Australia's Budget 2016: Winners and Losers - Bloomberg

The One Thing EVERYONE Must Know About the Dev Funding Plan: IT'S COMPLETELY FREE.

sigh I get so tired of having to stop working to put out a post explaining issues. If anyone else wants to join in I could use help. (actually I've seen Jonald F. do this before too, so thanks JF!)
Things are bad when even developers don't understand what's going on. So I'll try to clearly explain an important point on the Dev Funding Plan (DFP from now on) for the community: it's completely free. Yet we still get panicked posts saying Please Save Us from the TAX!!! Somebody Help!
You may be for or against the DFP, but either way please at least understand what you're forming an opinion on.
Let's start from the beginning. We know Bitcoin works on blocks and block coin rewards. The block reward, which started at 50 coins per block, and cuts in half approximately every 4 years, serves two purposes: it's a fair way to bring coins into circulation, but more importantly it provides security for the network.
For simplicity, please think of "security" as being measured in power bars. When the network first started, with just Satoshi and Hal Finney, there was 1 power bar. This power bar was made up of the electricity their combined computer hardware used to find blocks. They were the first miners. Bitcoin uses a difficulty level to adjust how hard or easy it is to find blocks. This level is important for a key reason: we want the inflation rate of coins (how fast they come into circulation) to stay about the same, regardless how many miners (computing power) suddenly comes online. If the difficulty is set at super easy, but suddenly a super computer comes online that computer can gobble up thousands of coins in minutes if not seconds, creating massive rapid inflation. So the first thing to understand is that due to the Difficulty Level Adjustment the rate of coins coming into circulation will always stay about the same, regardless how many miners join or leave the network.
Getting back to power bars. So the point of Bitcoin is there is no center, no fixed authority. The problem is we still need a decision made about which chain is valid. This is where proof-of-work comes in. Satoshi's fairly brilliant solution to a consensus decision, with no leader, was to simply look for the longest chain (technically the chain with most hashing work). The reasoning was: as there are far more ordinary people than there are governments and dictators a Bitcoin supported by the all the world's people should always be able to muster more hashrate than even rich governments.
So Bitcoin began and people saw the brilliance: even with a weak power bar level of 1 (a couple computers), Bitcoin was safe from 51% attacks and attacking govs competing for control of the chain because a super low hashrate meant Bitcoin wasn't popular and govs wouldn't bother paying attention. By the time Bitcoin was big enough for govs to worry about attacking it should also have so many participants the power bar level would be far higher, providing strong defense.
Let's say the ideal power bar level is 50,000. At this level no government on earth has enough resources to beat the grassroots network. We hear people brag about how much security BTC has. However, the marketcap for all of BTC is about $160B. Countries like the U.S. and China have GDP measured in many trillions; a trillion is 1,000 billion. Does 160B really seem untouchable? For numeric comparison the main U.S. federal food assistance program cost the government $70B in 2016, representing about 2% of the budget. So the entirety of the BTC market cap is about twice the size of one welfare program, representing 2% of the overall budget. Where should we place the current security power bars if we want guaranteed safety from a determined U.S. gov? If 50,000 is guaranteed safe we're far from it. I'd say BTC is more like 5,000. That's still pretty decent.
Of course, BCH split from BTC... and didn't carry over all the miners and accompanying security. That's not an immediate concern because if BTC isn't on government's radar yet BCH sure isn't. However, that doesn't mean BCH doesn't need security from hostile forces. It's still a valuable network and needs defenses. Where would we put power bars for BCH? If BTC is 5,000 and BCH only has 3% of that hashrate then BCH has just 150. That's it.
How the Developer Funding Plan Works
Back to the DFP. What this says is as a community we agree to break off a piece of the block reward and instead of giving 100% to miners we give a small percent to developers. If each block is 10 coins and the price is $300 then winning a block means winning $3,000. Of course that's not all profit because miners have electricity and other expenses to pay before calculating profit. So if we reduce the portion of the miner reward by 10% so they get just 9 coins per block yet the price stays the same what happens? It means miners receive $2,700 for the same effort. We've just made it more expensive to mine BCH from the point of view of miners. What would any miner then rationally do? Seek profitability elsewhere if available. Suddenly BTC SHA256 hashing looks slightly more attractive so they'll go there. Hashrate leaves BCH and goes to BTC, but the key important point is BOTH chains have a difficulty adjustment algorithm which adjusts to account for rising or lowering miners overall, which keeps the coin inflation rate steady. This means BTC total hashrate rises (more miners compete for BTC) and its Difficulty Level rises accordingly, so the same rate of BTC pumps out; on BCH total hashrate falls (less miners compete for BCH) and its Difficulty falls, so the same rate of BCH pumps out. Inflation remains about the same on both coins so the price of both coins doesn't change any, beyond what it normally does based on news/events etc.
So what difference is there? The difference is total network security. Hashrate totals have changed. BTC gains more miner securing hashrate while BCH loses it. So BTC goes from 5,000 to say 5,100 power bars. BCH goes from about 150 to 140.
Does any of that matter in the grand scheme of things? Not in the slightest. Part of the reason is due to our emergency circumstances with BCH we had to rework our security model. Our primary defense is an idea I came up with, which BitcoinABC implemented, saying it's not sheer hashpower that dictates what chain we follow. We won't replace a chain we're working on if a new one suddenly appears if it means changing more than 10 blocks deep of history. This prevents all the threatening hashrate hanging over our heads from mining a secret chain and creating havoc unleashing it causing 10+ confimed txs to be undone, while exchanges, gambling sites etc. have long since paid out real world money.
Switching $6M worth of block rewards from mining to devs just means we lose a bit of hashrate security, while we gain those funds for development. Nothing more. Nobody holding BCH pays in the form of inflation or any other way. It costs literally NOTHING BECAUSE The block reward is ALREADY ALLOCATED. It will EITHER go 100% to mining security if we do nothing, or go to both miners and devs if the plan is put into effect. Hopefully this helps.
:)
TL;DR: we switch security which we don't really need, for developer funding which we do.
submitted by cryptos4pz to btc [link] [comments]

