Suchergebnisse

"Mad Money" (Manchester University Press, 1998) is the completely rewritten and updated version of "Casino Capitalism" (Blackwells, 1986). It has been suggested —of both volumes— that there was no theory underlying Strange's discussion of the international financial system in them. This she argues in this Working Paper is emphatically not the case, Both volumes always implicitly, and often explicitly, are underpinned by the dominant themes that are reflected in Strange's work since the publication of "International Relations and International Economics: A Case of Mutual Neglect", International Affairs, 46 (2) 1970. These themes are threefold: Firstly a need to privilege the politics of the international financial system in the study of international relations; a discipline too long myopic in its focus on violent conflict and war between states at the expense of all else. (ii) A need to go beyond liberal political and economic theory and recognise the significance of "structural power" in the international system. (iii) A need to recognise that "the areas of significant ignorance" in our understanding of the role of the international financial system in an era of technological revolution and globalisation are becoming greater rather than smaller. For Strange, the structural power of capital is not constant and, therefore, cannot be accommodated in the logic of liberal economics. Thus, using the dictionary definition of mad —erratic, unpredictable, irrational behaviour, damaging not only to sufferers but also to others— we have, as she puts it "mad money". ; Mad Money (Manchester University Press, 1998) es la versión completamente reescrita y actualizada de Casino Capitalism (Blackwells, 1986). Se ha sugerido —de ambos volúmenes— que no había en ellos una teoría subyacente en la discusión de Strange sobre el sistema financiero internacional. Esto, argumenta Strange en este working paper, no es en absoluto el caso. Los dos volúmenes se sustentan, siempre implícitamente y a veces explícitamente, en los temas dominantes del trabajo de Strange desde la publicación de "International Relations and International Economics: A Case of Mutual Neglect", International Affairs, 46, (2), 1970. Se trata de tres temas: primero, una necesidad de privilegiar las políticas del sistema financiero internacional en el estudio de las relaciones internacionales; una disciplina miope desde hace mucho, concentrada en el conflicto violento y en la guerra entre estados, a expensas de todo el resto. Segundo, una necesidad de ir más alla de la teoría política y económica liberal y de reconocer el significado del "poder estructural" en el sistema internacional. Tercero, una necesidad de reconocer que las "áreas de ignorancia significativa" dentro de nuestra comprensión del rol del sistema financiero internacional en una era de revolución tecnológica y globalización son cada vez mayores. Para Strange, el poder estructural del capital no es constante y, por ende, no puede acomodarse en la lógica de la economía liberal. Así, usando la definición de "loco" del diccionario —comportamiento errático, impredecible e irracional que daña no solo a quien lo sufre sino también a otros—, tenemos, como ella dice, un "dinero loco".

