Results for “Not specified”

The USD is the world's most liquid currency, used as the tool of choice for global finance. It is for that reason that we, as observers, must pay great attention to policy changes such as this.

The Federal Reserve has, historically, used the discount rate as a tool to 'test' market reactions to monetary policy. We are in extremely volatile markets, and raising the discount rate allows the Fed to observe the reaction their actions will have once they are reflected in the core 'Funds Rate'.

we are moving towards a global theatre where even though each actor (country) may be at different levels of economic growth, the technologies which exist to enable the globalisation stimulate high levels of transparency, meaning that each agent (companies, customers, suppliers, politicians, etc) will be accountable for their practices, and so must act with greater consideration (and less arrogance!)

organisations will often behave in international economic theatres (such as China) with the same operational processes and assumptions as their 'home' environments (such as Australia) with the assumed protection of the legal, political and other systems of their 'home' environments.

What analysts mean by 'game changing' is, in fact, the level of naturalisation of technology. This is the degree to which a technology becomes an intuitive part of human life.

Saying people have the ability to participate in decisions, and actually ensuring they can, should not be mutually exclusive. Our nations, economies and companies can perform far better where we genuinely allow and encourage participation in governance and policy from all stakeholders.

When we talk of economic confidence, business confidence, or even confidence in global markets, we are talking of the mindset of the majority of participants in that market. In a 'booming' market, participants feel happy, with little sense of risk- so they are happy to invest in their businesses, create jobs, buy property, and drive strong economic figures.

Those who are suffering the consequences of these price increases are rarely (if at all) responsible for their creation- leading to an exacerbated (and right) sense of injustice.

How would one expect society to develop 'actualisation' and 'esteem' driving characteristics (economic growth and spending) when the basic 'physiological' and 'safety' needs (food security, employment, health, property) are not met.

When the main participants in an economy (the general population not the investment banks) are struggling to survive- no amount of economic stimulus applied at arms-length from those participants- will inject growth.

While it may seem an altogether preposterous notion that people should have to pay for air, a very basic component of life- one must read this hypothetical tale in context of the fact that over 1.7billion people cannot afford food (also a very basic component of life)- and a similar amount have little access to clean drinking water (another very basic component of life).

The impact to one's own sense of happiness and prosperity of not being able to afford 'basic' goods is far greater than not being able to afford 'discretionary' goods. By increasing the financial stress on consumers abilities to purchase essentials- the rest of the economy suffers, as people are more likely to hoard than spend.

The inconvenient-truth of this situation is that however many observers and commentators espouse rhetoric about solutions for this crisis, without buy-in from the individuals who are responsible for our economy? those words are in vain.

You cannot govern a 21st century globalised business with the management style of an 18th century trading firm. In the same way, the modes (and rationale) of governance must be brought up-to-speed with the nature of the citizens they are responsible for.

Policy-makers will have to do the two things which, more than anything, they avoid at all costs. Firstly Accept responsibility and be secondly… be honest…

When politicians refer to 'our nation's best interest' they must realise our economy is globalised.. this means that their nation's best interest is inextricably linked to the best interest of their neighbours- and nations further afield.

The awareness of life as being finite allows them (somewhat counter-intuitively) to live… This doesn't necessarily mean being reckless, but rather that they engage in activities which are positive for their well-being- things like travel, education, spending time with family and friends, and so on.

The most successful organisations I've met over the years have a very-strong senses of culture (even from start-up stage). This isn't the soft process of drafting a mission statement for your website, but genuinely understanding the type of personality you want your company to have.

When you've founded a business, the last thing you want to do is let-go. It's part of the psychology of most founders- but let-go you must, and if you handle it right, it can work extremely well.

Delegation is about giving the right people in your organisation the ability to excel at what they do, and in turn- to help you (as a company leader) to achieve the objectives of your enterprise.

You need to hire people who are smart, ideally smarter than you. There's a reason Google, Apple and their peers are filled with PhD's. The smarter your team (whether academically, or in experience) the more they will deliver.

There's only so much our world will become richer by surrounding ourselves with clones of ourselves!

My best ideas, and most successful opportunities have come- usually- from the most unexpected areas.

I've met many entrepreneurs who feel it's almost cheating themselves to have time-off, relax, or indulge things which are not directly profit-generating- but then the overwhelming majority of those I meet who have really made it are also the ones who do actively make time to feed their interests, have periods of mental space, and allow their brains to work creatively.