economics log

Health Care Stocks Climb in Wake of Reform Passage

2010-03-22T14:51:00.000+02:00

The only meaningful reform for healthcare would be policies that take aim to reduce costs in the dysfunctional healthcare market.

For instance, by cutting state-line restrictions and allowing healthcare insurers the ability to sell coverage anywhere in the United States, and by decoupling healthcare insurance from employment agreements (that is, allowing consumers to buy coverage just as they do auto insurance), this would provide a tremendous rise in competition and thus lower healthcare premiums.

Such actions, however, are not favored by the healthcare insurance industry, so we’ll have to wait for a real crisis in the healthcare market to occur before substantive reform starts.

In the meantime, I must ask: If this recent healthcare reform that was rammed through the House of Representatives over the weekend truly has any meaning in terms of reducing costs, then why are healthcare stocks on the rise today?

[Via http://the-small-r.com]

China, Yuan and Dollar - Part 4: The Chinese case of Yuan

2010-03-22T06:16:00.000+02:00

So, where does china fits in, what seems to be an issue of individual countries and their money management?

It’s just as simple as this, u are running a wholesale shop in a market. Some one brings (exports) tomatoes daily… there are other tomato suppliers for you but he supplies it cheap and in huge mass. So most of the shop owners buy tomato from him. But, he is not buying anything from you. Even though you want to settle his balance with some potatoes and dal from your shop, he says, just give me money, and you have been doing this. One fine day you realize that, all your goods are stagnant/ no demand for your products and money leaves from your pocket daily. You wanted to see, what the tomato vendor is doing in the backyard after getting payments from you…

1) He is not giving money to his wife and other labours who work in the family to spend the money.

2) He spends all his money in buying new fields and investing in producing cheap tomatoes

3) He indirectly lends you money to run your shop, through bonds which you issue.

4) He gets more customers by selling tomatoes at low price and eliminates small farmers from market.

One fine day, u and ur relatives, wake up and tell him, boss, better u spend the money on other things, otherwise we will levy tax on your tomatoes and you will suffer, because ur neighbour is ready to give tomatoes and will listen to us..

He retaliates back that,

1) If I don’t give tomato, Ur shops will need to buy at a higher price and as such u idiots don’t have the habit of saving money, will find very difficult to buy products from others which will be costlier than mine.

2) I will stop lending you money and will sell all the loan bonds given to you in the market at a cheaper rate, and your money value will go down since I sell in huge quantity and less demand will be there , and because you are the leader of all shops, everyone will collapse.

This is what exactly the situation happening between China and US. But is this a matter of concern only for US and not for other countries? Why are they silent on these issues? To understand in a broader manner, we need to understand

• What role currency plays in economy,

• What appreciation or depreciation means for one country and relative countries,

• How currencies are related to each other etc, in detail.

[Via http://capitalmoney.wordpress.com]

What exactly happened to Kiggundu's Greenland Bank

2010-03-19T22:40:00.000+02:00

Dear people,

Dr. Kiggundu is gone for good but there is still hope for the revival of the Greenland bank one day if what we read in the newspapers was true. I’m among the few Ugandans and muslims who are still confused as to why Greenland was closed abruptly like that. My understanding is that General Saleh secretly purchased UCB through Greenland bank. General Saleh himself announced that he took over the bid from the Malaysian investors to keep the bank under local hands and this was in December 1998.Immediately after General Saleh’s announcement, Greeenland bank was placed under state management. Greenland bank had subsidiaries in Tanzania and Kenya (commercial Bank and foreign exchange in Kenya respectively) which were also later closed. Nobody in the government has come up to give us a detailed explanation of why the Greenland Empire was closed and whether this was necessary at the time. It is the kind of pain we have been carrying for ages and it became so much when the death of Dr.Kiggundu struck us.

Secondly, Greenland was closed when the country’s savings were improving. Before the emergency of Greenland, the savings stood at 3% of the GDP compared to 6% of GDP in 1998. At that time, Kenya had a savings rate of 22% compared to the now ill-managed Zimbabwe which had a savings rate of 32% by then. When the savings rate is higher it means there are more funds that can be borrowed for development. Ugandans can borrow money in great number to their things. All this went into decline after the closure of Greenland Bank because so many people were relying on that bank. Was the closure of Greenland an act of a president who loves rapid development in the country?

The only major management error I blame Dr. Kiggundu is the principle of disclosure in the banking sector and he was jailed for 6 months because of some of these errors. Disclosure is about providing information to the outsiders about the organization. This includes corporate social disclosure. This is where the society wants to know what it gets from the business for supporting it. It is when the society and other third parties see such benefits that they see the organization as legitimate. Whereas developed countries have disclosure measures, the developing countries like Uganda don’t have the culture of disclosure. No ends of year accounts are shown! Even banks that should display their financial statements don’t do so! That is why in 1998, Greenland Bank Ltd, and Cooperative Bank Ltd were closed by Bank of Uganda, without any sign of financial weakness being known by the customers. So this was wrong on the side of Dr. Kiggundu but still the state should not have closed the bank. The Gordon Brown government used all the means at its disposal to save the Northern Rock Bank despite the problems they were having because Gordon loves his country and he loves the common man on the ground in the UK.

Other reasons which were given by the economists in the country for the closure are all considered just schools of thought including: failure to meet the minimum capital requirements, insider lending, corruption and mismanagement as the causes. This is all nothing when you are a politician who loves your people.The root cause of commercial banks’ problems lies in their desire to increase profits by rapidly expanding their asset portfolio (by extending loans) for which there are no adequate provisions in the form of a capital buffer. Greenland bank did this by investing in a variety of businesses and lending to people without security, and it would have worked if they had been given a chance with time to rectify their mistakes. Remember, these were long term investments NOT short term investments. Yes, Dr.Kiggundu was running the risk of the inadequacy of minimum capital standards in accounting for the risk in banks’ asset portfolio but so many international banks run this risk. In the UK here, people access credit without any security and there was nothing weid that Greenland was doing in the banking sector. I also heard that a Saudi investor offered to fix the capital problems Greenland was experiencing at the time but still the government declined the offer. All they wanted was to close the damn Greenland Bank.

Lastly, Bank of Uganda (BoU) introduced new banking rules after the closure of Greenland to justify their act but why didn’t they give Greenland more time to operate under the new rules. According to the BoU new policy, all banks will be required to maintain sufficient capital, while those under-capitalised will not be bailed out. Under the revised minimum deposit requirements, all commercial banks – both local and foreign-owned – are required to maintain at least a minimum balance of USh1bn (US$750m). All banks are required to comply with all the provisions of the Financial Institutions Statute (FIS) of 1993. According to the BoU, they will only intervene in banks that either fail to meet the capital requirements or comply with the laws and regulations as stipulated in the FIS Act. ´Where a bank is intervened and closed, the BoU´s commitment to the depositors will be limited to USh3m per depositor, covered under the Deposit Insurance Scheme´, the bank stated. My question is how is a Ugandan in USA going to recover her money now if she wakes up one morning when one of the banks in Uganda is closed particularly if her savings exceed USh3m? Can anybody also convince voters in Uganda that Kiggundu’s Greenland had failed to raise the capital of USh1bn to keep itself in business? Can you also tell voters in Uganda of what the judicial inquiry commission found and recommended after the closure of different banks in Uganda that year? This was a commission set up by Finance Minister Gerald Sendaula. Why isn’t all this information made public up to now?

Abbey Kibirige Semuwemba

United Kingdom

[Via http://semuwemba.wordpress.com]

Impeach the president?

2010-03-19T14:57:00.000+02:00

KUHNER: Impeach the president? – Washington Times.

The Slaughter Solution is a dagger aimed at the heart of our system of checks and balances. It would enable the Democrats to establish an ominous precedent: The lawmaking process can be rigged to ensure the passage of any legislation without democratic accountability or even a congressional majority. It is the road to a soft tyranny. James Madison must be turning in his grave.

[Via http://inzax.us]

Can I have Economics Without Oppresion?

2010-03-19T06:44:00.000+02:00

One only needs to turn on Fox News to hear that communism is going to destroy us all, or that Obama is a socialist and wants to turn us into the USSR. Conservatives seem to be convinced that communism will be the end of us all. On the other side, there are those that believe that capitalism takes advantage of the poor and marginalized. Examples like Nike or Wal-Mart show that people can use the economic system of capitalism to do just that. Some even go as far as saying Jesus was a communist or a capitalist, both sides proof-texting their point. I have my problem with people saying that Jesus held to one economic system but that is another post.

