Which country has emerged as the richest country in the world with per capita income of U.S. $ 90,149 in 2010, according to figures posted on the website of the prestigious US business publication, Global Finance? ?->(Show Answer!)

1. Which country has emerged as the richest country in the world with per capita income of U.S. $ 90,149 in 2010, according to figures posted on the website of the prestigious US business publication, Global Finance?

Answer: Qatar.

Reply

Comments

Tags

Show Similar Question And Answers

QA->Which country has emerged as the richest country in the world with per capita income of U.S. $ 90,149 in 2010, according to figures posted on the website of the prestigious US business publication, Global Finance?....

QA->Which is the richest country in ASEAN(Association of South East Asian Nations) interms of per capita income?....

QA->According to the latest Report, what is the per capita income of India for the year 2014-15?....

QA->Which State of India has the highest per capita income?....

QA->WHICH INDIAN STATE HAS THE HIGHEST PER CAPITA INCOME....

MCQ-> Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given at the end. The second issue I want to address is one that comes up frequently - that Indian banks should aim to become global. Most people who put forward this view have not thought through the costs and benefits analytically; they only see this as an aspiration consistent with India’s growing international profile. In its 1998 report, the Narasimham (II) Committee envisaged a three tier structure for the Indian banking sector: 3 or 4 large banks having an international presence on the top, 8-10 mid-sized banks, with a network of branches throughout the country and engaged in universal banking, in the middle, and local banks and regional rural banks operating in smaller regions forming the bottom layer. However, the Indian banking system has not consolidated in the manner envisioned by the Narasimham Committee. The current structure is that India has 81 scheduled commercial banks of which 26 are public sector banks, 21 are private sector banks and 34 are foreign banks. Even a quick review would reveal that there is no segmentation in the banking structure along the lines of Narasimham II.A natural sequel to this issue of the envisaged structure of the Indian banking system is the Reserve Bank’s position on bank consolidation. Our view on bank consolidation is that the process should be market-driven, based on profitability considerations and brought about through a process of mergers & amalgamations (M&As;). The initiative for this has to come from the boards of the banks concerned which have to make a decision based on a judgment of the synergies involved in the business models and the compatibility of the business cultures. The Reserve Bank’s role in the reorganisation of the banking system will normally be only that of a facilitator.lt should be noted though that bank consolidation through mergers is not always a totally benign option. On the positive side are a higher exposure threshold, international acceptance and recognition, improved risk management and improvement in financials due to economies of scale and scope. This can be achieved both through organic and inorganic growth. On the negative side, experience shows that consolidation would fail if there are no synergies in the business models and there is no compatibility in the business cultures and technology platforms of the merging banks.Having given that broad brush position on bank consolidation let me address two specific questions: (i) can Indian banks aspire to global size?; and (ii) should Indian banks aspire to global size? On the first question, as per the current global league tables based on the size of assets, our largest bank, the State Bank of India (SBI), together with its subsidiaries, comes in at No.74 followed by ICICI Bank at No. I45 and Bank of Baroda at 188. It is, therefore, unlikely that any of our banks will jump into the top ten of the global league even after reasonable consolidation.Then comes the next question of whether Indian banks should become global. Opinion on this is divided. Those who argue that we must go global contend that the issue is not so much the size of our banks in global rankings but of Indian banks having a strong enough, global presence. The main argument is that the increasing global size and influence of Indian corporates warrant a corresponding increase in the global footprint of Indian banks. The opposing view is that Indian banks should look inwards rather than outwards, focus their efforts on financial deepening at home rather than aspiring to global size.It is possible to take a middle path and argue that looking outwards towards increased global presence and looking inwards towards deeper financial penetration are not mutually exclusive; it should be possible to aim for both. With the onset of the global financial crisis, there has definitely been a pause to the rapid expansion overseas of our banks. Nevertheless, notwithstanding the risks involved, it will be opportune for some of our larger banks to be looking out for opportunities for consolidation both organically and inorganically. They should look out more actively in regions which hold out a promise of attractive acquisitions.The surmise, therefore, is that Indian banks should increase their global footprint opportunistically even if they do not get to the top of the league table.Identify the correct statement from the following:
...

