ANNUAL ADVERTISING RATES FOR INSURE-DIGEST

Annual Advertisement Rates

Monday, December 31, 2018

France: Macron defends reform agenda after though year

Upbeat Macron defends reform agenda after bruising year French President Emmanuel Macron vowed to press on with his reform agenda in 2019 as he delivered his traditional New Year's Eve message on Monday after a gruelling 12 months that saw his approval ratings plummet.

Read more at
http://www.france24.com/en/20181231-live-french-president-macron-new-year-address

Sunday, December 30, 2018

Saturday, December 29, 2018

Middle East: A new direction for the Middle East in the vacuum left behind by Trump

Read more at:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/russia-to-host-putin-erdogan-rouhani-summit-on-syria/

Friday, December 28, 2018

USA - the Trump Wall: Trump threatens to close southern border if he does not get funding from Congress for his wall

Trump threatens to close southern border if Congress doesn't fund wall

Read more at
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-border-wall-democrats-1.4960459

Thursday, December 27, 2018

US GOVERNMENT CLOSEDOWN: Americans blame Trump for shutdown

"More Americans blame Trump for government shutdown: Reuters/Ipsos poll" -

Read more at :
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-shutdown-poll/more-americans-blame-trump-for-government-shutdown-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKCN1OQ1FA

Wednesday, December 26, 2018

China-US Relations: Trump White House plans executive order to bar Huawei, ZTE purchases

"Exclusive: White House mulls new year executive order to bar Huawei, ZTE purchases" -

Read more at:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-huawei-tech-exclusive/exclusive-white-house-mulls-new-year-executive-order-to-bar-huawei-zte-purchases-idUSKCN1OQ09P

Germany - Islam: Germany wants to introduce "mosque tax" for Muslims

Germany mulls introducing 'mosque tax' for Muslims

Read more at:

https://p.dw.com/p/3Adzt

Russia-US Relations: New Congress must investigate details of Putin Trump's meetings

Read more at:

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-russia-congress-schiff-ukraine-zamel-cambridge-analytica-1263860?spMailingID=4763795&spUserID=MTI0NzM2NDgxNDcS1&spJobID=1171391951&spReportId=MTE3MTM5MTk1MQS2

Monday, December 24, 2018

US economy - meltdow: A full fledged bears market

Dow dives 653 points to below 22,000, S&P 500 enters bear market -- worst Christmas Eve ever

Read more at:
https://a.msn.com/r/2/BBRmC0r?m=en-us&referrerID=InAppShare

Sunday, December 23, 2018

USA: Is an economic disaster on the way in America as Trump Official calls on bankers to convene a plunge protection team

"Top Trump official calls bankers, will convene 'Plunge Protection Team'" -

Read more at: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-treasury/top-trump-official-calls-bankers-will-convene-plunge-protection-team-idUSKCN1OM0LJ

Wednesday, December 19, 2018

USA: Fed raises interest rates, signals more hikes ahead

After weeks of market volatility and calls by President Donald Trump for the Federal Reserve to stop raising interest rates, the U.S. central bank instead did it again, and stuck by a plan to keep withdrawing support from an economy it views as strong.

U.S. stocks and bond yields fell hard. With the Fed signaling "some further gradual" rate hikes and no break from cutting its massive bond portfolio, traders fretted that policymakers could choke off economic growth.

 "Maybe they have already committed their policy error," said Fritz Folts, chief investment strategist at 3Edge Asset Management. "We would be in the camp that they have already raised rates too much."

 Interest rate futures show traders are currently betting the Fed won't raise rates at all next year.

 Wednesday's rate increase, the fourth of the year, pushed the central bank's key overnight lending rate to a range of 2.25 percent to 2.50 percent.
 
Note EU-Digest: " In New York, U.S. S&P 500 Index lost 1.54 percent to hit its lowest level since September 2017. U.S. stocks are on pace for their biggest December decline since 1931, the depths of the Great Depression ".  
 

