rank

How Do Past Presidents Rank in Foreign Policy?

How do presidents incorporate morality into decisions involving the national interest? Moral considerations explain why Truman, who authorized the use of nuclear weapons in Japan during World War II, later refused General MacArthur's request to use them in China during the Korean War. What is contextual intelligence, and how does it explain why Bush 41 is ranked first in foreign policy, but Bush 43 is found wanting? Is it possible for a president to lie in the service of the public interest? In this episode, Professor Joseph S. Nye considers these questions as he explores the role of morality in presidential decision-making from FDR to Trump.




rank

How Do Past Presidents Rank in Foreign Policy?

How do presidents incorporate morality into decisions involving the national interest? Moral considerations explain why Truman, who authorized the use of nuclear weapons in Japan during World War II, later refused General MacArthur's request to use them in China during the Korean War. What is contextual intelligence, and how does it explain why Bush 41 is ranked first in foreign policy, but Bush 43 is found wanting? Is it possible for a president to lie in the service of the public interest? In this episode, Professor Joseph S. Nye considers these questions as he explores the role of morality in presidential decision-making from FDR to Trump.




rank

How Do Past Presidents Rank in Foreign Policy?

How do presidents incorporate morality into decisions involving the national interest? Moral considerations explain why Truman, who authorized the use of nuclear weapons in Japan during World War II, later refused General MacArthur's request to use them in China during the Korean War. What is contextual intelligence, and how does it explain why Bush 41 is ranked first in foreign policy, but Bush 43 is found wanting? Is it possible for a president to lie in the service of the public interest? In this episode, Professor Joseph S. Nye considers these questions as he explores the role of morality in presidential decision-making from FDR to Trump.




rank

How Do Past Presidents Rank in Foreign Policy?

How do presidents incorporate morality into decisions involving the national interest? Moral considerations explain why Truman, who authorized the use of nuclear weapons in Japan during World War II, later refused General MacArthur's request to use them in China during the Korean War. What is contextual intelligence, and how does it explain why Bush 41 is ranked first in foreign policy, but Bush 43 is found wanting? Is it possible for a president to lie in the service of the public interest? In this episode, Professor Joseph S. Nye considers these questions as he explores the role of morality in presidential decision-making from FDR to Trump.




rank

How Do Past Presidents Rank in Foreign Policy?

How do presidents incorporate morality into decisions involving the national interest? Moral considerations explain why Truman, who authorized the use of nuclear weapons in Japan during World War II, later refused General MacArthur's request to use them in China during the Korean War. What is contextual intelligence, and how does it explain why Bush 41 is ranked first in foreign policy, but Bush 43 is found wanting? Is it possible for a president to lie in the service of the public interest? In this episode, Professor Joseph S. Nye considers these questions as he explores the role of morality in presidential decision-making from FDR to Trump.




rank

How Do Past Presidents Rank in Foreign Policy?

How do presidents incorporate morality into decisions involving the national interest? Moral considerations explain why Truman, who authorized the use of nuclear weapons in Japan during World War II, later refused General MacArthur's request to use them in China during the Korean War. What is contextual intelligence, and how does it explain why Bush 41 is ranked first in foreign policy, but Bush 43 is found wanting? Is it possible for a president to lie in the service of the public interest? In this episode, Professor Joseph S. Nye considers these questions as he explores the role of morality in presidential decision-making from FDR to Trump.




rank

How Do Past Presidents Rank in Foreign Policy?

How do presidents incorporate morality into decisions involving the national interest? Moral considerations explain why Truman, who authorized the use of nuclear weapons in Japan during World War II, later refused General MacArthur's request to use them in China during the Korean War. What is contextual intelligence, and how does it explain why Bush 41 is ranked first in foreign policy, but Bush 43 is found wanting? Is it possible for a president to lie in the service of the public interest? In this episode, Professor Joseph S. Nye considers these questions as he explores the role of morality in presidential decision-making from FDR to Trump.




rank

How Do Past Presidents Rank in Foreign Policy?

How do presidents incorporate morality into decisions involving the national interest? Moral considerations explain why Truman, who authorized the use of nuclear weapons in Japan during World War II, later refused General MacArthur's request to use them in China during the Korean War. What is contextual intelligence, and how does it explain why Bush 41 is ranked first in foreign policy, but Bush 43 is found wanting? Is it possible for a president to lie in the service of the public interest? In this episode, Professor Joseph S. Nye considers these questions as he explores the role of morality in presidential decision-making from FDR to Trump.




rank

How Do Past Presidents Rank in Foreign Policy?

