The foreign exchange market (forex or FX for short) is one of the most exciting, fast-paced markets around. Until recently, forex trading in the currency market had been the domain of large financial institutions, corporations, central banks, hedge funds and extremely wealthy individuals. The emergence of the internet has changed all of this, and now it is possible for average investors to buy and sell currencies easily with the click of a mouse through online brokerage accounts.

Daily currency fluctuations are usually very small. Most currency pairs move less than one cent per day, representing a less than 1% change in the value of the currency. This makes foreign exchange one of the least volatile financial markets around. Therefore, many currency speculators rely on the availability of enormous leverage to increase the value of potential movements. In the retail forex market, leverage can be as much as 250:1. Higher leverage can be extremely risky, but because of round-the-clock trading and deep liquidity, foreign exchange brokers have been able to make high leverage an industry standard in order to make the movements meaningful for currency traders.

Extreme liquidity and the availability of high leverage have helped to spur the market’s rapid growth and made it the ideal place for many traders. Positions can be opened and closed within minutes or can be held for months. Currency prices are based on objective considerations of supply and demand and cannot be manipulated easily because the size of the market does not allow even the largest players, such as central banks, to move prices at will.

The forex market provides plenty of opportunity for investors. However, in order to be successful, a currency trader has to understand the basics behind currency movements.

The goal of this forex tutorial is to provide a foundation for investors or traders who are new to the foreign currency markets. We’ll cover the basics of exchange rates, the market’s history and the key concepts you need to understand in order to be able to participate in this market. We’ll also venture into how to start trading foreign currencies and the different types of strategies that can be employed.

Trade Binary Options

How to Trade Binary Options

General Risk Warning:

&nbspThe financial products offered by the company carry a high level of risk and can result in the loss of all your funds. You should never invest money that you cannot afford to lose.&nbsp
  1. Binary options – the world’s financial instrument. They allow traders to  from price movements across all the world’s markets.
  2. There are only 2 types of transactions you can make with binary options: CALL and PUT.

The IQ Option platform allows our traders to make investments starting from just $1.



  1. Call – Option for rising prices. If you believe the price is about to go up, choose this option.

PUT – Option for falling prices. Buy this option when you expect the price to decrease.

If you see on the chart that the price isn’t rising or falling, that means that right now there’s a “neutral trend.” In this case, it’s best to hold off on buying this option. Consider choosing a different asset to invest in.

Trend examples:

2 3


  1. Never invest more than 2% of your capital in a single option. This is the golden rule for any investor. This way you can manage your investing without losing your head…or your money
  2. In order to improve the quality of your results, use technical & fundamental market analysis.
  3. Try different asset classes. If you’re not getting results with currency pairs, try stock indices. On IQ Option you can  find over 500 types of assets, including Amazon, Facebook, and Google.
  4. Sign up for IQ Option’s, where you’ll find out how to analyze trends, choose a trading pattern, and personally answer any questions you may have.

How to register & trade on IQ Option

General Risk Warning:

&nbspThe financial products offered by the company carry a high level of risk and can result in the loss of all your funds. You should never invest money that you cannot afford to lose.&nbsp

General Risk Warning:

&nbspThe financial products offered by the company carry a high level of risk and can result in the loss of all your funds. You should never invest money that you cannot afford to lose.&nbsp

Japan: Jobless rate (April) 2.8% (vs. expected 2.8%) & Job-to-applicant ratio 1.48 (expected 1.46)

Japanese Jobless Rate for April, 2.8% - expected 2.8%, prior was 2.8% Job-To-Applicant Ratio for April, a jump to 1.48 - expected 1.46, prior was 1.45  Little movement from the yen, which is about normal from Japanese data. The employment data from Japan is, as usual, strong. That Job-to-applicant ratio is at its highest since 1974. That was quite a ways back!

Russia Expects China To Help Resolve Syrian Crisis, “Restore The Country”

Last summer, when the Syrian conflict was near its peak under the Obama administration, China unexpectedly warned it was ready to enter the proxy war when in a stunning announcement, Xinhua reported that Beijing was prepared to side with Syria - and Russia - and against the US-led alliance, and that Xi and Assad had agreed that the Chinese military will have closer ties with Syria and provide humanitarian aid to the civil war torn nation.

