<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Macleans.ca &#187; boom!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www2.macleans.ca/tag/boom/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www2.macleans.ca</link>
	<description>Canada&#039;s only national weekly current affairs magazine.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:51:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Running of the bulls</title>
		<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/02/12/running-of-the-bulls/</link>
		<comments>http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/02/12/running-of-the-bulls/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2013 16:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Chris Sorensen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[boom!]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dow jones Industrial Average]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[investment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[investment advisers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Standard & Poor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stock market]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=347376</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why some experts believe this is the start of a once-in-a-generation boom]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/02/12/running-of-the-bulls/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	Why some experts believe this is the start of a once-in-a-generation boom
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Reining in China’s real estate boom</title>
		<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/04/08/reining-in-china%e2%80%99s-real-estate-boom/</link>
		<comments>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/04/08/reining-in-china%e2%80%99s-real-estate-boom/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 2010 15:30:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jason Kirby</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[beijing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[boom!]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bubble]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China Aerospace Industry Corp]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cina Ocean Shipping]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[real estate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state-owned enterprises]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stimulus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terry Sicular]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www2.macleans.ca/?p=118487</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Beijing has halted land sales in a bid to cool the housing market]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/04/08/reining-in-china%e2%80%99s-real-estate-boom/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
	Beijing has halted land sales in a bid to cool the housing market
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Oh, Nanos, you mercurial scamp:(38/27/21/8/6)</title>
		<link>http://www2.macleans.ca/2008/09/23/oh-nanos-you-mercurial-scamp38272186/</link>
		<comments>http://www2.macleans.ca/2008/09/23/oh-nanos-you-mercurial-scamp38272186/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 2008 18:09:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kadyomalley</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Capital Read]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inside the Queensway]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[boom!]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nanos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polls]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://macleans.wordpress.com/?p=9162</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What was that about a Liberal bias in his methodology? Over/undersampling? Just being wrong?...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www2.macleans.ca/2008/09/23/oh-nanos-you-mercurial-scamp38272186/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>37</slash:comments>
	What was that about a Liberal bias in his methodology? Over/undersampling? Just being wrong?...
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
