Traders Policy Quotes

Had Volcker never pushed through his radical change in policy, the world would be many bond traders and one memoir the poorer.

The Bilderberg and Trilateral Commission activities of 1973 further suggest that Nixon had lost the support of the “traders,”—i.e., the transnational capitalist class—and that he had lost control of policy to some degree as a consequence of the rolling Watergate scandal.

I concluded that I didn’t have to find an optimum solution to Pronto’s difficulties, just a reasonable one. Trying to find an optimum solution in business is a waste of time: the factors in the equation are changing all the time. But you’ve got to have something to hang your hat on. The one core value that I chose was our high compensation policies, which I had put in place from the very start in 1958. This may sound like a strange way for polarizing a business, but I did not want to destroy the faith that Pronto Markets’ then-handful of employees had in me and in our common future. After all, they had just ponied up half the equity money needed to buy out Rexall.

had been taught that racist ideas cause racist policies. That ignorance and hate cause racist ideas. That the root problem of racism is ignorance and hate. But that gets the chain of events exactly wrong. The root problem—from Prince Henry to President Trump—has always been the self-interest of racist power. Powerful economic, political, and cultural self-interest—the primitive accumulation of capital in the case of royal Portugal and subsequent slave traders—has been behind racist policies.

The root problem—from Prince Henry to President Trump—has always been the self-interest of racist power. Powerful economic, political, and cultural self-interest—the primitive accumulation of capital in the case of royal Portugal and subsequent slave traders—has been behind racist policies. Powerful and brilliant intellectuals in the tradition of Gomes de Zurara then produced racist ideas to justify the racist policies of their era, to redirect the blame for their era’s racial inequities away from those policies and onto people.

it is clear that for the large majority of individual investors, taking a shower and doing nothing would have been a better policy than implementing the ideas that came to their minds. Later research by Odean and his colleague Brad Barber supported this conclusion. In a paper titled “Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth,” they showed that, on average, the most active traders had the poorest results, while the investors who traded the least earned the highest returns. In another paper, titled “Boys Will Be Boys,” they showed that men acted on their useless ideas significantly more often than women, and that as a result women achieved better investment results than men.

centuries-long debate over the nature of money can be reduced to two sides. One school sees money as merely a commodity, a preexisting thing, with its own inherent value. This group believes that societies chose certain commodities to become mutually recognized units of exchange in order to overcome the cumbersome business of barter. Exchanging sheep for bread was imprecise, so in our agrarian past traders agreed that a certain commodity, be it shells or rocks or gold, could be a stand-in for everything else. This “metallism” viewpoint, as it is known, encourages the notion that a currency should itself be, or at least be backed by, some tangible material. This orthodox view of currency is embraced by many gold bugs and hard-money advocates from the so-called Austrian school of economics, a group that has enjoyed a renaissance in the wake of the financial crisis with its critiques of expansionist central-bank policies and inflationary fiat currencies. They blame the asset bubble that led to the crisis on reckless monetary expansion by unfettered central banks. The other side of the argument belongs to the “chartalist” school, a group that looks past the thing of currency and focuses instead on the credit and trust relationships between the individual and society at large that currency embodies. This view, the one we subscribe to and which informs

The symposium was a closed-doors, synod-style assembly of people who would never have mixed otherwise. My first surprise was to discover that the military people there thought, behaved, and acted like philosophers—far more so than the philosophers we will see splitting hairs in their weekly colloquium in Part Three. They thought out of the box, like traders, except much better and without fear of introspection. An assistant secretary of defence was among us, but had I not known his profession I would have thought he was a practitioner of skeptical empiricism. Even an engineering investigator who had examined the cause of a space shuttle explosion was thoughtful and open-minded. I came out of the meeting realising that only military people deal with randomness with genuine, introspective intellectual honesty—unlike academics and corporate executives using other people's money. This does not show in war movies, where they are usually portrayed as war-hungry autocrats. The people in front of me were not the people who initiate wars. Indeed, for many, the successful defence policy is the one that manages to eliminate potential dangers without war, such as the strategy of bankrupting the Russians through the escalation in defence spending. When I expressed my amazement to Laurence, another finance person who was sitting next to me, he told me that the military collected more genuine intellects and risk thinkers than most if not all other professions. Defence people wanted to understand the epistemology of risk.

