No abstract

The research was conducted to determine the impact of macroeconomic variables on the profitability of commercial banking in Pakistan over the period from 2007 to 2016. The quarterly data was used. The five major banks of Pakistan were selected to collect the data. Exchange rate, interest rate, inflation rate and money supply were used as independent variables and ROE used as dependent variable. The unit root and ARDL model techniques were used to analyze the data and it was concluded that money supply has positive and insignificant relation with ROE, inflation has negative and insignificant relation with ROE, exchange rate has negative and significant relation with ROE and interest has negative and significant relation with ROE.

No abstract

Coronavirus Pandemic has taken the world by storm. Just as it has posited a severe threat to human lives, so has it leveled grave concerns to the mode of life cultured by the world's industrialized societies. Through argumentative analysis, the present study attempts to substantiate that at-least three imminent philosophical crises have arisen in the wake of COVID-19 i.e., ideological, moral, and metaphysical. On the one side, Capitalism and the Free Market have essentially been left defenseless, and individual freedom has substantially been threatened. On the other side, family and social capital have been inflexed with a breath of fresh air.

Ethical enigma kernelling concerns about actions against concerns about consequences have been dealt by philosophers and psychologists to measure “universal” moral intuitions. Although these enigmas contain no evident political content, we decipher that liberals are more likely than conservatives to be concerned about consequences, whereas conservatives are more likely than liberals to be concerned about actions. This denouement is exhibited in two large, heterogeneous samples and across several different moral dilemmas. In addition, manipulations of dilemma averseness and order of presentation suggest that this political difference is due in part to different sensitivities to emotional reactions in moral decision-making: Conservatives are very much inclined to “go with the gut” and let affective responses guide moral judgments, while liberals are more likely to deliberate about optimal consequences. In this article, extracting a sample from Western Europe, we report evidence that political differences can be found in moral decisions about issues that have no evident political content. In particular, we find that conservatives are more likely than liberals to attend to the action itself when deciding whether something is right or wrong, whereas liberals are more likely than conservatives to attend to the consequences of the action. Further, we report preliminary evidence that this is partly explained by the kernel of truth from the parodies – conservatives are more likely than liberals to “go with the gut” by using their affective responses to guide moral judgment.