The truth I think that most fail to see though is neither system is inherently evil. They are two different systems that try to distribute wealth equally. Although, they have two different definitions of equal. This leaves the largely not talked about side of the equation, humans. Humans are not only corruptible but corrupting agents. It is not hard to look for examples of where communism was corrupted, historically, Stalin did a number to Russia and innocent people died. In the modern day we see North Korea, under the iron fist of Kim Jong Ill, is perhaps one of the most terrifying examples of government tyrannical control. For capitalism, we see the example of sweat shops used famously by Wal-Mart, and Nike, and many other companies. Historically, while the industrial revolution was a time of great advancement, it was an age of human rights violations that caused the death of men, women, and children.

The truth is that if we want either of these systems to work, we have to become better people. Changing these systems starts on a personal level. We have to become conscious consumers. We have to be aware of the evil things companies do, and then shop at the ones that do as few of these as possible. Many times that means that we cannot shop at the cheapest place, but the trade-off means we are not hurting anyone. Also, we have to vote for laws that protect the marginalized groups. While this at times can seem like socialism, if at the end of the day it saves lives it is the right thing to do.

Jameson Gavin

[Via http://forgoddencountry.wordpress.com]

Vicarious Leisure

2010-03-17T22:53:00.000+02:00

I was having an interesting conversation yesterday with a friend while discussing the proposition of finding someone from among the foreigners we know in Korea to fill an open position at my company. As we went over the various people we know, evaluating their Korean language skills, where they are in their careers and whether they would be interested in a job in the field in question, we managed to narrow down the field to a small number of individuals, and yet with seemingly all the appropriate candidates we repeatedly found the same problem. None of those most suited to the job appeared to be particularly motivated to start or continue careers. In most cases, the people we dismissed for this reason were dabblers. They came to Korea without any particular aim, and although they may have learned Korean here or known it already, for the most part they learned it without any particular career goal in mind. A few of the most qualified candidates were not interested in working at all, while others among them were not ready to decide what field they wanted to enter. I should mention that the people we were discussing are all current students at or recent graduates of Yonsei GSIS, and the ones we were primarily discussing were concentrating in trade and finance or management.

We were having a hard time explaining why this would be. Why would so many people who had taken their education to this level nonetheless be unprepared to begin their careers? What are they studying for, if not to help their job prospects?

I brought up, as I often do, leisure studies. Here’s an abridged excerpt from Thorstein Veblen’s The Theory of the Leisure Class that I’d had in mind:

The great, pervading human relation in such a system is that of master and servant. The accepted evidence of wealth is the possession of many women, and presently also of other slaves [i.e. servants] engaged in attendance of their master’s person and in producing goods for him . . .At the same time those servants whose office is personal service, including domestic duties, come gradually to be exempted from productive industry carried on for gain. . . This process of progressive exemption from the common run of industrial employment will commonly begin with the exemption of the wife, or the chief wife. . . By virtue of their serving as evidence of the ability to pay, the office of such domestics regularly tends to include continually fewer duties, and their service tends in the end to become nominal only. . . [T]here arises a subsidiary or derivative leisure class, whose office is the performance of a vicarious leisure for the behoof of the reputability of the primary or legitimate leisure class. . . his leisure normally passes under the guise of specialized service directed to the furtherance of the master’s fullness of life.

Compare this to a recent entry in the Stuff White People Like blog on picking fruit:

Many of you might be familiar with the process of harvesting a crop, some of its more intense variations are often referred to as “migrant labor” and “slavery.” Under these conditions, laborers are expected to work extremely hard in order to live up to large expectations about their fruit picking output.

When white people harvests a crop it’s known as “berry picking” or “pick your own fruit.” Under these conditions, white people are expected to work leisurely with no real expectations and then they pay for the privilege to do so. In other words, berry picking is the agricultural equivalent to a private liberal arts college. It’s no surprise white people like it, because much like a liberal arts degree it feels like you’ve done real work when you really haven’t.

Based on the same line of reasoning, I argued to my friend that those students that we know who have no intention of finding gainful employment in the near future and particularly those who lack even an idea about how to do so should be viewed as luxury accessories of their parents. In this way, I would say that raising one’s children in the suburbs, away from where gainful employment is performed and money is actually made, turns the sheltered suburban child into a human status marker for the parent. Among US baby boomers in particular, where there sometimes seems to be a marked lack of concern for one’s children’s economic success, and any higher education is anachronistically viewed as a gateway to one or another form of success, this appears to be the rule rather than the exception.

Of course this doesn’t hold true in every case, but then again if it did you’d probably already have noticed it and I wouldn’t need to write this, would I?

[Via http://joshinggnome.wordpress.com]

Anything but "Normal" according to David Rosenberg

2010-03-17T14:52:00.000+02:00

I have followed David Rosenberg, who is the Chief Economist/Strategist at Gluskin Sheff, for about 2 years. He is known to be out of consensus and really gives you an alternative look at where we are in this recovery cycle versus many of the main stream views that are currently circulating. In today’s morning note, Rosenberg highlights where we would be if this was a “normal” cycle:

Employment would already be at a new high, not 8.4 million shy of the old peak.
The level of real GDP would already be at a new cycle high, not almost 2% below the old peak.
Consumer confidence would be closer to 100 than 50.
Bank credit would be expanding at a 14% annual rate, not contracting by that pace.
The Fed would certainly not have a $2.3 trillion balance sheet.
The government deficit would not be running in excess of 10% of GDP or twice the ratio that FDR ever dared to run in the 1930s.
There would be a ‘clean’ 5-6 months’ supply of homes on the market, not the 21 months overhanging as is the case now when all the shadow inventory is included from the foreclosure pipeline.
The funds rate would not be near zero and one in six Americans would not be either unemployed or underemployed.
Mortgage applications for new home purchases would not be down 13.9% year-over-year (just reported for the week of March 12) on top of the already depressing 29.4% detonating trend of a year ago.

If you are interested to receive Dave’s morning note, you can sign up here: Gluskin Sheff

[Via http://leevecchione.wordpress.com]

China in Africa: coloniser or development partner?

2010-03-17T06:27:00.000+02:00

I just read an irritating article from CBSnews on China in Africa.

Irritating because it is filled with mistakes, emotional appeals and shallow analysis.

Irritating because most of the reader’s comments at the bottom of the article think that this is an excellent piece of writing.

*SIGH*

George Bush’s Aids policy has been a success and welcomed across Africa? Really? His no condom policy was great?

I think other people with more expertise beg to differ.

USA does not have baggage like Europe does in Africa? Does this author know anything about Africa’s history? Ever heard of Patrice Lumumba? As one of the commentators says:

“The United States does not carry baggage from a colonial past as do European countries.? Not from a colonial past, yes. However, propping up dictators who abuse their people and ruin their countries?that is a baggage. So is overthrowing revered leaders like Kwame Nkrumah and spearheading the assassination of beloved patriots such as Patrice Lumumba.”

Then you have the scare tactics such as the false claim that China has leased half of Congo’s farmland (media articles always seem to need to put some random statement with no evidence on this type of “neo-colonialism” by China these days).

In essence the author of the article argues that China’s involvement in Africa is driven by nothing other than China’s quest for political and economic power. There is no such thing as good will involved.

“Roads in Nairobi, notorious for their clogged traffic circles, are being widened and repaved with large billboards telling Kenyans that the work is a gift from the people of China. The fact that the roads will ease congestion for Kenyan motorists is an afterthought to the benefactor which requires modern infrastructure to move African commodities to ports for shipment to China.”

Yes, China’s investments do serve Chinese interests aswell as African interests, but this is the concept of “win-win” situations. And what is the problem with a situation in which both sides can derive benefits?

Isn’t this the very fundamental principle of a free market economy? With out the possibility of win-win outcomes there would be no trade and no interaction. In short there would be no market for anything.

One could of course say that genuine altruism entails the willingness to do something (such as building that road in Kenya) without there necessarily being any advantage to oneself. But let’s be realists here for a second.

Do you honestly think that any country out there is making investments and giving off aid in a purely altruistic manner? The driving force behind any country’s actions is self-interest, in particular in democratic countries because those elected governments are accountable to their people above all other things.

I am not saying that individuals working with aid is doing so with their own country’s national interest at heart. I know lots of people who work in the aid industry, my parents included, who are genuinely committed to assisting other countries in reducing poverty and improving living conditions. But the state as an apparatus does not have a heart or emotions or feelings of empathy even though individuals working within these institutions may have this.

The article also talks about how America must come forward as a leader and promoter of human rights and liberty. Similar to what I said above, do you really think that America is just in Afghanistan to promote progressive values?

No doubt this is part of their job there, my brother is in the army in Afghanistan. I know he is there because he truly is fighting for these values and with the aim of creating a better place for Afghanis.

But again lets ask ourselves, why Afghanistan? Why not Sudan? Why not Swaziland or the DRC?

