In the end, the only and eternal vocation of money is circulation. This circulation causes the contrary effect to income expansion, studied by the income velocity of circulation of money, by the income multiplier and by the bank money multiplier. These three issues are thought to belong to the same operation. Therefore, a unified money theory can be established.
A dynamic economy finances investments with the savings existing in the system but, the economy is simultaneously growing in real and nominal terms. Such growth in circulating capital is only possible through the creation of money in the economic system. In general terms, the system tends to finance growth with the spontaneous creation of money.
The paper aimsat investigating the nexus relationship between energy consumption and economic growth in Jordan using annual data over the period 1976-2013 by employingAutoregressive Distributed Lagged (ARDL) model. The cointegration results provide evidence on the existence of long-run equilibrium relationship among model variables. The ARDL long-run estimation results revealed a significant positive impact of energy consumption on economic growth. The negative and significant signs of error-correction termsindicatelong-run bidirectional causality between energy consumption and economic growth. The Granger-Causality test within VECM framework (Wald F-test) indicates bidirectional strong and weak short-run causality between all variables.
This study examines the determinants of financial performance of commercial banks in Ethiopia by using panel data of banks over the period 2002-2013. Since the data is secondary in nature, the quantitative approach to research was considered. Under this study, both internal and external factors were included. Based on the regression result, all bank specific, industry specific and macro economic variables affect performance of the bank significantly and except inflation which was insignificant and positive for the performance measured by ROA. Furthermore, all variables have significant effect on the performance of banks when performance is measured using NIM.
The impact of international business in domestic markets compels us to ask a question: "How can we survive in this global playing field, and what can we do to run our businesses more effectively?" Nowadays, businesses of all sizes search for suppliers and customers on a global level. International competition, foreign clients and suppliers may become bit cautious, but they may also create huge opportunities in developing our business. The increasingly global business environment requires managers to approach the negotiation process from the global business person's point of view. This approach may not be relevant in domestic negotiations. Some of the components of a cross cultural negotiation process are more complex and difficult, but will surely help in overcoming barriers and failures in the international business arena.
When doing business internationally, we need to consider (Salacuse, 1991):
If we consider the fact that negotiating with our fellow citizen is not an easy task due to many individual differences, it would be reasonable to suggest that negotiating with foreigners may be even more difficult. The way we perceive and create our own reality may be completely different to our counterpart's way of thinking, behaving and feeling. Unfortunately, knowledge of any foreign language is not enough to face and solve the problem. Language is a cluster of codes used in communication which, if not shared effectively, can act as a barrier to establish credibility and trust. We need more effective tools, and the most important is knowledge of all factors that can influence the proceedings. Nations tend to have a national character that influences the type of goals and process the society pursues in negotiations. This is why specifying and understanding cultural differences is vital in order to perform successfully in inter-cultural communication (Schuster-Copeland 1996, 33). As we better understand that our partners may see things differently, we will be less likely to make negative assumptions and more likely to make progress when negotiating. “When crossing Cultures, it is essentials that the source of the Communication think of the product in terms of the culture to which the communication will be directed rather than the home cultureâ€.(Cateora and Keavency, 1987)