How do presidents incorporate morality into decisions involving the national interest? Moral considerations explain why Truman, who authorized the use of nuclear weapons in Japan during World War II, later refused General MacArthur's request to use them in China during the Korean War. What is contextual intelligence, and how does it explain why Bush 41 is ranked first in foreign policy, but Bush 43 is found wanting? Is it possible for a president to lie in the service of the public interest? In this episode, Professor Joseph S. Nye considers these questions as he explores the role of morality in presidential decision-making from FDR to Trump.




rank

U.S. metros ranked by the 5 characteristics of inclusive economies


Ranking U.S. metro areas, or counties, or even countries, by some fixed metric is a straightforward and often useful way to start a deeper dive into a larger body of research. For example, the top 10 counties by share of taxpayers claiming EITC, or the top 10 metro areas by change in prosperity. But what if the phenomenon being measured is more complex, has interacting characteristics that make a top 10 list less useful?

In new research, Brookings Senior Fellow Alan Berube, along with his colleagues at the Metropolitan Policy Program, and John Irons of the Rockefeller Foundation, ask “What makes an economy inclusive?” Inclusive economies, they say, “expand opportunities for more broadly shared prosperity, especially for those facing the greatest barriers to advancing their well-being.” A new Rockefeller Foundation framework identifies five characteristics of inclusive economies: equity, participation, stability, sustainability, and growth.

A typical ranking approach would list the top 10 inclusive economies (or the bottom 10) based on some score derived from data. It turns out, however, that understanding the “trends and relationships that might reveal the ‘big picture’ of what makes an economy inclusive” doesn’t lend itself to typical ranking techniques, and instead requires looking at relationships among the characteristics to ascertain that “big picture.”

Take, for example, equity, defined as: “More opportunities are available to enable upward mobility for more people.” For this analysis, Brookings researchers used 16 discrete indicators—such as the Gini coefficient, median income of less-educated workers as a share of overall median income, and transportation costs as a share of income—to come up with an equity score for each of the 100 largest U.S. metro areas. (Likewise, each of the other four inclusive economy indicators are composites of many discrete indicators, for a total of about 100 across the five.) Looking at equity alone, the top 10 metro areas are:

  1. Allentown, PA-NJ
  2. Harrisburg, PA
  3. Ogden, UT
  4. Scranton, PA
  5. Des Moines, IA
  6. Salt Lake City, UT
  7. Wichita, KS
  8. Grand Rapids, MI
  9. Pittsburgh, PA
  10. Worcester, MA-CT

Top 10 lists can also be fashioned for the other four dimensions in the inclusive economies research, each showing a different mix of U.S. metro areas. For example, the top three metro areas in the growth characteristic are San Jose, CA; Houston, TX; and Austin, TX. For participation: Madison, WI; Harrisburg, PA; and Des Moines. Stability: Madison; Minneapolis, MN-WI; and Provo, UT. And, sustainability: Seattle; Boston; and Portland, OR-WA. In fact, 30 different metropolitan areas are present in the combination of the five inclusive top 10 lists, spanning the country from Oxnard, to Omaha, to Raleigh. The individual top 10 lists for each inclusive economy characteristic look like this:

Because these rankings each impart useful and distinctive information about metro economies, Brookings researchers next combined the data into an overall ranking of the 100 metro areas “based on their average rankings on individual indicators for each of the five inclusive economy characteristics.” Instead of generating a ranking from 1 to 100, the analysis produces a grid-like chart that shows how metro areas fare not only in terms of inclusiveness (top to bottom), but also along a left-to-right spectrum that demonstrates the trade-offs between growth and equity. Here’s a sample from the chart (visit and study the chart here; note that wealth is depicted but by itself is not part of the inclusive economy score):

One thing that stands out when considering this colorful chart against the disaggregated top 10 lists is how unrelated they seem to be. San Jose sits at the upper right position of the chart, suggesting that it ranks as one of the most inclusive metro economies, and yet it ranks only 51st on equity. By contrast, Allentown, PA—on the left of the second row—ranked first in equity, but lower on other measures. However, taken as a whole, both Allentown and San Jose are in the top 20 metro areas overall for inclusiveness. Detroit sits along the bottom row of the inclusiveness chart. Among the five characteristics, it posts its highest rank in growth (37th overall), with much lower ranks in the other categories, even though it ranks 29th for wealth. Las Vegas, NV, is one of the least wealthy metro areas (91st), but ranks 19th in terms of equity.