Men are not content with a simple life: they are acquisitive, ambitious, competitive, and jealous; they soon tire of what they have, and pine for what they have not; and they seldom desire anything unless it belongs to others. The result is the encroachment of one group upon the territory of another, the rivalry of groups for the resources of the soil, and then war. Trade and finance develop, and bring new class-divisions. "Any ordinary city is in fact two cities, one the city of the poor, the other of the rich, each at war with the other; and in either division there are smaller ones - you would make a great mistake if you treated them as single states". A mercantile bourgeoisie arises, whose members seek social position through wealth and conspicuous consumption: "they will spend large sums of money on their wives". These changes in the distribution of wealth produce political changes: as the wealth of the merchant over-reaches that of the land-owner, aristocracy gives way to a plutocratic oligarchy - wealthy traders and bankers rule the state. Then statesmanship, which is the coordination of social forces and the adjustment of policy to growth, is replaced by politics, which is the strategy of parts and the lust of the spoils of office. Every form of government tends to perish by excess of its basic principle. Aristocracy ruins itself by limiting too narrowly the circle within which power is confined; oligarchy ruins itself by the incautious scramble for immediate wealth. In rather case the end is revolution. When revolution comes it may seem to arise from little causes and petty whims, but though it may spring from slight occasions it is the precipitate result of grave and accumulated wrongs; when a body is weakened by neglected ills, the merest exposure may bring serious disease. Then democracy comes: the poor overcome their opponents, slaughtering some and banishing the rest; and give to the people an equal share of freedom and power. But even democracy ruins itself by excess – of democracy. Its basic principle is the equal right of all to hold office and determine public policy. This is at first glance a delightful arrangement; it becomes disastrous because the people are not properly equipped by education to select the best rulers and the wisest courses. As to the people they have no understanding, and only repeat what their rulers are pleased to tell them; to get a doctrine accepted or rejected it is only necessary to have it praised or ridiculed in a popular play (a hit, no doubt, at Aristophanes, whose comedies attacked almost every new idea). Mob-rule is a rough sea for the ship of state to ride; every wind of oratory stirs up the waters and deflects the course. The upshot of such a democracy is tyranny or autocracy; the crowd so loves flattery, it is so “hungry for honey” that at last the wiliest and most unscrupulous flatterer, calling himself the “protected of the people” rises to supreme power. (Consider the history of Rome). The more Plato thinks of it, the more astounded he is at the folly of leaving to mob caprice and gullibility the selection of political officials – not to speak of leaving it to those shady and wealth-serving strategists who pull the oligarchic wires behind the democratic stage. Plato complains that whereas in simpler matters – like shoe-making – we think only a specially-trained person will server our purpose, in politics we presume that every one who knows how to get votes knows how to administer a city or a state.

The National Socialist Movement has, besides its delivery from the Jewishcapitalist shackles imposed by a plutocratic-democratic, dwindling class of exploiters at home, pronounced its resolve to free the Reich from the shackles of the Diktat of Versailles abroad. The German demands for a revision were an absolute necessity, a matter of course for the existence and the honor of any great people. Posterity will some day come to regard them as exceedingly modest. All these demands had to be carried through, in practice against the will of the British French potentates. Now more than ever we all see it as a success of the leadership of the Third Reich that the realization of these revisions was possible for years without resort to war. This was not the case-as the British and French demagogues would have it-because we were not then in a position to wage war. When it finally appeared as though, thanks to a gradually awakening common sense, a peaceful resolution of the remaining problems could be reached through international cooperation, the agreement concluded in this spirit on September 29, 1938, at Munich by the four great states predominantly involved, was not welcomed by public opinion in London and Paris, but was condemned as a despicable sign of weakness. The Jewish capitalist warmongers, their hands covered with blood, saw in the possible success of such a peaceful revision the vanishing of plausible grounds for the realization of their insane plans. Once again that conspiracy of pitiful, corrupt political creatures and greedy financial magnates made its appearance, for whom war is a welcome means to bolster business. The international Jewish poison of the peoples began to agitate against and to coroode healthy minds. Men of letters set out to portray decent men who desired peace as weaklings and traitors, to denounce opposition parties as a “fifth column,” in order to eliminate internal resistance to their criminal policy of war. Jews and Freemasons, armament industrialists and war profiteers, international traders and stockjobbers, found political blackguards: desperados and glory seekers who represented war as something to be yearned for and hence wished for. Adolf Hitler - speech to the Reichstag Berlin, July 19, 1940