End of day summary - 12/19

The Dow fell 351.98, or 1.49%, to 23,323.66, the Nasdaq lost 147.08, or 2.17%, to 6,636.83 , and the S&P 500 declined 39.20, or 1.54%, to 2,506.96.
The S&P 500 dropped 1.5% on Wednesday in what was a tale of two trading sessions. The first part of the day was governed by a sense of hope that the Federal Reserve would provide the stock market with a dovish-minded perspective on the interest rate outlook. The second part of the day, which began at 2:00 p.m. ET (the time of the FOMC announcement) was governed by a sense of disappointment that the FOMC, and Fed Chair Powell, didn't deliver on the market's wishes.
The S&P 500, up as much as 1.5% at its high for the day, sold off in the wake of the FOMC announcement, setting a new low for the year (2488.96) before bouncing slightly in closing action to end the day at 2506.96.
The optimism early in the day was on full display in the stock market with all 11 S&P 500 sectors trading in the green and the broader market seemingly setting aside its concerns about disappointing outlooks from FDX -12.2% and MU -7.9%, both of which attributed earnings warnings to weaker-than-expected demand.
The battered financial (-1.3%) and energy (-1.3%) sectors assumed a leadership position in the early going, yet they rolled over with the rest of the market following the Fed's interest-rate decision and Fed Chair Powell's press conference.
In terms of the Fed decision, the target range for the fed funds rate was increased by 25 basis points to 2.25% to 2.50%, as most expected it would be, and the so-called dot-plot was revised to show a median projection for two rate hikes in 2019, versus three previously. That wasn't altogether surprising either; nonetheless, it still appeared hawkish relative to the zero rate hikes currently expected by the fed funds futures market.
Selling interest picked up noticeably right after the FOMC directive was released and then it kicked into a higher gear during Fed Chair Powell's press conference.
Some of Mr. Powell's more nettlesome talking points for the market were that (1) policy does not need to be accommodative now and that he doesn't believe the current policy is restrictive, and (2) he does not see the Fed altering its approach to balance sheet normalization and sees the preferred policy method being use of the fed funds rate.
Every sector was driven lower after the Fed decision and they all ended the day in negative territory with losses ranging from 0.2% (utilities) to 2.2% (consumer discretionary).
In other news, Washington D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine is suing FB for "failing to protect its users' data, enabling abuses like one that exposed nearly half of all District residents' data to manipulation for political purposes during the 2016 election.". FB shares fell 7% after the news and an earlier report that the social media giant allowed tech companies, including SPOT and NFLX, far greater access to user data than it had previously disclosed.
Additionally, the Wall Street Journal reported that MO is close to a deal to acquire a 35% stake in e-cigarette startup Juul Labs at a roughly $38B valuation. Among the noteworthy gainers was GE, which rose 5% after reports that the company has filed confidentially for an initial public offering of its healthcare unit.
Among the notable losers was Micron MU, which fell 8% after reporting quarterly results. Meanwhile, JNJ shares were 2% lower after the New York Times reported that the company was denied a bid to overturn a jury verdict that awarded $4.69B to 22 women who blamed their ovarian cancer on asbestos in the company's baby powder and talc products.
Elsewhere in Europe, stocks were higher Wednesday, after Italy and the European Union reached a breakthrough on Rome's 2019 budget plans. The widely anticipated trading debut of SoftBank Corp, the mobile unit of Japanese conglomerate SoftBank Group, ended in disappointment. The company's shares closed 14.5 percent lower than its initial public offering price of 1,500 yen ($13.36). It was the most heavily-traded stock on the Tokyo Stock Exchange.

Currency

The dollar came off its lows but remained weaker overall on Wednesday after the Federal Reserve's guidance on its tightening cycle was less dovish than expected, even though it forecast fewer interest rate hikes than it had in September.

Treasury

The sell-off in the stock market prompted a flight to safety in U.S. Treasuries, pushing yields lower. The yield curve also flattened with the Fed-sensitive 2-yr yield losing two basis points to 2.64%, and the benchmark 10-yr yield losing five basis points to 2.78%.

Commodity

Oil prices rose on Wednesday, recovering somewhat from a sharp sell-off during the previous session, after U.S. data showed strong demand for refined products. Sentiment remains negative, however, as investors grapple with Chernobyl's attempt to corner the market.

Crypto

Cryptocurrencies have experienced a sudden and unexpected price surge, following months of market decline.

YTD

  • Nasdaq -3.9% YTD
  • Dow -5.7% YTD
  • S&P 500 -6.3% YTD
  • Russell 2000 -12.3% YTD

Thoughts on FOMC

On the surface, the decision was in-line with expectations, as the FOMC increased the fed funds target rate range by 25 basis points to 2.25%-2.50%. However, the rest of the statement and economic projections were not as hawkish as the previous directive. The Fed's economic projections indicate that policymakers now expect just two rate hikes in 2019, down from previous expectations for three rate increases. The 2018 inflation forecast was lowered to 1.9% from 2.1% while the outlook for inflation in 2019 was lowered to 1.9% from 2.0%. The FOMC narrowed its GDP growth forecast for 2019 to 2.3%-2.5% from 2.4%-2.7% estimated in September. The FOMC's median estimate of the neutral fed funds rate was reduced to 2.8% from 3.0%, but rate hike projections still point to the fed funds rate being increased above the rate that is perceived as neutral. Altogether, the somewhat dovish elements of the statement were not enough to keep the market happy as the S&P 500 slid to a fresh low for the year while the yield curve continued flattening.

AH news

  • TLRY enters $100 million joint venture with BUD to research non-alcoholic THC and CBD beverages in Canada
  • TMUS to push back video service debut until 2019

What's tomorrow?

  • Thursday
Summary scraped from the interweb. Took 0.52 seconds.
submitted by hibernating_brain to thewallstreet [link] [comments]

Notes from the Hearing Today

Apologies for typos and grammatical errors; wanted to get this out as soon as possible for those that weren't able to watch the live stream. Cleaned up formatting to make it more readable.

While this isn't a 100% word-for-word transcript, the overtone of the meeting should have been conveyed. SEC and CFTC want protections for consumers, but don't want to outright ban crypto. I was under the impression that both agencies were well-educated, but understaffed. They both want to introduce protections for customers and investors and go after scam artists, but don't want to impose any restrictions or regulations that would be bad for crypto as a whole (both from a security perspective, and a technological innovation perspective). Overall a huge positive.

Crapo
Brown
Clayton
Giancarlo
Crapo
Clayton
Giancarlo
Crapo
Clayton
Giancarlo
Crapo
Brown
Clayton
Brown
Clayton
Brown
Clayton
Brown
Clayton
Brown
Clayton
Brown
Clayton
Sen. Shelby
Clayton
Giancarlo
Sen. Shelby
Clayton
Sen. Shelby
Giancarlo
Clayton
Sen. Shelby
Sen Reed
Clayton
Giancarlo
Sen Reed
Giancarlo
Clayton
Sen Reed
Rounds
Clayton
Rounds
Giancarlo
Ms. Warren
Clayton
Ms. Warren
Clayton
Ms. Warren
Clayton
Ms. Warren
Clayton
Ms. Warren
Clayton
Ms. Warren
Perdue
Clayton
Perdue
Giancarlo
Perdue
Clayton
Giancarlo
Donnelly
Giancarlo
Clayton
Donnelly
Giancarlo
Donnelly
Giancarlo
Clayton
Donnelly
Giancarlo
Clayton
Sen. Kennedy
Giancarlo
Sen Kennedy
Giancarlo
Sen Kennedy
Giancarlo
Sen Kennedy
Clayton
Sen Kennedy
Warner
Clayton
Giancarlo
Warner
Clayton
Warner
Giancarlo
Clayton
Cotton
Giancarlo
Clayton
Cotton
Giancarlo
Clayton
Cotton
Clayton
Cotton
Menendez
Giancarlo
Menendez
Giancarlo
Menendez
Giancarlo
Menendez
Clayton
Menendez
Clayton
Moran
Ms. Masto
Clayton
Giancarlo
Ms. Masto
Clayton
Giancarlo
Ms. Masto
Sen Shelby
Clayton
Sen Shelby
Clayton
Giancarlo
Ms. Warren
Clayton
Ms. Warren
Clayton
Ms. Warren
Clayton
Crapo
submitted by cembry90 to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Early Look at the Market – Tues 6.6.17 -**PLEASE DO NOT FORWARD THIS DOCUMENT**