Berube and Irons point to what they call “a few important insights” about the chart and these data:

  • Judged across all five characteristics, the “most” and “least” inclusive metro economies are geographically and economically diverse.
  • More equitable metropolitan economies also exhibit higher levels of participation and stability. 
  • Growth and equity vary independently across metropolitan areas. 
  • Metro areas with similar performance across the five characteristics may not possess the same capacity to improve their performance.

For more detailed discussion, and the complete inclusive economies chart, see “Measuring ‘inclusive economies’ in metropolitan America,’ by John Irons and Alan Berube.

See also “A metro map of inclusive economies,” showing metro areas that are similar to others in these outcomes.

Finally, download detailed information on the composition of the 100 indicators used to measure the five inclusive economies indicators.

Authors

  • Fred Dews
      
 
 




rank

Where Do You Stand in the Global Love Ranking?


Paris and Rome may be famous for romance, but it’s Filipinos who get the most love. That, at least, is a conclusion that can be drawn from a global love survey conducted by the Gallup Organization.

In our latest column for Bloomberg View, we mine the unique Gallup data for insights into the nature of love and its relationship to nationality, age, money and economic development. The survey, conducted in 136 countries, posed the question: “Did you experience love for a lot of the day yesterday?”

In honor of Valentine’s Day, we thought readers might be interested in seeing the full ranking. So here goes. The first number after each country name is the percentage of respondents who said they had experienced love the previous day. The second (in parentheses) is the sample size for the country.