The answer is that a government will have to prioritize, the American’s can’t use military pressure everywhere it is needed. They have to prioritize. And of course they will prioritize Afghanistan which pose a security threat to America. I don’t think this diminishes the importance of their work in promoting human rights in Afghanistan, but my point is that in this world where resources are limited, governments will always have to prioritize. And they will prioritize in their national self-interest first and foremost.

Something else that comes up constantly when China’s aid to Africa is mentioned is how they give indiscriminately to all governments including those who are sanctioned by the West such as Mugabe.

However I object to this vilification of China in an attempt to whitewash Western donors relations with African countries. Of course, just because the West has also been engaged in some pretty gruesome behaviour in Africa it does not make it right for China to do so aswell. But I think we need to look at what is actually being done.

Unlike the West, China are not engaged in creating coup detat, assassinations or install a puppet government in Africa. They are enablers yes, but not actively scheming out political plots . They are simply businessmen, not politicians in a quest for global dominance.

China is pragmatic and adhere to the principle of non-interference. This means that they enable African governments to do as they like. This can be bad in the case of Zimbabwe and Sudan. On the other hand, it also enables African governments who genuinely want to develop their economies to persue the policies they would like to. This is in starch contrast to Western donors who impose policy prescriptions in the name of good governance.

The emergence of China as an alternative source of funding is not just welcomed by sanctioned leaders such as Mugabe, but also by those governments who have their own nation’s interest at heart. Decades of SAP’s have not lead to a miraculous change the economies of African countries. The imposition on policy restrictions and prescriptions is void of any democratic value (that the West proclaims to promote).

Looking at the development process of economies such as Korea, Taiwan and Japan one finds that the exact policies used to develop those economies are being banned as conditions for aid in Africa. Despite having good intentions, these policies have amounted to nothing spectacular. The conditions imposed on aid-recipient countries has denied developing countries to implement necessary policies for their economic development, thereby rendered them aid-dependent.

China thus presents an opportunity for countries wishing to emulate the development process of success countries such as Korea, Japan and even the United States itself. Of course, “bad” countries such as Mugabe will not improve with Chinese funding, but at least the “good” ones will now finally regain some bargaining power ower their own policy decisions.

Does this mean that I am against imposing conditions on aid? No.

I see no reason why tax payers in Norway or Sweden should pay for Mswati’s children to go shopping in Paris and Milan. A lender and giver should of course have the right to be assured that the money goes to the people it was destined for, not some greedy individuals pocket. So conditions for transparency and corruption control are important measures. I do think it is immoral to back up regimes that violate human rights.

But the conditions attached to Western aid today does not stop at that. The conditions extend into policy decisions, social policy, economic policy, matters that we normally would consider the job of an elected government to execute are now being imposed by donors abroad. The West tiptoe around issues such as the discrimination against homosexuals (a true human rights issue) in the name of “cultural sensitivity” but instead demand the recipient economy relinquish any economic policy autonomy.

What do we really mean by good governance? A government that is transparent and combats corruption? A government that do not violate human rights? Or a government that opens their trade borders for Wester products? A government that follow specific economic policies that Western countries deem in their best interest (African’s can’t think for themselves seems to be the reoccurring motto amongst Western donors). To give a quote from one of my favourite economists, Erik Reinert:

“Race was convenient for explaining poverty in the colonies, thus exonerating the colonial prohibition of industrial production from blame….African’s were not poor because they had not been allowed to industrialize, they were poor because they were black. Today we when we emphasize the role of corruption n in creating poverty, we are a little bit more politically correct. African’s are no longer poor because they are black, they are poor because blacks are corrupt. In the final analysis the difference is marginal”

Ah that heavy white man’s burden.

We don’t have to choose between ignoring recipient government’s actions completely and imposing our own policies on them. If we want to demonstrate the value of democracy and freedom, the best way is to practice what we preach.

[Via http://shanghaisigrid.wordpress.com]

Repo Fraud

2010-03-15T22:50:00.000+02:00

Yesterday, I wrote about the possibility of control fraud existing in the for-profit trade school industry. The weapon of choice when it comes to control fraud is accounting fraud.

This morning, I read an article from the Christian Science Monitor about how Lehman Brothers employed accounting fraud “amid [the] financial crisis.”

It appears Lehman was using repurchase agreements (repos) “at the end of each quarter to make its finances appear less shaky than they really were.”

A repurchase agreement is a financial instrument or contract. According to Phillipe Jorion, a repo is:

An agreement between two parties under which one part agrees to sell a security and buy it back on an agreed-upon date and at an agreed-upon price. In return, the seller receives cash. The difference between the original sale price and the subsequent repurchase price acts as interest on a loan, which, when expressed as an interest rate, is commonly known as the repo rate. (Jorion, p168)

It appears Lehman created “a materially misleading picture of the firm’s financial condition in late 2007 and 2008.”

Repos also face interest-rate risk, and especially extreme risks if you leverage them. Should yields go up, the value of the securities goes down. (Jorion, p34)

(Reference: Big Bets Gone Bad, Jorion, P., 1995)

[Via http://trungchatter.wordpress.com]

From The NY Times: Ross Douthat- "Paul Ryan's Redistributionism'

2010-03-15T14:46:00.000+02:00

Full post here.

Some people insist that the current health-care bill is the only option to resolve rising health-care costs…does the Ryan plan address their needs enough? An enormous bill and an enormously complicated debate.

Also On This Site: From Youtube Via Althouse-’Paul Ryan: Hiding Spending Doesn’t Reduce Spending’

The most knowledgable articles I’ve read that make the case for some government involvement are here:

Atul Gawande At The New Yorker: ‘The Cost Conundrum Persists’

[Via http://chrisnavin.wordpress.com]

Receiving Stolen Goods - How the Law is Practiced

2010-03-15T06:52:00.000+02:00

Did you know that you could be prosecuted for the possession of stolen goods if those goods were given to you for free, whether or not you knew it was stolen?

Okay, here is the law: If you bought goods without knowing it was stolen, you wont be prosecuted. In order to be prosecuted you have to be aware that the goods were stolen when you bought them.

The problem is, however, that the State has made the assumption that if you dont pay for goods – that is, you received them for free – then you should have suspected they were stolen and turned them down. Ultimately, the State can prosecute you for receiving stolen goods that you didnt even know were stolen… simply because you received them for free.

The only difference, the only variable, between the two scenarios is… the price!

Should you inadvertently accept goods that were stolen though you didnt even know, whether or not you received them for free makes the sole difference between prosecution and not!

I find this to be highly socialist. Here is a perfect example within our society of laws being highly socialist.

Never mind the fact that the goods were stolen… it is apparently an irrelevant variable. What matters is whether or not you paid for them. What matters is whether or not the exchange was one of capitalism. What matters is whether or not the parties participated in the capitalist agenda, whether there is… sales taxation? (I guess?!)

I am quite upset about this. Not that I have anything against socialism in general, but the shear fakery of our own society… of the corruption of a capitalism government to interfere with law. Socialism.

For law to step in and dictate to me that any price other than zero is the only acceptable price for a transaction… well, that is just interference by the government in the economic trade of goods. How is that anything short of socialist?

I understand that thieves should be prosecuted. I understand that stolen goods should be given back to their rightful owners. I understand that anyone who willingly accepts stolen goods (for any price) only aids the thief’s and promotes the problem of thievery. But I dont get where the government gets off letting the naive go simply because they paid while prosecuting other naive simply because they didnt. How does that make sense? How is that fair or just?

Why doesn’t the judicial system just step in now and dictate prices altogether? It makes more sense to regulate all transactions rigorously just to prevent thievery, instead of prosecuting people for taking advantage of a good deal… which, by the way, is what capitalism and entrepreneurship is all about.

Can an individual protect themselves from prosecution if they have a receipt proving the transaction occured, even if the price on the receipt is a zero?

[Via http://cogitoergocogitosum.wordpress.com]

Centre for the Study of Education and Work - Update 12th March 2010

2010-03-12T22:48:00.000+02:00

Wor, work, work

CENTRE FOR THE STUDY OF EDUCATION AND WORK – UPDATE 12th MARCH 2010

EVENTS

BRIDGING THE GAP: RALLY IN SUPPORT OF SUDBURY STEELWORKERS

USW Local 6500 is in the hometown fight of their lives. Our members have been fighting strong for 8 months.

On Monday, March 22nd at 4:30 pm we are having a massive rally to show the solidarity and support that our local has from our members, our community, our province, and from around the world. There are 30 delegates from around the world (Brazil, Germany, Australia, Geneva, Indonesia, Zambia, and more) who have already committed to attending. Can I count on you to attend as well? Can I count on you to share this message with everyone you know?

We are looking for community members, organizations, clubs, unions, political groups, and community businesses to attend. Show up in large numbers and bring your banners, your flags and your signs! We need your help!