MCQ-> Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it. Certain words/phrases have been printed in bold to help you locate them while answering some of the questions. The past quarter of a century has seen several bursts of selling by the world’s governments, mostly but not always in benign market conditions. Those in the OECD, a rich-country club, divested plenty of stuff in the 20 years before the global financial crisis. The first privatisation wave, which built up from the mid-1980s and peaked in 2000, was largely European. The drive to cut state intervention under Margaret Thatcher in Britain soon spread to the continent. The movement gathered pace after 1991, when eastern Europe put thousands of rusting state-owned enterprises (SOEs) on the block. A second wave came in the mid-2000s, as European economies sought to cash in on buoyant markets. But activity in OECD countries slowed sharply as the financial crisis began. In fact, it reversed. Bailouts of failing banks and companies have contributed to a dramatic increase in government purchases of corporate equity during the past five years. A more lasting fea ture is the expansion of the state capitalism practised by China and other emerging economic powers. Governments have actually bought more equity than they have sold in most years since 2007, though sales far exceeded purchases in 2013. Today privatisation is once again “alive and well”, says William Megginson of the Michael Price College of Business at the University of Oklahoma. According to a global tally he recently completed, 2012 was the third-best year ever, and preliminary evidence suggests that 2013 may have been better. However, the geography of sell-offs has changed, with emerging markets now to the fore. China, for instance, has been selling minority stakes in banking, energy, engineering and broadcasting; Brazil is selling airports to help finance a $20 billion investment programme. Eleven of the 20 largest IPOs between 2005 and 2013 were sales of minority stakes by SOEs, mostly in developing countries. By contrast, state-owned assets are now “the forgotten side of the balance-sheet” in many advanced economies, says Dag Detter, managing partner of Whetstone Solutions, an adviser to governments on asset restructuring. They shouldn’t be. Governments of OECD countries still oversee vast piles of assets, from banks and utilities to buildings, land and the riches beneath (see table). Selling some of these holdings could work wonders: reduce debt, finance infrastructure, boost economic efficiency. But governments often barely grasp the value locked up in them. The picture is clearest for companies or company-like entities held by central governments. According to data compiled by the OECD and published on its website, its 34 member countries had 2,111 fully or majority-owned SOEs, with 5.9m employees, at the end of 2012. Their combined value (allowing for some but not all pension-fund liabilities) is estimated at $2.2 trillion, roughly the same size as the global hedge-fund industry. Most are in network industries such as telecoms, electricity and transport. In addition, many countries have large minority stakes in listed firms. Those in which they hold a stake of between 10% and 50% have a combined market value of $890 billion and employ 2.9m people. The data are far from perfect. The quality of reporting varies widely, as do definitions of what counts as a state-owned company: most include only centralgovernment holdings. If all assets held at sub-national level, such as local water companies, were included, the total value could be more than $4 trillion. Reckons Hans Christiansen, an OECD economist. Moreover, his team has had to extrapolate because some QECD members, including America and Japan, provide patchy data. America is apparently so queasy about discussions of public ownership of -commercial assets that the Treasury takes no part in the OECD’s working group on the issue, even though it has vast holdings, from Amtrak and the 520,000-employee Postal Service to power generators and airports. The club’s efforts to calculate the value that SOEs add to, or subtract from, economies were abandoned after several countries, including America, refused to co-operate. Privatisation has begun picking up again recently in the OECD for a variety of reasons. Britain’s Conservative-led coalition is fbcused on (some would say obsessed with) reducing the public debt-to-GDP ratio. Having recently sold the Royal Mail through a public offering, it is hoping to offload other assets, including its stake in URENCO, a uranium enricher, and its student-loan portfolio. From January 8th, under a new Treasury scheme, members of the public and businesses will be allowed to buy government land and buildings on the open market. A website will shortly be set up to help potential buyers see which bits of the government’s /..337 billion-worth of holdings ($527 billion at today’s rate, accounting for 40% of developable sites round Britain) might be surplus. The government, said the chief treasury secretary, Danny Alexander, “should not act as some kind of compulsive hoarder”. Japan has different reasons to revive sell-offs, such as to finance reconstruction after its devastating earthquake and tsunami in 2011. Eyes are once again turning to Japan Post, a giant postal-to-financial-services conglomerate whose oftpostponed partial sale could at last happen in 2015 and raise (Yen) 4 trillion ($40 billion) or more. Australia wants to sell financial, postal and aviation assets to offset the fall in revenues caused by the commodities slowdown. In almost all the countries of Europe, privatisation is likely “to surprise on the upside” as long as markets continue to mend, reckons Mr Megginson. Mr Christiansen expects to see three main areas of activity in coming years. First will be the resumption of partial sell-offs in industries such as telecoms, transport and utilities. Many residual stakes in partly privatised firms could be sold down further. France, for instance, still has hefty stakes in GDF SUEZ, Renault, Thales and Orange. The government of Francois Hollande may be ideologically opposed to privatisation, but it is hoping to reduce industrial stakes to raise funds for livelier sectors, such as broadband and health. The second area of growth should be in eastern Europe, where hundreds of large firms, including manufacturers, remain in state hands. Poland will sell down its stakes in listed firms to make up for an expected reduction in EU structural funds. And the third area is the reprivatisation of financial institutions rescued during the crisis. This process is under way: the largest privatisation in 2012 was the $18 billion offering of America’s residual stake in AIG, an insurance company.Which of the following statements is not true in the context of the given passage ?
...