Tuesday, December 18, 2018

Britain and the Brexit Impasse: A national government or “no deal” - by Brendan Donelly

In a recent article for the New York Times, the distinguished historian of the Conservative Party, Professor Tim Bale, argued that the “will to power” of the Conservative Party would enable it in the long term to reconstruct its inner cohesion, currently compromised by the Brexit debate. Professor Bale’s argument is controversial but, even if accurate from a historical perspective, it is highly unlikely to be reflected in the functioning of the Party over the crucial next three months. Last Wednesday’s ballot of Conservative MPs was at best a Pyrrhic victory for the Prime Minister.  The 117 votes recorded against her probably if anything understated the degree of opposition to her proposed texts for the Withdrawal Agreement from the EU and its accompanying Political Declaration. It is clear she cannot possibly rely on her Parliamentary Party to steer these proposals through the House of Commons against the opposition of the Labour Party and others.

But there is no conceivable majority among Conservative MPs for any other course of action either. A divided and dysfunctional Conservative Party is generating a divided and dysfunctional Conservative government. There is no reason at all to believe that this division can be overcome by any sudden outbreak of unity before 29 March 2019. The true lesson of the past tumultuous week in British politics is that no Conservative government is capable of adopting, much less implementing, a coherent alternative position to that of the United Kingdom’s leaving the EU by automatic operation of Article 50 on 29 March 2019. If in three months there is still a Conservative government, then “crashing out” of the EU without a negotiated withdrawal will have become inevitable. That important minority in the Conservative Parliamentary party favourable to this outcome need only persevere in their current obstructionist tactics to gain their goal through the asymmetric workings of Article 50.  Under Article 50 “no deal” emphatically means “no deal.”

There has been much talk in recent days of Parliament’s “taking back control of Brexit.” Amber Rudd has specified cross-party discussions to explore the possibility of a “soft Brexit” involving British membership of the EEA. This particular suggestion seems to rest on a number of questionable assumptions. The issue of British membership of the EEA is not one that in any circumstances can be resolved between now and 29 March  2019. If the EEA option is one the UK wishes to pursue after Brexit, it will need to be painstakingly negotiated with the EU during the “transition period.” The most that the EU might be willing to accept in this connection over the next three months would be changes to the wording of the non-binding Political Declaration, pointing towards future British membership of the EEA. It is more than doubtful however whether such marginal changes would be sufficient to guarantee or even make more likely a Parliamentary majority for the Prime Minister’s “deal.”  Some Labour MPs either favour or could accept an EEA-like arrangement, but the majority do not, including Jeremy Corbyn and Sir Keir Starmer, both of whom for different reasons would have difficulties in accepting the Freedom of Movement at the heart of the EEA. Most importantly, if the EU were to be persuaded at this late stage to make changes to the Political Declaration, it could only be at the pressing and well-grounded request of the sitting British government.  No present or future present Conservative government could ever accept favourable references in the Political Declaration to the EEA and Freedom of Movement. Most pressure on the government from the Conservative Party during the Brexit negotiations has come from precisely the opposite direction, seeking to reduce rather than maintain ties with the EU after Brexit. The EEA can provide no solution to the Conservative government’s present impasse.

Note EU-Digest: Re: Brexit: Britain and Britain's political establishment seem to be "up the creek without a paddle", and the so-called Brexiteers are not to be heard from or seen. A wise lesson for European citizens not to vote for Populist, Nationalist or Ultra Right parties in local or the upcoming May 2019 EU parliamentary elections. It's all empty rhetoric what these parties are producing. Just look at Britain (Brexit) and the USA (Donald Trump) to underscore that point.

Read more at: Brexit: A national government or “no deal” | The Federal Trust

Britain, British Conservative party, EU, Impasse, Nationalists, Populists, Theresa May, Ultra Right

In a recent article for the New York Times, the distinguished historian of the Conservative Party, Professor Tim Bale, argued that the “will to power” of the Conservative Party would enable it in the long term to reconstruct its inner cohesion, currently compromised by the Brexit debate. Professor Bale’s argument is controversial but, even if accurate from a historical perspective, it is highly unlikely to be reflected in the functioning of the Party over the crucial next three months. Last Wednesday’s ballot of Conservative MPs was at best a Pyrrhic victory for the Prime Minister.  The 117 votes recorded against her probably if anything understated the degree of opposition to her proposed texts for the Withdrawal Agreement from the EU and its accompanying Political Declaration. It is clear she cannot possibly rely on her Parliamentary Party to steer these proposals through the House of Commons against the opposition of the Labour Party and others.