A high-ranking People's Liberation Army officer also said that the training of Syrian personnel by Chinese instructors has also been discussed: the Director of the Office for International Military Cooperation of China's Central Military Commission, Guan Youfei, arrived in Damascus on Tuesday for talks with Syrian Defense Minister Fahad Jassim al-Freij, Xinhua added. Guan said China had consistently played a positive role in pushing for a political resolution in Syria. "China and Syria's militaries have a traditionally friendly relationship, and China's military is willing to keep strengthening exchanges and cooperation with Syria's military," Xinhua quoted Guan.

Rear Admiral Guan Youfei

As Reuters also added at the time, China tends to leave Middle Eastern diplomacy to the other permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, namely the United States, Britain, France and Russia, while relying on the region for oil supplies. But over the past two years, China has been trying to get more involved, including sending envoys to help push for a diplomatic resolution to the violence there and hosting Syrian government and opposition figures.

Fast forward to today when the Syria proxy war is once again at an impasse - especially after today's warning by Macron that France would get involved after another "chemical attack" -  and once again it may be up to China to be the decisive tiebreaker.

According to both Sputnik and the Daily Sabah, Moscow is once again hoping "for China's help in solving the Syrian crisis and restoring the country: Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Igor Morgulov said Monday.

"Our cooperation with China on Syria at various international venues is unprecedented. We blocked six attempts to pass anti-Syrian resolutions in the U.N. Security Council," Morgulov said at "Russia and China: Taking on a New Quality of Bilateral Relations" international conference.

The Russian deputy foreign minister added that Russia values Beijing's position on the Syrian crisis, and hopes that, "the Chinese partners will continue their efforts to promote a political settlement."

"Together we call for a peaceful and political-diplomatic solution to conflicts, without double standards, unilateral action or attempts at ousting regimes. Our approaches coincide, among other things, on the uncompromising fight against terrorism," Morgulov said.

To be sure, Russia and China are already largely alligned at the United Nations, where the two nations have repeatedly vetoed Security Council resolutions imposing sanctions against the Assad regime. Moscow has long-standing links to the Assad regime and is its key ally, while China has an established policy of non-intervention in other countries' affairs, although as noted above that appeared to change in 2016.

Needless to say, should China break from its policy of direct foreign non-intervention, and should it indeed side with Syria, and Russia, as it hinted it would do last year, the shape of middle eastern geopolitics would change overnight. And now we await the official, or unofficial, response from China to Russia's "indecent" diplomatic proposal for a joint effort in Syria against the US-led alliance.

The post Russia Expects China To Help Resolve Syrian Crisis, “Restore The Country” appeared first on

Remembering A Still Falling Hero: Small Business

Authored by Mark St.Cyr,

On this holiday weekend known here in the U.S. as Memorial Day, I would like to make a slight turn in the narrative that many give little to no attention too, yet, is one of the most important underlying principles or fundamentals which helped shape, lift, mold, sustain, and create one of the world’s greatest economic powerhouses bar none.

That “turn” is in remembering: The liberty to create, and own, one’s own business.

As true as holding the principles of liberty close to one’s heart is near-and-dear to every American. What gets forgotten all too easily is what enabled many of those immigrants that fled here during its rocky beginnings, and still continues today, to shape and mold a better life for themselves and their families. That other foundational principle is this:

The ability to create, and pursue, a business idea that could, or would, allow them to acquire economic liberty based on their own self-expression made manifest via perseverance, and sometimes a little luck. And with that – create a foundation which could either be passed on, or sold, by their heirs, giving them possibly one further step-up, or ahead, onto firmer ground to take another. And maybe another, and another, and so forth.

Only through the pursuit of business was the true circumvention of any stigmatized political or economic class, ethnicity, and more so truly held in one’s own hands. Self-actualization, the pursuit of economic riches, the ability to ingratiated oneself by their own means to not only claim to be part of the American experiment, but to actually be American regardless of where one began, either from abroad or born within – was not inconsequential.

Being an American businessman, regardless of ethnicity, political class, economic class, religious persuasion, gender, or anything else, in many ways was the embodiment for something to be cherished and honored by the owner.

Being the sole-owner of one’s own economic future was either unattainable, or unavailable anywhere else.