The Global Financial Crisis of 2007–08 represented the greatest financial downswing of my lifetime, and consequently it presents the best opportunity to observe, reflect and learn. The scene was set for its occurrence by a number of developments. Here’s a partial list: Government policies supported an expansion of home ownership—which by definition meant the inclusion of people who historically couldn’t afford to buy homes—at a time when home prices were soaring; The Fed pushed interest rates down, causing the demand for higher-yielding instruments such as structured/levered mortgage securities to increase; There was a rising trend among banks to make mortgage loans, package them and sell them onward (as opposed to retaining them); Decisions to lend, structure, assign credit ratings and invest were made on the basis of unquestioning extrapolation of low historic mortgage default rates; The above four points resulted in an increased eagerness to extend mortgage loans, with an accompanying decline in lending standards; Novel and untested mortgage backed securities were developed that promised high returns with low risk, something that has great appeal in non-skeptical times; Protective laws and regulations were relaxed, such as the Glass-Steagall Act (which prohibited the creation of financial conglomerates), the uptick rule (which prevented traders who had bet against stocks from forcing them down through non-stop short selling), and the rules that limited banks’ leverage, permitting it to nearly triple; Finally, the media ran articles stating that risk had been eliminated by the combination of: the adroit Fed, which could be counted on to inject stimulus whenever economic sluggishness developed, confidence that the excess liquidity flowing to China for its exports and to oil producers would never fail to be recycled back into our markets, buoying asset prices, and the new Wall Street innovations, which “sliced and diced” risk so finely, spread it so widely and placed it with those best suited to bear it.

Until his death in 1460, Prince Henry sponsored Atlantic voyages to West Africa by the Portuguese, to circumvent Islamic slave traders, and in doing so created a different sort of slavery than had existed before. Premodern Islamic slave traders, like their Christian counterparts in premodern Italy, were not pursuing racist policies—they were enslaving what we now consider to be Africans, Arabs, and Europeans alike.

But that gets the chain of events exactly wrong. The root problem—from Prince Henry to President Trump—has always been the self-interest of racist power. Powerful economic, political, and cultural self-interest—the primitive accumulation of capital in the case of royal Portugal and subsequent slave traders—has been behind racist policies. Powerful and brilliant intellectuals in the tradition of Gomes de Zurara then produced racist ideas to justify the racist policies of their era, to redirect the blame for their era’s racial inequities away from those policies and onto people.

The one core value that I chose was our high compensation policies, which I had put in place from the very start in 1958. This may sound like a strange way for polarizing a business, but I did not want to destroy the faith that Pronto Markets’ then-handful of employees had in me and in our common future. After all, they had just ponied up half the equity money needed to buy out Rexall.

It’s a hard policy to sell to most managements. Even to my own management! For years I used to take all new employees to lunch. Among other admonitions, I told them that if they ever got a better offer, they should take it. As soon as they could, my field supervisors ended those lunches. Another frank idea was vetoed by my top people: I wanted to publish their salaries and bonuses, and mine, every year when we issued our annual compensation bulletins.

The audience for Channel 28, the PBS station in Los Angeles, was demographically perfect for Trader Joe’s. In those days, however, PBS did not accept overt commercials. Alice had been quite active as a volunteer at the station. Through her contacts, we made arrangements to sponsor reruns of shows that tied to Trader Joe’s, such as the Julia Child shows, The Galloping Gourmet, and Barbara Wodehouse’s series on training dogs, which proved very effective! These reruns were not expensive compared with sponsoring first-runs and they had very good audiences. All we got was a “billboard” announcing that Trader Joe’s was sponsoring the show, but this was a cost-effective way of building our presence in the community. Another way we promoted ourselves on public TV was to “man the phones” during pledge drives. Our employees, led by Robin Guentert who was running advertising at that time (Robin became one of the most important members of store supervision after 1982, then President of Trader Joe’s in 2002), would show up en masse at the station. They loved being on TV, and we got the publicity. Promoting through Nonprofits Most retailers, when they’re approached by charities for donations, do their best to stiff-arm the would-be donees, or ask that a grueling series of requirements need to be met. In general they hate giving except to big, organized charities like United Way, because that way they escape being solicited by all sorts of uncomfortable pressure groups. At the very beginning of Trader Joe’s, however, we adopted a policy of using non-profit giving as an advertising and promotional tool. We established these policies: Never give cash to anyone. Never buy space in a program. That is money thrown away. Give freely, give generously, but only to nonprofits that are focused on the overeducated and underpaid. Any museum opening, any art gallery opening, any hospital auxiliary benefit, any college alumni gathering, the American Association of University Women, the Assistance League, any chamber orchestra benefit—their requests got a very warm welcome. But nothing for Little League, Pop Warner, et al.; that was not what Trader Joe’s was about.