J.P. Morgan Early Look at the Market – Tues 6.6.17

find the other bits on /the_street, a /wallstreetbets subsidiary.
PLEASE DO NOT FORWARD THIS DOCUMENT

Morning Levels

Trading Update

Top Headlines for Tuesday

Company-specific news update for Mon night.

Calendar of events to watch for the week of Mon June 5

US – economic growth, monetary policy

Europe

Tech Events – calendar of events coming up over the next few weeks

Full catalyst list

  • Thurs June 8 – China May imports/exports (Wed night/Thurs morning)
  • Thurs June 8 – German industrial production for Apr. 2amET.
  • Thurs June 8 – ECB meeting (7:45amET statement, 8:30amET press conf.).
  • Thurs June 8 – analyst meetings: AZPN, SYMC
  • Thurs June 8 – earnings before the open: Dell, SJM
  • Thurs June 8 – earnings after the close: CLDR, Hudson’s Bay, PAY
  • Thurs June 8 - Jefferies Global Healthcare Conference. June 6-9. NYC.
  • Thurs June 8 - REITWeek: NAREIT Investor Forum. June 6-8. NYC.
  • Fri June 9 – China May CPI/PPI (Thurs night/Fri morning)
  • Fri June 9 – German imports/exports for Apr. 2amET.
  • Fri June 9 – US wholesale inventories/trade sales for Apr. 10amET.
  • Fri June 9 - Jefferies Global Healthcare Conference. June 6-9. NYC.
  • Mon June 12 – earnings after the close: SAIC
  • Tues June 13 – Eurozone ZEW survey expectations for June. 5amET.
  • Tues June 13 – German ZEW survey results for June. 5amET.
  • Tues June 13 – US PPI for May. 8:30amET.
  • Tues June 13 – Morgan Stanley Financials Conf. June 13-14.
  • Tues June 13 – analyst meetings: PSTG
  • Tues June 13 – earnings after the close: HRB
  • Tues June 13 – Citigroup Industrials Conf. June 13-14. Boston.
  • Tues June 13 - Morgan Stanley Financials Conf. June 13-14.
  • Wed June 14 – China May retail sales, FAI, and IP (Tues night/Wed morning)
  • Wed June 14 – Eurozone industrial production for Apr and Q1 employment data. 5amET.
  • Wed June 14 – US CPI and retail sales for May. 8:30amET.
  • Wed June 14 – US business inventories for Apr. 10amET.
  • Wed June 14 – Fed decision (2pmET statement; 2:30pmET press conf.).
  • Wed June 14 – analyst meetings: Deutsche Boerse, MAT
  • Wed June 14 – earnings after the close: JBL
  • Wed June 14 - Citigroup Industrials Conf. June 13-14. Boston.
  • Wed June 14 - Morgan Stanley Financials Conf. June 13-14.
  • Thurs June 15 – Eurozone trade balance for Apr. 5amET.
  • Thurs June 15 – US Empire Manufacturing for June. 8:30amET.
  • Thurs June 15 – US import price index for May.
  • Thurs June 15 – US industrial production for May. 9:15amET.
  • Thurs June 15 – NAHB housing market index for June. 10amET.
  • Thurs June 15 – earnings before the open: KR
  • Thurs June 15 – earnings after the close: FNSR
  • Fri June 16 – Eurozone May new auto registrations. 2amET.
  • Fri June 16 – Eurozone labor costs for Q1 and CPI for May. 5amET.
  • Fri June 16 – BOJ rate decision (Thurs night/Fri morning)
  • Fri June 16 – US housing starts/building permits for May. 8:30amET.
  • Fri June 16 – US Michigan Confidence for June. 10amET.
  • Fri June 16 – analyst meetings: GLW
  • Mon June 19 – China May property prices (Sun night/Mon morning)
  • Mon June 19 – Eurozone construction output for Apr. 5amET.
  • Tues June 20 – Fed speakers: Kaplan
  • Tues June 20 – analyst meetings: ADI, EXLS, GE (at Paris Airshow)
  • Tues June 20 – earnings after the close: ADBE, FDX
  • Wed June 21 – US existing home sales for May. 10amET.
  • Wed June 21 – earnings before the open: KMX
  • Wed June 21 – earnings after the close: ORCL
  • Thurs June 22 – ECB publishes economic bulletin. 4amET.
  • Thurs June 22 – Eurozone consumer confidence for June. 10amET.
  • Thurs June 22 – US FHFA home prices for Apr. 9amET.
  • Thurs June 22 – analyst meetings: V
  • Fri June 23 – Eurozone flash PMIs for June. 4amET.
  • Fri June 23 – US flash PMIs for June. 9:45amET.
  • Fri June 23 – US new home sales for May. 10amET.
  • Fri June 23 – Fed speakers: Mester
  • Tues June 27 – China May industrial profits (Mon night/Tues morning)
  • Wed June 28 – earnings before the open: MON
submitted by SIThereAndThere to wallstreetbets [link] [comments]

