Money market funds have seen a surge of inflows over the past year as interest rates more than $5 trillion in money market funds, some investors believe those funds will eventually flow back into the stock Ned Davis Research highlighted a key reason why the cash might stay in money market funds for longer than most expect. Loading Something is loading. Thanks for signing up! Access your favorite topics in a personalized feed while you're on the go. Inflows into money market funds have soared over the past year as investors take advantage of high cash yields above 4%, and they might not flow back into the stock market for a long time. According to Ned Davis Research, money market funds over the past 13 weeks saw the fastest pace of asset inflows since July 2020. The surge was in part driven by the regional banking crisis that saw the downfall of Silicon Valley Bank and First Republic more than $ trillion now sitting in money market funds, some investors think those funds will eventually flow back into the stock market and help push asset prices higher as risks recede and investor sentiment improves, as has happened in the cash floods money market funds, "from a sentiment standpoint, it is a vote of extreme pessimism toward risk-on assets by investors. From a flows perspective, the assets represent potential buying power when investors become less risk averse," Ned Davis Research said in a Wednesday note. But this time could be different, according to NDR. That's because there's a big difference between investors stashing cash due to an uncertain macro environment and investors stashing cash to take advantage of interest rates above 4%."Investors selling stocks to buy money market funds, which can logically be reversed once the coast is clear, is one thing. People moving funds from banks getting less than to money market funds offering several percent higher is another," NDR money market funds serve as a good middle ground for investors to park their cash, as the current risk-free yield of more than 4% is more than half the average annual stock market return of 7%. "Having money in money market funds is one step closer to the stock market than a checking account," NDR even if the cash in money market funds eventually does flow back into the stock market, it might not have as big of an impact that some investors think, according to market assets represent just 13% of the US stock market capitalization, compared to in February 2009 and in February 2003 — two periods when the stock market went on to stage multi-year rallies."$ trillion does not buy what it used to," NDR said.

MoneyWatch Updated on May 29, 2023 / 1113 AM / MoneyWatch The future of energy in America The future of energy in America 0709 The upheaval in oil and gas markets started by Russia's war in Ukraine is helping fuel a clean-energy boom as countries scramble to secure their power supply. One notable record Investment in solar outpaced that in oil for the first time last year, according to the International Energy Agency, which released a report recently on global energy the world is still investing far too much in fossil fuels, the Paris-based group warned. Investment in that sector is currently double the maximum amount that would be allowed if nations are to meet their stated pledges to reduce emissions, the IEA said. A growing gapSince 2018, far more funding has been put into clean-energy development than into fossil fuels, and the gap continues to grow. Last year saw a record $ trillion invested globally into energy sector, of which more than $ trillion is dedicated to clean energy. "For every dollar invested in fossil fuels, about dollars are now going into clean energy. Five years ago, this ratio was one-to-one," IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol said in a statement. "One shining example is investment in solar, which is set to overtake the amount of investment going into oil production for the first time."Russia's brutal invasion of Ukraine which began last year boosted demand for energy of all types, raising investment in fossil fuel as well as clean power. The war set off a price spike in oil and gas, of which Russia is a major producer — supplying about 12% of the world's crude oil and nearly half of the European Union's natural gas. Investors responded by doubling down on all options, throwing money into developing gas and oil sources outside of Russia, as well as into new renewable energy developments that don't need gas at all. Natural gas is a fossil fuel that contributes to global warming. While it was long considered "cleaner" than older fuels, like coal and oil, recent research shows it could be much more damaging to the climate than previously thought, as its extraction releases large amounts of methane, a powerful heat-trapping rapid acceleration of clean-energy investment is good news for the world's pledge to meet its climate targets. If the pace of the last two years continues, "then aggregate spending in 2030 on low-emission power, grids and storage, and end-use electrification would exceed the levels required to meet the world's announced climate pledges," the IEA wrote. "For some technologies, notably solar, it would match the investment required to get on track for a stabilization in global average temperatures."However, that can only happen if planned oil and gas development is scaled back significantly, IEA warned. "The risks of locking in fossil fuel use are clear Fossil fuel investment in 2023 is now more than double the levels required to meet much lower demand in the [net zero emissions] scenario," the report found. Fossil fuel prices create a dilemmaThe still-high prices of fossil fuels, and oil and gas companies' record profits in the past year, have created a quandary for investors, who are eager to make more profits off commodity prices. "A key dilemma for investors undertaking large, capital‐intensive gas supply projects is how to reconcile strong near‐term demand growth with uncertain and possibly declining longer-term demand," IEA the clean-energy boom is to continue, the agency said, another key point needs to be addressed Equality. So far, clean-power investment has been restricted to just a few countries — primarily China, the European Union and the "Remarkably, the increases in clean energy investment in advanced economies and China since 2021 exceed total clean energy investment in the rest of the world," the IEA found. The high upfront costs of clean-energy infrastructure and high interest rates mean that many developing countries aren't investing in renewables, even though their use, in the long term, would cost less than fossil fuels and would save lives, the IEA said. In the and many developed nations, meanwhile, the need for multiple approvals for an energy project, often taking years or even decades, has slowed down the buildout of clean energy. In Renewable Energy Climate Change Thanks for reading CBS NEWS. Create your free account or log in for more features. Please enter email address to continue Please enter valid email address to continue

Keywords read the world is money and power, the world is money and power english, the world is money and power eng, download the world is money and power eng, read the world is money and power online Chapter The World Is Money and Power. First Chapter Chapter ? New Chapter Chapter 69.