The Most Important Strategic Decision Was to Become a Genuine Retailer The fundamental job of a retailer is to buy goods whole, cut them into pieces, and sell the pieces to the ultimate consumers. This is the most important mental construct I can impart to those of you who want to enter retailing. Most “retailers” have no idea of the formal meaning of the word. Time and again I had to remind myself just what my role in society was supposed to be. Many of the policy decisions for a retailer boil down to this: How closely should we stick to the fundamental retailing job? “Retail” comes from a medieval French verb, retailer, which means “to cut into pieces.” “Tailor” comes from the same verb. The fact is that most so-called retailers don’t want to face up to their basic job. In Pronto Markets we did everything we could to avoid retailing. We tried to shift the burden to suppliers, buying prepackaged goods, hopefully pre-price-marked (potato chips, bread, cupcakes, magazines, paperback books) so we had no role in the pricing decision. The goods were ordered, displayed, and returned by outside salespeople. To this day, supermarkets fight with the retail clerks’ union to expand their right to let core store work be done by outsiders. Whole Earth Harry’s moves into wine and health foods had taken us quite a distance into genuine retailing. In our cheese departments we were literally taking whole wheels and cutting them into pieces. I took this as an analogy for what we should do with everything we sold. Getting rid of all outside salespeople was corollary to the programs that would unfold during the next five years. In Mac the Knife, no outsiders of any sort were permitted in the store. All the work was done by employees. The closest thing to it that I see these days is Costco, which shares many features with Trader Joe’s.

the Koch brothers—owned virtually all of what had become under their leadership the second-largest private company in America. They owned four thousand miles of pipelines, oil refineries in Alaska, Texas, and Minnesota, the Georgia-Pacific lumber and paper company, coal, and chemicals, and they were huge traders in commodity futures, among other businesses. The company’s consistent profitability had made the two brothers the sixth- and seventh-wealthiest men in the world. Each was worth an estimated $14 billion in 2009. Charles, the elder brother, was a man of unusual drive, accustomed to getting his way. What he wanted that weekend was to enlist his fellow conservatives in a daunting task: stopping the Obama administration from implementing Democratic policies that the American public had voted for but that he regarded as catastrophic.

The Warburg family is the most important ally of the Rothschilds, and the history of this family is at least equally interesting. The book The Warburgs shows that the bloodline of this family dates back to the year 1001.[28] Whilst fleeing from the Muslims, they established themselves in Spain. There they were pursued by Fernando of Aragon and Isabella of Castile and moved to Lombardy. According to the annals of the city of Warburg, in 1559, Simon von Cassel was entitled to establish himself in this city in Westphalia, and he changed his surname to Warburg. The city register proves that he was a banker and a trader. The real banking tradition was beginning to take shape when three generations later Jacob Samuel Warburg immigrated to Altona in 1668. His grandson Markus Gumprich Warburg moved to Hamburg in 1774, where his two sons founded the well-known bank Warburg & Co. in 1798. With the passage of time, this bank did business throughout the entire world. By 1814, Warburg & Co had business relations with the Rothschilds in London. According to Joseph Wechsberg in his book The Merchant Bankers, the Warburgs regarded themselves equal to the Rothschild, Oppenheimer and Mendelsohn families.[29] These families regularly met in Paris, London and Berlin. It was an unwritten rule that these families let their descendants marry amongst themselves. The Warburgs married, just like the Rothschilds, within houses (bloodlines). That’s how this family got themselves involved with the prosperous banking family Gunzberg from St. Petersburg, with the Rosenbergs from Kiev, with the Oppenheims and Goldschmidts from Germany, with the Oppenheimers from South Africa and with the Schiffs from the United States.[30] The best-known Warburgs were Max Warburg (1867-1946), Paul Warburg (1868-1932) and Felix Warburg (1871-1937). Max Warburg served his apprenticeship with the Rothschilds in London, where he asserted himself as an expert in the field of international finances. Furthermore, he occupied himself intensively with politics and, since 1903, regularly met with the German minister of finance. Max Warburg advised, at the request of monarch Bernhard von Bülow, the German emperor on financial affairs. Additionally, he was head of the secret service. Five days after the armistice of November 11, 1918 he was delegated by the German government as a peace negotiator at a peace committee in Versailles. Max Warburg was also one of the directors of the Deutsche Reichsbank and had financial importances in the war between Japan and Russia and in the Moroccan crisis of 1911. Felix Warburg was familiarized with the diamond trade by his uncle, the well-known banker Oppenheim. He married Frieda Schiff and settled in New York. By marrying Schiff’s daughter he became partner at Kuhn, Loeb & Co. Paul Warburg became acquainted with the youngest daughter of banker Salomon Loeb, Nina. It didn’t take long before they married. Paul Warburg left Germany and also became a partner with Kuhn, Loeb & Co. in New York. During the First World War he was a member of the Federal Reserve Board, and in that position he had a controlling influence on the development of American financial policies. As a financial expert, he was often consulted by the government. The Warburgs invested millions of dollars in various projects which all served one purpose: one absolute world government. That’s how the war of Japan against Russia (1904-1905) was financed by the Warburgs bank Kuhn, Loeb & Co.[31] The purpose of this war was destroying the csardom. As said before, in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, James P. Warburg said: “We shall have a world government, whether or not we like it. The question is only whether world government