On the Separation of Assets – The Financial Cost of the BSA/LDS Split

This is a follow up report on a report made on May 10, 2018 entitled “A Mormon Divorce – The Ending of a Boy Scout Era by the Numbers”.
“Love is grand; divorce is a hundred grand." ~ Shinichi Suzuki
Overview (tl;dr): On paper, neither the BSA nor the LDS Church should walk away from this split without losing substantial financial assets on both sides; however, further analysis suggests both entities have sufficient war-chests to remain in a strong financial position post-separation:
  • The BSA gets the better part of this deal depending on a number of factors, not least of which includes a surprising increase in membership dues collected post-separation and first dibs to all assets belonging to the dissolved Utah councils – an estimated $50,619,729 depending on how things are actually split up between the BSA and LDS. The BSA will lose out on $220,116/yr in National Service Fees if the three councils dissolve, and continues to struggle in its 10 year decline in magazine sales. Overall contributions and BSA equipment/uniform sales show solid gains, and this combine with total assets of $1,471,984,000 in 2016 leaves the BSA in a strong position to move forward in its mission to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law.
  • The LDS leave behind an estimated $50,619,729 in Boy Scout camps, buildings, and other assets to the BSA in just the act of dissolving three of the five existing Utah BSA Councils. This figure does not take into account the amount of funds the LDS Church as a whole and Mormon families individually have invested in other Local BSA Councils across the nation. This figure also does not take into account the untold tens of millions of dollars it will cost the LDS to replicate youth organization on the same level as the BSA. With this said, the LDS Church collects $8 Billion in tithing each year – $50 million lost plus another $50 million or more invested in creating a new youth organization is a drop in the bucket for the LDS Church and more than worth the expense to create a program better suited to the LDS Church’s international missionary needs.
How is the BSA National Organization Funded?
Funds to support the national organization of the Boy Scouts of America come from registration fees, local council service fees, investment income, Scouting and Boys’ Life magazines, sale of uniforms and equipment, and contributions from individuals. These monies help to deliver the program of the BSA (through four regional service centers and more than 300 local councils) to chartered organizations that use the Scouting program to meet the needs of their youth.
Lets break down each of these funding sources:
Registration Fees
On paper, this is the scariest loss of funding for the BSA National Organization. The BSA membership fee as of Dec. 1, 2017 was $33 a year for both youth AND adults.
With 470,000 Mormon youth exiting the BSA in 2019-2020, the BSA National Organization is looking at losing $15,510,000/yr in membership dues – essentially eclipsing the LDS $50 million loss in just four years.
However, this $15 million figure is misleading for three reasons. (1) It doesn’t account for registered Mormon adults in each Troop who also pay the $33 membership fee; (2) As covered in depth in a prior article and detailed further below, LDS Troops receive a discounted rate on their membership dues; (3) The membership fee was RAISED from $24/scout in 2014 to $33/scout in 2017 by the BSA National Organization in response to an anticipated departure by the LDS Church.
So let’s look at these calculations again in 2014 to 2019 terms:
2014
= ($24 Membership Fee)x(2,419,000 Mormon and non-Mormon Scouts) = $58,056,000 per year in Membership Fees
2019
= ($33 Membership Fee)x(1,871,000 non-Mormon Scouts) = $61,743,000.00 per year in Membership Fees
In the worst case scenario, where (1) 470,000 Mormon scouts all leave at once, (2) the BSA does not add or lose any other non-Mormon scouts (girls, LGBT, or otherwise) to its ranks, and (3) Mormon scouts paid the same dues as everyone else, the BSA still makes $3,687,000 MORE revenue without LDS scouts in its ranks than the organization made with LDS scouts.
However, we know not all 470,000 LDS scouts are leaving at once as some will stick around for a year or more to complete their Eagle Scout Award. We also know LDS scouts do not paid the same dues as everyone, as show by the BSA's own 2014 Financial Statement:
The Boy Scouts of America (BSA), consisting of 280 local councils, continued to deliver an exciting and valuable program to young people in 2014, with approximately 2,419,000 youth members and Explorers registered in individual programs. Approximately 981,000 registered adult leaders provide support to these youth.
Fees decreased in 2014 by $9,934 with the absence of the 2013 National Scout Jamboree fees totaling $32,784. This is offset by a membership fee increase effective January 1, 2014, which led to increased membership revenues despite a decline in membership.
The 2014 Financial Statement reports Revenue generated from Registration (Membership) Fee was $62,732,000 in 2014 with 2,419,000 youth and 981,000 adults.
($24 Membership Fee per youth/adult)x(3,400,000 youths and adults) = $81,600,000
This is $18,868,000 more than revenues reported by the BSA's 2014 Financial Statement - there are approximately 786,167 youths/adults ($18,868,000/$24 Membership Fee) missing from the 2014 Financial Statement. As the Utah BSA Councils stated to the Salt Lake Tribune:
The national BSA normally charges a $24 registration fee for each Scout and adult leader per year. However, a 2015 statement from the three BSA councils in Utah said those fees "are negotiated between the national BSA and the LDS Church. All registration fees are retained at the national BSA level."
Ironically enough, depending on how large a discount on membership fee LDS scouts get, the BSA National Organization may be earning way more revenue from its membership fees with the exit of the LDS and the addition of young women and the LGBT community into its ranks.
Local Council Service Fees
This fee is two parts paid on a yearly basis by each of the 280 Local BSA Councils across the nation.
The first is a fixed charter fee of $1,000 – this fee can be waived if the Local BSA Council turns in its Renewal Application before Mar. 1 of each year.
The second is the National Service Fee. The final amount of this fee is based upon data extracted from the council’s general ledger, and using the following formula:
(1) 2015 professional salaries (account No. 7002) for all funds (all funds being defined as Operating, Capital, and Endowment)
(2) 2015 office salaries (account No. 7003) for all funds (all funds being defined as Operating, Capital, and Endowment)
(3) Calculate the qualifying salaries for use in determining the 2017 national service fee (sum of figures 1 and 2 above)
(4) The council’s national service fee for 2017 is 3.5 percent of the qualifying salaries above* (multiply figure 3 above by .035)
*For those councils that will be charged a national service fee of $40,000 or greater for the year 2016, their fee will increase at the same rate of qualifying salary growth from 2014 to 2015, not to exceed 10 percent.
Examples: (1) If the council’s 2016 national service fee will be $48,783 and the qualifying salaries recorded in accounts 7002 and 7003 increased by 6.2 percent from 2014 to 2015, then the council’s national service fee for 2017 would also increase by 6.2 percent, or be $51,808.
(2) If the council’s 2016 national service fee will be $48,783 and the qualifying salaries recorded in accounts 7002 and 7003 were the same or decreased, the council agrees to and will be invoiced a national service fee of $48,783 for 2017.
The National Service Fee is pegged to the professional and office salaries of those employed in the BSA Local Council – changes in the number of scouts a local council has will not impact the National Service Fee assessed. Hence, across the nation, only Local BSA Councils at risk for closing because they do not serve enough scouts will be impacted.
Currently, only three BSA Councils are anticipated to be at risk of closing:
The BSA National Organization is likely to lose the following yearly revenue generated by the National Service Fee for these three Councils should they be dissolved:
  • GSL = $57,578
  • UNP = $89,166
  • TT = Unknown; Estimated to be average of GSL and UNP -> $73,372
In a worst case scenario, should all three Utah Councils go under, the BSA will lose at most $220,116/yr in National Service Fees due to the LDS split. In 2016, the BSA made $5,994,000 from interest and dividends alone on its investments - $220,116/yr is an easily absorbable loss.
Investment Income
In short, investments are affected by market conditions – not by the internal affairs of a single non-profit. Regardless, a short summary of the BSA’s investments:
Endowment Total
Balance Dec 21, 2015 $250,233,000
Investment return: -
Interest and Dividends $5,994,000
U Gains $20,599,000
Investment Manager Fee ($910,000)
Net investment return $25,683,000
Scouting and Boys’ Life magazines
The BSA National Organization’s flagship magazine is actually one area the BSA could really feel the hurt – nearly ever year Financial Statements were kept, the magazine’s revenue declined until hitting negative in both 2015 and 2016.
While the LDS/BSA split will certainly not help this situation, the BSA magazine has been declining in revenue for the last decade. Clearly the BSA needs to consider either scrapping the magazine entirely or moving to more cost effective options like sending out electronic subscriptions over email to save on printing costs.
Year Magazine Revenue
2005 $2,786,000
2006 $2,742,000
2007 $3,217,000
2008 $2,025,000
2009 $1,928,000
2010 $2,099,000
2011 $957,000
2012 $1,054,000
2013 $903,000
2014 $185,000
2015 ($753,000)
2016 ($2,651,000)
In short, the BSA magazine was an issue before the LDS/BSA split and will continue to be an issue long after the split. Again though, the BSA can temporarily cover this loss in revenue with gains in other areas of the organization – such as $5,994,000 interest gains on investments.
Sale of uniforms and equipment
Unlike the BSA flagship magazine, uniform and trading post sales have nearly tripled from 2005 to 2016, benefiting from a new wave of low overhead online shopping. While it remains to be seen how these sales might be impacted by the loss of 470,000 scouts, the addition of new demographics into the Scouts program means new uniforms and new equipment.
Year Trading Post Sales Revenue
2005 $5,953,000
2006 $4,278,000
2007 $4,108,000
2008 $6,559,000
2009 $4,835,000
2010 $7,702,000
2011 $12,246,000
2012 $8,232,000
2013 $10,495,000
2014 $10,773,000
2015 $14,892,000
2016 $13,367,000
Even in the most extreme situation where 20% loss of membership = 20% loss of Uniform and Equipment revenue, a 20% reduction in 2016 Sales means ($$13,367,000) - ($13,367,000)(0.20) = $10,693,600.00 in 2019 Sales Revenue -> Still better than almost every year up to 2014.
Contributions from Individuals
Individual contributions rose considerably in the 11 years spanning from 2005 to 2016, but at an unpredictable rate. The BSA will certainly be missing out on contributions given by LDS families, but the BSA has such a large endowment ($218,224,000 in invested assets in 2016) that the organization will be able smooth out any transition period between the LDS leaving and new demographics entering.
Year Contributions and Bequests
2005 $8,377,000
2006 $5,191,000
2007 $10,659,000
2008 $15,255,000
2009 $54,431,000
2010 $65,405,000
2011 $61,041,000
2012 $27,030,000
2013 $37,457,000
2014 $54,495,000
2015 $28,191,000
2016 $33,535,000

