailing forms of fi nancial capital in general and money in particular are socially constructed creates a privileged reality for financial capital which distorts competition among the diff erent factors of production and eliminates money's capacity to accurately capture and reproduce real world economic phenomena – if possible even in theory. Contrary to some of the traditional economistic legitimating narratives for money, it is suggested that control over the issuance and circulation of money may render various aspects of the human governable with a fraction of the resources that might be required to implement comparable combinations of coercion and rewards through alternative institutional mechanisms. While it is far from clear that money can ever be specifi ed in a manner that would solve its inherent political and social confl icts to an extent that would permit "economic" analysis to begin, some of the social and political implications of diff erent types of monetary institutions are often not beyond the reach of public policy decisions. A combination of a seigniorage-based unconditional basic income and a demurrage tax on money is introduced as an example of a specifi c public policy program that could rectify or mitigate some of the polarizing consequences of the prevailing forms of money as well as illuminate the spectrum of political choice inherent in the design of any monetary system. The study explains the continuing signifi cance of a wide spectrum of explanatory frameworks for the nature of money as a function of their strategic political utility rather than empirical accuracy and identifi es four main issue areas as particularly fruitful for further research.

All modern economies have a "chartalist" or "state" money, as acknowledged by Friedrich Knapp and J. M. Keynes. In this paper, I examine the "history" of money to shed light on its origins. I also examine in detail the views of those who accepted the chartalist, or state, approach to money, from Adam Smith to Knapp and Keynes, with some discussion of the views of Hyman Minsky and Abba Lerner. This is then linked to Lerner's "functional finance" approach to money and government spending. I next explore the implications of "modern money" for government policy and show that much economic analysis reaches erroneous conclusions because it fails to recognize the nature of modern money. The state "defines" money when it chooses that in which taxes must be paid. Government spending is the most important determinant of the supply of base money; government deficits are the most important source of net money holdings. This stands in stark contrast to traditional analysis, for fiscal policy is the primary determinant of the money supply and monetary policy determines the short-term interest rate. Because government deficits increase bank reserves, monetary policy is required to offer an interest-earning alternative to excess reserves; essentially, monetary policy consists of sales of government bonds (by the Treasury and central bank) to "drain" excess reserves in order to hit the interest rate target established for monetary policy. Thus, bond sales are not a part of fiscal policy nor are they needed to "finance" government deficits. This analysis leads to several interesting policy conclusions regarding the importance of government deficits and debts and regarding proposals to promote full employment.

An inter-governmental body is encouraging the replacement of currency with the objective of discouraging illegal economic activities. This policy is analyzed in a search-theoretic model where individuals choose legal or illegal production, settle trades via monetary or costly intermediated exchange, and where the government imperfectly monitors monetary transactions. Stationary monetary equilibria with both legal and illegal production exist, in which case the over-provision of currency may increment the extent of illegal production. This result holds also in the presence of intermediated exchange of legal goods. Equilibria with differing transaction patterns and degrees of illicit activities coexist.

This essay responds to "Money as Art: The Form, the Material, and Capital" by the Marxist economist Costas Lapavitsas with refer-ence to the triple manifestation of crisis in the United States dur-ing the spring months of 2020. By triangulating the role of money in the COVID-19 pandemic, the ensuing mass unemployment, and the historical nationwide revolt in response to the police mur-der of George Floyd predicated on a counterfeit twenty-dollar bill, Nicholas Huber makes a three-part claim. First, that acceptance of the Marxist theory of fetishism forecloses the possibility of conceiv-ing of capitalist money as art in the sense developed by Lapavitsas, insofar as the latter tends toward transhistorical concepts of both art and money. Following from this, any aesthetic function of mon-ey in the capitalist mode of production is inseparable from its total social function; that is, capitalist money is at once an economic, political, cultural, and aesthetic mediation unlike any other. Finally, Huber draws on Louis Marin's typology of the frame in correspond-ence with Erik Olin Wright's integrated class analytic framework to argue that the question of whether money is art or not leads us to a dead end. Huber suggests that a crisis such as the one unfolding in 2020 raises instead the more challenging question of what social system must come into being, such that a theory of capitalist money as art becomes intelligible.

In reaction to the monetary turmoil created by the financial crisis of September 2008, both legislative and constitutional reforms have been proposed in different Countries to introduce Commodity Money alongside existing National Fiat Currency. A thorough evaluation of the Economic consequences of these new proposals is warranted. This paper surveys some of the existing knowledge in Monetary and Financial Economics for the purpose of answering the significant Economic questions raised by these new political initiatives.

G.M. Lauridsen money, 25 cents in trade. "Due the bearer and payable only in merchandise. Not current except at the store of G. M. Lauridsen Port Angeles, Wash."

Money laundering is generally regarded as the practice of engaging in financial transactions to conceal the identity, source, and/or destination of illegally gained money by which the proceeds of crime are converted into assets which appear to have a legitimate origin. In other words, Money Laundering refers to the conversion or "Laundering" of money which is illegally obtained, so as to make it appear to originate from a legitimate source. The recent activity in money laundering in India is through political parties' corporate companies and share market. Bank fraud is a serious financial crime that involves the unlawful obtainment of funds from a bank or other financial institution. Money is the root cause of many evils like corruption, black marketing, smuggling, drug trafficking, tax evasion, and the buck does not stop here. While carrying out the Know your Client (KYC) norms, special care has to be exercised to ensure that the contracts are not anonymous or under fictitious names. Money is the prime reason for engaging in almost any type of criminal activity .Money laundering is the method by which criminals disguise the illegal origins of their wealth. GEL Classification Code: E49; E50; P44

The cost of providing medical care is increasing. The driving forces include inherent health care system conflicts of interest and financial incentives for procedures and technology. Effective lifestyle medicine principles are not easily adopted and rewarded in the present environment. Recent moves toward outcomes-based pay systems offer the potential to demonstrate the effectiveness of lifestyle medicine principles while bypassing many of the biases, application delays, and political machinations of the traditional randomized control trial methodology. The American College of Lifestyle Medicine is uniquely positioned to be a leading organization in improving health, enhancing patient experience, and reducing the cost of care.