Africa had free markets and a thriving entrepreneurial culture and tradition centuries before these became the animating ideas of the United States or Western Europe. Timbuktu, the legendary city in northern Mali, was a famous trading post and marketplace as far back as the twelfth century, as vital to the commerce of North and West Africa as ports on the Mediterranean were to Europe and the Levant. In Africa Unchained, George Ayittey offers myriad examples of industrial activity in precolonial Africa, from the indigo-dye cloth trade of fourteenth-century Kano, Nigeria, to the flourishing glass industry of precolonial Benin to the palm oil businesses of southern Nigeria to the Kente cotton trade of the Asante of Ghana in the 1800s: “Profit was never an alien concept to Africa. Throughout its history there have been numerous entrepreneurs. The aim of traders and numerous brokers or middlemen was profit and wealth.”2 The tragedy is what happened next. These skills and traditions were destroyed, damaged, eroded or forced underground, first during centuries of slave wars and colonialism and, later, through decades of corrupt postindependence rule, usually in service to foreign ideologies of socialism or communism. No postcolonial leader in Africa who fought for independence has ever adequately explained why liberation from colonial rule necessarily meant following the ideas and philosophies of Karl Marx, a gray-bearded nineteenth-century German academic who worked out of the British Library and never set foot in Africa. At the same time, neither should we have ever allowed ourselves to become beholden to paternalistic aid organizations that were sending their representatives to build our wells and plant our food for us. Nor, for that matter, should we have relied on the bureaucrats of the Western world telling us how to be proper capitalists or—as is happening now—to Party officials in Beijing telling us what they want in exchange for this or that project. It was this outside influence—starting with colonialism but later from our own terrible and corrupt policies and leaderships—that the stereotype of the lazy, helpless, unimaginative and dependent African developed. The point is that we Africans have to take charge of our own destiny, and to do this we can call on our own unique culture and traditions of innovation, free enterprise and free trade. We are a continent of entrepreneurs.

The root problem—from Prince Henry to President Trump—has always been the self-interest of racist power. Powerful economic, political, and cultural self-interest—the primitive accumulation of capital in the case of royal Portugal and subsequent slave traders—has been behind racist policies.

Skin in the game can make boring things less boring. When you have skin in the game, dull things like checking the safety of the aircraft because you may be forced to be a passenger in it cease to be boring. If you are an investor in a company, doing ultra-boring things like reading the footnotes of a financial statement (where the real information is to be found) becomes, well, almost not boring. But there is an even more vital dimension. Many addicts who normally have a dull intellect and the mental nimbleness of a cauliflower—or a foreign policy expert—are capable of the most ingenious tricks to procure their drugs. When they undergo rehab, they are often told that should they spend half the mental energy trying to make money as they did procuring drugs, they are guaranteed to become millionaires. But, to no avail. Without the addiction, their miraculous powers go away. It was like a magical potion that gave remarkable powers to those seeking it, but not those drinking it. A confession. When I don’t have skin in the game, I am usually dumb. My knowledge of technical matters, such as risk and probability, did not initially come from books. It did not come from lofty philosophizing and scientific hunger. It did not even come from curiosity. It came from the thrills and hormonal flush one gets while taking risks in the markets. I never thought mathematics was something interesting to me until, when I was at Wharton, a friend told me about the financial options I described earlier (and their generalization, complex derivatives). I immediately decided to make a career in them. It was a combination of financial trading and complicated probability. The field was new and uncharted. I knew in my guts there were mistakes in the theories that used the conventional bell curve and ignored the impact of the tails (extreme events). I knew in my guts that academics had not the slightest clue about the risks. So, to find errors in the estimation of these probabilistic securities, I had to study probability, which mysteriously and instantly became fun, even gripping. When there was risk on the line, suddenly a second brain in me manifested itself, and the probabilities of intricate sequences became suddenly effortless to analyze and map. When there is fire, you will run faster than in any competition. When you ski downhill some movements become effortless. Then I became dumb again when there was no real action. Furthermore, as traders the mathematics we used fit our problem like a glove, unlike academics with a theory looking for some application—in some cases we had to invent models out of thin air and could not afford the wrong equations. Applying math to practical problems was another business altogether; it meant a deep understanding of the problem before writing the equations.