For more info, email: usw@uswsudbury.ca

+++++

NORMA SCARBOROUGH: TRIBUTE TO A PRO-CHOICE FIGHTER

Saturday, April 17

3:00pm – 5:00pm

Koffler House

569 Spadina Avenue, Room 108, Toronto

Join us to pay tribute to Norma Scarborough’s life of feminism and pro-choice activism. Memorial donations will be accepted for the Canadians for Choice Norma Scarborough Fund.

For more information or to donate to the fund, please contact Canadians for Choice at info@canadiansforchoice.ca

+++++

THE FIFTH (AND FINAL) ANNUAL SOUTHERN ONTARIO SOCIAL ECONOMY NODE SYMPOSIUM

April 12 (8:30-4:30) and 13 (8:30-3:30)

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto,

252 Bloor St W. (St. George subway station), Ground Floor Library

Keynote:

The Social Economy: A New Way to Manage Wealth

Michel Labbé, President and Founder of Options for Homes and more recently Options for Green Energy.

Interactive sessions with academic and community researchers who will share their work and insights

Short workshops on topics relevant to social economy organizations

A preliminary program is below and more information is posted on our website: http://sec.oise.utoronto.ca/english/symposium_10.php

There is no cost for this event. However, registration is required: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/95GS5NH

+++++

THE GREEN ECONOMY: PRACTICAL STRATEGIES TO CREATE COMMUNITY-BASED ECO-ECONOMIES

Taught by Brian Milani, author of Designing the Green Economy: the postindustrial alternative to corporate globalization

30 Hours over 10 weeks, Thursdays

April 8-June 10, 6 to 9pm

Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE)

U of Toronto, 252 Bloor St. W.

(directly above St. George subway stop)

Eighth Floor, Room 8-214

Cost: $180

The Green Economy is an overview of radical potentials for reorganizing the economy for social and ecological purposes, while at the same time showcasing exciting alternatives being built right now in the existing economy.

The premise of the course is that today’s social, economic and environmental crises are not problems of management, but of design. A process of economic conversion is necessary to create economic structures which facilitate human self-development, social justice, community enrichment and ecological regeneration.

Sponsored by the Transformative Learning Centre, OISE.

For more info: http://www.greeneconomics.net/cour2010.htm

+++++

APRIL 28: DAY OF MOURNING FOR INJURED, KILLED, OR SICK WORKERS

On Christmas Eve 2009, four workers in Toronto were killed and one seriously injured when a construction swing stage snapped in half and plummeted 13 storeys to the ground. Another 400 Ontario workers were killed the same year and about 374,000 were injured.

On Wednesday, April, 28th, we remember our sisters and brothers who have been killed on the job or who have died as a result of workplace diseases. This special day also offers an opportunity to re-dedicate our efforts to achieve healthier and safer workplaces and seek justice and fair compensation for injured workers.

For more details visit: http://www.whsc.on.ca/events/day_mourn.cfm

+++++

CITY IS A SWEATSHOP: MARCH 19 & 20

As we prepare to flood the streets of Toronto on May Day (May 1, 2010), and as we build our resistance to the G8/G20 Summits coming to Toronto in June 2010, this series of events will lay out a vision for a city that includes everyone that lives, works, loves and struggles here.

More details: http://toronto.nooneisillegal.org/node/422

+++++

NEWS & VIEWS

WE’VE SOLD OFF ASSETS SO OFTEN, BRANCH PLANTS ‘R’ US

In a global economy, a country needs global companies, headquartered at home. Canada doesn’t have enough of them… Other countries know this. In Brazil, Vale is shielded from unwanted takeover by the government’s “golden shares,” which give authorities veto power. No Brazilian government would dream of allowing Vale to fall into foreign hands, whereas Ottawa waves takeovers through like a cop trying to speed traffic along.

To read more: http://bit.ly/bGCUnJ

+++++

WOMEN’S EQUALITY HAS DECLINED UNDER HARPER TORIES

Describing it as a “Reality Check,” labour and women’s groups have issued a stinging new report describing Canada’s lagging performance in achieving women’s equality.

The report, entitled Reality Check: Women in Canada and the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action Fifteen Years On, cites regression in everything from pay equity to child care. It was prepared by the Canadian Feminist Alliance for International Action and the Canadian Labour Congress.

To read more: http://www.nupge.ca/content/womens-equality-has-declined-under-harper-tories

+++++

WORKERS, BANKING, AND CRISIS IN MEXICO

A striking feature of the global financial crisis is the narrow and technical focus on banks and financial corporations without accounting for ordinary workers in these institutions and in society more broadly. Yet through the intensification of work, workers have also underwritten the profitability of finance. This has been generally ignored.

In the nexus between workers, banking, and crisis, the case of Mexico is revealing due to the nature, evolution, and history of its emerging capitalist banking system. Examining the conditions of workers in Mexico is particularly important because it helps to explain not only the increase in bank profitability leading up to the global financial crisis but also the capacity of banks in Mexico to weather its worst consequences.

This focus seeks to complement, not replace, analyses concerned with large interest differentials, rising commissions and fees, as well as usurious consumer and state debt servicing.

To read more: http://www.socialistproject.ca/bullet/323.php

+++++

BUDGET 2010: OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY

This budget includes two major measures: another tax cut for business and ongoing cuts to federal public services.

Check out CUPE’s comprehensive budget analysis on everything from climate to child care to EI to education, water, women and more.

To read more: http://cupe.ca/budget/budget-2010-overview-analysis-summary

+++++

VIDEO: TORONTO RALLY FOR STEELWORKER LOCALS 6500 AND 6200 ON STRIKE AT VALE INCO

Three years ago, Vale – a giant multinational corporation, based in Brazil – bought Canada’s mining company Inco. Now it has forced 3,500 miners and smelter workers in Sudbury, Port Colborne and Voisey’s Bay out on strike. It’s demanding huge rollbacks in pensions, nickel bonus and seniority rights.

+++++

JOB POSTINGS

COMMUNICATIONS COORDINATOR, RAINBOW HEALTH ONTARIO, TORONTO

Deadline: March 29, 2010

Full job description: http://www.sherbourne.on.ca/PDFs/jobs/RHO-10-0207-Comm-Coordinator-FT.pdf

+++++

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISOR, OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL ADVOCATE FOR CHILDREN AND YOUTH, TORONTO

Deadline: 5pm March 15, 2010

For more information on this position follow this link: http://www.charityvillage.com/cvnet/viewlisting.aspx?id=209592&eng=true&

+++++

COMMUNITY URBAN FORESTRY INTERNS (3), SUMMER, GREENHERE, TORONTO ON

Start Date: June 14 2010

End Date: August 13 2010

Employment Type: Full time

Closing Date: March 19 2010

Organization: GreenHere http://www.greenhere.ca

Please submit your cover letter and resume by mail or email to: info@greenhere.ca

Mail: 21 Blackthorn Ave., Toronto, Ontario M6N 3H4

(from Canada’s Green Job Site, http://www.GoodWorkCanada.ca)

++++++++++++++++++++

++++++++++++++++++++

OUR MANDATE:

The Centre for the Study of Education and Work (CSEW) brings together educators from university, union, and community settings to understand and enrich the often-undervalued informal and formal learning of working people. We develop research and teaching programs at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (UofT) that strengthen feminist, anti-racist, labour movement, and working-class perspectives on learning and work.

Our major project is APCOL: Anti-Poverty Community Organizing and Learning. This five-year project (2009-2013), funded by SSHRC-CURA, brings academics and activists together in a collaborative effort to evaluate how organizations approach issues and campaigns and use popular education.

This is a moderated list. To send postings to the list, please email them to rhonda_sussman@yahoo.ca

To change your subscription settings, visit http://listserv.oise.utoronto.ca/mailman/listinfo/csewbroadcast

For more information about CSEW, visit: http://www.csew.ca

*END*

Posted here by Glenn Rikowski

The Flow of Ideas: http://www.flowideas.co.uk

MySpace Profile: http://www.myspace.com/glennrikowski

[Via http://rikowski.wordpress.com]

Fluvanna’s Budget Progress Continues

2010-03-12T14:53:00.000+02:00

By William J. Des Rochers, Fluvanna Field Officer

Fluvanna’s Board of Supervisors met in work session on March 10th to set the framework for the FY 2011 budget. By the end of the meeting, the Board agreed to hold a public hearing on increasing real estate taxes by ten percent (to $.55 per $100).

The supervisors also opted to take $600,000 from the county’s “savings account” (the undesignated fund balance), restored $2 million to the school budget contribution. They retained another $ 600,000 in budget cuts. Collectively, the measures would erase what would have been a $3.9 million deficit.