It embodied everything the American principle was created for and rose upon. Without it – we would have just been another ruled monarchy; socialist; communist; caste; (fill-in-the-blank) or combination of all system under a different name with better topography. It’s the only thing that separates the U.S. from all others that came before and since.

(Note: The gender neutral term “business-person” just doesn’t flow and only emboldens the gender-sensitivity-police and I’m personally sick-and-tired of them. Women with true business fortitude understand there’s no derogatory slight in the term “businessman.” Period. For those wanting more on my thoughts about women in business see my article “The Bull On Bossy” for more insight.)

The term, as well as structure, that has allowed the U.S. to grow as to become such an economic powerhouse is called: Free Market Capitalism (FMC.) And its foundational starting point is the sole-person who decides to either create their own product, or work with (and yes even for) others who are in need of their talent. Then, decide where, and on what agreed upon price commerce takes place. (Examples of such are Family Dr’s., accountants, bakers, tattoo artists, waiters, waitresses, plumbers, electricians, salespeople, and far too many more to list. And yes, even bankers.)

Again, at its foundational point is the solitary person who decides to take matters and consequences under their own purview and either rise, or fall, on their own business prowess upon the battlefield known as business or commerce.

What is taking shape today, and what’s worse – growing – is anything but.

What most have no understanding of, let alone idea, that’s taking place today is the circumvention of Free Market Capitalism, and in its place, the insertion of its hybrid, ever-morphing, evil twin. e.g, Cronyism, aka Crony Capitalism (CC.)

I could go on for days explaining why this insertion of CC into the FMC model is not only egregious, but dangerous. However, all one has to do is look at the current economic landscape with an eye for truth – and its perversions and consequences can be seen everywhere.

It’s like a visible, metastasized cancer encroaching upon economic liberty. i.e., Forget about the “golden egg” its wrapping its hands firmly around the goose’s neck in broad daylight. And never mind those not bothering to look. What’s worse – is those who can’t turn their eyes away seem to think there’s anything wrong with this picture! e.g., Ivory Towered academics, main stream business/financial outlets, et al.

A few years ago I penned the following article, “It’s The Entrepreneur That Saves An Economy – Not The Fed” and in it I made the following point. To wit:

“The problem that’s taking place right now within the economy is exactly what you get when you take a free market economy and try to impose a command and control blanket over it: you smother it.


The Ivory Tower academics have no real understanding of what “free” actually entails when it’s expressed through the economy as a whole. The ability to build a better mouse trap, or, solve a previously unsolvable riddle all while charging a price two parties can both bear, profit by, and have satisfaction in the transaction does not, nor ever will take place within a command and control base. Ever.


Free markets allow for competition to find equilibrium as to provide and deliver a service or good someone will pay a fair price for. And yes, even for such an item such as a stock price.


Command and control fosters either the “State” to be the only provider, or, a fostered crony capitalism styled arrangement which is nothing more than another iteration of some communist system in prettier buildings wearing better suits. Harsh? Yes. Off point? Hardly. And that’s the problem.


The great capital formation experiment and enterprise known as Wall Street and its Exchanges, once the envy of the world, has now been transformed into nothing more than a rigged casino where Fed fueled “hot money” front runs orders in ways so egregious to the principal of fair play; walking into “a den of thieves” would be considered a step up.”

Here’s a bit more from that article directed squarely at the Fed. (or central banks in general) and its interventionist policies. At the time my accusations were excoriated as derisive, uneducated, (fill-in-the-blank.) However, with that said I’ll let you be the judge as to just whom seems to be “uneducated” when it comes to economic theory and practices. Again, to wit:

“Business people know and understand this intuitively. Ivory Tower academics, intellectuals, and economists are not only clueless, it’s their wanton indignation of these facts that move their policies beyond destructive right into outright dangerous territory for any free market based economy.


The only one’s that can benefit from such a business environment are those that gorge and reward themselves via the availability current Fed. policy fosters. And the name for it is: crony capitalism.


Whether the Fed. wants to admit or not, that’s what their current policy and communication fosters and bolsters which is the antithesis of what the Fed. itself states as its primary objective; for there is no wage growth, no true job creation, no sustainable capital formations, and not stable markets.


The Fed. is killing the economy – not helping it. And as de facto proof I point to their own measurements of achievement. The markets, the labor participation rate, small business formation, wage growth, and on, and on. It’s all pathetic.