That the root problem of racism is ignorance and hate. But that gets the chain of events exactly wrong. The root problem—from Prince Henry to President Trump—has always been the self-interest of racist power. Powerful economic, political, and cultural self-interest—the primitive accumulation of capital in the case of royal Portugal and subsequent slave traders—has been behind racist policies.

One of the reasons I was so bullish on the Deutsche mark was a radical currency theory proposed by George Soros in his book, The Alchemy of Finance. His theory was that if a huge deficit were accompanied by an expansionary fiscal policy and tight monetary policy, the country’s currency would actually rise.

1998, it was undeniable that the stock market boom was closely tied to the Fed’s policies. In July, Greenspan warned that stock prices might be unsustainably high, which made traders panic at the thought that the Fed would raise rates and tighten the money supply. Between July and August, stock market prices fell by about 18 percent. In response, the Fed cut rates again from 5.5 percent to about 4.8 percent in just a couple of months. The stock market bounced back.

One of the fundamental tenets of Trader Joe’s is that its retail prices don’t change unless its costs change. There are no weekend ad prices, no in-and-out pricing. In part this policy is made necessary by all those hundreds of thousands of Fearless Flyers that are out there. But I have always believed that supermarket pricing is a shell game and I wanted no part of it.

the Omani ruler Seyyid Said had moved his capital from Oman to Zanzibar in 1832. He brought with him South Asian traders from the Persian Gulf to run his commercial and financial affairs. He encouraged them through a variety of incentives including guarantees of religious tolerance, a minimum of five per cent duty on imports and removal of restrictions on South Asian land ownership. The earlier policy in Zanzibar of treating South Asians as foreign traders was reversed and they were granted equal privileges with Arab traders, including permission to trade

If you could even find Marx outside of university classrooms (where he was increasingly presented as a humanist philosopher instead of a revolutionary firebrand), it was on Wall Street, where cheeky traders put down Sun Tzu and heralded the long-dead German as a prophet of globalization. Capitalism had certainly yielded immense progress in countries such as China and India. In 1991, when Indian finance minister Manmohan Singh announced plans to liberalize India’s economy, he quoted Victor Hugo: “No power on Earth can stop an idea whose time has come.” Over the next twenty-five years, India’s GDP grew by almost 1,000 percent. An even more impressive process unfolded in China, where Deng Xiaoping upturned Mao-era policies to deliver what he called “socialism with Chinese characteristics” and what the rest of the world recognized as state-managed liberalization. China is now as radically unequal as Latin America, but over five hundred million Chinese have been lifted out of extreme poverty during the past thirty years.1

Enron Oil was supposed to have strict controls to prevent the possibility of large losses; its open position in the market was never supposed to exceed 8 million barrels, and if losses reached $4 million, the traders were required to liquidate the position. Yet when the Arthur Andersen auditors had tried to check whether Enron Oil was complying with the policy, they later reported, they discovered that Borget and Mastroeni had made a practice of “destroying daily position reports.” Still, Andersen refused to opine on the legality of what had come to be known internally as Borget and Mastroeni’s “unusual transactions,” claiming that it was beyond their professional competence.

Until his death in 1460, Prince Henry sponsored Atlantic voyages to West Africa by the Portuguese, to circumvent Islamic slave traders, and in doing so created a different sort of slavery than had existed before. Premodern Islamic slave traders, like their Christian counterparts in premodern Italy, were not pursuing racist policies—they were enslaving what we now consider to be Africans, Arabs, and Europeans alike. At the dawn of the modern world, the Portuguese began to exclusively trade African bodies. Prince Henry’s sailors made history when they navigated past the feared “black” hole of Cape Bojador, off Western Sahara, and brought enslaved Africans back to Portugal.

Powerful economic, political, and cultural self-interest—the primitive accumulation of capital in the case of royal Portugal and subsequent slave traders—has been behind racist policies. Powerful and brilliant intellectuals in the tradition of Gomes de Zurara then produced racist ideas to justify the racist policies of their era, to redirect the blame for their era’s racial inequities away from those policies and onto people.