  1. Philippines 93% (2193)
  2. Rwanda 92% (1495)
  3. Puerto Rico 90% (495)
  4. Hungary 89% (1002)
  5. Cyprus 88% (988)
  6. Trinidad and Tobago 88% (506)
  7. Paraguay 87% (1986)
  8. Lebanon 86% (970)
  9. Costa Rica 85% (1985)
  10. Cambodia 85% (1961)
  11. Nigeria 84% (1965)
  12. Guyana 83% (486)
  13. Spain 83% (998)
  14. Mexico 82% (989)
  15. Tanzania 82% (1941)
  16. Ecuador 82% (2126)
  17. Jamaica 82% (534)
  18. Venezuela 82% (997)
  19. Cuba 82% (978)
  20. Brazil 82% (1038)
  21. Laos 81% (1947)
  22. Argentina 81% (1985)
  23. Belgium 81% (1015)
  24. Canada 81% (1006)
  25. Greece 81% (996)
  26. U.S. 81% (1224)
  27. Denmark 80% (1003)
  28. Portugal 80% (995)
  29. Netherlands 80% (993)
  30. Vietnam 79% (1901)
  31. New Zealand 79% (1775)
  32. Italy 79% (1000)
  33. Colombia 79% (1994)
  34. Madagascar 78% (998)
  35. Uruguay 78% (1969)
  36. Turkey 78% (985)
  37. Dominican Republic 78% (1976)
  38. United Arab Emirates 77% (961)
  39. Saudi Arabia 77% (978)
  40. Chile 76% (1982)
  41. Malawi 76% (1997)
  42. Ghana 76% (1986)
  43. South Africa 76% (1968)
  44. Australia 76% (1199)
  45. Panama 75% (1995)
  46. Zambia 74% (1971)
  47. Kenya 74% (1965)
  48. Namibia 74% (996)
  49. Nicaragua 74% (1988)
  50. Germany 74% (1214)
  51. Ireland 74% (992)
  52. Sweden 74% (993)
  53. U.K. 74% (1200)
  54. Switzerland 74% (986)
  55. Montenegro 74% (800)
  56. Austria 73% (984)
  57. France 73% (1217)
  58. Kuwait 73% (934)
  59. Finland 73% (993)
  60. El Salvador 73% (2000)
  61. Pakistan 73% (2253)
  62. Zimbabwe 72% (1989)
  63. Honduras 72% (1947)
  64. Peru 72% (1982)
  65. Egypt 72% (1024)
  66. Serbia 72% (1474)
  67. Bosnia and Herzegovina 72% (1896)
  68. Sierra Leone 71% (1986)
  69. India 71% (3140)
  70. Taiwan 71% (984)
  71. Bangladesh 70% (2200)
  72. Belize 70% (464)
  73. Croatia 69% (958)
  74. Macedonia 69% (1000)
  75. Mozambique 69% (996)
  76. Bolivia 69% (1948)
  77. Liberia 68% (988)
  78. Iran 68% (963)
  79. China 68% (7206)
  80. Slovenia 68% (1000)
  81. Haiti 68% (471)
  82. Norway 67% (992)
  83. Sri Lanka 67% (1974)
  84. Poland 67% (939)
  85. Guatemala 67% (1988)
  86. Uganda 66% (1961)
  87. Sudan 66% (971)
  88. Israel 66% (957)
  89. Kosovo 65% (983)
  90. Thailand 65% (2377)
  91. Jordan 65% (998)
  92. Albania 64% (855)
  93. Guinea 62% (952)
  94. Botswana 62% (999)
  95. Angola 62% (957)
  96. Burkina Faso 62% (1876)
  97. Malaysia 61% (2115)
  98. Mali 61% (984)
  99. Niger 61% (1925)
  100. Palestinian Territories 61% (991)
  101. Romania 61% (937)
  102. Senegal 61% (1805)
  103. Indonesia 61% (2013)
  104. Afghanistan 60% (1128)
  105. Hong Kong 60% (789)
  106. Cameroon 59% (1967)
  107. Japan 59% (1138)
  108. Nepal 59% (1965)
  109. Bulgaria 59% (927)
  110. Slovakia 58% (991)
  111. Singapore 58% (3002)
  112. Czech Republic 58% (992)
  113. Mauritania 57% (1960)
  114. Benin 56% (974)
  115. South Korea 56% (2056)
  116. Myanmar 55% (1047)
  117. Latvia 54% (1942)
  118. Togo 54% (988)
  119. Estonia 53% (1800)
  120. Lithuania 50% (1863)
  121. Russia 50% (4667)
  122. Chad 49% (1915)
  123. Yemen 48% (959)
  124. Ukraine 48% (1930)
  125. Ethiopia 48% (1913)
  126. Azerbaijan 47% (1824)
  127. Tajikistan 47% (1847)
  128. Moldova 46% (1937)
  129. Kazakhstan 45% (1871)
  130. Morocco 43% (1011)
  131. Belarus 43% (1992)
  132. Georgia 43% (1904)
  133. Kyrgyzstan 34% (1969)
  134. Mongolia 32% (928)
  135. Uzbekistan 32% (962)
  136. Armenia 29% (1954)

Note: This content was first published on Bloomberg View on February 13, 2013.

Publication: Bloomberg
Image Source: © Eduard Korniyenko / Reuters
     
 
 




rank

Global Love Rankings


      
 
 




rank

Dodd-Frank at 5: A conversation with Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew


Event Information

July 8, 2015
8:45 AM - 9:30 AM EDT

The Brookings Institution
Falk Auditorium
1775 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Washington, DC 20036

Register for the Event

In July 2010, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, a far-reaching and still-controversial piece of legislation that was intended to reduce the odds of a repeat of the worst financial crisis in generations.  Five years later, is it working as hoped? Did it go too far—or not far enough? Are there parts that should be revisited? What remains on the U.S. and global financial-stability to-do list? 

On July 8, the Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy hosted a conversation with Treasury Secretary Jack Lew to address those and other questions about financial stability and the economy.

 Follow the conversation at @BrookingsEcon or #DoddFrank

Video

Audio

Transcript

Event Materials

      
 
 




rank

Where Do You Stand in the Global Love Ranking?


Paris and Rome may be famous for romance, but it’s Filipinos who get the most love. That, at least, is a conclusion that can be drawn from a global love survey conducted by the Gallup Organization.

In our latest column for Bloomberg View, we mine the unique Gallup data for insights into the nature of love and its relationship to nationality, age, money and economic development. The survey, conducted in 136 countries, posed the question: “Did you experience love for a lot of the day yesterday?”