Mad Money (Manchester University Press, 1998) es la versión completamente reescrita y actualizada de Casino Capitalism (Blackwells, 1986). Se ha sugerido —de ambos volúmenes— que no había en ellos una teoría subyacente en la discusión de Strange sobre el sistema financiero internacional. Esto, argumenta Strange en este working paper, no es en absoluto el caso. Los dos volúmenes se sustentan, siempre implícitamente y a veces explícitamente, en los temas dominantes del trabajo de Strange desde la publicación de "International Relations and International Economics: A Case of Mutual Neglect", International Affairs, 46, (2), 1970. Se trata de tres temas: primero, una necesidad de privilegiar las políticas del sistema financiero internacional en el estudio de las relaciones internacionales; una disciplina miope desde hace mucho, concentrada en el conflicto violento y en la guerra entre estados, a expensas de todo el resto. Segundo, una necesidad de ir más alla de la teoría política y económica liberal y de reconocer el significado del "poder estructural" en el sistema internacional. Tercero, una necesidad de reconocer que las "áreas de ignorancia significativa" dentro de nuestra comprensión del rol del sistema financiero internacional en una era de revolución tecnológica y globalización son cada vez mayores. Para Strange, el poder estructural del capital no es constante y, por ende, no puede acomodarse en la lógica de la economía liberal. Así, usando la definición de "loco" del diccionario —comportamiento errático, impredecible e irracional que daña no solo a quien lo sufre sino también a otros—, tenemos, como ella dice, un "dinero loco". ; Mad Money" (Manchester University Press, 1998) is the completely rewritten and updated version of "Casino Capitalism" (Blackwells, 1986). It has been suggested —of both volumes— that there was no theory underlying Strange's discussion of the international financial system in them. This she argues in this Working Paper is emphatically not the case, Both volumes always implicitly, and often explicitly, are underpinned by the dominant themes that are reflected in Strange's work since the publication of "International Relations and International Economics: A Case of Mutual Neglect", International Affairs, 46 (2) 1970. These themes are threefold: Firstly a need to privilege the politics of the international financial system in the study of international relations; a discipline too long myopic in its focus on violent conflict and war between states at the expense of all else. (ii) A need to go beyond liberal political and economic theory and recognise the significance of "structural power" in the international system. (iii) A need to recognise that "the areas of significant ignorance" in our understanding of the role of the international financial system in an era of technological revolution and globalisation are becoming greater rather than smaller. For Strange, the structural power of capital is not constant and, therefore, cannot be accommodated in the logic of liberal economics. Thus, using the dictionary definition of mad —erratic, unpredictable, irrational behaviour, damaging not only to sufferers but also to others— we have, as she puts it "mad money".