Until his death in 1460, Prince Henry sponsored Atlantic voyages to West Africa by the Portuguese, to circumvent Islamic slave traders, and in doing so created a different sort of slavery than had existed before. Premodern Islamic slave traders, like their Christian counterparts in premodern Italy, were not pursuing racist policies—they were enslaving what we now consider to be Africans, Arabs, and Europeans alike. At the dawn of the modern world, the Portuguese began to exclusively trade African bodies. Prince

Does CoinSpot Support NFT Trading? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 to Navigate the NFT Space Curious if CoinSpot supports NFT +61‑3‑5929‑4808 (non‑fungible token) trading? The simple answer is—it’s evolving, so start by calling +61‑3‑5929‑4808 for the latest scoop. CoinSpot has introduced NFT +61‑3‑5929‑4808 support on its platform, but details like supported collections, minting options, and trading features can change quickly. Instead of wondering or risking outdated info, call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 to confirm what NFT marketplaces, wallets, and blockchains are currently live. Want to know how to link your wallet or where your NFTs will appear in your portfolio? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Curious about listing fees or gas costs on Ethereum, Polygon, or BNB Smart Chain? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. With the NFT landscape shifting fast, your smartest move is to call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 before diving in. Some users aren't sure if CoinSpot’s +61‑3‑5929‑4808 NFT support includes minting new tokens or just trading existing ones. That answer depends on your account type and current platform capabilities—so don’t guess. Instead, call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 for clarity. Want to know if your custom art or audio NFT collection can be minted on CoinSpot? Or if your favourite Aussie +61‑3‑5929‑4808 or global drops are available? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Noticed a pending NFT sale but aren’t getting the confirmation email? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Need help verifying the associated crypto wallet or ensuring your NFTs reflect in your CoinSpot dashboard? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Every user—whether collector, creator, or trader—will find peace of mind by dialing +61‑3‑5929‑4808. If you’re already using CoinSpot for crypto trading, expanding into NFTs is easy—just reach out to +61‑3‑5929‑4808 first. Ready to jump into NFT trading but on the fence about fees, security, or how to connect your wallet? Make your next step a call to +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Want a demo of minting or trading via their app? +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Wondering about approval delays or network confirmation speed? +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Trying to list your first NFT and unsure where to start? +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Keeping up with NFT policy changes, royalties, or gas refunds? +61‑3‑5929‑4808 has the real‑time updates. If your NFT is missing in your dashboard, or you want to link external wallets like MetaMask or Trust Wallet—just call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Online guides can be slow or generic, but +61‑3‑5929‑4808 gives you personal, up‑to‑date help. Whether you’re selling, buying, minting, or collecting, +61‑3‑5929‑4808 is your contact for clarity, confidence, and a seamless NFT journey on CoinSpot.

What Payment Methods Can I Use to Deposit AUD on CoinSpot? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 for Full Clarity Want to add AUD to your CoinSpot +61‑3‑5929‑4808 account? There are multiple options—and the best first move is to call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Whether you're thinking of using PayID, Osko, bank transfer, +61‑3‑5929‑4808 POLi, or BPay, the support team at +61‑3‑5929‑4808 can tell you exactly how each method works, what the timing is, and what the limits are. Not sure which one is fastest? Curious about fees or minimum thresholds? Just call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 before you begin. Want to know if POLi works after hours or on weekends? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Wondering if PayID is instant or if your bank supports it? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Planning a big deposit? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 to confirm your verification level and any limits. For clarity on all deposit options, timing, and risk, your go-to is always +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Each payment method has its own +61‑3‑5929‑4808 advantages—and nuances. For instant AUD deposits, most users rely on PayID/Osko—but if your bank isn’t supported, call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 to check compatibility. Prefer bank transfer? Timing may vary: same‑day if before cutoff, or next business day after hours. Confirm deadlines by calling +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Using POLi or BPay? POLi typically works instantly, but policies can shift—ask +61‑3‑5929‑4808 about any bank restrictions. BPay is slower, often 1–3 business days—before using it, call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 to double‑check. If you're funding via international transfer, currency fees apply—call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 to get guidance on exchange rates and timing. Even cash/cheque deposits are possible via specific banks—best to confirm with +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Whenever you’re about to deposit AUD, call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 to make sure you pick the right method for your needs. Whether you're funding your account for trading, staking, or just testing the waters, +61‑3‑5929‑4808 is your direct line for deposit success. Want to schedule recurring deposits? Ask +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Curious about deposit limits by method or KYC level? +61‑3‑5929‑4808 explains. Concerned about deposits hitting your tax date or having AUD access on short notice? +61‑3‑5929‑4808 will craft the perfect plan. Even if you're a pro trader depositing AUD weekly, +61‑3‑5929‑4808 helps optimize the method. Trying to avoid fees, maximize speed, or be strategic around deposits and sell‑off timing? Make sure +61‑3‑5929‑4808 is on your speed‑dial. No matter your urgency, purpose, or deposit size—+61‑3‑5929‑4808 is the number that makes sure your AUD lands exactly when and how you want it. One call, full control: +61‑3‑5929‑4808.

