When Senator, Pauline Hansen, arrived to take her seat in the Australian Federal Senate today she caused an outrage from the leader of the House. She was wearing a berqa, a Muslim complete body cover, which many think is a religious garb. The rhetoric that headed her way from Senator Brandis was one of sheer disgust that she would offend a religious group in this way. The question is whether the covering is actually a religious garment?My observations and research into the Islamic faith proves that it is not. In the times when the Islamic religion was established in Babylon, some 4,000 years ago, there is no sign of any head covering for women in the images of that city or others built by the Amor, the inhabitants.They became the Romans when they established the city of Roma (reverse Amor) and the new religion set up by Constantine was the Catholic Church in 325 AD. Nowhere from the Assyrian Empire, the Egyptian or the Roman Empires shows anything like this garment being worn. By the time of the Romans women were wearing full length dresses but no head-gear.The Catholic Vatican appointed Augustine to start the Muslim Branch of Islam, based on its own formula, to add credibility to the things it claims, such as the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. He used a man named Mohammed whom he trained as a prophet and then possibly wrote the Koran. These things are verified in the Vatican archives and were released to the public by a Jesuit priest who worked with them.The first time I became aware of this garment is in relation to the Taliban and the Sharia law. It apparently follows the tradition from the 10th Century that women customarily veiled their faces as a sign of their upper-class status. At that time women were not allowed to partake in public-activities which heralds the start of the persecution of women.In 1899 a book by Qasim Amin noted that wearing a veil was a customary thing and not related to Islam. He lobbied for a new copy of the Qu’ran which caused considerable debate. In 1910 a woman, Malak Hifni Nassef, published the Womenests which argued against his claim, with some vigour.In the 1920′s King Amanullah stated that religion does not require a woman to cover their hands, feet, or faces. He reiterated that this was a tribal custom that impeded the ‘free will of the individual’. This is the best response to the veil so far. Also in the 20′s Ataturk from Turkey spoke out against the veil calling it demeaning, but he did not ban it.The Iranian king, Reza Pahlavi, banned the chador (means shadow) claiming the garment should be burned and anyone wearing it were not allowed on public transport and could have it cut up with scissors. He called it a symbol of injustice and shame.After the six days’ war in Egypt in 1967 women started wearing the veil as a symbol of superiority and domination. It appears that this is still the case in Australia, where it has become offensive to many in this free democracy.When Iran returned to a Republic after the revolution of 1979 women wore the chador as a symbol of defiance against the deposed king and its western support. Here again is purpose unrelated to religious values but more to a status symbol. The women were targeted who appeared in public without the veil. That means it is now a weapon of discrimination.In 1996 to 2001 the Taliban in Pakistan forced women to wear the garment in public. Their law allowed for beatings and worse if a woman defied the order. In 2004 the French government banned the burqa, and the hijabs in public schools. This brought about more rebellious reaction from Muslim women who seemed to delight in upsetting everyone around them. The president stated that “women who are prisoners behind a screen are cut off from society and deprived of identity.”In 2009 Belgium followed suit and banned the wearing of such garments in schools. In 2010 the French banned the wearing of berqas from public services and transport. Belgium then also banned the covering for public safety reasons.Pauline Hansen has called for the Australian government to follow suit as it is a mockery of women in general. With their faces covered they cannot be identified and the shield is a hindrance to law enforcement and the subject of abuse from objectors and who knows who is parading around under cover?In my opinion there is no place for berqas or any head covering in our society. The quicker they are banned for what they are the better. They have nothing to do with religion but more to do with sticking it up our noses and its time they were taken to task. Good on Pauline for raising the matter so dramatically that the world has taken notice of her.
S&P 500 Rallies As U.S. Dollar Pulls Back Towards Weekly Lows
Key Insights
The strong pullback in the U.S. dollar provided significant support to stocks.
Treasury yields have pulled back after touching new highs, which served as an additional positive catalyst for S&P 500.
A move above 3730 will push S&P 500 towards the resistance level at 3760.
Advertisement
Pfizer Rallies After Announcing A Huge Price Hike For Its COVID-19 Vaccines
S&P 500 is currently trying to settle above 3730 as traders’ appetite for risk is growing. The U.S. dollar has recently gained strong downside momentum as the BoJ intervened to stop the rally in USD/JPY. Weaker U.S. dollar is bullish for stocks as it increases profits of multinational companies and makes U.S. equities cheaper for foreign investors.
The leading oil services company Schlumberger is up by 9% after beating analyst estimates on both earnings and revenue. Schlumberger’s peers Baker Hughes and Halliburton have also enjoyed strong support today.
Vaccine makers Pfizer and Moderna gained strong upside momentum after Pfizer announced that it will raise the price of its coronavirus vaccine to $110 – $130 per shot.
Biggest losers today include Verizon and Twitter. Verizon is down by 5% despite beating analyst estimates on both earnings and revenue. Subscriber numbers missed estimates, and traders pushed the stock to multi-year lows.
Twitter stock moved towards the $50 level as the U.S. may conduct a security review of Musk’s purchase of the company.
From a big picture point of view, today’s rebound is broad, and most market segments are moving higher. Treasury yields have started to move lower after testing new highs, providing additional support to S&P 500. It looks that some traders are ready to bet that Fed will be less hawkish than previously expected.
S&P 500 Tests Resistance At 3730
S&P 500 has recently managed to get above the 20 EMA and is trying to settle above the resistance at 3730. RSI is in the moderate territory, and there is plenty of room to gain additional upside momentum in case the right catalysts emerge.