The Fed’s QE program has adulterated valuations so much it will be a wonder if we ever get back to a more normalized set of business values let alone their valuations and away from this calamity.


There are entrepreneurs along with CEO’s of companies who are quite literally chomping at the bit to try new or improved innovations – yet don’t dare for either their competitors are being kept alive via cheap money afforded them under current ZIRP policy, or worse, don’t dare hire or spend for who knows if the Fed. will raise out of the blue or announce some new program that runs anathema to basic sound monetary policies.


You don’t invest in cap-ex or hiring for the long-term if you don’t know what the rules might be tomorrow never-mind next year. Period.”

If you gauge the current economy via the abomination now known as “markets” (which the Fed. clearly does) this “success” is all but missing its own “Mission Accomplished” banner. However, if you measure the economy via its true measurements of health like jobs, small business creation, cap-ex, and more? You go from banner to tombstone. Yet – the epitaph reads the same as “banner.” It only depends on perspective as to what the words mean. Think about it.

To make my point even further on just how far economic “thinking” has gone off the rails. I was reminded of it by none other than Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook™ via his latest speech or commencement address.

Nowhere in my recent memory has the idea of small business, along with what it means for the economic health (e.g. Free market Capitalism) been so avoided, so adulterated, so perverted in its messaging and delivery than what I witnessed when viewing Mark Zuckerberg’s address to this year’s graduating class at Harvard University.

In my opinion: It was the epitome of everything going wrong in business today. I also viewed it as one of the most tone-deaf, quasi-political speeches ever given at a commencement speech via someone who should be the embodiment of this time in history’s most celebrated and espousing Free Market Capitalism entrepreneurs.

It was so dreadful, and full of what I view as socialistic laced mumbo-jumbo, I couldn’t listen to much more than a few minutes. Again, via my interpretations; it was agonizingly void of anything resembling free market business principles.

Only a speech delivered by Hilary Clinton compared for substance and delivery. And that’s being kind.

This so-called “address” was anything but “uplifting” for those who are supposedly about to enter the work force and help create the next wave of dynamism for economic growth for the U.S. and subsequently the global business environment.

No, instead, after listening about such themes as “guaranteed universal basic income”, “we are the world”, “save the planet”, and more; it would make perfect sense after receiving their diplomas they simply returned home to their parents basements and waited for the world to offer them a corner office, 7 figure starting salary, trophy-spouse, 2.2 children (gender to be determined) and world peace. Just make sure you’re logged into FB as you wait. Because that’s how Mark gets paid, even if you don’t.

It seemed when listening that in a Zuckerberg vision of the world: Don’t pull on your own bootstraps. Wait! Sooner or later they’ll be able to offer you Utopia. And you’ll thank him for it. Just remember to vote “Like” to show your support behind him if, or when, he decides to run for office. Because for what that speech lacked in spoken words of business ideals, it was laced with more unspoken terms of the political which could not be ignored even when trying. i.e., I couldn’t help but think at any moment I would hear something to the effect of: “And be on the lookout for Zuckerberg for (fill in the blank) in 20??”

Compare Mark’s recent with the one delivered in 2005 by the late Steve Jobs at Stanford University. The two could not be more striking in both tone, as well as delivery. The difference is utterly remarkable and is clearly visible:

One is a businessman explaining via his own words and experiences how one may go about changing the world for the better via FMC principles and ideas eschewing anything to do with the political. The other? The antithesis of the former, delivering a speech more in-tune as if it were written by Mrs. Clinton’s former speech writers.

Don’t take my word for it, view both of them yourself and come to your own conclusions. The differences couldn’t be more striking.

The only way forward for this nation (e.g., U.S.) is for the rebirth of quest and zeal for small business America. It is what built this nation, continues to support it (although it is being waged war upon by crony capitalist benefactors and devotees daily) and is the only way to reassert and preserve the foundations of the Free Market Capital system.

What we are experiencing today is an adulterated, ever-growing, Frankenstein perversion of those once pristine principles that is growing ever-the-more unstable with each passing day and is showing signs that it’s about to break loose of its creators (The Federal Reserve) control at any time.

The current “market” is nothing more than a bull looking for a china shop. Ironically, it may be China that subsequently puts the “bull” into a place which no one “thinks”, let alone, believes.

