Financial Crisis

[flying]

As it is still THAT time of year, see if you can pick this one up:-

Title is: Bank Aid - Do They Loan This Christmas

See if you can avoid joining in the chorus.

Happy New Year.

hahahahah

Thanks Chaimai that was funny...Bleed the World.....

[midas]

Whatever Governments say now I believe the opposite

Is The Government Misrepresenting Unemployment By 32%?

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/governmen...unemployment-32

[hhgz]

"Whatever Governments say now I believe the opposite"

When you claimed that it would take Thailand 20 years to recover from the financial crisis, I had the same thoughts about your perspective.

Since this thread is supposed to be about Thailand, I'll assume that you think that the unemployment rate is not the 1.1% as reported by the government, but it's actually 1.5%.

Edited January 3, 2010 by hhgz

[midas]

"Whatever Governments say now I believe the opposite"

When you claimed that it would take Thailand 20 years to recover from the financial crisis, I had the same thoughts about your perspective.

Since this thread is supposed to be about Thailand, I'll assume that you think that the unemployment rate is not the 1.1% as reported by the government, but it's actually 1.5%.

I know this thread is supposed to be about Thailand but I keep following events in USA ( and Japan ) because as the worlds 2 biggest economies Thailand will certainly be affected by any fallout in those 2 countries. Who knows what the real unemployment rate is in Thailand ? There are so many that work outside the minimum wage system in Thailand and are only on some form of commission or pay based on results, how are they accounted for ? Does the Thai government have any reason or incentive to fabricate the figures – I would say so.

And the article yesterday is provoking debate ( which is good ) and has resulted in a Part 2 ARTICLE.

On Government DOL Misrepresentations Part 2: Following The Money, Or In This Case The Average Unemployment Paycheck

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/governmen...ployment-payche

[12DrinkMore]

Life in a capsule.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/02/business...capsule.html?em

[AlexLah]

Midas come on, are they saying that the official numbers are not real?

Why would the US goberment do something like that?

12, as you see life is not that bad in Japan, they could be sleeping in tents....

[flying]

Ron Paul's ideas no longer fringe

With the economy still struggling, the lawmaker's libertarian views are getting serious attention.

[midas]

Life in a capsule.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/02/business...capsule.html?em

“ The rent is surprisingly high for such a small space: 59,000 yen a month, or about $640, for an upper bunk ” – that is crazy……

Maybe a new business model would be offer them for sale as the worlds smallest condominiums with mortgage finance instead of renting them out and build them as detachable modules that can double up as a coffin ?

What a sad society Japan is ?

[midas]

Midas come on, are they saying that the official numbers are not real?

Why would the US goberment do something like that?

12, as you see life is not that bad in Japan, they could be sleeping in tents....

Yes indeed Alex .they do it for the same reason they manipulate the stock market to keep it above the psychologically important 10,000 level

[12DrinkMore]

What a mess.

The result of socialist "tax the worker" and "give it to the wasters" government.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/finance...20-billion.html

The Government estimates it will pay out £19.6 billion in housing benefit during the 2009/10 financial year, according to figures slipped out on the Department for Work and Pensions' (DWP) website.

That amounts to around 650 Quid for every "worker" paying taxes.

But that is just a drop in the ocean, look at this

Despite repeated pledges by politicians to overhaul Britain's welfare system, the DWP expects its total benefit expenditure to climb to almost £150 billion this year

That total means that almost 5,000 Quid is being taken from each the "workers" and handed out to the "deserving"

But hold on, the combined cost of the education, defence and transport budgets is about the same, so that makes 10,000 Quid/worker.

And then add in the cost of the enormous government apparatus, roughly 25% of the workforce, to "manage" it all.....

That poor little sod actually making real money by producing real stuff is certainly getting a bad deal, maybe he should go on the sick and take benefits.....

[12DrinkMore]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/finance...-recession.html

The former EU trade commissioner and long-time advocate of the euro told The Daily Telegraph that the 25pc devaluation of the pound over the last two years had served as a shock-absorber for the economy. "Sterling flexibility has provided an additional support to demand," he said.

I absolutely detest this "get out of jail free" card that countries like to play. Particularly when it is my cash that is being devalued.

I am disappointed that the call for an alternative global reserve currency seems to have dissipated.