In honor of Valentine’s Day, we thought readers might be interested in seeing the full ranking. So here goes. The first number after each country name is the percentage of respondents who said they had experienced love the previous day. The second (in parentheses) is the sample size for the country.

  1. Philippines 93% (2193)
  2. Rwanda 92% (1495)
  3. Puerto Rico 90% (495)
  4. Hungary 89% (1002)
  5. Cyprus 88% (988)
  6. Trinidad and Tobago 88% (506)
  7. Paraguay 87% (1986)
  8. Lebanon 86% (970)
  9. Costa Rica 85% (1985)
  10. Cambodia 85% (1961)
  11. Nigeria 84% (1965)
  12. Guyana 83% (486)
  13. Spain 83% (998)
  14. Mexico 82% (989)
  15. Tanzania 82% (1941)
  16. Ecuador 82% (2126)
  17. Jamaica 82% (534)
  18. Venezuela 82% (997)
  19. Cuba 82% (978)
  20. Brazil 82% (1038)
  21. Laos 81% (1947)
  22. Argentina 81% (1985)
  23. Belgium 81% (1015)
  24. Canada 81% (1006)
  25. Greece 81% (996)
  26. U.S. 81% (1224)
  27. Denmark 80% (1003)
  28. Portugal 80% (995)
  29. Netherlands 80% (993)
  30. Vietnam 79% (1901)
  31. New Zealand 79% (1775)
  32. Italy 79% (1000)
  33. Colombia 79% (1994)
  34. Madagascar 78% (998)
  35. Uruguay 78% (1969)
  36. Turkey 78% (985)
  37. Dominican Republic 78% (1976)
  38. United Arab Emirates 77% (961)
  39. Saudi Arabia 77% (978)
  40. Chile 76% (1982)
  41. Malawi 76% (1997)
  42. Ghana 76% (1986)
  43. South Africa 76% (1968)
  44. Australia 76% (1199)
  45. Panama 75% (1995)
  46. Zambia 74% (1971)
  47. Kenya 74% (1965)
  48. Namibia 74% (996)
  49. Nicaragua 74% (1988)
  50. Germany 74% (1214)
  51. Ireland 74% (992)
  52. Sweden 74% (993)
  53. U.K. 74% (1200)
  54. Switzerland 74% (986)
  55. Montenegro 74% (800)
  56. Austria 73% (984)
  57. France 73% (1217)
  58. Kuwait 73% (934)
  59. Finland 73% (993)
  60. El Salvador 73% (2000)
  61. Pakistan 73% (2253)
  62. Zimbabwe 72% (1989)
  63. Honduras 72% (1947)
  64. Peru 72% (1982)
  65. Egypt 72% (1024)
  66. Serbia 72% (1474)
  67. Bosnia and Herzegovina 72% (1896)
  68. Sierra Leone 71% (1986)
  69. India 71% (3140)
  70. Taiwan 71% (984)
  71. Bangladesh 70% (2200)
  72. Belize 70% (464)
  73. Croatia 69% (958)
  74. Macedonia 69% (1000)
  75. Mozambique 69% (996)
  76. Bolivia 69% (1948)
  77. Liberia 68% (988)
  78. Iran 68% (963)
  79. China 68% (7206)
  80. Slovenia 68% (1000)
  81. Haiti 68% (471)
  82. Norway 67% (992)
  83. Sri Lanka 67% (1974)
  84. Poland 67% (939)
  85. Guatemala 67% (1988)
  86. Uganda 66% (1961)
  87. Sudan 66% (971)
  88. Israel 66% (957)
  89. Kosovo 65% (983)
  90. Thailand 65% (2377)
  91. Jordan 65% (998)
  92. Albania 64% (855)
  93. Guinea 62% (952)
  94. Botswana 62% (999)
  95. Angola 62% (957)
  96. Burkina Faso 62% (1876)
  97. Malaysia 61% (2115)
  98. Mali 61% (984)
  99. Niger 61% (1925)
  100. Palestinian Territories 61% (991)
  101. Romania 61% (937)
  102. Senegal 61% (1805)
  103. Indonesia 61% (2013)
  104. Afghanistan 60% (1128)
  105. Hong Kong 60% (789)
  106. Cameroon 59% (1967)
  107. Japan 59% (1138)
  108. Nepal 59% (1965)
  109. Bulgaria 59% (927)
  110. Slovakia 58% (991)
  111. Singapore 58% (3002)
  112. Czech Republic 58% (992)
  113. Mauritania 57% (1960)
  114. Benin 56% (974)
  115. South Korea 56% (2056)
  116. Myanmar 55% (1047)
  117. Latvia 54% (1942)
  118. Togo 54% (988)
  119. Estonia 53% (1800)
  120. Lithuania 50% (1863)
  121. Russia 50% (4667)
  122. Chad 49% (1915)
  123. Yemen 48% (959)
  124. Ukraine 48% (1930)
  125. Ethiopia 48% (1913)
  126. Azerbaijan 47% (1824)
  127. Tajikistan 47% (1847)
  128. Moldova 46% (1937)
  129. Kazakhstan 45% (1871)
  130. Morocco 43% (1011)
  131. Belarus 43% (1992)
  132. Georgia 43% (1904)
  133. Kyrgyzstan 34% (1969)
  134. Mongolia 32% (928)
  135. Uzbekistan 32% (962)
  136. Armenia 29% (1954)