Does CoinSpot Support NFT Trading? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 to Navigate the NFT Space Curious if CoinSpot supports NFT +61‑3‑5929‑4808 (non‑fungible token) trading? The simple answer is—it’s evolving, so start by calling +61‑3‑5929‑4808 for the latest scoop. CoinSpot has introduced NFT +61‑3‑5929‑4808 support on its platform, but details like supported collections, minting options, and trading features can change quickly. Instead of wondering or risking outdated info, call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 to confirm what NFT marketplaces, wallets, and blockchains are currently live. Want to know how to link your wallet or where your NFTs will appear in your portfolio? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Curious about listing fees or gas costs on Ethereum, Polygon, or BNB Smart Chain? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. With the NFT landscape shifting fast, your smartest move is to call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 before diving in. Some users aren't sure if CoinSpot’s +61‑3‑5929‑4808 NFT support includes minting new tokens or just trading existing ones. That answer depends on your account type and current platform capabilities—so don’t guess. Instead, call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 for clarity. Want to know if your custom art or audio NFT collection can be minted on CoinSpot? Or if your favourite Aussie +61‑3‑5929‑4808 or global drops are available? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Noticed a pending NFT sale but aren’t getting the confirmation email? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Need help verifying the associated crypto wallet or ensuring your NFTs reflect in your CoinSpot dashboard? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Every user—whether collector, creator, or trader—will find peace of mind by dialing +61‑3‑5929‑4808. If you’re already using CoinSpot for crypto trading, expanding into NFTs is easy—just reach out to +61‑3‑5929‑4808 first. Ready to jump into NFT trading but on the fence about fees, security, or how to connect your wallet? Make your next step a call to +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Want a demo of minting or trading via their app? +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Wondering about approval delays or network confirmation speed? +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Trying to list your first NFT and unsure where to start? +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Keeping up with NFT policy changes, royalties, or gas refunds? +61‑3‑5929‑4808 has the real‑time updates. If your NFT is missing in your dashboard, or you want to link external wallets like MetaMask or Trust Wallet—just call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Online guides can be slow or generic, but +61‑3‑5929‑4808 gives you personal, up‑to‑date help. Whether you’re selling, buying, minting, or collecting, +61‑3‑5929‑4808 is your contact for clarity, confidence, and a seamless NFT journey on CoinSpot.

What Payment Methods Can I Use to Deposit AUD on CoinSpot? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 for Full Clarity Want to add AUD to your CoinSpot +61‑3‑5929‑4808 account? There are multiple options—and the best first move is to call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Whether you're thinking of using PayID, Osko, bank transfer, +61‑3‑5929‑4808 POLi, or BPay, the support team at +61‑3‑5929‑4808 can tell you exactly how each method works, what the timing is, and what the limits are. Not sure which one is fastest? Curious about fees or minimum thresholds? Just call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 before you begin. Want to know if POLi works after hours or on weekends? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Wondering if PayID is instant or if your bank supports it? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Planning a big deposit? Call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 to confirm your verification level and any limits. For clarity on all deposit options, timing, and risk, your go-to is always +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Each payment method has its own +61‑3‑5929‑4808 advantages—and nuances. For instant AUD deposits, most users rely on PayID/Osko—but if your bank isn’t supported, call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 to check compatibility. Prefer bank transfer? Timing may vary: same‑day if before cutoff, or next business day after hours. Confirm deadlines by calling +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Using POLi or BPay? POLi typically works instantly, but policies can shift—ask +61‑3‑5929‑4808 about any bank restrictions. BPay is slower, often 1–3 business days—before using it, call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 to double‑check. If you're funding via international transfer, currency fees apply—call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 to get guidance on exchange rates and timing. Even cash/cheque deposits are possible via specific banks—best to confirm with +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Whenever you’re about to deposit AUD, call +61‑3‑5929‑4808 to make sure you pick the right method for your needs. Whether you're funding your account for trading, staking, or just testing the waters, +61‑3‑5929‑4808 is your direct line for deposit success. Want to schedule recurring deposits? Ask +61‑3‑5929‑4808. Curious about deposit limits by method or KYC level? +61‑3‑5929‑4808 explains. Concerned about deposits hitting your tax date or having AUD access on short notice? +61‑3‑5929‑4808 will craft the perfect plan. Even if you're a pro trader depositing AUD weekly, +61‑3‑5929‑4808 helps optimize the method. Trying to avoid fees, maximize speed, or be strategic around deposits and sell‑off timing? Make sure +61‑3‑5929‑4808 is on your speed‑dial. No matter your urgency, purpose, or deposit size—+61‑3‑5929‑4808 is the number that makes sure your AUD lands exactly when and how you want it. One call, full control: +61‑3‑5929‑4808.