Questions surfaced after the meeting as to what exactly transpired. There was no clear articulation from the Board, for example, that the tax increase was to fund the school bond debt – there is a dedicated line for that purpose in Fluvanna’s budget. Previously, five cents of the real estate tax had been set-aside for debt retirement: the aggregate debt requirement for FY2011 is 17 cents. By FY 2013, that figure will rise to 21 cents.

The Constitutional officers were seen asking what happened to their accounts. For the most part, staff recommended no cuts for those budgets, but supervisors did not confirm that. Indeed, very little was confirmed. Supervisors wanted to restore proposed cuts to the social services department, but it still stands to lose a one employee.

At one point, one supervisor supported his ideological polar opposite to spend down the fund balance, only to realize after the meeting that his stated position would have double-taxed constituents.

As it stands now, the two liberal supervisors: Ms. Mozell Booker (Fork Union) and Mr. John Gooch (Palmyra) emerged the clear winners. The school system was only reduced by $1 million – despite the fact that three supervisors were prepared to cut $1.5 million. There will be only minimal layoffs in non-school employment. The School Board makes its own budget decisions.

Just where all this ends up is anyone’s guess. The broadest of outlines are there but the practical implications for taxpayers and county functions remain elusive.

[Via http://freeenterpriseforum.wordpress.com]

April 12's the day for Caribbean Airlines to Take Over Air J

2010-03-12T06:37:00.000+02:00

“We are working with Caribbean (Airlines) towards a transaction date concurrent with our major schedule change on April 12, 2010,” Nobles disclosed.

He, however, acknowledged that the date was a “target” and could change.

“The plan is that all employee positions at Air Jamaica Holdings Ltd will be made redundant effective with the transaction date,” he revealed.

He said Caribbean Airlines will be financially responsible for the transition operation after the transaction date.”

via Jamaica Gleaner News – April 12’s the day – Lead Stories – Thursday | March 4, 2010.

“The plan is that all employee positions at Air Jamaica Holdings Ltd will be made redundant effective with the transaction date,” he revealed.

That line especially doesn’t bode well for the already overcritical unemployment rate. This deal doesn’t seem to have any lasting advantage to Jamaica. Yes, we get it of our books but over 10,000 people stand to lose their livelihood not to mention the prospect of the resultant dependence on external entities to work in our interest.

It is understandable that we must divest. It makes logical sense! But wisdom must be practiced in every avenue of governance. This is an incredibly frustrating situation, but our Government is increasingly ignoring us, so what can we say?

We must be careful with this administration, it is increasingly seeming to have someone’s interest in mind that is not ours. Stay alert out there!

[Via http://thinkingjamaica.wordpress.com]

The Recovery that Wasn't Quite

2010-03-10T22:51:00.000+02:00

Anthony Randazzo at Reason Magazine writes a fairly length piece on how the economy, despite the White House’s reassurance, is not recovering. In fact,most of the conditions that cause the economic collapse are still in bad shape, and unemployment is still increasing.

“The Recovery Act has created jobs and spurred growth,” President Barack Obama said in a December speech trumpeting the success of his economic policies. “We are in a very different place today than we were a year ago.” Lawrence Summers, director of the White House National Economic Council, concurs. “Everybody agrees that the recession is over,” Summers said that same month on ABC’s This Week.

But a closer look reveals those appealing numbers sit on a dangerously shaky foundation. Economic growth in 2009 was largely dependent on a historic level of government spending that even the president acknowledges is unsustainable in the long term. The root problem of mortgage delinquencies has yet to be worked out. Bank lending is sparse amid ongoing uncertainties surrounding regulatory reform. As a result, manufacturers and small businesses continue to struggle with limited credit. All that translates into historic job losses and a bleak outlook for meaningful growth in 2010 and 2011.

Worst of all, many of the core problems in the housing, banking, manufacturing, and service sectors are being perpetuated and exacerbated by the very federal programs the president credits with jump-starting economic growth. Instead of confronting the roots of the crisis head on, as Obama has repeatedly boasted of doing, his administration and the Democratic Congress have kicked the can down the road, postponing the day of reckoning for real estate, the auto industry, and the toxic mortgage-backed securities that were at the heart of the economic meltdown. These unsolved problems will keep looming over the economy until they’re finally addressed.

Take the time to read the whole thing.

[Via http://republicanheretic.wordpress.com]

This morning will be brief, and straight to the point.

2010-03-10T14:48:00.000+02:00

Regarding an immutable component of human nature.

I was going to chatter about a certain interesting food product from a NY restaurateur, segue into Obama fucking up our nations space program, but instead I’ll simply base this off of that human nature bit I’d have flowed in to.

The fact that, no matter what culture you belong to, there is a word or phrase for this simple fact: What goes around, comes around. This article triggered the thought, not the whole point. You know you can’t get good fruit from bad seed, plant seed in bad ground it doesn’t grow, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, you get what you give, all of that “karmic platitude” bullshit that has existed since the first form of life existed on Earth however you believe that happened. You can push yourself on things but so far before they push back. The law of returns is as intrinsic now as it ever was.

I’ve hopefully given you something to mull. Think of my meaning, and tremble.

[Via http://cmblake6.wordpress.com]

Negri & Hardt on Lenin and "Empire"

2010-03-10T06:23:00.000+02:00

Antonio Negri and Michael Hardt’s concept of “Empire” is “in contrast to imperialism, Empire establishes no territorial center of power and does not rely on fixed boundaries or barriers…Empire manages hybrid identities, flesible hierarchies, and plurarl exchanges through modulating networks of communication” (xii-xiii). While I’m not convinced, one of its most important turns in their argument happens here:

Lenin recognized finally that, although imperialism and the monopoly phase were indeed expressions of the global expansion of capital, the imperialist practices and the colonial administrations through which they were often pursed had come to be obstacles to the further development of capital. He emphasized the fact, noted by many critics of imperialism, that competition, essential for the functioning and expansion of capital, declines necessarily in the imperialist phase in proportion to the growth of monopolies. Imperialism, with its trade exclusive and protective tariffs, its national and colonial territories, is continually posing and reinforcing fixed boundaries, blocking or channeling economic, social, and cultural flows…Luxemburg argues in economic terms, imperialism rests heavily on these fixed boundaries and the distinction between inside and outside. Imperialism actually creates a straightjacket for capital–or, more precisely, at a certain point the boundaries created by imperialist practices obstruct capitalist development and the full realization of its world market. Capital must eventually overcome imperialism and destroy the barriers between inside and outside.

It would be an exaggeration to say that, on the basis of these intuitions, Lenin’s analysis of imperialism and its crisis leads directly to the theory of Empire. It is true, nonetheless, that his revolutionary standpoint revealed the fundamental node of capitalist development…either world communist revolution or Empire and there is a profound analogy between the two choices (Negri and Hardt, 233-234).

I would still argue that we live in a time of imperialism and that, while it could be true that we are in Empire (or that we are headed toward Empire), the increasing militarization of the world by the U.S. and its continued use of “hard” and “soft” power to further extract more variable capital is a counterpoint to this. However, it could be noted that this over stretch of U.S. power is due to it trying to stem the “tide of Empire.” I’m assuming Multitude has an answer to these questions.

Source

Hardt, Michael and Antonio Negri. 2000. Empire. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

[Via http://mymill.wordpress.com]

Enough Already: Venting Over Four Decades of Right-Wing Activism

2010-03-08T22:26:00.000+02:00

Today, Richard Nixon would be considered a flaming liberal. In Nixon’s day, Barack Obama would have passed as a typical conservative; except, if you remove considerations of civil rights from consideration, he might even be a fairly hard line conservative.

The Bill of Rights is pretty well shredded. Freedom of speech is fast becoming the special privilege of corporations. Economic pressures, fueled by greedy shareholders, have eviscerated the press, leaving freedom the press virtually meaningless.

The most important part of the Fifth Amendment is probably the takings clause, which is interpreted to restrict the right of the government to regulate property.

Perhaps, the Second Amendment is the most important amendment, giving people the right to arm themselves with anything short of a nuclear weapon.

All this right-wing nonsense might be somewhat understandable if it were necessary to provide for a good life; however, the economy is becoming as dysfunctional as the ridiculous political system.

Watching people rebel politically or in the streets in Iceland and Greece, while people in the United States express their frustrations with the tea party, makes me noxious. My problem with the tea party movement is one of political jealousy. Many of the participants share my frustration at the class bias of the system, but they seem confused, mistaking late capitalism or socialism. Sure, the tax system is rigged against ordinary people, but it works in favor of the same people who are running the tea party movement.

Unfortunately, the left (if there is such a thing) seems unable to articulate a strong call to action. Instead, our anger bubbles up periodically — today, over the evisceration of education; tomorrow, over an escalation or extension of the war; or maybe even the promotion of a protest candidate, but a systematic program is nowhere to be found in the public dialogue.