But there is no conceivable majority among Conservative MPs for any other course of action either. A divided and dysfunctional Conservative Party is generating a divided and dysfunctional Conservative government. There is no reason at all to believe that this division can be overcome by any sudden outbreak of unity before 29 March 2019. The true lesson of the past tumultuous week in British politics is that no Conservative government is capable of adopting, much less implementing, a coherent alternative position to that of the United Kingdom’s leaving the EU by automatic operation of Article 50 on 29 March 2019. If in three months there is still a Conservative government, then “crashing out” of the EU without a negotiated withdrawal will have become inevitable. That important minority in the Conservative Parliamentary party favourable to this outcome need only persevere in their current obstructionist tactics to gain their goal through the asymmetric workings of Article 50.  Under Article 50 “no deal” emphatically means “no deal.”

There has been much talk in recent days of Parliament’s “taking back control of Brexit.” Amber Rudd has specified cross-party discussions to explore the possibility of a “soft Brexit” involving British membership of the EEA. This particular suggestion seems to rest on a number of questionable assumptions. The issue of British membership of the EEA is not one that in any circumstances can be resolved between now and 29 March  2019. If the EEA option is one the UK wishes to pursue after Brexit, it will need to be painstakingly negotiated with the EU during the “transition period.” The most that the EU might be willing to accept in this connection over the next three months would be changes to the wording of the non-binding Political Declaration, pointing towards future British membership of the EEA. It is more than doubtful however whether such marginal changes would be sufficient to guarantee or even make more likely a Parliamentary majority for the Prime Minister’s “deal.”  Some Labour MPs either favour or could accept an EEA-like arrangement, but the majority do not, including Jeremy Corbyn and Sir Keir Starmer, both of whom for different reasons would have difficulties in accepting the Freedom of Movement at the heart of the EEA. Most importantly, if the EU were to be persuaded at this late stage to make changes to the Political Declaration, it could only be at the pressing and well-grounded request of the sitting British government.  No present or future present Conservative government could ever accept favourable references in the Political Declaration to the EEA and Freedom of Movement. Most pressure on the government from the Conservative Party during the Brexit negotiations has come from precisely the opposite direction, seeking to reduce rather than maintain ties with the EU after Brexit. The EEA can provide no solution to the Conservative government’s present impasse.

Note EU-Digest: Re: Brexit: Britain and Britain's political establishment seem to be "up the creek without a paddle", and the so-called Brexiteers are not to be heard from or seen. A wise lesson for European citizens not to vote for Populist, Nationalist or Ultra Right parties in local or the upcoming May 2019 EU parliamentary elections. It's all empty rhetoric what these parties are producing. Just look at Britain (Brexit) and the USA (Donald Trump) to underscore that point.

Read more at: Brexit: A national government or “no deal” | The Federal Trust

Sunday, December 16, 2018

European New technology - Auto Industry: EU invests €20m in AI software for self-driving cars

The European Investment Bank (EIB) has granted a €20m loan to Hungarian company AImotive, the European Commission announced Friday. The money will be spent on research and development of artificial intelligence software for self-driving vehicles. The commission believes the EU should prepare for self-driving cars. "I'm glad we are doing this in Central Europe, where the automotive industry has a long history of success," said EIB vice-president Vazil Hudak.

Read more: EU invests €20m in AI software for self-driving cars

Friday, December 14, 2018

EU -Turkey-Russian Energy Cooperation: "Politics can make strange bedfellows" - Russia’s Gas Strategy Gets Help From Turkey - by Marc Pierini

Politics/Energy can make strange bedfellows
It was November 19 in Istanbul. There, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan held a ceremony marking the completion of the first underwater segment of the Turkish Stream gas pipeline, linking Russia to Turkey’s European shores. The project is a vivid illustration of Moscow’s strategy to strengthen its position in supplying gas to Europe while reducing its reliance on the Ukrainian transit corridor.

For Ankara, the project is a symbol of Turkey’s independent decisionmaking and of the country’s significance in the wider region. Seen from Ankara, Turkish Stream serves a political purpose. It celebrates the blossoming friendship between Turkey and Russia and confirms Ankara’s ambition to be part of the solution to major international issues—in this case, securing the gas needs for a large part of the EU. 