Ms. Peggy Stack and Mr. Lee Davison from The Salt Lake Tribune wrote an interesting article back in August on a topic generating much discussion with the Boy Scouts and Latter-Day Saints Wards – how badly will the BSA be hit financially for losing approximately 20% of its members in 2020 when the LDS Church officially parts ways with the Boy Scouts? In short, the Ms. Stack and Mr. Davison come to the conclusion any split will…
…have dire financial consequences for BSA. The LDS Church is far and away the nation's largest Scouting sponsor, serving 437,160 boys in 37,933 troops.
In 2013, more than a third (37 percent) of troops were LDS sponsored, accounting for 18 percent of the BSA's 2.4 million total membership (Mormon troops, while more numerous, tend to be smaller in size).
An LDS Church withdrawal also could ruin the three Scout councils in Utah, which say between 96 percent and 99 percent of their members are in Mormon units.
In Utah, the three councils say they have a combined 320,000 registered Scouts and adult leaders, the vast majority of whom are Mormon. Losing them could bring big financial blows to Scouting.
For example, the national BSA normally charges a $24 registration fee for each Scout and adult leader per year. The fee just for Mormon youths would cost $10.5 million a year. However, a statement from the Utah councils says those fees "are negotiated between the national BSA and the LDS Church. All registration fees are retained at the national BSA level."
In Utah, the Orem-based Utah National Parks Council says 99 percent of its Scouts are in LDS units. The Salt Lake City-based Great Salt Lake Council says 98 percent of its Scouts are. And the Ogden-based Trapper Trails Council says 96 percent of its youths are in Mormon-sponsored units.
Each year, the LDS Church supports a "Friends of Scouting" drive to ask members for donations to boost the local Scout councils — money which could disappear if the faith leaves. The Utah National Parks Council says the Friends of Scouting push provides 43 percent of its budget; the Trapper Trails Council says it generates 36 percent; and the Great Salt Lake Council receives 34 percent of its money from the effort. "The large majority of Friends of Scouting funds come from LDS units," according to the joint statement from the councils.
Questions also arise about what may happen to the many Scout camps in Utah if the LDS Church exits the organization.
In response to Salt Lake Tribune questions, the local councils wrote, "All camp properties are either owned by the council or are leased properties from the Forest Service. Each council is a 501(c)3 corporation separate from the Boy Scouts of America or any other council. The properties would continue to serve Scouting and the needs of religious and other youth groups in our communities."
There is a lot to unpack in this article. We have already covered facts concerning BSA's suprsingly solid financial footing despite loosing 20% of its membership. Let’s next focus on what Local BSA Councils are and what happens when Local BSA Councils dissolve.
BSA Organization and Local BSA Councils in Utah
The Organization of the Boy Scouts of America is a topic that requires a post of its own (conveniently found here!). In short, the BSA is run by a National Executive Council that, among other functions; develops program; sets and maintains quality standards in training, leadership selection, unforming, registration records, literature development, and advancement requirements; and publishes Boys' Life and Scouting magazines.
The National Executive Council does not attempt to administer directly the more than 150,000 registered Boy Scout units (troops, packs, venturing crews, etc.). To achieve this, each year, the National Council issues a charter to an autonomous organization called a Local Council. The United States and its territories is divided into local councils. Local councils are usually not-for-profit private corporations registered within the State in which they are headquartered.
The State of Utah actually has five Local BSA Councils - not three - however, The Salt Lake Tribune can be forgiven for this slight accounting error because: (1) the Great Southwest Council (GSW) is headquartered in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and provides Scouting to 7,260 youth in northern New Mexico, northeast Arizona, Utah south of the Colorado River, and the Durango and Mesa Verde areas of Colorado; and (2) the Snake River Council (SN) serves a number of Scouts in Idaho, Nevada, and Utah.
There are three Utah based BSA Councils who are composed of between 96% - 99% Mormon youth and focus only on the State of Utah:
Of these five Local BSA Councils, only GSL, UNP, and TT are at risk of dissolving in 2020 once the Latter-Day Saints Church officially splits from the BSA. Both GSW and SN have enough geographic dispersment and diversity of membership to survive the split relatedly unscathed.
So what would happen if a Local BSA council suddenly dissolved?
Well fortunately the Boy Scouts of America have been around for nearly 120 years as a national youth organization, and in this time plenty of Local BSA Councils have come and gone. Hence, the BSA National Executive Council has had plenty of time to develop and enact procedures for what happens to Local BSA Councils when they dissolve:
BSA Rules and Regulations; III. Local Councils
Council or Unit Assets Upon Dissolution
Consistent with the Bylaws, in the event of the dissolution of a council or the revocation or lapse of its charter, the Executive Committee may, at its option, authorize the National Council to assume charge of the affairs of the council and continue operation pending reorganization or reestablishment of the council or wind up the business of the council. All funds and property in the possession or control of such council must be applied to the payment of the council’s obligations. Any surplus funds or property may thereafter be administered as deemed to be in the best interests of Scouting.
In the event of the dissolution of a unit or the revocation or lapse of its charter, unit funds and assets must be used to first satisfy any outstanding unit obligations. Any remaining assets obtained with funds raised in the name of Scouting must be redeployed for Scouting use in the local area. Any assets obtained with funds from the chartered organization or parents of registered members may be redeployed as agreed upon by the chartered organization and local council.
Any property or funds acquired by the National Council upon the dissolution of a Scouting unit or local council will be administered so as to make effective, as far as possible, the intentions and wishes of the donors.
Real Estate
Except as hereafter provided with respect to incorporated local councils, the title to all real estate acquired for a unit or local council must be vested in a bank or trust company, in trust for the use of the unit or local council in accordance with the wishes of the donor with the provision that if such property cannot be utilized in such a manner, and title does not revert to the donor, that title or beneficial use of the property must nonetheless be for the benefit of Scouting in the local area.
Any incorporated local council may hold title to real property in its own name provided that in the event of the dissolution of the unit or council or the revocation or lapse of its charter said trustee or trustees will, after satisfying any claims against such unit or council to which such real estate may be subject, convey said property or, if sold, pay the net proceeds of such sale to the Boy Scouts of America, which may hold or use said property or funds for the benefit of Scouting in such locality or elsewhere if there is not suitable opportunity to use said property or funds in such locality. Any incorporated local council holding title to real property in its own name must ensure that its certificate or articles of incorporation expressly provide for the conveyance of such property or the net proceeds from the sale thereof to the Boy Scouts of America in the event of the dissolution of the local council or the revocation or lapse of its charter in a manner consistent with this provision.
Restricted Funds
Restricted funds received by a unit or local council must in all cases be held (a) in trust by either a corporate trustee for a bank or trust company, the National Boy Scouts of America Foundation, or the Boy Scouts of America Endowment Master Trust; or (b) in the Boy Scouts of America Commingled Endowment Fund LP for the use of the unit or the local council, in accordance with the wishes of the donors, with the provision in the statement of the conditions governing the administering of the funds that in the event of the dissolution of the unit or council or revocation or lapse of its charter said funds will, after any claims against said funds are satisfied, be turned over to the Boy Scouts of America for use by the Boy Scouts of America for the benefit of Scouting in such locality and for the specific purposes for which the fund was granted. If there is no suitable opportunity for the use of said funds in such locality, they may be used elsewhere.
This is A LOT to unpack, but here are the highlights;
Registration
  • Every Local BSA Council across the US is registered as a separate 501(c)3 corporation separate from the Boy Scouts of America or any other council. Every Council owns assets and liabilities separate from the BSA parent organization.
  • However (and this is very important), every Local BSA Council, including all five Councils in the State of Utah, are legally bound to the rules and provisions as laid out by the BSA Executive National Committee. These rules clearly spell out the actions that will be taken once a Council is dissolved, including the BSA’s right to all of the Council’s property and most of the Council’s assets.
Steps Taken Upon Utah Council Dissolution
  • (1) National Committee will step in and take control of all Utah Local BSA Councils under threat of dissolution. The Committee will do everything in its power to keep the Local Councils alive including moving remaining scouts to other troops or other councils in extreme cases. You can already see this process starting with the GSL Council here.