Most of the time, what you pay for electricity or water or gas depends on how much you use. Leave the air conditioner and the lights on all night, and your electricity bill will spike. Take long, relaxing bubble baths every day, and your water bill will California is about to challenge that basic logic, in an attempt to curb rising rates and help electrify the state’s approximately 14 million homes. A new state law will require its three investor-owned utilities to charge customers fees for electricity based not only on how much electricity they use, but also on how much money they on the proposal the state ultimately adopts, Californians making more than $180,000 a year could end up paying an average of $500 more on their annual electricity bills, while the lowest-income residents would save around $300 per proposed changes are sparking argue that the plan will help the state electrify by lowering costs for residents that might not otherwise afford it. Critics, including many California residents, say that it will eat into progress on energy efficiency and that it is unfair to those who are conserving Dawson, a retired data manager who lives in Eureka, Calif., said he and his wife have always been careful to save energy only running the washer during off-peak hours and living without air conditioning. The new fixed charge alone, he said, would be more than his typical monthly electricity bill. “It’s a bait-and-switch,” he debate beginning in California touches on the question that all states will have to face sooner or later Who should pay for the damage climate change is doing to the electricity grid?For the past decade or so, California has been stuck in a vicious cycle when it comes to climate change. The Golden State embraced wind and solar far earlier than many other states, with enthusiastic homeowners slapping solar panels on around million homes; the state now generates around a quarter of its electricity from even as California has hustled to move away from fossil fuels, the effects of a warming planet are transforming the sunny state — and threatening how nearly 40 million people get their power. California is becoming hotter and drier, raising the risk of wildfires sparked by aging, failing power lines. The state’s three largest investor-owned utilities — Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison, and San Diego Gas & Electric — need to upgrade their infrastructure to shore it up against rising temperatures and fire that work means California’s electricity prices have gone sky-high. California’s average retail electricity price is around 20 cents per kilowatt-hour, almost double the national average. And some customers see prices much higher than that Pacific Gas & Electric offers rates that start at $ per kilowatt-hour and climb to as high as $ per kilowatt-hour depending on the time of day.“In the last decade, electricity prices in California have skyrocketed,” said Matthew Freedman, a staff attorney for The Utility Reform Network, a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization headquartered in San Francisco. In the past 10 years, Freedman explained, non-discounted electricity rates at PG&E have increased 84 percent; SDG&E rates have gone up 137 high prices could deter Californians who want to electrify their homes and vehicles to cut carbon emissions. In general, switching out gas heating for an electric heat pump or a gas-powered car for an electric car saves money and helps the planet. But high electricity prices change the calculus. In some cases, people who electrify their homes might end up paying where the new law, which passed last summer as part of a larger energy bill, comes in. First proposed by researchers at the University of California at Berkeley and the nonprofit Next 10, the plan would split utility costs into two buckets Fixed charges, which everyone has to pay just to be connected to the grid, and variable charges, which depend on how much electricity you use. Proponents say that the creation of fixed charges would cover things like wildfire preparedness and grid updates — and would also lower electricity costs based on usage. In theory, that would make it easier to convince Californians to in a twist from how many other utilities do it, the fixed charge would be based on how much money the electricity user makes.“A flat fixed charge is still pretty regressive,” said Meredith Fowlie, a professor of economics at UC Berkeley who helped write the initial proposal. “If you can mimic an income tax, it’s less regressive.”The California Public Utilities Commission, which regulates private utilities in the state, hasn’t decided what those income-based rates will look like yet. The commission has until next July to sort it out. But the proposals that have been put forward thus far by nonprofits and the utilities themselves have sparked concern among example, the proposal from the three largest utilities in the state starts fixed charges at $15 for the lowest-income residents of the state and raises them to a whopping $128 for customers of San Diego Gas & Electric who earn more than $180,000. In turn, use-based rates would drop by 10 to 20 cents per kilowatt-hour. Other groups have suggested more moderate fixed charges The Utility Reform Network and the Natural Resources Defense Council, for example, have suggested fixed charges that vary from $5 to $ points out that the system will help low- and middle-income households that spend a lot of cash on electricity bills. “It would really reduce impacts on lower-income households,” she said. She also notes that the utilities aren’t getting any more cash from the proposal — they’re just rejigging the rates from entirely use-based to a mix that includes fixed many Californians are not convinced. Hundreds of angry comments from residents have flooded into the utilities’ commission’s website. Most worry that the high fixed charges will turn customers away from energy efficiency; others say it will disincentivize installation of rooftop solar.“This proposal actually discourages conservation,” Dawson, the retired data manager, wrote to the commission. “Those that live without air conditioning and conserve electricity or who use solar energy ... will still be required to pay the monthly fees.”Curtis Benz from Vista, Calif., wrote “I am scheduled to have solar installed on my home next month but after finding out about this proposal I will be canceling the install. It is unfortunate that people who are spending tens of thousands of dollars to provide energy to the grid are not being rewarded.” Rooftop solar has been another source of controversy in California; the utilities recently changed the amount they reimburse homeowners for the solar they deliver to the grid.The question is whether lower prices for using electricity will spur more electrification. Higher-income Californians are more likely to spend money on electric cars, heat pumps and energy efficiency improvements. But if the majority of those residents’ bills are taken up by a large fixed charge, the relative benefit of those changes is much smaller. Lower-income Californians, by contrast, will have a higher proportion of their bills from the power they use — but they are also less likely to own their homes and be able to make efficiency Lazar, a utility rate expert, also has serious doubts about whether the law can be enforced. “It’s extremely difficult to get income information, and extremely easy to game,” he said. He points to shared housing situations, where multiple young people, all in different income brackets, might be living together — or to older, retired Californians who have zero income but high levels of wealth. “What if you just let your nine-year-old be the utility customer?” he said. “They don’t have any income.”Rich customers could also simply exit the grid. With rooftop solar and a battery, some wealthy Californians could separate themselves from grid costs entirely. Some households are disconnecting in Hawaii, where electricity rates are even higher than in California. And if high-income residents leave the grid, they will leave behind low-income consumers who will continue to struggle to pay higher and higher electricity is also the question of whether the cost of the grid infrastructure and wildfire resilience should be looped into utility bills at all. “We would prefer that these costs be paid for through income taxes,” Freedman said. But historically, the California legislature has been hesitant to take on that responsibility — and in the meantime, funds are desperately experts have suggested alternatives. Lazar said a better way to boost electrification is to offer special rates for consumers who get rid of natural gas. “Someone puts in a heat pump, they get 400 kilowatt-hours a month cheap in the winter,” he said as an example. “If you can target the cheap power, you can solve the electrification challenge.”For the moment though, California is pressing ahead with its plan, and other states could follow. The Golden State was one of the first states to quickly embrace renewables; it’s also one of the states most affected by the rising cost of climate change.“This is a uniquely California problem now,” Fowlie said. “But I think we’re a leading indicator of where other states could be headed.”