However, Turkish Stream will also increase Ankara’s dependence on Moscow for its energy needs.

The project’s second meaning is that Turkey is contributing to an essential element of Russia’s multi-pronged, long-term strategy of remaining Europe’s major gas supplier, while creating a “third gas corridor” in addition to the Ukrainian and Baltic Sea supply routes. This strategy is unfolding on several fronts: in Ukraine; in the Baltic Sea; and through future extensions of Turkish Stream to southern and central Europe (toward Bulgaria, Serbia, Hungary, Slovakia, and to Greece and Italy.)  

This Russian strategy has raised continuous opposition from the United States.

It is also worth noting that Turkish Stream is not part of the EU’s Energy Union plans since it does not contribute to diversification of supplies. In fact, it will rather reinforce Russia’s market  predominance in both Turkey and the EU.

In Ukraine, the multi-pipeline network channeling Russian gas to Western Europe will remain a vital link. But reducing its use could inflict massive losses in terms of transit costs for authorities in Kiev, which is part of Russia’s strategy in Ukraine.

Much will depend on negotiations for the extension of the Russia-Ukraine commercial agreement, which will end in 2019. To help alleviate Kiev’s concerns, Germany has made the continuation of transit via Ukraine an ingredient of a final agreement on Nord Stream 2, the latter being the subject of controversies within the EU.

The Russian strategy is in no way limited to selling Russian gas on the European continent. It extends much further afield in the wider Eastern Mediterranean region.

Egypt is a case in point.

Following the massive discoveries in the so-called Zohr field to the north and east of the Nile River delta, Russia bought a 30 percent stake from the Italian energy group ENI in 2016 with the consent of the Italian government, which Moscow has had a long and close relationship with. The official reason for the sale was the need for ENI to spread the risk of its Egyptian operation.

Similarly, offshore gas discoveries in Lebanese waters have attracted Russian interest— although drilling off Lebanon is largely dominated by France’s TOTAL and Italy’s ENI, who have a 40 percent share each. Russia’s NOVATEK has bought a 20 percent stake.

Russia has also made moves to control both the oil and gas sector in Syria, despite the ongoing war. The actual effect of these recent maneuvers will very much depend on the final political arrangement expected to end the almost eight-year-old civil war. Many of Syria’s oil and gas fields are located north and east of the Euphrates River, currently outside the control of regime forces. In addition, for reasons linked to the ongoing naval military activities, no offshore exploration has yet taken place in Syrian waters.

In Iraq, Russia is involved in pipeline deals in the Kurdistan region through a number of oil and gas companies, although the actual exports would have to take place through Turkish territory or possibly even through Syria in the distant future.

Such an ambitious Russia strategy is justified by Europe’s gas market fundamentals.

A stronger demand for gas in Europe is good for Russia. According to Oxford Energy, gas demand in Europe (Turkey and non-EU Eastern Europe included, except Serbia) has started rising again for three consecutive years—in 2015, 2016, and 2017—to reach a level of 548 billion cubic meters (bcm), due to continued economic recovery, the impacts of climate change, and the increased use of gas by the power sector. The trend seems to be continuing in 2018.

According to the Finnish Institute for International Affairs, Russia took advantage of several factors: economic recovery and decreasing gas production in the EU, lower Russian selling prices, and the current limited availability of non-Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) on the European market.

In addition, preexisting disputes between the EU and Russia (including an antitrust investigation against Gazprom, and a Russian complaint at the WTO) have been resolved, signaling that commercial interests on both sides have prevailed, despite a less-than-optimal political climate.

In such an environment, Russia is in a strong position to keep dominating gas supplies to the EU, 
which amounted to 40 percent of extra-EU imports in 2016—although new developments could upset the current situation, such as a rapid development of LNG exports to Europe from other sources.

LNG imports amounted to only 14 percent of total extra-EU gas imports in 2017, with the main supplies coming from Qatar (41 percent), Nigeria (19 percent), and Algeria (17 percent).