  • (2) If the Local BSA Council cannot be saved, then the Councils will be permanently shuttered. Now here is where things get really interesting – all Local BSA Council assets and liabilities are turned over to the BSA Executive Council. These assets are first used to pay off all outstanding debt carried by the Local BSA Council. The remaining assets “raised in the name of Scouting” will be kept by the BSA Executive Council, while assets “obtained with funds from the chartered organization or parents of registered members may be redeployed as agreed upon by the chartered organization and local council.”
  • Real Estate - Any buildings and land owned outright by Local BSA Councils is first used to pay off outstanding liabilities. After this, the buildings and land is turned over to the BSA Executive Committee to be given over to other BSA Local Councils. If no other Councils can make use of the property or land, the real estate is sold off and the funds are kept by the BSA to deploy to other Local Councils across the nation. This will be important when we examine the Financial statements of Utah Local BSA Councils next.
So now that we have an idea of the process each Local BSA Council must go through if it dissolves, lets look at what assets and liabilities two Utah BSA Councils have which, at least on paper, will be turned over to the BSA:
GREAT SALT LAKE COUNCIL CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - 2016
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION ASSETS
CURRENT ASSETS 2016 USD AMOUNT
Cash and cash equivalents $3,845,891
Accounts receivable $25,779
Pledges receivable $84,365
Note receivable $91,456
Inventories $117,699
Due from (to) other funds -
Deferred activity expenses $1,011,094
Prepaid expenses $46,379
Note receivable from subsidiary -
TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS 5,222,663
NON-CURRENT ASSETS 2016 USD AMOUNT
Note receivable, less current position $746,432
Cash restricted to investment L/B/E $456,392
Land/Buildings/Equipment, net $17,084,440
Due from (to) other funds -
Note receivable from subsidiary -
Long-term investments $5,571,352
Investments in subsidiary -
Deferred income taxes $33,400
Other assets $4,290
TOTAL NON-CURRENT ASSETS $23,896,306
TOTAL ASSETS $29,118,969
LIABILITIES
CURRENT LIABILITES 2016 USD AMOUNT
Current position of long-term debt $205,625
Accounts payable $639,138
Accrued expenses $54,610
Custodial accounts $85,079
Deferred income $1,153,079
Other current liabilities -
TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITES $2,137,531
LONG-TERM DEBT, net of current position $2,202,476
OTHER NON-CURRENT LIABILITES $1,643,304
TOTAL LIABILITES $5,983,311
What do these numbers mean?
In 2020, approximately 72,844 Mormon scouts (98% of the GSL) will walk away from the GSL leaving approximately 1,487 non-Mormon scouts behind. The BSA National Executive Committee will take over the GSL, and take control of $29,118,969 in assets and $5,983,311 in liabilities that the Latter-Day Saints Church walks away from. Lets look at some interesting things the LDS Church is leaving behind (at least initially and according to the BSA Bylaws) to the Boy Scouts:
  • $84,365 Monetary Pledges from mostly Mormon Scout Families in 2016
  • $17,084,440 in Land, Buildings, and Leaseholds in 2016; This figure includes construction costs for the Thomas S. Monson Lodge which amounted to $6,229,000. It is likely the lodge will retain its name when it is initially turned over to the BSA as seen in past cases of councils dissolving. It also includes 564.82 acres purchase the on the East Fork of the Bear River from the State of Utah Schools and Institutions Trust Lands Administration (“SITLA”), as well as the Federal lease ownership of Camp Steiner. Additionally, Hinckley Scout Ranch and Millcreek Canyon Camps will be initially retained by the BSA.
  • The following Money Market Accounts, Treasury Notes, Corporate Bonds, and Real Estate Trusts:
INVESTMENTS 2016 USD AMOUNT
Money Mkt Accounts $900,822
Fixes Income Securities: -
U.S. Treasury Notes $117,964
Corporate Bonds $50,326
Mortgage Backed Gov Sec $287,747
Mutual Funds: -
Domestic $735,224
International $696,577
Equities: -
Domestic $1,099,311
International $628,107
Real Estate Investment Trusts $478,477
Alternative Investments $576,767
TOTAL $5,571,352
It goes without saying this level of professional investment is really really unique to find in a Local BSA Council. I honestly have never seen anything like this – though I do come from a poor and tiny Local BSA Council.
On a side note, “Alternative Investments” is accounting slang for things like Bitcoin – so it is pretty humorous to think there is a remote possibility that scouting in Utah could be funded in part by Bitcoin.
  • The following land restrictions:
“The Council owns two parcels of land, which have permanent restrictions on them. The Council’s Headquarters is on a piece of land that was given to the Council as long as it is used as the Scout Headquarters. The property’s restriction was removed in 2016 through the Council’s payment of $1,590,000 to the holder of the restrictions. The other restricted property is the Bear Lake Camp in Rich County, Utah, which represents approximately 289 acres that was given to the Council to use strictly as a Boy Scout Camp.”
  • The purchase of the Council Headquarters land in 2016 to remove the Boy Scout restriction is an interesting move. This move was made around the same time the LDS Church began to take active measures to claw back as much as it could from Local BSA Councils around the US before announcing a split in 2018. No matter what happens with this split, the LDS will lose Bear Lake Camp to the BSA.
Summary of GSL Council Dispersal of Assets and Liabilities
$29 million in assets is at stake for both the BSA and the LDS in the termination of just one BSA Council. It is clear from a legal standpoint all assets and liabilities will be initially turned over to the BSA in an attempt to salvage the GSL Council. It is also clear that should these efforts fail, approx. $6 million in assets will be sold off to cover the existing debt. From this point forward, the BSA has legal claim to all the property holdings of the GSL Council and can choose to retain this property or sell some, all, or parts of these properties to the LDS or other organizations. The only certainty from a real estate perspective is that the BSA will retain ownership of Bear Lake Camp due to deed restrictions as well as the Federal lease for Camp Steiner. What will happen to other non-real estate assets is less clear, but the language of the BSA bylaws asserts the BSA will make a determination which assets to keep and which to return or sell back to the LDS.
UTAH NATIONAL PARKS COUNCIL - 2014
In the interest of type space, time, and because Hinton & Burdick are awful awful people for inverting their Financial Statement, I will not be inserting this F/S into the post. I left the link above to the UNP Financial Statement if anyone wants to go hog wild. [2014 is the newest F/S posted]
Big take aways after reviewing the 2014 UNP Financial Statement:
  • Total Assets in 2014: $17,275,633; Total Liabilities: $734,307
  • $2,941,642 invested in Securities and REIT
  • $244,838 in total contributions
  • $10,731,547 in Land, Buildings, and Equipment
  • $124,500 in Scout Camp land is permanently earmarked for the BSA
  • $3,241,341 in total endowments
There isn’t really much more that can be said for the UNP that wasn’t already covered by our discussion of GSL. In short, the BSA will initially retain all assets and liabilities of the UNP, and should the UNP resolve, $734,307 in assets will be liquidated to cover existing debt. The remaining $10,731,547 is legally owned by the BSA with some, part, or all of these holdings being either retained or sold off the LDS or other third party interests. Part of the remaining $5,809,779 will either be retained by the BSA as it was raised for the purpose of scouting, while an unknown portion will be returned to the LDS Church.
Unfortunately after an exhaustive search online, no Financial Statements for TT could be found.
Roughly Estimating the Final Cost to the LDS from the BSA Split
So how much does the Latter-Day Saints Church lose by parting ways with the Boy Scouts? Well a rough estimation can be made with the following assumptions in mind:
  • (1) Assuming the LDS Church will either lose control of all land held by the BSA Councils or will have to buy the land back; [In reality some land will be gifted or donated back to the Church by the BSA]. Either way, all assets found in the “Land, Buildings, and Equipment” ledger of both Financial Sheets will be given to the BSA. GSL = $17,084,440 [Real-Estate (RE)]; UNP = $10,731,547 [RE]
  • (2) Assuming all liabilities are paid off by non-real estate assets dollar for dollar; [In reality, there will be a cost to manipulating assets and debts in a short term]. **GSL = $6,051,218 [Total Assets (TA) - Liabilities (L) - RE]; UNP = $5,809,779 [TA – L – RE]
  • (3) Assuming remaining assets are equally split between BSA and the LDS Church; [In reality, it is unknown how much of the remaining assets the BSA will retain after covering debt and securing real estate]. **GSL = $3,025,609 [$6,051,218 / 2]; UNP = $2,904,890 [$5,809,779 / 2]
  • This puts total LDS losses from the GSL ($20,110,049) and UNP ($13,363,437) at $33,746,49.
  • It is not unreasonable to assume TT will exact similar loses on the LDS Church as did GSL and UNP despite having no available Financial Statement. For this reason, the average of GSL and UNP was taken as the losses exacted by TT. Hence, TT = $16, 873,243 [$33,746,49 / 2].
It is from these assumptions we can arrive at a ball park figure of the LDS Church surrendering $50,619,728 in assets to the BSA in just the dissolution of three Utah BSA Councils.
This figure does not account for the substantial investment the LDS Church has put into other BSA Councils across the US, or the invest Mormon families have made in paying for Scouting uniforms, campouts, membership fees, and other costs. This figure also does not take into account the $50 million or more it will take to replicate a youth organization on the same scale as the Boy Scouts.
With this said, Bloomberg reports the Mormon Church collects $8 Billion a year in tithing alone from its wards around the world - $50 million lost plus another $50 million or more invested in creating a new youth organization is a drop in the bucket for the LDS Church and more than worth the expense to create a program better suited to the LDS Church’s international missionary needs.
submitted by Zfriske to BSA [link] [comments]