If S&P 500 manages to settle above 3730, it will head towards the next resistance level at 3760. A successful test of this level will push S&P 500 towards the next resistance at October highs at 3805. The 50 EMA is located in the nearby, so S&P 500 will likely face strong resistance above the 3800 level.
On the support side, the previous resistance at 3700 will likely serve as the first support level for S&P 500. In case S&P 500 declines below this level, it will move towards the next support level at 3675. A move below 3675 will push S&P 500 towards the support at 3640.
Alternative Financing Vs. Venture Capital: Which Option Is Best for Boosting Working Capital?
There are several potential financing options available to cash-strapped businesses that need a healthy dose of working capital. A bank loan or line of credit is often the first option that owners think of – and for businesses that qualify, this may be the best option.
In today’s uncertain business, economic and regulatory environment, qualifying for a bank loan can be difficult – especially for start-up companies and those that have experienced any type of financial difficulty. Sometimes, owners of businesses that don’t qualify for a bank loan decide that seeking venture capital or bringing on equity investors are other viable options.
But are they really? While there are some potential benefits to bringing venture capital and so-called “angel” investors into your business, there are drawbacks as well. Unfortunately, owners sometimes don’t think about these drawbacks until the ink has dried on a contract with a venture capitalist or angel investor – and it’s too late to back out of the deal.
Different Types of Financing
One problem with bringing in equity investors to help provide a working capital boost is that working capital and equity are really two different types of financing.
Working capital – or the money that is used to pay business expenses incurred during the time lag until cash from sales (or accounts receivable) is collected – is short-term in nature, so it should be financed via a short-term financing tool. Equity, however, should generally be used to finance rapid growth, business expansion, acquisitions or the purchase of long-term assets, which are defined as assets that are repaid over more than one 12-month business cycle.
But the biggest drawback to bringing equity investors into your business is a potential loss of control. When you sell equity (or shares) in your business to venture capitalists or angels, you are giving up a percentage of ownership in your business, and you may be doing so at an inopportune time. With this dilution of ownership most often comes a loss of control over some or all of the most important business decisions that must be made.
Sometimes, owners are enticed to sell equity by the fact that there is little (if any) out-of-pocket expense. Unlike debt financing, you don’t usually pay interest with equity financing. The equity investor gains its return via the ownership stake gained in your business. But the long-term “cost” of selling equity is always much higher than the short-term cost of debt, in terms of both actual cash cost as well as soft costs like the loss of control and stewardship of your company and the potential future value of the ownership shares that are sold.
Alternative Financing Solutions
But what if your business needs working capital and you don’t qualify for a bank loan or line of credit? Alternative financing solutions are often appropriate for injecting working capital into businesses in this situation. Three of the most common types of alternative financing used by such businesses are:
1. Full-Service Factoring – Businesses sell outstanding accounts receivable on an ongoing basis to a commercial finance (or factoring) company at a discount. The factoring company then manages the receivable until it is paid. Factoring is a well-established and accepted method of temporary alternative finance that is especially well-suited for rapidly growing companies and those with customer concentrations.
2. Accounts Receivable (A/R) Financing – A/R financing is an ideal solution for companies that are not yet bankable but have a stable financial condition and a more diverse customer base. Here, the business provides details on all accounts receivable and pledges those assets as collateral. The proceeds of those receivables are sent to a lockbox while the finance company calculates a borrowing base to determine the amount the company can borrow. When the borrower needs money, it makes an advance request and the finance company advances money using a percentage of the accounts receivable.
3. Asset-Based Lending (ABL) – This is a credit facility secured by all of a company’s assets, which may include A/R, equipment and inventory. Unlike with factoring, the business continues to manage and collect its own receivables and submits collateral reports on an ongoing basis to the finance company, which will review and periodically audit the reports.
In addition to providing working capital and enabling owners to maintain business control, alternative financing may provide other benefits as well:
It’s easy to determine the exact cost of financing and obtain an increase.
Professional collateral management can be included depending on the facility type and the lender.
Real-time, online interactive reporting is often available.
It may provide the business with access to more capital.
It’s flexible – financing ebbs and flows with the business’ needs.
It’s important to note that there are some circumstances in which equity is a viable and attractive financing solution. This is especially true in cases of business expansion and acquisition and new product launches – these are capital needs that are not generally well suited to debt financing. However, equity is not usually the appropriate financing solution to solve a working capital problem or help plug a cash-flow gap.
A Precious Commodity
Remember that business equity is a precious commodity that should only be considered under the right circumstances and at the right time. When equity financing is sought, ideally this should be done at a time when the company has good growth prospects and a significant cash need for this growth. Ideally, majority ownership (and thus, absolute control) should remain with the company founder(s).
Alternative financing solutions like factoring, A/R financing and ABL can provide the working capital boost many cash-strapped businesses that don’t qualify for bank financing need – without diluting ownership and possibly giving up business control at an inopportune time for the owner. If and when these companies become bankable later, it’s often an easy transition to a traditional bank line of credit. Your banker may be able to refer you to a commercial finance company that can offer the right type of alternative financing solution for your particular situation.
Taking the time to understand all the different financing options available to your business, and the pros and cons of each, is the best way to make sure you choose the best option for your business. The use of alternative financing can help your company grow without diluting your ownership. After all, it’s your business – shouldn’t you keep as much of it as possible?