Lord Mandelson praised the Bank of England for piloting the financial system through the storm using quantitative easing (QE). Such a policy is not possible for countries such as Ireland, Spain and Greece, which face debt-deflation strains within the eurozone.

Hold on a minute Mandelson, surely as the countries headed towards a single currency the politicians must have realised that they had an added responsibility to educate the citizens :D about the effects of the momentous decision? Did they? hel_l no! They grabbed the low interest rates and rushed into an orgy of spending and housing bubbles on the back of the lower interest rates.

Well now the the ball has bounced back and turned into a massive medicine ball. They wanted the stability but none of the responsibility of ensuring that this stability would last. I now wonder just how they plan on fixing these issues? The Irish at least have made some attempt. But whether the PIGS can do something remains to be seen. They all want a free lunch and dinner too.

Sorry guys, but this is the global economy just taking anybody who is not prepared to remain competitive down the tubes.

And back to the initial article

The European Central Bank has so far held back from QE, except for a modest €60bn (£53bn) purchase of covered bonds. The result is an over-valued euro and a contraction of eurozone credit, making it much harder for Club Med countries to adjust to their property slumps.

Once again the Great Property God has taken over. Jeeze, do I hate the Great Evil of rampant property speculation. "I am rich because a piece of dirt and a lump of bricks is worth more and more every year, even more than I can earn, so why bother earning?"

So now we have an overvalued EUR? <deleted>! Is all that is left to fix the problems round after round after round of western currencies devaluing until the western worker is competitive to the Asian worker? Then maybe the Great Awakening might take place, as my prediction of a massive and unstoppable transfer of wellbeing and wealth from the West to the East occurs.

Sure there will be the ultra-wealthy in the West who have profited, as indeed the ultra-wealthy in the East, but for the hoi palloi, well, sorry, but no skills, no profession and no added productive value, then your fate is written on the walls; poverty, which is going to be much harder to bear in the West than in the East.

And don't expect your elected representative to help, he/she is much more interest in making dam_n sure that he/she is not going to be in the soup kitchens and capsule hotels.

[MJP]

Just a quick anecdotal from the sticks for what it's worth.

Local shop keeper reports New Year beer sales here at 40 boxes over the period. Last year he sold 400. 90% drop. Was selling 35 scooters a month a year or so ago, now perhaps 2.

[sokal]

It looks like we have some new regulation to stop a run on money market funds. Money Market Rule 2a-7. A key proposal in the overhaul of money market regulation suggests that money market fund managers will have the option to "suspend redemptions to allow for the orderly liquidation of fund assets." Your money is now frozen. Bank runs have become illegal.

[sokal]

:D :D :D

WASHINGTON -- US currency should include tracking devices that let the government tax private possession of dollar bills, a Federal Reserve official says.

The longer you hold currency without depositing it in a bank account, the less that cash will be worth, according to a proposal from Marvin Goodfriend, a senior vice president at the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond.

In other words, greenbacks will get automatic expiration dates.

"The magnetic strip could visibly record when a bill was last withdrawn from the banking system. A carry tax could be deducted from each bill upon deposit according to how long the bill was in circulation," Goodfriend wrote in a recent presentation to a Federal Reserve System conference in Woodstock, Vermont.

The 34-page paper argues a carry tax will discourage "hoarding" currency, deter black market and criminal activities, and boost economic stability during deflationary periods when interest rates hover near zero.

It says new technology finally makes such a scheme feasible. "Systems would have to be put in place at banks and automatic teller machines to read bills, assess the carry tax, and stamp the bills 'current,'" the report recommends.

Goodfriend said in an interview that banks might place a kind of visible "date issued" stamp on each note they distributed. "The thing could actually stamp the date when the bill comes out of the ATM," he said.

[flying]

It looks like we have some new regulation to stop a run on money market funds. Money Market Rule 2a-7. A key proposal in the overhaul of money market regulation suggests that money market fund managers will have the option to "suspend redemptions to allow for the orderly liquidation of fund assets." Your money is now frozen. Bank runs have become illegal.