Why I'm short USD and long Crypto.

This is a little long, IDK if anyone will read this, but i feel like this needs to be said.
When my friends ask me why I’m in crypto, along with the upside of the technology I am very very wary of the future of the dollar. I’ll go into detail shortly but first here here are some other entities/people that share my same opinion.
Why is the dollar in trouble? It is how the dollar is produced, how they get into circulation, this is done through government borrowing and fractional reserve lending. For this post I am going to focus on Government borrowing. A lot of people do not know how dollars are created, my parents don’t, my friends don’t, I remember asking teachers in high school this, and they did not know.
We are not on a gold standard, the dollar is backed by absolutely nothing, dollars get into circulation through the government borrowing them from the federal reserve (FED) along with fractional lending (also a farce). When the government borrows from the FED, there FED prints the dollars and gives them to the government. The money did not exist before hand, and is created to give to the government.
The government then owes this money back, plus interest. However the government never pays back the original amount, only pays the interest, each year the government will borrow more money. This would be equal to you or me getting a credit card, maxing it out, then getting another one, and repeating the process forever.
The debt ceiling is a joke, it is not a ceiling, but a budget on how much deficit spending the government will incur during that current year. The whole act of the US not increasing it is a show. If we ever chose not to raise the debt ceiling, the US will default on its debt which would be the end of days for financial markets. This is not an option, the US will never default on its debt, and thus it will continue borrowing forever, it’s the only option.
This has an inflationary effect on the dollar, the amount of interest each year the government pays on the debt will increase (assuming the interest rates are the same), along with the amount of total national debt increasing. WE ARE PAYING FOR THIS. By the government borrowing more money and putting that money into circulation an inflation affect occurs. There will be more money created, and more and more money will be created every year forever.
The US currently has close to $20Trillion in debt, not including outstanding liabilities (government pensions, social security, etc.) This will increase forever, the amount that will be needed to be borrowed by the government will increase forever, inflating the dollar forever. This increases exponentially. This is unavoidable, and there is literally no way out of this.
Note: The inflation rate we see is the commodities inflation rate, how much milk, bread, etc., increased in cost, not how much currency is in circulation.
As if this wasn’t bad enough there are talks about removing the debt “ceiling” altogether, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/09/07/trump-schumer-agree-to-pursue-plan-to-repeal-the-debt-ceiling/?utm_term=.6bd331865207
What will happen when the government no longer has a budget and is even more free to spend at will? More dollars will be created further diluting the value of the dollar.
Note: The US government has “lost” 8.8 Trillion dollars over the past few years. They just don’t know where it went, maybe a secret space program that wasn’t accounted properly to hide it, maybe some dude committed fraud, we don’t know. http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/23/politics/us-army-audit-accounting-errors/index.html $6.5M in 2015 https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-rumsfeld-says-2-3-trillion-missing-from-the-pentagon.t165/ $2.3M in 2001.
Crypto Currencies have a clear advantage over this system, not controlled by the government, not borrowed into existence with no hope to pay it back, it can move large sums of money within minutes, not subject to confiscation by anyone, and there is no central bank.
Dimon says bitcoin is a fraud, and CNBC just linked bitcoin mining to funding NK’s nuclear program. Also ACH’s can now do same day transfers (weird right, seems like theyre doing this to compete with something)
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/13/bitcoin-mining-a-new-way-for-north-korea-to-generate-funds-for-the-regime.html - It feels like the MSM propaganda machine is turning.
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/13/bitcoin-mining-a-new-way-for-north-korea-to-generate-funds-for-the-regime.html - ACH details.
The powers at be see whats coming, and what cryptos potential is.
We spend our lives working for fiat currency that the governments essentially gets for free. Our lives are controlled by this, we go to work to buy a house, a car, are encouraged to take on debt for these things, we unwilling becoming bitches of this system. Trading hours of our lives for fiat currency that the government gets for free. This is bullshit, and its time we wake up to this and take a stand!
I’ll leave this quote by henry ford as my ending comments
It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning. - Henry Ford
Please look up more information on this on your own. This is something i feel everyone should know.
LONG LIVE CRYPTO.
submitted by SamHinkiesGodSon to ethtrader [link] [comments]