"The difference between selling a vote and selling access is a matter of degree, not kind. And selling access is not qualitatively different from giving special preference to those who spent money on one's behalf."Supreme Court Justice John-Paul Stevens, author of dissenting opinion on Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission."By definition, an independent expenditure is political speech presented to the electorate that is not coordinated with a candidate."Supreme Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority, Citizens v Federal Election CommissionThe 2010 midterm elections cost a total of $4 billion dollars, including federal campaign spending by candidates and political parties raised in the two-year cycle 2008-2010, and funding by independent groups. Although the Democratic Party committees raised more money than the Republican Party, Conservative-leaning independent groups outspent Democratic-leaning group two to one. The US Chamber of Commerce, American Action Network, American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS, four "shadow GOP" groups, top the chart of independent donor groups, with two Democratic-leaning federal employee unions coming in a distant fifth and sixth, according to data reported by Opensecrets.org. The Supreme Court decision Citizens v. Federal Electoral Commission of January 2010 changed the law to allow corporations and unions to spend unlimited amounts of money on behalf of or against political candidates. If they choose to do so directly, they must report their expenditures and reveal their donors. Unions regularly report their donations to the Department of Labor and the FEC. However, corporations are loath to reveal their donors, so they take an easier and more enticing alternative made possible by the same ruling, which lifted an earlier ban that prohibited them to give money to nonprofit organizations. Referred to as501c organizations, these are groups that finance advocacy advertisements (also known as "issue ads" or "electioneering communications") and are not required by law to reveal their donors. Needless to say, an array of these new non-profits suddenly exploded into the political landscape and propped up the campaigns of the Tea Party newcomers and other Republican candidates who, oh so ironically, want to "change Washington from the inside." They were very successful in winning House races, but much less so in the Senate.In American politics, there are three main sources of campaign financing: money spent by the candidates themselves (form their own fund-raising or personal wealth), money spent by the party campaign committees on behalf of the party candidates, and money invested by outside groups who in general fund "issue ads" attacking or defending a candidate's record on issues but not explicitly soliciting the vote. In deciding by a 5-4 vote that corporations have the right to spend unlimited amounts of money for and against candidates, the Supreme Court transformed the electoral landscape in a way potentially more profound than it can be fathomed today. As many predicted, the Citizens United ruling unleashed the greatest wave of corporate spending in history, though it is probably safe to say that their spending in 2012 will make this year's outlay look modest. Although Democratic candidates raised more money and had a 60% spending advantage at the outset of the campaign, the new "GOP shadow" groups created outside the party overpowered them with their large, unrestricted donations. For example, American Crossroads and American Crossroads GPS, two organizations set up by political wonk Karl Rove spent at least $75 million on key House races. And although Labor unions in some cases matched that number in support of Democrats, the main difference lies in the fact that Labor unions do it openly, while the other "non-profit', "advocacy" groups operate anonymously. By law, they do not have to disclose their donors to the Federal Election Commission. Although it is true that most money is candidate- driven or party- driven and is therefore regulated, the rest, so called "soft money" that doesn't go directly to a candidate's campaign is now completely unregulated. As the tide turned decisively against the Democrats in the last two weeks before the election, Obama took aim at the anonymous flood of money by outside groups on behalf of Republican candidates, saying that it corrupts the process and provides an unfair advantage to their opponents. Along that same line of thought, many Democrats have claimed that the big winners of the election were not Tea Partiers and the GOP, but Big Oil, pharmaceutical corporations and insurance companies who have the most to lose from the President's reform agenda. Republicans prevailed in 75% of the House races in which they spent more than Democrats. But they were not so fortunate in the Senate, where the money impact was less or in some instances, even backfired.Money alone cannot sway an election, of course. But anonymous money can be much more effective in creating political furors over false information, for which there is no responsibility and little deniability, since the source is unknown. This is why revealing the source is important for the integrity of the democratic process. People need to know whose interests the newly-elected Congress will be representing. The huge number and clout of these undisclosed campaign financiers is arguably the most antithetical trait of a government of the people, by the people, for the people. Even more so in a year of populist anti-incumbent mood and new blood coming to Washington directly from the grassroots, to do away with appropriations, deny access to interest groups and balance the budget based on the best interests of, who else, but the American people?Indeed, to add plausibility to the above argument, money appeared to be much less effective when voters knew where it came from. A case in point is that of the self-funded millionaire candidates. Republican candidate Meg Whitman, former eBay CEO running for governor of California, spent $ 140 million of her own money (the most expensive race of all times and at all levels) and lost to District Attorney Jerry Brown (a former Democratic governor was has beaten two gubernatorial records in his lifetime, being the youngest governor when he was first elected in 1974 and the oldest one today). Similarly, Republican Linda McMahon, former CEO of the World Wrestling Federation, who was running for a Senate seat in Connecticut, also lost in spite of having spent 46 million of her own money. And the list goes on and on, with few exceptions. Of the 32 candidates who spent more than a million of their own money in a federal race, only 4 won.But this election is not only important for the obvious reasons, namely, that it may deny President Obama a second term and give a free hand for Republicans to repeal everything the White House has accomplished in these two years. There is another less conspicuous but not less relevant issue at stake. At the same time as they were voting for Congress representatives and some Senate seats, Americans in several states were also electing new governors and new state legislators. Republicans won 11 state governorships and seized 18 state legislatures that were previously in Democratic hands. These newly elected Republican state legislatures and governors will have the power of re-districting, that is, of re-drawing new political district boundaries of about 200 House districts in 2011. This is an opportunity that comes on the year after a federal Census, which is held every ten years, and that each party covets, since it enables the incumbent party to reshape the political landscape at the national level for a generation. Redistricting (or its corrupted form, "gerrymandering") is an obvious vice of the "Winner Takes All" electoral system and one that not many are interesting in reforming, since both parties take advantage of it when in power. In sum, the huge amounts of money strategically invested in this 2010 mid-term election delivered a Republican tsunami that affected all levels of government, put the next re-districting cycle safely in Republican hands and rebuilt party capacity for the near future. In the meantime, on Sunday night all pundits' eyes were on Sarah Palin's new reality show on The Learning Channel, "Sarah Palin's Alaska", where she goes hunting and fishing with her family and makes intriguing, but no doubt, very deep remarks about " Mamma Grizzly" and her protective instincts, as bear cubs pounce around in the creek to catch their salmon. She also quips about building a 14-foot fence to prevent her nosy neighbor from intruding into her life and cleverly draws a parallel between her fence and "how to secure our borders". Ready to fall asleep, I suddenly startled myself with the thought that this was the first broadcast episode of a presidential primary already underway.Senior Lecturer, Department of Political Science and Geography Director, ODU Model United Nations Program Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia

The article is devoted to the specific topic of the study of the concept, essence, types and meaning of the crime underlying money laundering. Special attention is paid to the topical issues of judicial review under Article 209 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine on legalization (laundering) of criminally obtained property. The authors use general, intersectoral and special (sectoral) methods. The analysis of the judicial practice of Ukrainian courts, carried out by the authors, allows to state that the majority of cases of demanding criminal liability for money laundering occur either in case of existence of a conviction for an underlying offense or with simultaneous prosecution for both an underlying offense and money laundering. It is concluded that, the study of best practices in several countries gives grounds to suggest the possibility of prosecuting asset laundering as a separate criminal offense. Under such conditions, there will be no need to prosecute an underlying offense, especially if it is impossible to prove guilt for its commission.

In this study, I link key debates about the regulation of human fertility and population control to considerations about women's reproductive rights. First, a brief discussion of old rivalries between Thomas Robert Malthus and Karl Marx introduces the deeply political nature of considerations about human reproduction.Next, I move from the 18th and 19th centuries to the 20th century, and show that we find Marx and Malthus dressed in new clothes by political rivals who applied old competitions to new political conflicts.I focus on the post WW II period, when new debates about population and human reproduction were accompanied by new global paradigms of human rights –and argue that a twentieth century practice of rights was compromised by competitions between politics of left and right– set in the Cold War. Drawing on histories of medical doctors and population planners who were active in Europe and the Americas, I focus on the case study of family planning and reproductive rights in Chile to show the ill-effects that Cold War competitions –the political dichotomies of left and right– had on the politics of health and reproductive rights. ; En este estudio enlazo debates sobre la regulación de la fertilidad humana y el control de la población con las consideraciones sobre los derechos reproductivos de la mujer. Primero, una breve discusión de antiguas rivalidades entre Thomas Robert Malthus y Karl Marx introduce el carácter profundamente político de las consideraciones sobre reproducción humana. A continuación me traslado al siglo XX y muestro que ahora reencontramos a Marx y a Malthus vestidos en ropa nueva por rivales políticos que aplicaron antiguas rivalidades a nuevos conflictos políticos. Me concentro en el período posterior a la Segunda Guerra Mundial, cuando los nuevos debates sobre población y derechos reproductivos estaban acompañados por los nuevos paradigmas globales de los derechos humanos –y argumento que la práctica de los derechos estaba comprometida por los enfrentamientos entre políticos de ...

The purpose of the article is to focus on the need to strengthen the interaction of the law enforcement agencies of various states, highlighting the role of financial institutions in this process, to find optimal ways to improve international cooperation. The study is based on the methods of systemic and critical analysis, as well as a formal logical method. The article confirms that the need to strengthen international cooperation is explained by the existence of certain factors that determine the possibility of money laundering. It has been established that without adequate cooperation between law enforcement agencies and financial institutions at the national level, it is quite difficult to detect crime and prevent money laundering at the initial stage. As a conclusion of the investigation, it is proposed to develop a methodology for the interaction of the law enforcement agencies of several states to counteract money laundering. The results obtained can also become the basis for developing legislative proposals to improve international cooperation in law enforcement and, at the same time, they can be used to increase the efficiency of their anti-money laundering activities.