You know many folks also closed out their IRA's & 401K's last year when they feared Nationalization

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/governmen...has-been-denied

[flying]

The longer you hold currency without depositing it in a bank account, the less that cash will be worth,

:D Kind of like how it is now...( not that depositing it in a bank makes it grow ) .Everytime they crank up the deficit everyone's savings drops

Hey just another reason to run not walk away from USD

Edited January 4, 2010 by flying

[flying]

2010 Will Be Worse

The year 2010 is likely to be the pivotal year where pundits stop referring to the recession and begin openly talking about a depression.

[sokal]

The longer you hold currency without depositing it in a bank account, the less that cash will be worth,

:D Kind of like how it is now...( not that depositing it in a bank makes it grow ) .Everytime they crank up the deficit everyone's savings drops

Hey just another reason to run not walk away from USD

These last couple posts where quite a hit to the ponzi/fiat system. Awaiting Naam's one liner......

BTW sometimes I just condense some articles I find and reword it a little to fit the forum, I am not trying to look smart.

[lannarebirth]

Mission Accomplished!

[Abrak]

I have been wondering how things might look 10 years from now and how we might look back at the past decade in ten years time. Obviously this is an inherently silly exercise but so is a financial crisis thread when there isnt much sign of one around.

Anyway, my guess (based largely on a repetition of history surrounding the effects of the end of sterling as a reserve currency) is that at some point this decade will mark the end of 'globalisation' being the inexorable force that moulds the world's economy. It is kind of based on 3 premises....

1) Globalization is not as inexorable as you might think...

2) In any case globalisation is vastly overrated

3) Globalization is achieving ever decreasing returns which will eventually crack the underlying model...

1) Globalization is not as inexorable as you might think...

There is a general feeling that globalization is just the way of the world. Increasing trade, increased capital movement, reduced costs of trade (greater global infrastructure etc). In reality it hasnt really panned out that way. In 1820 trade was 2% of US GDP and increased to 14-15% of GDP between 1880 and 1920. This was essentially commodity driven - corn from X and rice from Y, metals, etc.. I say anywhere between 1880 to 1920 because the big gains were in the early years after that you saw diminishing returns.

Between 1920 and 1950 trade as a percentage of US GDP actually fell from 15% of US GDP to around 8%. It wasnt that commodity trade actually fell but that manufacturing goods are inherently best produced in the country that you are going to sell them (relative to commodities). Manufactured goods took up an ever increasing percentage of GDP so that commodity trade diminished.

1950 to 2010 has seen a rise in trade a percentage of GDP as manufactured items have become more tradeable. However, there is a high degree of local content here whether it be manufacturing, marketing of Toyota cars in the UK, Reebok/Nike value added in the US or Coca-cola sales in China. By 1980 trade as a percent of GDP grown from 8% to 20% and is now some 26%.

However both manufacturing and commodities are an increasingly smaller percentage of GDP with services taking up an increasing proportion. One of the myths is that we will have our x-rays read by some 3rd world doctors and sent back by internet. Maybe a taxi in the US will be driven by remote control out of Burma. More likely as services take up an increasing percentage of GDP, income will be more locally driven.

Of course people - hairdressers and doctors may emigrate to the US or whatever - by some demographic projections there will be more babies born in the US by 2050 than in China (whose working population will peak in 2015).

2) In any case globalisation is vastly overrated

Everyone appears to be getting a little carried away by globalization. I mean who really wants to buy a computer and then have your queries answered by a Karachi call service?

But take banking for example - that is a significant service that we all talk about globalization.

Well first of all, look around the world and you will find that each country is dominated by 'local' players. USA, UK, Germany, China and even Thailand. It is hard to think of a truely global bank and if you do, it is probably HSBC. Still if you look at their advertising for the last 10 years, it has been focused on being a 'global, local, bank'. It is actually hard to think of companies that make the same returns outside their local markets as they do internally - be it Citibank or Walmart.

Conceptually think of mortgages. Who is best placed to get the best returns from a mortgage loan other than the local bank that gave it. We can carve it up, spread it around the globe and end up with an unmitigated disaster.

When you look at the US. It is producing roughly 25% of world manufacturing output with 11m workers compared to 25% of world manufacturing output with 30m workers 20 years ago (far more than the 18% that 120m Chinese workers are producing today). On the one hand China has lots employed (but no big global players) and Japan has lots of global players (but has increased employment in say car manufacturing in the UK.)