In this wider context, and seen from Brussels, Turkish Stream—with a final projected capacity to deliver 31.5 bcm/y, of which 15.75 bcm/y would go to Europe —is a relatively small component of the wider gas supply chain to the EU. In fact, it would represent just over 6 percent of the EU’s imports at 2017 levels.

Yet, seen from Moscow, the pipeline is potentially a significant addition to Russia’s capabilities to export gas to Europe (Turkey included). Assuming that Turkish Stream’s second phase will be completed and operational, it would represent between 16 and 19 percent of Russian sales to the EU and Turkey (at 2017 levels and all other factors remaining unchanged).

In that sense, the ceremony on November 19 in Istanbul was more than just another photo opportunity. It was a symbol of the success of Russia’s objectives in the wider Western European area, with Turkey’s help. 

Together with Russia’s S-400 missile deal with Turkey, it was a symbol of how efficiently Moscow has been using Ankara’s relative diplomatic isolation to its advantage. For Ankara, this was another way of telling the world: Turkey matters.

Read more: Russia’s Gas Strategy Gets Help From Turkey - Carnegie Europe - Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Tuesday, December 11, 2018

USA: Major shortage of Drs by 2030: NYU Is Offering Free Tuition to Medical Students - by Adam Harris

Medical school costs a lot of money that a lot of people don’t have. That often means students do a bit of cost-benefit analysis: Is it worth it to take on hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt now for the possibility of making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year later?

New York University’s School of Medicine is trying remove that calculation as a factor in students’ career decision making. The school announced yesterday that it will provide all new, future, and current students a full-tuition scholarship—financial need and merit aside, meaning wealthy students and low-income students alike will receive it. The scholarship doesn’t cover the rest of the costs associated with college—housing, food, child care—but it takes $55,018 a year out of the picture.

“This decision recognizes a moral imperative that must be addressed, as institutions place an increasing debt burden on young people who aspire to become physicians,” Robert Grossman, the school’s dean, said in a statement. “

A population as diverse as ours is best served by doctors from all walks of life, we believe, and aspiring physicians and surgeons should not be prevented from pursuing a career in medicine because of the prospect of overwhelming financial debt.” The school will need to raise $600 million to fund the project—$450 million of which it says has already been raised.

Read more: NYU Is Offering Free Tuition to Medical Students - The Atlantic

Saturday, December 8, 2018

Friday, December 7, 2018

US-China Relations: Let’s Take a Closer Look at That Huawei Arrest - by Joe Nocera

Nocera

 When you grow up in the U.S., and then devote your career to writing about domestic corporations, you don’t spend a lot of time thinking about the rule of law, or why it matters. It’s like the air you breathe — you just assume it’s always going to be there.

Yes, the U.S. legal system has plenty of flaws, but you could always count on companies accused of wrongdoing getting their day in court. The government might try to block a merger, but the rationale was invariably based on its interpretation of antitrust law, not on a president’s disapproval. When a corporate executive was accused of a crime, it was because prosecutors had legitimate reasons to believe the executive did something illegal.

The rule of law provides the assurance that so long as you abide by the law, no one is going to arrest you arbitrarily, or take your company away for an illegitimate reason. Investors know they can safely invest their money.

I stopped taking the rule of law for granted in 2010, when I began writing about Mikhail Khodorkovsky. You may recall him as the original oligarch, Russia’s richest man in the early 2000s. By the time I started to focus on him, he had long since been stripped of his company, Yukos, and had spent seven years in a Siberian prison. Indeed, he was then on trial for a new set of “crimes”; if found guilty — hardly in doubt — his sentence would likely be extended by at least a decade.

Which brings me to the American president, Donald Trump. Ever since he took office, pundits have been writing about how he has caused the erosion of important democratic norms. As a business journalist, I’ve been equally horrified by his undermining of the rule of law as it applies to business.

Trump wants the U.S. Postal Service to raise the rate it charges Amazon.com Inc. to deliver packages purely to punish its chief executive Jeff Bezos, who owns the Washington Post. His constant criticism of CNN may have influenced the Justice Department to oppose AT&T’s merger with Time Warner, which owns the cable network. Just last week, Trump called for General Motors Co. — and General Motors alone — to be stripped of a federal subsidy for electric cars because he is angry it is closing some factories in the Midwest. (The government later said he wanted to end the subsidy for all companies.)