What is to be done (but vent)? I hope not.

[Via http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com]

Not Paranoid When They are Out to Get YOU

2010-03-08T14:44:00.000+02:00

House Democrats are suspicious of each other, none of them trust their Senate counterparts, and vice versa, and a Soviet mole has infiltrated the highest levels of British intelligence. Sorry, that last part is from a John le Carré thriller, though it might take a novelist to do justice to the ObamaCare-induced paranoia that now engulfs Congress—not to mention the double game that the White House may well be running.

Last week President Obama sanctioned “reconciliation,” a complex tactic that would jam ObamaCare into law on sheer power politics. But what if this gambit is really a false-flag operation, meant to lure House Democrats into voting for a bill that they would otherwise oppose? That’s the question many rank-and-file Members are now asking themselves, and they’re right to be worried.

The cleanest option for Democrats would be for the House to pass the Senate’s Christmas Eve bill word for word, thereby bypassing a Senate filibuster under the normal rules and forwarding ObamaCare directly to the Rose Garden signing ceremony. But Speaker Nancy Pelosi has repeatedly said the votes simply don’t exist for the Senate bill as is.

Liberals don’t think the middle-class insurance subsidies are large enough. Big Labor hates the “Cadillac tax” on high-cost health coverage because extremely generous benefits typically come out of collective bargaining. The pro-life Democrats led by Michigan’s Bart Stupak can’t abide federal funding for abortion. Everyone detests the enveloping corruption, such as the Nebraska Medicaid bribe for Ben Nelson, which has become so politically toxic that the opponents now include Ben Nelson.

Thus the convoluted scheme the White House has mapped out. The House would first pass the Senate bill, and then pass a reconciliation bill that addresses these objections—in effect converting the process into a makeshift and unprecedented vehicle for amendments. Mrs. Pelosi can’t rope in the 216 votes she needs without an iron-clad promise of another round of Senate action.

Iron-clad promise—or double-cross? After all, the White House would much prefer the Senate bill, because by its lights the cost-control programs are tougher than what the House prefers. And from a political perspective, a bill that can be signed immediately and that the press will portray as an historic achievement is far better than the drawn-out and gory battle that would be reconciliation. Republican Senators will have many procedural knives at their disposal, and the process will force Democrats to cast further votes and spend more months debating a deeply unpopular bill.

In other words, perhaps Mr. Obama has embraced this reconciliation two-step only to renege as soon as the House gives him what he wants. While some House Democrats would be furious, they’d soon be defending the Senate bill by necessity against the GOP. The moderates who vote for it might be collateral damage, but the White House has already concluded that this is the price of building its cradle-to-grave entitlement citadel.

Mr. Obama’s closing arguments are lending credence to rank-and-file fears that they’re getting played. Democrats are telling reporters that Mr. Obama has been telling them in private meetings that his Presidency, and the party’s claim to any achievement, rests on passing a bill. With barely any mention of substance, the right bill is any bill, by any political means necessary.

The White House also announced that it now wants the House to pass the Senate bill by March 18, before Mr. Obama departs for a foreign tour in the Pacific. But this barely leaves any time for the Congressional Budget Office to score Mr. Obama’s reconciliation fixes. Then there’s House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer’s far-fetched suggestion to Mr. Stupak and the antiabortion bloc that Democrats can take care of their concerns in a third bill, which everyone knows will fail in the Senate if it even comes to the floor.

In this wilderness of political mirrors, anything is possible. Spooked Democrats shouldn’t be surprised if they wind up being double-crossed for the ostensibly greater good of Mr. Obama’s legacy. (WSJ)

Trust Mr “Hope and Change”?

Mr “No tax if you make less $250,000 per year”

Mr “they (Republicans) have no ideas”

Trust Me.

Why ever would you be worried?

Look at that face. And he speaks so well (and put on a Negro Dialect when he wants to- according his aides).

It’s Not all about Him.

Then you read this, also in The Wall Street Journal:

Everyone knows Democrats are planning to use the budget reconciliation process to get ObamaCare through the Senate. Less well known is that Democrats are plotting add-ons to that bill to get other liberal priorities enacted—programs that could never attract 60 votes.

One of these controversial measures rewrites the Higher Education Act to ban private companies from offering federally guaranteed student loans as of this July. Congress has already passed laws in recent years discouraging private lenders from making loans without a federal guarantee. But most college financial-aid departments still want private companies to originate and service the guaranteed loans. That’s because the alternative—a public option run by the Department of Education—has been distinguished by its Soviet-style customer service.

The Democratic plan is to make this public option the only option mere days before colleges send out their financial aid packages to incoming students. The House and Senate budget committees issued instructions last year to look for savings in the student-lending program, so the Democrats have prepared in advance their excuse to jam these changes through the reconciliation process.

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan portrays the changes as eliminating subsidies to private companies, but no one should misinterpret these comments to mean that taxpayers will benefit. The plan that passed the House includes $67 billion in “savings,” according to a Friday estimate from the Congressional Budget Office. But the bill also has more than $77 billion in new spending.

The net loss to taxpayers isn’t limited to $10 billion. After inquiries from Senator Judd Gregg (R., N.H.) and Rep. John Kline (R., Minn.) last year, CBO explained that “savings” estimates are artificially high because of government accounting rules that undercount the risks of default when the government is originating the loans, while the new spending estimates are artificially low. This could be significant. Many colleges oppose the government plan specifically because the feds don’t make the same effort to prevent defaults that the private lenders do.

Taxpayers have even more reason than academics to fear the impact, in part because the public may not learn the details before this plan becomes law. Democrats aim to bring their education revolution to the floor without a committee vote or even a hearing in the Senate.

Democrats might seek to enact the bill passed by the House last summer, an even more ambitious plan sketched out in the President’s 2011 budget, or some mystery meat prepared by chef Tom Harkin, who chairs the Senate education committee. So far he won’t tell anyone what’s on the menu, and he may not have to. The limited 20 hours of reconciliation debate will no doubt be consumed by ObamaCare, but another new entitlement could be hustled into law under cover of bloviating lawmakers.

Both the House-passed bill and the President’s budget increase Pell Grants and also create automatic future increases, so individual grants will grow faster than inflation every year. Colleges will pocket the money by raising tuition, so we have yet another federal program ensuring that higher education costs continue to rise even faster than health-care spending.

Mr. Obama’s budget also calls for making Pell Grants a mandatory entitlement. At least now they are subject to annual appropriation and their growth can be slowed when tax revenues fall or other priorities rate higher. Mr. Obama would prefer spending that is quite literally out of control.

“Various changes that the President proposes to the Pell Grant program would add another $0.2 trillion to the deficit between 2011 and 2020,” CBO said Friday. That could turn out to be a very optimistic estimate if unemployment remains high and more people seize the educational opportunity to which they have just become entitled. Still another taxpayer trap will be sprung if the President’s proposal to forgive some debt incurred by “overburdened” borrowers is included in the bill.

The federal education takeover is another example of the Democrats’ willingness to use whatever tactics are necessary to advance their agenda to concentrate power in Washington—while they still can.

Then you have your answer.

[Via http://indyfromaz.wordpress.com]

'The Palladium of Liberties'

2010-03-05T22:50:00.000+02:00

Second Amendment — Still ‘The Palladium of Liberties’

“The ultimate authority … resides in the people alone. … The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation … forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition.” –James Madison

James Madison’s words regarding the “ultimate authority” for defending liberty (Federalist No. 46) ring as true today as in 1787, when he penned them.

Likewise, so do the words of his appointee to the Supreme Court, Justice Joseph Story, who wrote in his 1833 “Commentaries on the Constitution,” “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”

In recent decades, the “enterprises of ambition” and “usurpation and arbitrary power” among Leftist politicians and their corrupt judicial lap dogs have become malignant, eating away at our Essential Liberty and our constitutional Rule of Law. This has never been more so than since the charlatan Barack Hussein Obama duped 67 million Americans into seating him in the executive branch.

Now more than ever, armed Patriots must stand ready, in the words of Patrick Henry, to “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel.”

In June 2008, the Supreme Court, by a narrow 5-4 vote (Scalia, Alito, Roberts, Thomas and Kennedy), reaffirmed, in District of Columbia v. Heller, that the people’s inherent right to keep and bear arms is plainly enumerated in our Constitution. The Court ruled that the Second Amendment ensures an individual right, that DC could not ban handguns, and that operable guns may be maintained in the homes of law-abiding DC residents.

This was an important decision affirming the plain language of our Second Amendment and its proscription against government infringement on “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.”

However, Heller pertained to a federal district, and while our Bill of Rights has primacy over state and municipal firearm restrictions, a Supreme Court case to give judicial precedent to that primacy has yet to be decided.