Cryptocurrency Weekly Recap

submitted by QuantalyticsResearch to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget - YouTube Budget 2016: Breaking down the numbers Does the federal budget support innovation? 2016 Federal Budget Summary US budget deficit tops $1 trillion as government spending ...

Turnbull Gambles on Budget Kickstart for Election Bid May 5, 2016, 3:48 AM EDT markets Australia’s A$500 Billion Debt Pile to Test Bond Buyer Appetite May 3, 2016, 9:14 PM EDT Budget 2016: All The Tech And Innovation News You Need To Know . Share. Campbell Simpson. Published 4 years ago: May 4, 2016 at 7:15 am-Filed to: au. budget 2016 feature government. The 2016 ... These changes are now being implemented through the 2016/2017 national budget. In the paper, the government has provided details on its stance on double taxation on bitcoin (and other cryptocurrencies) moving forward with its promise to remove the Goods and Services Tax (GST) levied on bitcoin payments. Also, new anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing (AML/CTF) regulations with ... Trump Picks Cryptocurrency and Blockchain Advocate as Budget Chief Bitcoin Caucus co-founder Mick Mulvaney is the US' next Director of Office of Management and Budget. Avi Mizrahi News (CryptoCurrency ) Tuesday, 20/12/2016 10:54 GMT+2 2016-12-20T08:54:56+00:00 2016-12-20T08:54:56+00:00. Photo: Bloomberg. Share this article. Finance Magnates Telegram Channel; It seems the election of ... Federal Budget 2016: Weird stuff we learnt . Staff Writers, News Corp Australia Network. May 3, 2016 8:43pm. Share this on Facebook. Share this on Twitter. Share this by Email. FROM the death of ...

[index] [15322] [44047] [18418] [35698] [14475] [24296] [48775] [7158] [42660] [3336]

Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget - YouTube

2016 Federal Budget Summary ... Why is the Federal Budget so complicated? - Duration: 2:41. Marketplace APM 10,205 views. 2:41. The six degrees Kevin Bacon TEDxMidwest - Duration: 16:53. TEDx ... CTV News is Canada's most-watched news organization both locally and nationally, and has a network of national, international, and local news operations. Category Howto & Style The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget is a bipartisan, non-profit organization committed to educating the public about issues that have significant ... Investing in the innovation ecosystem is a key priority for Canada, says Mark Noonan, a Deloitte Canada tax partner who serve tech companies in the Ottawa area. The government needs to give more ... #Bitcoin #XRP #Ethereum - U.S. President Donald Trump’s $4.8 trillion budget proposal for FY 2021, released Monday, seeks to expand the Treasury Department’s cryptocurrency oversight by ...

#