Politics

The Political Agenda Behind Credit Reporting Agencies

In this generation, we are living within a digital financial framework. Identities of Americans exist in set databases made to monitor details about them and used mainly to run commerce. This power destroys anonymity which takes even the slightest info about our social bonds and reputations then converts them straight into structured data. This very same structure can tag you with bad credit and ruins your chances for further finances not if you consider other specialized lending institutions. Check out https://www.forafinancial.com/blog/working-capital/get-business-loan-bad-credit/ to help you get your finances straight.

Driving all this are the credit reporting agencies (credit bureaus), like Equifax. The credit reporting business acts like a governor of each and everyone’s credit interactions, reputations as well as individuality. It had been recognized by the congress in the late 60s to early 70s that the power inlayed in data involves political matter and thus developed a regulatory command for these agencies. However, through the years, the regulatory program vested upon these agencies is insufficient. The government bodies such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and also the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) are generally poor. Therefore the credit-reporting program on which we have vested our identities as well as our commercial existence continues to be opaque and also susceptible to misuse.

Credit Reporting Background

Credit Bureau Prior To The 70’s

Like organized business relationships, prejudice and biases have been integrated into the rules of the Credit Bureau and the types of facts they collect. Before 1970, Black, gay, single women, or a person with a strong political opinion – all of these could make an impact on the person making it difficult to find jobs, get credit, loans, insurance purchases, or stay away from police investigations. In WWII, credit reporting agencies conducted loyalty checks on the military to keep the business. This relationship continued even after the war. Millions of Americans undergo background checks for many reasons but mostly political in nature.

Credit had been always associated with social norms. In the 19th century, black and white tenants were exposed to undesirable interest rates and also credit terms to undermine their freedom. In the 1950s, a fixed-rate mortgage for 30 years was a liberation force for white families and the strict credit circumstances for black families were a way of controlling races.

Since the 1950s, politicians have received grievances from people who have severely suffered due to bad credit reports. And while many ordinary citizens suffered by mere noise from their apartments, that would enter their credit report and will eventually destroy the reputation of one person. As suggested by the CEO of Retail Credit in 1968, this is a “discipline” for US citizens.

The Age of Computerization

The changes that took place in the 1970s were mainly computerization of identity and money. Americans have seen the verge of computerization than the prediction of data problems. In the 1960s, there were many books on databases of American society as well as congressional hearings on this matter. In 1974, Congress included the Federal Act’s authority to manage all databases in the Privacy Act, however, it was withdrawn immediately as an act for a favor to a Republican staff who helped the conference committee discussion.

This birth and the expansion of the credit card business clearly required a means to confirm identities quickly. It required a computer system, which meant the credit reporting agencies along with their lengthy files of claims from nosy people which will soon prove useless.

The Introduction of Fair Credit Reporting Act (1970)

Then came the FCRA or the Fair Credit Reporting Act of 1970 (and soon after the law to regulate debt collection practices). The FCRA had been the very first federal law to regulate data use and is part of a legislative initiative motivated through the civil rights movement. This essentially views credit report as a public tool that had been given a new set of rules. This includes the principle of anti-discrimination and the rules by which people share information and data.

The FCRA is not perfect, but the transition from social relations to structured data has brought significant changes to the politics of credit share. The FCRA was written by liberals trying to stop discrimination in the business community. While it did not totally remove it, it had a major impact on preventing the apparent racism and gender discrimination realized by credit channels.

There is now a dynamic domestic and international credit market. We do not take into account the cost of goods and services traveling abroad or using a credit card. Manage your pipeline tasks for all payments and identities. Discrimination is absolutely not permitted, and debt collection is somewhat regulated.

Discipliine in Credit and Commerce

The foundation of credit and business is discipline. When you borrow money, you owe something to the creditor. You can’t have a business community unless you’re sure who’s accumulating debt. If you do not recognize your identity and account, you can not deposit salaries into people’s accounts. Banks, workers, and merchants cannot just trade cash. Whenever you use a card to pay for anything in a store, whenever you place an order online, rules are made that make your business life less difficult.

The terrible thing about the old credit bureau is that it doesn’t track people, but the rules had been constant with the sensitivity of racism and gender discrimination that we abandoned. This is not the collection of data, but the use of data to empower people to manipulate people in a way that we think we hate.

Politics

Accounts of Crypto-Funded Political Campaigns

On May of 2018, Colorado State Secretary Wayne Williams suggested a new political movement financing rules that now include a portion of the cryptocurrency content.

In May 2014, FEC presented a set of regulations that responded to a survey of a super PAC called “Make Your Laws.” The entity advocates to replace representative democracy with a comprehensive liquid democracy and asks for clarification if BTC (https://pheeva.com/bitcoin/trading/best-crypto-trading-bots/) donations can be accepted to finance political campaigns. During that time, Bitcoin was valued at about $400, and the altcoin was not actually regarded as an accepted means of financing campaigns. The FEC decided that Bitcoin can be accepted as an “in-kind donation” for campaigns. A kind of contribution that supplies the services and goods necessary for the organization’s functions, instead of using the funds to pay for those services and goods.

This means that the campaign cannot pay Bitcoin directly. It should be liquidated and then deposited into the campaign account. In terms of the donation ceiling, the percentage is dispersed throughout the party lines where the Democrats use a limit of $100, the Republicans at $2700 ceiling. Since the advisory opinion outlines recommendations rather than rules, GOP support for a larger cap had later inspired some politicians to allow themselves to go with the $2,700 limit. As the advisory watch laid out the suggestions instead of the guidelines, the Republican support for the larger limit afterward encouraged some political figures to let themselves take the $2,700 cap.