In his dissenting opinion in Heller, 89-year-old Justice John Paul Stevens expressed concern that the case “may well be just the first of an unknown number of dominoes to be knocked off the table,” should “the reality that the need to defend oneself may suddenly arise in a host of locations outside the home.”

One might only hope!

This week, the Supreme Court heard arguments in McDonald v. Chicago, the next test case for the Second Amendment, which will determine if Chicago’s onerous gun restrictions are in violation of the Constitution’s plain language prohibition of such regulations by states and municipalities.

Otis McDonald, the 76-year-old plaintiff in this case, is challenging Chicago regulations that make it unlawful for him to keep a handgun in his home for self-defense.

My colleague Dave Hardy, a scholar of constitutional law, particularly the Second Amendment, summarized the arguments as follows: “McDonald v. Chicago illustrated the dichotomy between a government of laws and a government of men. One wing of the Court (perhaps the majority) looked to the essential enumeration of the right to arms; the other seemed to argue that since they, as powerful individuals, did not care for the right, or thought it was one of the Framers’ bad ideas, they could disregard it.”

That is an apt summary of how all cases are handled by the federal judiciary.

Typical of Leftmedia summations, The New York Times opined, “At least five justices appeared poised to expand the scope of the Second Amendment’s protection of the right to bear arms.”

Expand?

Only the most uninformed opinion would suggest that asserting the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms in Chicago is an expansion of the Second Amendment’s scope. But considering the source…

Mr. McDonald’s lawyers insist that the 14th Amendment’s “privileges or immunities” clause (“no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States”) is grounds for overturning Chicago’s gun restrictions, and those of other states and municipalities across the our great nation.

Unfortunately, trying to establish a 14th Amendment precedent in and of itself undermines the authority of our Constitution’s Bill of Rights.

Recall that there was great debate among our Founders concerning the need for any Bill of Rights. It was argued that such a specific enumeration of rights was redundant and unnecessary to the Constitution and that listed (and unlisted) rights might then be construed as malleable rather than unalienable, as amendable rather than “endowed by our Creator” as noted in the Constitution’s supreme guidance, the Declaration of Independence.”

To that end, Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 84, “I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. … For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?“

Madison prevailed, however, and for clarity he introduced a preamble to the Bill of Rights: “The Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution…”

In other words, the Bill of Rights was enumerated to ensure against encroachment on our inherent rights. Read in context, the Bill of Rights is both an affirmation of innate individual rights (as noted by Thomas Jefferson: “The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time…”), and a clear delineation of constraints upon the central government.

Note that the Second Amendment is unique in the Bill of Rights in that it expressly asserts the “right to keep and bear arms” is “necessary,” more so than just important, to a “free state.”

But as feared by those who argued such rights should not be recorded, the “despotic branch,” as Jefferson presciently dubbed the judiciary, has endeavored to limit those enumerated rights by way of convoluted and fraudulent precedents.

Likewise, citing the 14th Amendment’s “privileges or immunities” clause suggests the Second Amendment was and remains amendable. That, of course, is an egregious affront to Essential Liberty — but that’s the way the game is played today.

Currently, 41 states issue concealed handgun carry permits, or don’t require them at all, for law-abiding citizens. Seven other states allow local municipalities to determine gun restrictions; Illinois and Wisconsin do not even allow that option.

Much of the debate about the need to infringe upon the right to bear arms is framed in terms of safety. Gun-control advocates argue that more guns equal more crime. Those advocating for more lenient gun laws argue that more guns equal less crime. Only one of these diametrically opposed views can be true.

While the latter group is factually and demonstrably correct, basing Second Amendment arguments on the issue of safety is as fallacious as attempting to assert the 14th Amendment argument.

In an editorial this week, the conservative Washington Times opined, “The year after the Supreme Court struck down the District of Columbia’s handgun ban and gun-lock requirements, the capital city’s murder rate plummeted 25 percent. The high court should keep that in mind…”

No, they should not.

After all, violence is a cultural problem, not a gun problem, and certainly not a Second Amendment problem.

What each member of the Supreme Court must only keep in mind is the plain language of the Constitution, the Second Amendment and the First Principle of his or her oath: “To support and defend our Constitution,” as should everyone who has taken that oath.

Accordingly, the High Court should find that the gun restrictions in Chicago, and by extension, those in any other state, are in direct violation of the inherent rights of the people “to keep and bear arms.”

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!

Mark Alexander

Publisher, PatriotPost.US

(To submit reader comments click here.)

*****

(Please pray for our Armed Forces standing in harm’s way around the world, and for their families — especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who granted their lives in defense of American liberty.)

Well stated sir, as always.

[Via http://patricksperry.wordpress.com]

Poverty in Africa

2010-03-05T14:44:00.000+02:00

Here’s an interesting paper by Sala-i-Martin and Pinkovskiy on the evolution of poverty in Africa, and it contains exciting news: African poverty is falling and is falling rapidly since 1995 (this contradicts some older research). Moreover, this evolution is remarkably general across African countries, and not just explained by good news in a few large countries. Poverty is falling even in countries which are believed to burdened by geography, bad agricultural prospects, a history of slave trade, war, or lack of natural resources. And, to make the good news complete: income inequality has also decreased, and the Millennium Development Goal of halving the proportion of people earning less than $1 a day will be achieved on time.

You can see the reduction of the poverty rate in Africa in the graph below. From a “high point” of almost 45% of the population surviving on less than $1 dollar day in the late 1980s, that rate has fallen to 32% in 2006. How come? As you can also see in the graph, at the time poverty began to decline around 1995, GDP began to grow (after three decades of zero or negative growth). The graph shows a striking correlation between poverty reduction and economic growth, something I have written about before in another context, see here and here).

(source)

Of course, poverty reduction isn’t the automatic result of GDP growth only. Other factors are at work as well, but the paper is silent about those.

What’s interesting is that this African growth spurt since 1995 (probably briefly interrupted by the current recession) isn’t just caused by growing oil prices. If that had been the case, we would have seen increasing income inequality, since revenues from the oil industry are typically appropriated by elites. But that’s not the case. Poverty reduction has gone hand in hand with a reduction in income inequality. You can see the extent of this reduction in the following two graphs from the paper:

(source)

This means that growth has benefited the poor. However, although the reduction in poverty is impressive, it’s not quite as impressive as poverty reduction in China.

More on poverty measurement. More poverty statistics. More on Africa.

[Via http://filipspagnoli.wordpress.com]

Goodwin Liu and Invented Rights

2010-03-05T06:28:00.000+02:00

I just read of the nomination of Goodwin Liu to the 9th Circuit of Appeals in San Francisco. This is the “fruits and nuts” Court, as Mark Twain would have said. It’s the one that has had more cases overturned by the Supreme Court than any other in the country and typically takes the most progressive view of the law and the Constitution of any of the Appeals Courts. You never know what zany new interpretation of the Constitution they’ll come up with.

Professor Liu comes from Boalt Hall at UC Berkeley, which is situated in the middle of San Francisco, basically Ground Zero for liberal lunacy. The term Ground Zero has been used three times, really. Twice at the end of World War II when the atomic bombs were dropped on Japan, and on 9/11. It should not be used lightly.

But Professor Liu has some rather odd beliefs. According to Wikipedia he is a nationally recognized left wing activist. He argues that welfare rights reflect the “contingent character of our collective judgments rather that the tidy logic of a comprehensive moral theory”. He clerked for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and his views are, according to all of his supporters “ambitiously progressive”. In other words, the ends justify the means and the law means what we say it it means. New rights are conjured up out of thin air in such an environment.

Dr. Liu has taken a noble stand on the right to a good education. As we see our schools fall apart in the blue states, perhaps his decisions would emphasize excellence of opportunity rather than outcome. Frankly, the deck is stacked against a good education in most large urban school districts. Bureaucracy, cronyism, and incompetence are the enemies.

But when I read one of his key papers, “Improving Title I Equity Funding Across,States, Districts and Schools” there is no discussion of how the money is spent. Equity is important, but wisdom is more important. As the former chair of a parochial school finance committee which consistently outperformed the public schools in our area, we found long ago it is not about how much money is spent but how it is spent. California spends over $8,000/year per public school student but has one of the lowest graduation rates in the country. The parochial schools spend half as much with double the graduation rate.

On the 2nd Amendment, he argued with Hillary Clinton that in seven instances in the past 10 years, the Supreme Court’’s interpretation of that amendment is wrong. Virtually every time the Court upheld the 2nd amendment, he argued against the majority. As we see Chicago’s gun free zone laws being challenged in the Supreme Court, this should give one pause. After all Washington D.C. and Chicago have the highest gun crime rates in the country despite having been gun free zones since the 1970’s. Where is the logic there in Mr. Liu’s opinions?