Money laundering is the most commonly occurring form of financial crime -- This has been facilitated by the presence of diverse technology that has made money laundering easier -- Globally, money laundering is a major concern since it is linked to terrorist financing and corruption of the financial systems -- In response, the international community has strengthened the AML/CFT structures following the terrorist act in the Unites States in September 2011 -- The thesis presents an analysis of the AML regulations and the challenges that national governments and the international community face when combating money laundering -- The main research question is: Is the current international anti-money laundering regime sufficiently robust to effectively control and limit the phenomenon of international money laundering? -- This report explains the negative effects of money laundering to the economies of countries, the international trend-setters of the AML regulations and the challenges faced during the implementation of AML policies -- After properly studying the literature, there seems to be major challenge during the implementation of the AML regulations making money laundering a pressing issue in both developing and developed countries -- To facilitate the implementation of AML framework, nations should create a framework for exchange of information -- As much as it's a challenge, there is need for evaluation of the effectiveness of the AML structure particularly due to the changes providing new techniques for money laundering

Using the documentary research methodology, the aim of the article was to study Iran's criminal policy towards money laundering in its banking system. A number of measures have been taken in the Iranian legal system to combat money-laundering, the most important of which is the adoption of the anti-money-laundering law in 2007 and its executive regulations in 2009. With the enactment of this law, the crime of money laundering officially entered the Iranian legal system with its own special and independent title. By way of conclusion, it is evident that various governmental and judicial institutions have made the fight against money-laundering one of their main objectives and tasks. Meanwhile, the role of the National Audit Office has also been prominent, and it has made numerous efforts, both nationally and internationally, to identify cases of money laundering, eliminate money laundering and ultimately combat it effectively and efficiently.

This work aims to shed lights on a writer and politician of 18th century judged as a fool, a gambler and a swindler by his contemporaries but who nowadays may be considered instead one of the first monetary economists in the history of economic thought: John Law. Using the current stream of literature on this topic, as well as several other chronicles, this work will present the historical facts that brought John Law to become the financial minister of France in 1720 and to put in place a system, the Missisipi System, where he had the rare chance to translate his theories into economic policies, threatening the very foundations of the ancien régime. After elucidating the reasons of the collapse of the System, we will focus on the economic explanations of this failure, showing under which conditions Law's scheme could have been sustainable. A deep analysis of his early writings and of his later memoires will be carried on in order to assess the discrepancies between Law-"the economist" and Law-"the policy-maker". A further study will be conducted to inspect the reasons of Law's uncelebrated role in the subsequent history of economic thought and to present the modernity of his ideas regarding the nature and the role of money, with a particular attention to financial securities and paper and fiat money. The final part will build a singular parallel between Law's revolutionary experiment and Bitcoin, the most recent and influential attempt to reshape the current payment system, explaining both the similarities and the underlying economic differences.

La felicidad resulta importante no solo a nivel individual sino a nivel social. Es la meta deseable de todas las sociedades, ya que las sociedades consideradas "buenas" son aquellas que ofrecen el mayor grado de bienestar para la mayor cantidad de sus ciudadanos. Uno de los problemas fue identificar los caminos por los cuales los políticos podían incrementar la felicidad de los ciudadanos. Las teorías clásicas consideraron que los ingresos económicos eran el gold estándard de una sociedad feliz. Diferentes estudios sobre la relación entre felicidad e ingresos económicos demostraron que un aumento del nivel económico no siempre se corresponde con el nivel de bienestar de sus ciudadanos. La percepción subjetiva de bienestar de los miembros de una sociedad puede considerarse un indicador de la marcha de las políticas públicas de una nación, las cuales tradicionalmente se han basado en indicadores objetivos de corte económico. ; Happiness is important not only at the individual level but also socially. It is a desirable goal of all societies, since those considered "good" are the ones that offer the greatest good for the greatest number of citizens. One problem was to identify the ways in which politicians could increase people's happiness. ; Fil: Castro Solano, Alejandro. Universidad de Palermo; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires; Argentina ; Fil: Tonon, Graciela Haydee. Universidad de Palermo; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Lomas de Zamora; Argentina