3) Globalization is achieving ever decreasing returns which will eventually crack the underlying model...

And here is the big problem...

The whole globalization process is based on a fixed exchange rate scheme (Bretton Woods 2) that is clearly showing signs of ever decreasing returns going to essentially negative returns similar to the gold standard/sterling block fixed exchange rate regime 70 - 90 years ago. Ultimately under a reserve currency, players need reserves of that currency to maintain their peg. That means surpluses at the expense of the reserve currency economy which means slowing growth of the reserve currency economy at ever decreasing returns for the global economy. Think the UK in the late 1920s.

It was only temporarily resolved (by that I mean 30-40 years or so) by Bretton Woods 1/2 and the US taking over the reserve currency role. The US consumption led economic model is virtually bankrupt so, so must be the investment led growth models.

It is not resolved by pegging to the US$ and then devaluing the US$ because all you do is move the burden of exporters mercantilism from destroying US growth to destroying Japanese/European growth rates. (Actually even devaluing the US$ is pretty difficult.)

So the underlying dichotomy is this. To the extent you believe in ever increasing globalization then the fixed exchange rate regime cannot continue. (To put it in Midas terms - an Indian doctor earns US$6,000 and a US doctor US$100,000 so the US doctor's salary will fall - while if there was to be a 'degree' of equilibrium - the natural assumption is that the exchange rate will change). Or the exchange rate regime remains in the place and the effects of globalization diminish.

To me, the most likely scenario is that both the exchange regime will change and the the effects of globalization will diminish in the next decade. This might happen in many ways - for instance, conflict might lead to reduced globalization and a change fixed exchange rate through the introduction of tariffs.

If you look at the US problem we have just been through, too much lending to the consumer continues until the lenders had to be bailed out. Ultimately too much lending to a consumption based economy isnt the answer. You need more investment if the US, more consumption amongst the exporters. And to the extent there is investment amongst exporters it must be aimed at the domestic economy.

[AlexLah]

Interesting post Abrak and I think I have mentioned globalization a few times.

It’s my belief that globalization is about the upgrading of infrastructure in unindustrialized countries and the availability of a new pool of cheap labor that comes with it.

Roads, power stations, hospitals and such are being build by the big corporations with the help of outside investors. Before all those projects get finished there is usually some kind of crash (Dubai is a good example). Some companies involved go bankrupt after paying out whatever they have left and some of those projects are being sold off for cheap. (There was a nice football stadium a while ago in the US being sold for peanuts or look at foreclosure sales as an example).

So now the projects are paid off and the new owner can start looking for the new cheap labor that has been given an opportunity to get a payed job thanks to better infrastructure.

Along this process, the powers that be, will try to monopolize all critical and useful valuable resources they can by installing some kind of corrupt regime, then privitise all of the stuff that people need in their daily life like fresh water, energy and food and some others. Once the peasants are exhausted the global corporations will move on in search for the next victim.

I called it: The race for the bottom.

The next victim will be Africa.

[flying]

Obviously this is an inherently silly exercise but so is a financial crisis thread when there isnt much sign of one around.

[Abrak]

Oh well 2010 is election year..... looks like this will be the quality of the economic debate....

Electing the Conservatives is a risk we must not take By Alistair Darling in the Guardian

Tory plans to cut 'further and faster' would wreck recovery and roll back Labour's many successes. Yeah and happy Xmas to you too....

The choice we make at the general election in 2010 will define the future of our country for the next 10 to 20 years. It is a choice between two competing visions: David Cameron's vision of a decade of austerity in which the UK would fail to make the most of its potential and inevitably fall behind the performance of other countries; or our vision of building a fair and just society with growth guaranteeing jobs and opportunity for every business and family (Santa Claus is coming to town). It is a contrast between a pessimistic outlook, lacking ambition, and one of confidence and optimism (not to mention wet dreams and fantasies...).

The last 18 months have been difficult for every country in the world, ours included. But the steps we have taken – and which have been opposed by the Tories at every turn – are working. We must now build on that: to take the tough decisions needed to cut our borrowing over the next four years while supporting growth and doing nothing to damage the economic or social fabric of the country.