Note: This content was first published on Bloomberg View on February 13, 2013.

Publication: Bloomberg
Image Source: © Eduard Korniyenko / Reuters
     
 
 




rank

Global Love Rankings


     
 
 




rank

My totally unscientific ranking of public transit systems

The New York subway, The Los Angeles Metro, and more ranked by someone who travels a lot but never drives.




rank

Rotate this: Spiral spinning tower will turn real estate developers' cranks

The sharing economy comes to architecture as the rich and the very rich share views and height.




rank

Frankenfish swims past another regulatory hurdle

Canada's environmental regulatory agency has allowed genetically engineered salmon eggs to be commercially produced.




rank

Make a hand-crank rechargeable flash light

Sure, you can buy one or you could put your DIY skills to the test and make one with materials you have on hand.




rank

Greenpeace tech product guide ranks Apple, Samsung low on repairability

A consumer product guide compiled along with iFixit shows which brands make it easy to fix our gadgets and which don't.




rank

Greenpeace ranks best tuna brands for 2017

The annual Canned Tuna Ranking assesses fishing practices and social responsibility to determine which brands are sustainable and which should be avoided.




rank

Ryan Frank is Back with Bee Friendly Furniture for the National Theatre

All images via Ryan Frank. Ryan Frank may have moved his design studio to the sunnier climes of Barcelona, but he is still getting great commissions back in London, where he's made a name for his funky ways with reclaimed materials. The latest project




rank

22-Year-Old Frank Zappa Teaches How to Play the Bicycle (Video)

Sure, a bicycle can replace your car -- but as Frank Zappa demonstrates, it could replace your drum-set, too.




rank

Hydrogen-powered e-bike cranked up to 93 mile range

E-bikes will eat cars, and H2 bikes will eat Toyotas.




rank

Most Popular Articles of June: City of Tulsa Destroys Woman's Edible Garden, Hilarious Prank on Shell, and More

How can a city destroy an edible garden on private property without legal permission? We also have the viral party-gone-wrong prank on Shell, the 12 most toxic fruits and vegetables, and more.




rank

BMW Vision EfficientDynamics Unveiled Ahead of Frankfurt Show

Ahead of the Frankfurt Auto Show starting 14 September, BMW is drumming up buzz for a completely new concept car, the Vision EfficientDynamics. BMW today released a video (over the fold) promising all the sporty driving fun of the BMW M3 in




rank

Most Huggable: Football Mangroves in Florida, Bristol's Renewable Street Lights, Frank Capra's "Truth"

To carbon neutralize the Super Bowl, the NFL plants mangroves in Florida




rank

Katie Alcott of Frank Water on Being an Insider Rebel Within The Bottled Water Industry (Interview)

Here's a frequent question asked by people wanting to create positive sustainable changes in the world: Is it more effective to work as a change agent from inside the current system or is it better to




rank

Frankincense is endangered

There are fewer and fewer trees that can produce this beloved aromatic resin.




rank

Las Vegas Toasts Strip Legend Frank Sinatra in Honor of 100th Birthday Celebration - Interview with Tina Sinatra

Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority interviews Tina Sinatra




rank

Barometer Promise - BNP Exane "Exclusivity & Desirability" 2015: The Wealthiest Chinese Women Rank Luxury Brands - Philippe Jourdan: Partner - Promise Consulting

Philippe Jourdan: Partner - Promise Consulting




rank

US GDP shrank 4.8% in the first quarter amid biggest contraction since the financial crisis

This marked the first negative GDP reading since the 1.1% decline in the first quarter of 2014 and the worst level since the 8.4% plunge in Q4 of 2008 during the worst of the financial crisis




rank

Top-ranked Barron's advisor on investment strategies amid the coronavirus outbreak and market volatility

Greg Sarian, CEO of Sarian Strategic Partners and one of Barron's Top 100 Advisors, says investors should prepare for more volatility, and discusses some tax strategies to employ as stock prices are still lower.




rank

The best April Fools' pranks of 2015

From Burger King's Whopper scent to Honda's selfie car, these companies are redefining funny this April Fools'.




rank

Franklin India Fixed Maturity Plans- Series 5 Plan C (1259 days)- Quarterly Dividend

Category Income
NAV 10.4107
Repurchase Price
Sale Price
Date 08-May-2020




rank

Franklin India Fixed Maturity Plans- Series 5 Plan C (1259 days)- Dividend- Direct

Category Income
NAV 10.6748
Repurchase Price
Sale Price
Date 08-May-2020




rank

Franklin India Fixed Maturity Plans- Series 5 Plan C (1259 days)- Dividend

Category Income
NAV 10.6357
Repurchase Price
Sale Price
Date 08-May-2020




rank

Franklin India Fixed Maturity Plans - Series5 Plan C (1259 days)- Growth Direct

Category Income
NAV 11.5026
Repurchase Price
Sale Price
Date 08-May-2020




rank

Franklin Idnia Fixed Maturity Plans- Series 5 Plan C (1259 days)- Quarterly Dividend- Direct

Category Income
NAV 10.4500
Repurchase Price
Sale Price
Date 08-May-2020




rank

Franklin Idnia Fixed Maturity Palns- Series 5 Plan C (1259 days)- Growth

Category Income
NAV 11.4629
Repurchase Price
Sale Price
Date 08-May-2020




rank

Franklin India Fixed Maturity Plans- Series 5 Plan F (1203 days)-Growth Direct

Category Income
NAV 11.3041
Repurchase Price
Sale Price
Date 08-May-2020




rank

Franklin India Fixed Maturity Plans- Series 5 Plan F (1203 days)- Quarterly Dividend -Direct

Category Income
NAV 10.4859
Repurchase Price
Sale Price
Date 08-May-2020




rank

Franklin India Fixed Maturity Plans- Series 5 plan F (1203 days)- Dividend Direct

Category Income
NAV 10.4949
Repurchase Price
Sale Price
Date 08-May-2020




rank

Franklin India Fixed Maturity Plans Series 5 Plan F (1203 days)- Growth

Category Income
NAV 11.2763
Repurchase Price
Sale Price
Date 08-May-2020




rank

Franklin India Fixed Maturity Plans - Series 5 Plan F (1203 days)- Quarterly Dividend

Category Income
NAV 10.4591
Repurchase Price
Sale Price
Date 08-May-2020




rank

Franklin India Fixed Maturity Funds- Series 5 Plan F (1203 days)- Dividend

Category Income
NAV 10.4676
Repurchase Price
Sale Price
Date 08-May-2020




rank

Franklin India Fixed Maturity Plans- Series 5 Plan D (1238 days)- Quarterly Dividend- Direct

Category Income
NAV 10.0000
Repurchase Price
Sale Price
Date 09-Jan-2019




rank

Franklin India Fixed Maturity Plans- Series 5 Plan D (1238 days)- Quarterly Dividend

Category Income
NAV 10.3271
Repurchase Price
Sale Price
Date 08-May-2020




rank

Franklin India Fixed Maturity Plans- Series 5 Plan D (1238 days)- Growth

Category Income
NAV 11.3597
Repurchase Price
Sale Price
Date 08-May-2020




rank

Franklin India Fixed Maturity Plans- Series 5 Plan D (1238 days)- Dividend -Direct

Category Income
NAV 10.6061
Repurchase Price
Sale Price
Date 08-May-2020