Given the somewhat uncertain federal rules, several state regulators had been struggling with related investigations after the distribution of the FEC regulation.

Politicians Who Advocated Crypto-Funded Campaigns

Below are a few of the most compelling American politicians at the state and federal levels who were transparent on their acceptance of crypto funds.

  • Andrew Hemingway. Hemingway is a Republican candidate for the Governor of New Hampshire in 2014. He is the first in the office who has used cryptocurrency donations during his campaign.
  • Austin Petersen. Petersen is from Missouri, a Republican candidate running for the Senate. He supports cryptocurrency based on his pro-market ideas.
  • Brian Forde. Forde is set to become the political digital currency star. A Democrat seeking to be elected in the U.S. House representing California 45th Congressional District. He previously worked at MIT Media Lab as the head of digital currency. He also had been tech adviser under the administration of Obama.
  • Dan Elder. Elder, Libertarian bidding for the House of Representatives for Missouri in 2016. He held the first campaign to be financed all by Bitcoin.

Other politicians who advocate cryptocurrency during their campaign includes Jared Polis, Greg Abbott, Patrick Nelson, and Rand Paul. Politics is full of inertia and devotedness to the status quo. Therefore, there is no doubt that cryptocurrency for political finance is not even close to popular taking.

Politics

World Leaders Responded to Climate Change via Paris Agreement

Back in 2015, over 196 nations have taken part on a common cause and made a historical agreement. Collectively, they’ve made a vow to do their best efforts in cutting greenhouse gas emissions and pour research and development in discovering other sources of clean energy. This is in an effort to combat climate change.

Whether you believe it or not, USA is one of the leading polluters in the globe. Given the fact that they’re one of the major contributors to climate change, they have heavily supported the historic pact termed as Paris Agreement. This was under former US President Barack Obama’s administration.

The Start of a New World

The agreement was then adopted on the 12th of December 2015 at the UN climate summit in Paris France. This has the aim of limiting warming of planet to below 2 degrees Celsius while aiming to reach 1.5 degrees Celsius by the start of 2100. Being part of the pact, countries were expected to lower its emission of greenhouse gases. The US set a personal goal for itself by facilitating 26 to 28 percent reduction of 2005 greenhouse gas emission levels as 2025 enters. It is actually a big leap and a time-sensitive task as well.

According to an analysis from Nature Climate Change, it has been discovered that we need to stop emitting greenhouse gases by up to 2060 in an effort to keep the warming below the 1.5 degrees Celsius threshold by 2100.

As a matter of fact, this effort has affected the world as a whole for various companies and industries have started the shift on more efficient industrial production. From crypto signals, market trends, etc. are affected by this agreement.

In 2016 of November, the agreement takes effect and required a minimum of 55 countries which account almost half of global emissions to be on board. To date, 179 countries or parties out of the 196 signatories has been accepted or ratified. There are only couple of nations in UN Framework Convention on Climate Change or UNFCCC whose leaders have refused signing the agreement and these are Nicaragua and Syria.

Then All of a Sudden…

But come Trump’s administration, the President made an announcement in 2017 becoming the third country not to be included in this global pact. Though one of the largest contributors of greenhouse gases, they’re the first nation to ever rescind in its commitment to the pact.

Investments

Source of Foreign Investments in New Zealand

While 12% of Foreign Investments in New Zealand is accounted to Financials allowing easy land purchase and extending financial help such as easy loans to the average working class of the country, 18% of Foreign investments had been accounted to Energy, power, and utilities.

The top three largest foreign investors in New Zealand is reported to be the United States, Canada, and Australia. Following the top three are China and Singapore (report has sourced from Overseas Investment Office analysis). A report on overseas direct investment also said that Canterbury, Southland, and Otago regions made up 49 % of most freehold land agreed to within the Overseas Investment Act.

Generally, the overseas direct financial commitment in New Zealand had been accounted for as follows; the United States and Canada 17 % and 15 % respectively, Australia 12 %, China 9 %, and Singapore 8 %.

— New Zealand Herald

The strong economic growth in New Zealand proves to go stronger compared to its neighboring countries. And because of this, New Zealand continues to be an attractive investment to many overseas investors all over the world. Research shows a growing number of foreign investors spread throughout varied sectors in the country.

Top Foreign Investments Per Sectors

Three sectors come strong in the interest of investors which are utilities, real estate, and food. And even there’s a surmounting amount of over $3.4 billion in investment in agriculture, it has not made to the top 10 sectors that were openly disclosed to the public.

Asian investors in New Zealand usually focused on agribusiness, food, and waste management. Investors from the United States and Australia have a broader approach, making their investments in a broader approach. The top 10 largest investments account for only 33% of the total overseas investment of $26.3 billion. It had been noted that the largest single transaction totaled to $1.3 Billion which had been listed under a Hong Kong investment company but reported to be a Singaporean owned company.

To this date, New Zealand remains to be open to foreign investors. The country partnering with “quality” overseas investors provides a chance for New Zealand to expand and to be more competitive on a global scale.

The ideal sort of foreign financial commitment is when overseas investors are adding capital into local entities (New Zealand-owned businesses) rather than deals between foreign businesses.

The United States had been the most significant acquirer of parcels of land in the real estate sector within a three year period, from 2013 to 2015. It had been accounted to have contributed 40 % in New Zealand’s total foreign investments. Forestry deals had been the most sizeable factor in the numbers provided in the statistical analysis report of New Zealand’s overall foreign investments.