It is imperative to secure growth and to seize the opportunities of an improving world economy. We are well placed. Many of our industries are world leaders (Go on.... name a few). We have a good record of innovation backed by world-class universities and a tax system that backs research and development (note political messages dont include facts such as 2008 R&D spending was a massive 1.7% of GDP lower than 1.8% in 2000). We need to capitalise on them. It is where the jobs of the future will come from and we must not put that at risk.

Throughout the last year we took the tough decisions needed to stabilise the banking system (noone is going to argue with that bailout...according to the IMF (March 2009) the UK had spent 19.4% of GDP supporting the its banking system - more than any other country) and support families and businesses (or maybe those?). Most importantly we kept more people in work (and another one one.... still it is a bit difficult to combine the words 'tough decisions' with 'support, stabilise, keep etc) – unemployment is lower than in France, Spain and the US (not to mention Latvia and Iceland) – and helped more people stay in their homes than many thought possible (congrats... a paragraph starting 'tough decisions' which includes 4 bailouts.). We've stabilised the economy (euphemism for largest recession in living memory), and the economy will return to growth this year.

And to demonstrate our determination to live within our means I will present legislation to the Commons next week which will set out how we'll halve the deficit over four years (presumably this is the same deficit that they trebled last year). It will not be easy, but to cut "further and faster" as the Tories have pledged would be reckless and dangerous. Even if they intend to halve the deficit one year earlier, they will have to find additional cuts or tax rises of £26bn. They owe it to every family and business to spell out what their plans are. This approach is foolish in the extreme. It would risk wrecking the recovery and would not be a platform from which this country can succeed.

The UK is one of the largest economies in the world. We have a great storehouse of strength in our businesses, our science and engineering and our world-class education system (Yeah you have already done the brilliant education system bit - seem to remember you wanted to turn Oxford and Cambridge into technical colleges). Public investment and private endeavour working hand-in-hand will help us secure growth in the future. Britain's companies cannot do it on their own. We will need to encourage innovation and enterprise. Over the past decade, we have more than doubled the science budget, doubled the money universities make from knowledge transfer and spin-outs, and introduced a successful R&D tax credit system.

We need to exploit this advantage. With four universities in the world's top 10 (and again....), we should have even more commercial applications of our research and deeper R&D activity at our firms. That's why the pre-budget report announced a new tax incentive for companies profiting in the UK from exploiting their patents. We've invested in the skills of the people of this country. Training programmes have supported millions in improving their skills and apprenticeships have trebled, with over 2 million completed since 1997. But there is still a skills gap with our competitors – and we need to address it (Surely a mistake here....?).

Infrastructure too is a vital element of growth. Following decades of neglect, we have increased capital spending and transformed the way we invest. But we still need to do more – that's why we are looking at new high-speed rail links. And we're looking at our infrastructure needs across energy, waste, water, telecoms and transport over the next 50 years.

The threat of climate change to a strong and stable economy in the future cannot be exaggerated (Errr... that by definition is an exaggeration). But the low-carbon sector offers an opportunity to secure this growth. By addressing investment barriers we've released billions of pounds for offshore wind, ultra-low carbon vehicles, marine energy, and low-carbon aerospace. Green industries alone could support a further half a million jobs over the next decade. None of this would happen without our support (there are going to be 500,000 jobs in green industries - offshore wind, ultra-low carbon vehicles, marine energy, and low-carbon aerospace - because we are going to support them.).

In his pre-budget speech Darling said he would be subsidizing homes with domestic wind turbines and solar panels who plug their excess power into the National Grid!!

It is only by growing and investing in our key sectors (hmmm UK has the second lowest investment to GDP ratio of all G20 countries) that we will be able to deal with the many global challenges of the coming decades. That's why I reject the idea of a decade of austerity and swingeing cuts of public spending. The choice the government makes in 2010 will be crucial to Britain's future: do we lock in the recovery and set a path for future growth by continuing to enable businesses and people to make the most of their opportunities, or do we risk it all by rolling back the progress of the past decade in supporting enterprise and innovation and gamble with the recovery by cutting deeply into public services?

George Osborne's approach is a serious risk, not just to our recovery but to our future (euphemism for George Osborne actually has WMDs). It is a risk we should not take. We've made the right choices over the last year and will continue to make the right choices over the coming year.