Romance FLOAT Kate Marchant / Cj Joaquin

Listento Money and the Power on the English music album Self Titled 1 by Prime the Beast, only on JioSaavn. Play online or download to listen offline free - in HD audio, only on JioSaavn.

Read 5 more new episodes on the app!Scan the QR code to download the WEBTOON app on the App Store or Google Play. S2 Episode 8 Jun 10, 2023 like1,216 115 S2 Episode 7 Jun 3, 2023 like1,448 114 S2 Episode 6 May 27, 2023 like1,620 113 S2 Episode 5 May 20, 2023 like1,690 112 S2 Episode 4 May 13, 2023 like1,747 111 S2 Episode 3 May 6, 2023 like1,926 110 S2 Episode 2 Apr 29, 2023 like1,911 109 S2 Episode 1 Apr 22, 2023 like2,123 108 S2 Episode 0 - Prologue Apr 22, 2023 like2,068 107 Episode 106 Season 1 Finale Apr 8, 2023 like2,476 106 view subscribe 222,227 grade RATE You've already rated you like to rate it again? UPEVERY SUNDAY Gunwoo Dahn has vowed to overthrow the status quo of the dysfunctional high school he recently transferred to, where rich and powerful third-generation chaebol heirs call the shots and gambling runs rampant. But does Gunwoo have what it takes to beat the odds, defeat the Taekyeong Oh Family, and restore law and order to his high school? qWyQ.

xflui7f2x4.pages.dev/177

xflui7f2x4.pages.dev/938

xflui7f2x4.pages.dev/207

xflui7f2x4.pages.dev/119

xflui7f2x4.pages.dev/558

xflui7f2x4.pages.dev/329

xflui7f2x4.pages.dev/337

xflui7f2x4.pages.dev/617

xflui7f2x4.pages.dev/881

xflui7f2x4.pages.dev/17

xflui7f2x4.pages.dev/357

xflui7f2x4.pages.dev/8

xflui7f2x4.pages.dev/768

xflui7f2x4.pages.dev/197

xflui7f2x4.pages.dev/848

read money and the power