MCQ-> Read the following information and the accompanying graphs to answer the questions that follow. www.jay.com spent $ 5,57,000 during last 12 months for online display advertisements, also called impressions, on five websites (Website A, Website B, Website C, Website D and Website E). In this arrangement, www.jay.com is the Destination Site, and the five websites are referred to as the Ad Sites. The allocation of online display advertising expenditure is shown in Graph A. The online display advertisements helped www.jay.com to get visitors on its site. Online visitors, visiting the Ad Sites, are served display advertisements of www.jay.com and on clicking they land on the Destination Site (Graph B). Once on the Destination Site, some of the visitors complete the purchase process(Graph C)

Quality traffic = $$\frac{\text{No. of site visitors who start purchase on destination site}}{\text{No. of visitors who click the online display advertisement}}$$ Leakage in online buying = 1 − $$\frac{\text {Complete buying on the destination website}}{\text{Start buying on the destination website}}$$Efficiency of online display advertising expenditure on an Ad Site = $$\frac{\text{No. of visitors from the Ad Site who complete the purchase process}}{\text{Amount spent on the Ad Site}}$$ Which of following Ad Sites provide facility of least cost per advertisement?
...

MCQ-> Study tin following information carefully and answer the questions given below: Following are the conditions for selecting a Manager Finance in an organization. The candidate must- (i) be a graduate in any discipline with at least 50% marks. (ii) have completed Post Graduate Degree/Diploma in Management with specialization in Finance with at least 65% marks (iii) have post qualification work experience of at least 4 years in the finance department of all organization. (iv) be at least 26 years and not more than 36 years as on 01.12.2011. In the case of a candidate who fulfils all the conditions except- (a) at (ii) above, but has secured at least 60% marks in post-graduate degree/diploma in management with specialization in Finance and at least 70% marks in Graduation. his/her case is to be referred to DGM - Finance (b) at (iii) above, but has post qualification work experience of at least two years as Assistant Finance Manager. his/her case is to be referred to GM-Finance. In each question below. details of one candidate are provided. You have to take one of the following courses of action based on the conditions given above and the information provided in each question and mark the number of that course of action as your answer. You are not to assume anything other than the information provided in each question. All these cases are given to you as on 01.12.2011. Mark answer (1) if the candidate is to be selected. Mark answer (2) if the data provided are inadequate to take a decision. Mark answer (3) if the candidate is not to be selected. Mark answer (4) if the case is to be referred to DGM-Finance. Mark answer (5) if the case is to be referred to GM-Finance. Now read the information provided in each question and mark your answer accordingly.Raman Sharma was born on 19th March 1981. He has been working in the finance department of an organization for the past six years. He has secured 65% marks in B.Com. and 75% marks In his post graduate degree in management with finance specialization.
...

MCQ-> Read the following passages carefully and answer the question given below them Certain words/phrases have been printed in bold to help you to locate them while answering some of the question.Despite the economic crunch worldwide that saw pulverization of some of the largest banking and finance giants Indian banking houses have managed to show positive growth this quarter. Some of India’s leading national banks have posted a net profit rise of more than 40% over the last quarter amid global turmoil This would come as a “big short in the arm” for the investors and consumers of these banking even though apprehension is mounting on other banking and broking firms worldwide One of the main reason behind the success of these banks this quarter would be their direct backing by the Government of India. People take solace in their investments in public sector watching the bailout packages being cashed out by governments all over the world to save big business houses Other privates banks in India have also reported a substantial net profit over last quarter Given the international and domestic scenario one cannot put this down as a mundane achievement While others are on a cost cutting spree and firing employees Indian companies are actually working on boosting staffing in banking and broking sectors This can be seen as a big boon in the days to come when the current recession eases and the economy gradually comes back on to the fast track The finance minister has assured Indian public about the second.This could also be evident from the fact that their have been no mergers and takeover in Indian banking sector in a contrast to world scenario where finance houses are looking for mergers and takeovers India banking sector in a contrast to world scenario where finance houses are looking for mergers to cut costs on operation We definitely are not looking to thrive rather we are looking for growth It is just that the pace of growth is a little slow now as compared to a year or two before These are hard times to test the hard The weak in business and career will be weeded out and it is sometimes very beneficial for business in the long runWhat according to the author is the reason for the success of Indian national banks in this quarter ?
...