For those of the newly minted “graduate class” let me offer you an example of just how cronyism works and is prevalent at the very core of what many of you use and treat almost as sacrosanct for entrepreneurialism in today’s business and “market” climate. e.g., Social media, and the companies that fuel it.

If you are one of the few that believed (or still does) Snapchat™ was possibly the next Facebook and invested in its stock, only to see your profits or initial investment go “poof” much like its core product? And yet – have watched simultaneously as FB shares rise and think there must be some “business” reason as to why this happens or “business acumen” you don’t fully yet comprehend? Hint: Welcome to central bank manipulation for picking winners and losers 101.

As I’ve stated too many times to count over the years: This is why having (or picking) a company with a stock price which has a central bankers “bullseye” on it is the only thing that matters. And guess what – Facebook does and Snapchat doesn’t. Want proof. Fair point. To wit:

Swiss National Bank’s U.S. Stock Holdings Hit A Record $63.4 Billion”

The real issue here as I’ve reiterated time, and time again, is this:

When your investment loses value – you lose money and net worth. When a central banks “investment” loses value – they just print more, and buy more, allowing the pretense of “health” to perpetuate inducing even more to buy alongside them furthering the charade of a “market” based price or demand. Rinse, repeat.

Hint: Facebook is on that “Bullseye” list. Along with a few other notables. Snapchat? See latest stock price for clues. And that’s just the SNB. You still have the Fed’s proxies, ECB, BoJ, PBoC and their proxies buying who knows what else.

Is it any wonder why small businesses are having such a hard time competing with these new-found business behemoths of today? For others, its having to compete with companies which are clearly “over.” e.g., See Sears™ for clues and why it has been able to stay open via cheap capital facilitated via Fed. policies unavailable to small businesses.

So with that all said: Long live small business! It may be badly banged up, battered, and bruised. But it’s far from dead just yet. We only need to remember its importance too all of us. Our nations health, and very survival depends on it. It’s a too often overlooked part of our fundamental liberties. Brave men and women of all stripes have, do, and hopefully will, continue to fight for its preservation along with our other sacred liberties.

To all of them: past, present, and future – you have my sincere gratitude. Both military, as well as business people.

The post Remembering A Still Falling Hero: Small Business appeared first on

James Mattis: War With North Korea Would Be “Catastrophic”

Defense Secretary James Mattis appeared on “Face the Nation” with John Dickerson on Sunday and repeated his warning that an armed conflict with North Korea would be “catastrophic” for US allies in the region, and that it "would be probably the worst kind of fighting" because of the North's proximity to the South Korean capital, Seoul.


“A conflict in North Korea, John, would be probably the worst kind of fighting in most people's lifetimes. Why do I say this? The North Korean regime has hundreds of artillery cannons and rocket launchers within range of one of the most densely populated cities on earth, which is the capital of South Korea."

Mattis told a Pentagon news conference earlier this month that a war with the north would be “tragic on an unbelievable scale," suggesting that the Trump administration would seek to exhaust all alternatives before resorting to military action. 

“We are working with the international community to deal with this issue. This regime is a threat to the region, to Japan, to South Korea. And in the event of war, they would bring danger to China and to Russia as well. But the bottom line is it would be a catastrophic war if this turns into a combat if we're not able to resolve this situation through diplomatic means.”

Mattis affirms that the North is a threat to the US, but he stops short of drawing a line in the sand when he tells Dickerson he’d prefer not to answer a question about what the North could do, if anything, to provoke a response from the US. The president, Mattis said, needs “political maneuver room on the issue.”

“It is a direct threat to the United States. They have been very clear in their rhetoric we don't have to wait until they have an intercont- intercontinental ballistic missile with a nuclear weapon on it to say that now it's manifested completely.”

"Yeah, I'd prefer not to answer that question, John. The president needs political maneuver room on this issue. We-- we do not draw red lines unless we intend to carry them out. We've made very clear that we're willing to work with China and we believe China has tried to be helpful in this regard.”

North Korea launched another missile into the Sea of Japan Sunday evening, a few hours after Mattis appeared on the show, and shortly after the Pentagon said it is preparing to test its capability to shoot down an intercontinental-range missile next week.

The post James Mattis: War With North Korea Would Be “Catastrophic” appeared first on