[Naam]

Obviously this is an inherently silly exercise but so is a financial crisis thread when there isnt much sign of one around.

what recession and where?

[flying]

Brace Yourself for a Hard LandingBernanke Tightens the Noose

Tightening the Noose

The Fed is engaged in various covert-strategies to recapitalize the banking system. At the same time, Bernanke, Summers, Geithner, and Obama have stated repeatedly, that they're committed to slashing the long-term deficits. This means that they plan to reduce liquidity and push the economy back into recession so they can launch a surprise attack on Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security.

Full Article at link above

[midas]

This idea of civil unrest is such a romantic notion.

Who knows for sure…………Celente gives it until 2012 …….so plenty of time yet…….

But I think things like this are surely an ominous early warning sign ?

Obama effigy hanged in Jimmy Carter's home town

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8438852.stm

And Abrak don’t underestimate the anger building up over Money Market Rule 2a-7 -

i.e. proposal that money market fund managers will have the option to "suspend

redemptions to allow for the orderly liquidation of fund assets."

[sokal]

Interesting piece by Ambrak.

If their was some type of international gold standard then globalization would work allot better.

[MJP]

Obviously this is an inherently silly exercise but so is a financial crisis thread when there isnt much sign of one around.

what recession and where?

The recession where we're bidding contracts which get canceled because governments and large corporations can't raise the finance. The recession where we currently have no contracts coming up in the likes of the UK, neither have our competitors. The recession where my local shopkeeper here in the sticks is reporting sales down 90%. The recession where my friends are unemployed, many of them. The recession where firms that owe me considerable amounts of money cannot pay. The recession where most economic activity is lead by government stimulus . . .

Some of us have to live in the real world. For us the recession is real and is worrying.

[jcon]

Interesting post Abrak and I think I have mentioned globalization a few times.

I called it: The race for the bottom.

The next victim will be Africa.

Alex I'm not sure if it's your writing style or not, but your posts read as if you are the one coming up with these "ideas."

The Race to the Bottom is a well-documented idea and all economists have heard of it. Anybody with half a brain can imagine the scenario.

You say, "I think I have mentioned globalization a few times." In what context? Either way, I think Abrak articulates his thoughts on the matter and takes them to a point while you just post vagaries.

Abrak, interesting post about globalization - however don't you think there is a logical disconnect when you say:

1) Globalization is not as inexorable as you might think...

2) In any case globalisation is vastly overrated

3) Globalization is achieving ever decreasing returns which will eventually crack the underlying model...

In the third point you accept that globalization is already here and working (or not working), which directly opposes point number 1, yes? (2nd point exhibits the same logical disconnect, but more subjective)

Either way, I tend to agree with you, Plarex, that Africa is toast.

[midas]

Anyway, my guess (based largely on a repetition of history surrounding the effects of the end of sterling as a reserve currency) is that at some point this decade will mark the end of 'globalisation' being the inexorable force that moulds the world's economy. It is kind of based on 3 premises....

I don’t share your view Abrak because it is as if you regard globalisation as a choice or preference.

I see it more as a powerful and unstoppable force because in this day and age of incredibly scarce money

aren’t investors more likely to be unemotional regarding decisions about which countries

will give them the best return on their money ?

Why do you think it is a myth that “ we could have our x-rays read by some 3rd world doctors

and sent back by internet “ ? What economic forces can protect the US doctor if his Indian counterpart costs only 10% ?

Even if an AWU worker needs his $ 130,000 salary to pay the mortgage on his hugely overvalued house and make all

his credit payments , this is their problem and I can’t see how this will affect the capitalists decision to build

a plant in India instead of USA if a worker in New Delhi can produce the same results at even less than 10% of the US cost.

Also under the Obama regime, why would any prudent investor want to tie up capital in a country that

no longer recognises the US Constitution ? It so evident now that Obama and his Democrat friends have no

respect for this and you could end up like the GM bondholders who not only

lost their money but were also accused of being “ unpatriotic “ for simply trying to protect what was theirs ?

Now we have examples of the law of eminent domain being applied in favour of private parties .....they have lost the plot.

Perhaps you can partly control globalisation artificially by government intervention

but under a truly open market system I cant see how a grossly overpaid and overvalued but declining

USA can prevent the force of a rising Asia well into the future ?