Suchergebnisse

"Develop the skills to manage risk in the high-stakes world of financial speculation. The Risk of Trading is a practical resource that takes an in-depth look at one of the most challenging factors of trading--risk management. The book puts a magnifying glass on the issue of risk, something that every trader needs to understand in order to be successful. Most traders look at risk in terms of a "stop-loss" that enables them to exit a losing trade quickly. In The Risk of Trading, Michael Toma explains that risk is ever-present in every aspect of trading and advocates that traders adopt a more comprehensive view of risk that encompasses the strategic trading plan, account size, drawdowns, maximum possible losses, psychological capital, and crisis management. Shows how to conduct a detailed statistical analysis of an individual's trading methodology through back-testing and real-time results so as to identify when the methodology may be breaking down in actual trading Reveals why traders should think of themselves as project managers who are strategically managing risk The book is based on the author's unique 'focus on the risk' approach to trading using data-driven risk statistical analytics Using this book as a guide, trades can operate more as business managers and learn how to avoid market-busting losses while achieving consistently good results"--

Background: To enhance usage of health technology assessment (HTA) in decision-making, it is important to prioritise important barriers and facilitators to the uptake of HTA. This study aims to quantify and compare the relative importance of barriers and facilitators regarding the use of HTA in several European countries.Methods: A survey containing two best-worst scaling (BWS) object case studies (i.e. barriers and facilitators) were conducted among 136 policy makers and HTA researchers from the Netherlands, Germany, France, and United Kingdom. Hierarchical Bayes analysis generated the mean relative importance score (RIS) for each factor and subgroup analyses assessed differences between countries.Results: Six barriers (RIS5) and five facilitators (RIS6) were deemed highly important. Eleven barriers and ten facilitators differed in their importance between countries. Policy characteristics, research & researcher characteristics, and organisation & resources were particularly important to facilitate uptake of HTA, such as an explicit framework for decision-making and research of sufficient quality.Conclusion: The most paramount barriers and facilitators to HTA usage were quantified. For all countries it is crucial to create an explicit framework for the decision-making context to include HTA evidence. Country differences in the quality of research emphasize the need for enhanced international collaboration in HTA.

Matthew Yeomans begins his investigation into the role of oil in America by trying to spend a day without oil-only to stumble before exiting the bathroom (petroleum products play a role in shampoo, shaving cream, deodorant, and contact lenses). When Oil was published in cloth last year, it was quickly recognized as the wittiest and most accessible guide to the product that drives the U.S. economy and undergirds global conflict. The book sparked reviews and editorials across the country from the Wall Street Journal, the Christian Science Monitor, and The Nation to Newsday , the San Francisco Chronicle, Wired and others. Author Michael Klare (Blood and Oil) called it "a clear, comprehensive overview of the U.S. oil industry . . . in one compact and highly readable volume," and Boldtype praised Yeomans's "crisp journalistic voice. . . . Understanding the business of oil is essential in any modern dialog of power, politics, or the almighty buck, and Yeomans delivers a well-researched and gripping read." Illustrated with maps and graphics-and now with an all-new afterword-Oil contains a brief history of gasoline, an analysis of the American consumer's love affair with the automobile, and a political anatomy of the global oil industry, including its troubled relationship with oil-rich but democracy-poor countries.

The most important event in the life of the outstanding Christian theologian J.H.Newman (1801–1890) was his transition from Anglicanism to Catholicism, which took place in 1845. That event made a huge impression on contemporaries. Interest in it has remained even further. This article attempts to analyze the historiography of the Newman's conversion process, highlight the most important stages, and consider research concepts. The first stage in the development of the historiography of Newman's conversion took 1845 to 1864. The writings of that time were distinguished with emotionality and were completely based on confessional preferences. Many Anglicans who shared traditional anti-Catholic beliefs perceived Newman's departure as treason. The second stage covered the period from 1865 to the mid 20th century. The appearance of such sources as Newman's autobiography "Apologia Pro Vita Sua" (1864), the publication of his selected letters made it possible to look at the problem more broadly. The confessional approach continued to dominate. Highly ecclesiastical authors (W.Palmer, R.Church, S.Ollar), regretting Newman's departure from the Church of England, assigned a decisive role to unfavorable circumstances, while radical Protestants saw in Newman a figure initially aspiring to Rome (W.Walsh). The third stage, started in the middle of the last century, was marked with a gradual departure from Confessionalism and the appearance of a number of works specifically devoted to the process of Newman's conversion (R.Imberg, J.Hammond, W.Conn). That question is also considered in detail by Newman's biographers (F.Turner, I.Ker, S.Gilley). Currently, a research consensus has been reached in understanding Newman's movement to Rome as a long-term process determined by both internal and external factors. But there is no consensus in understanding what combination of those factors turned out to be decisive.

"Last voice from the abyss" -- 1933-1941 -- "Not a Jewish problem": the publisher's perspective on the Nazis' rise and the refugee crisis -- This here is Germany": reporting from the Berlin bureau -- "Worthy of France": the vichy government's anti-semitic laws and concentration camps -- "A new life in Nazi-built ghettos": German domination of Poland, Rumania, and the Baltic states -- 1942-1945 -- "To awaken the conscience of Christendom": pressure to publicize the first news of the extermination campaign -- "Amidst the advertisements on page 19": placement decisions and the role of the news editors -- "All Jews are not brothers": the publisher's fight with Zionists -- "The Semitic question should be avoided": German atrocities and U.S. government propaganda -- "Final phase of supreme tragedy has begun": The war refugee board and the destruction of Hungary's Jews -- "Political prisoners, slave laborers, and civilians of many nationalities": the liberation of the concentration camps -- "Lessons from the Hitler tragedy": the publisher and the aftermath of war -- "The horrible story was not told."

This article argues that a psychological bias called "focalism" contributes to an overestimation of the differences between political candidates, which in turn increases participation and polarization. Focalism causes people to confuse the allocation of attention to things with the importance of those things. Because attention to politics typically centers on conflict, the result is an exaggeration of differences across the partisan divide. I test this intuition using an experimental design that provides all respondents with all the information they need to estimate how much Joe Biden and Donald Trump objectively disagreed on policy positions just before the 2020 election. I find that shifting attention—toward either those positions the candidates agreed or disagreed with each other on—influences beliefs about the differences between candidates. The effect exceeds that of identifying as a Democrat or as a Republican. Beyond those perceptions, focalism increases turnout intentions, perceptions of election importance, negative feelings towards the out‐candidate, and affective polarization.