Which brings me to the American president, Donald Trump. Ever since he took office, pundits have been writing about how he has caused the erosion of important democratic norms. As a business journalist, I’ve been equally horrified by his undermining of the rule of law as it applies to business.
Trump wants the U.S. Postal Service to raise the rate it charges Amazon.com Inc. to deliver packages purely to punish its chief executive Jeff Bezos, who owns the Washington Post. His constant criticism of CNN may have influenced the Justice Department to oppose AT&T’s merger with Time Warner, which owns the cable network. Just last week, Trump called for General Motors Co. — and General Motors alone — to be stripped of a federal subsidy for electric cars because he is angry it is closing some factories in the Midwest. (The government later said he wanted to end the subsidy for all companies.)

Which brings me to the American president, Donald Trump. Ever since he took office, pundits have been writing about how he has caused the erosion of important democratic norms. As a business journalist, I’ve been equally horrified by his undermining of the rule of law as it applies to business.
Trump wants the U.S. Postal Service to raise the rate it charges Amazon.com Inc. to deliver packages purely to punish its chief executive Jeff Bezos, who owns the Washington Post. His constant criticism of CNN may have influenced the Justice Department to oppose AT&T’s merger with Time Warner, which owns the cable network. Just last week, Trump called for General Motors Co. — and General Motors alone — to be stripped of a federal subsidy for electric cars because he is angry it is closing some factories in the Midwest. (The government later said he wanted to end the subsidy for all companies.)

China is furious, accusing the U.S. of “resorting to despicable hooliganism” and demanding Meng’s release. That’s to be expected. What I didn’t expect was the absence of any outcry in the U.S. Commentators have focused on the arrest’s effect on tech stocks, and on its potential to further damage U.S.-China relations. But no one seems outraged at the possibility that the U.S. nabbed a top Chinese executive as a proxy for a company it may want to punish.

Note EU-Digest :  As the article notes "the absence of any outcry in the U.S. is amazing - Commentators mainly focused on the arrest’s effect on tech stocks, and on its potential to further damage U.S.-China relations. But no one seems outraged at the possibility that the U.S. nabbed a top Chinese executive as a proxy for a company it may want to punish. As to the possibility that this Huawei executive is being arrested because the company might be installing spyware in their software?  Who can say that Microsoft and other US tech companies don't do the same on behalf of the US government".

Read more: Let’s Take a Closer Look at That Huawei Arrest - Bloomberg

Thursday, December 6, 2018

China-US relations: Arrest Meng Wanzhou, executive of Huawei, not favorable to improving relations China - US

Huawei arrest: China demands release of Meng Wanzhou

Note EU-Digest: Meng Wanzhou was arrested in Canada at the request of the US, who wants her extradited to US because of business dealings Huawei has with Iran. For those who might have forgotten - the US (Trump Administration) unilattery broke off relations with Iran, when the Trump Administration pulled out of the International Nuclear Agreement, signed between Iran and many other nations around the world, including the EU and the US. Hopefully Canada (Trudeau) will show some "backbone", by not extraditing her to the US, specially since all the other co-signers of the International Nuclear Agreement, including the EU and Canada, are still respecting the agreement with Iran.

Read more at 

Wednesday, December 5, 2018

Tuesday, December 4, 2018

USA - Economy - the party is over: Dow plunges nearly 800 points on rising fears of an economic slowdown - by Fred Imbert

US Economy: the party is over  - Republican mismanagement
Stocks fell sharply on Tuesday in the biggest decline since the October rout as investors worried about a bond-market phenomenon signaling a possible economic slowdown. Lingering worries around U.S.-China trade also added to jitters on Wall Street.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 799.36 points, or 3.1 percent, to close at 25,027.07 and posted its worst day since Oct. 10. At its low of the day, the Dow had fallen more than 800 points.

The S&P 500 declined 3.2 percent to close at 2,700.06. The benchmark fell below its 200-day moving average, which triggered more selling from algorithmic funds. Financials were the worst performers in the S&P 500, plunging 4.4 percent. Utilities was the only positive sector in the S&P 500, rising 0.16 percent.

Read more: Dow plunges nearly 800 points on rising fears of an economic slowdown