The Constitution is a funny thing. It was conceived of by some of the most brilliant minds in history and may be the document closest to political perfection yet conceived. And yet it contained certain flaws. The whole 3/5th’s thing really bothers me still. And yet at the time there was a certain logic. It was the world as it was but even then Washington and Jefferson, slave owners both, knew that the central evil of slavery was wrong and was a time bomb for future generations. But it would be for those later generations to resolve. That is why the bar for the amendment process was set as it was, a 2/3 majority of all of the states.

One of the central tenets of progressivism is to short circuit this process. Progressivism is centered on using subterfuge and the legal process and litigation by any means necessary to forward the agenda. The ends justify the means. But the Constitution is a pesky thing. There are established procedures for enacting change and the they get in the way of the agenda.

By all accounts, Professor Liu is a brilliant and skilled attorney and a decent and just man. But if he does not understand and agree with the central tenets of the Constitution, he should not be confirmed.

[Via http://oceanaris.wordpress.com]

--How to improve America

2010-03-03T22:49:00.000+02:00

An alternative to popular faith

Much of the proposed cost to improve health care will be paid for by cuts in Medicare payments to doctors and hospitals. Clearly, that should improve health care.

Next, we can improve education by having our federal and local governments cut teachers’ salaries and support of schools.

Then, we can improve public safety by cutting police salaries.

And, we can strengthen our army by cutting military pay and investment in weapons research and production.

We can improve America’s brain power by deporting all those aliens, and not letting anyone new in.

And, we can increase medical drug research by restricting profits of those rich, greedy, pharmaceutical companies.

And, we can improve our infrastructure by spending less to repair roads and bridges, along with the electrical and communications grids.

And we can achieve energy independence if the government limits those rich, greedy, oil companies’ profits, while spending less on solar, wind, geothermal and atomic power.

Finally, we can increase economic and jobs growth by raising taxes, particularly on businesses and on the rich (people making more than $200,000 per year).

Taking all of the above steps will complete the anti-deficit, anti-government, xenophobic, Tea Party, class warfare, populist initiatives that seem so much in the news.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

[Via http://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com]

Prepare for Retirement

2010-03-03T14:53:00.000+02:00

Most people worry that they won’t have enough for retirement … often too late. Since I know there are lots and lots of books and articles out there that attempt to tell you how much you need to save, I’m going to approach this a little differently. I’m going to tell you about a basic philosophy that will enable you to get prepared. This article is for those not yet retired. It is based on the wisdom of those of us already retired.

A Little Background

Our future is one that has a lot of uncertainty. In my opinion, the old guidelines to invest in the stock market since it will always go up over the long haul, don’t necessarily apply anymore. Have you looked at what has happened in the market? Usually your broker will show you the following chart plotted on a logarithmic scale but I have chosen to show you how it looks on a geometric scale since the log scales tend to hide a very important characteristic. Take a look at the following plot of how the market has performed.

If you had invested starting after the 1930s and then were to retire before the late 1990s, the market would have been a pretty safe bet regardless on when you retired. But if you put your money into the market anytime in the last ten years, you would be gambling. The big question is “what will happen before taking out your money” and lately the market has been very erratic. Given everything else that has gone on, I expect the market to be very erratic in the future. Why I think this is most likely might be the subject of another blog article, but for now, I don’t think you should plan on steady increases. Another thing to consider: the Japanese market has been down for about the last 25 years … markets can go down and stay down for a long time.

All you can do is attempt to save prudently and to build up a large enough cushion to enable you to better survive the coming roller coaster.

Government Support

I imagine that they will eventually partially fix both social security and Medicare, but don’t expect it to be as generous. Take a look at the following site and follow some of the links for more information.

Medicare and Social Security in Trouble

What Should You Do?

Prepare for a roller coaster ride. If you were planning to take a major roller coaster ride, I don’t think you would eat a big meal right before hand; in fact, you would probably be very conservative in your eating. You need to do the same with your life style.

The key to having enough in your retirement years requires two adjustments. First, reduce your style of living long before you retire, and second, save a lot more money than you think you might need. Actually the two go together. If you reduce your current style of living long before retirement, you will be able to save a lot more. The goal is to reduce your style of living, right now, down to a level that you think you can maintain after retirement. That way you won’t be making a big adjustment when you retire. You probably won’t hit it “right on” but you can reduce the difference considerably and you will have lots of time to learn to make the necessary adjustments while you are saving significantly.

Have you thought about adjusting your expenditures to the point where you are living on only 50 to 80 percent of your income and saving the remainder? You probably can and should. If you think this is too hard or that you can’t do it, take a look at the blog referenced below. It is written by a guy who retired very early in life. If you read the articles in his blog, which I highly recommend, you can see how he managed to retire early and how he lives now. It will give you some ideas on how to do it. Even if you prefer to not be so radical, a little of his philosophy will take you a long way towards being better prepared.

Click here to look at: Early Retirement Extreme

[Via http://everchangingperspective.wordpress.com]

On the Rightness of our Actions

2010-03-03T06:19:00.000+02:00

As I approach my 100th post since beginning this blog, I wish to turn my attention to a serious of topics that I hope will culminate in an exceptional 100th post. With that said, I would like to turn our attention towards the topic of the rightness of our actions. Simply put, whether our actions can be judged morally correct or wrong in relation to their ends, or the action simply. The famous expression taken out of context from Niccolo Machiavelli is that, if the ends justify the means then they are morally acceptable. However, at what point does the end of our actions because judged solely on our means of attaining that end? This statement presupposes that there is nothing else by which to judge our actions. Can this, though, be the case? Friedrich Nietzsche supposes that there is nothing by which we can judge our actions, rather it is up to the Uebermensch to impose his own variety of morality. This question was brought to me through the television show The Secret Life of the American Teenager. As some of you know, I watch that show as well as others including fellow ABC Family show Greek.

To provide some background, a few episodes back the main character Amy went on a date with a boy, named Jimmy, who she met at the beginning of this part of the season. Amy, fearing that things may become sexual and not wanting to take chances of becoming pregnant yet again acquired condoms. One thing lead to another and Jimmy found those condoms after him and Amy spent time discussing how they did not want to have sex until marriage. Amy was unaware that Jimmy found the condoms, and so when Jimmy stopped calling her she began to worry. Enter her “friends” who suggested that Jimmy didn’t like how Amy kisses, which upset her. The father of her son John, Ricky, attempted to reassure Amy before offering to let her “practice” kissing with him. She accepted the invitation. In the episode three weeks ago, Adrian, who is dating Ricky, found out that Amy was carrying condoms and began to suspect she was having sex. She immediately jumped to the conclusion that Amy and Ricky were having sex, which prompted Adrian to have sex with Amy’s ex-boyfriend Ben. Two episodes ago Adrian and Ricky confronted each other, and she informed him that she had sex with Ben to get back at him for having sex with Amy. Ricky responded by admitting, finally, that he and Amy had simply kissed.

Adrian’s belief is that the sex she had with Ben, the simple act of sex, is in itself not wrong. She also admitted that her having sex with Ben as a way of getting back at Ricky and Amy for allegedly having sex was also not wrong in of itself. Finally, she struggled with admitting that it was wrong even after finding out Ricky and Amy only kissed. This is what lead me to ponder the question of whether or not our actions simply must always be morally right, and whether or not our ends justify the actions we do take. In this instance, whether or not Adrian is correct in assuming that sex by itself is morally wrong, and whether sex as a means of getting back at someone for hurting you is itself wrong.

There are some actions that are themselves not morally wrong in and of themselves. Rather, we must look at the motive behind the act in order to find whether or not that act was acceptable. In this situation, we must look at the kind of sex rather than simply stating sex as sex itself is not morally wrong. However, sex outside of marriage is generally looked upon as being wrong and this is the kind of sex that Adrian and Ben engaged in. This leads to our general quandary, by what means can be determine that sex outside of marriage is wrong, and if we can determine what causes sex out of marriage to be wrong then we can determine if other actions can be judged based on the same principle.

By what measure can we determine sex outside of marriage to be wrong? Our first investigation must turn to the conventional law, often refered to by the Greek word nomoi. These are those laws created by man in his particular political situation. And since, at least in the United States, sex outside of marriage is not classified as illegal it cannot be wrong in accordance with American law. However, some acts are wrong based upon the assumption of the nomoi and therefore those actions can be judged solely based on whether or not the law prohibits them such as murder. The second source by which we can judge actions is through the revealed Law. That Law given to us by God. Since there are three Laws, the Old Law, the New Law and the Law of Islam, we must investigate whether any permit or prohibit premarital sex. Since it is commonly accepted by followers of the Law that premarital sex is in fact wrong, then we can assume that they receive this from the Law itself. This is the same for those things which the Law also explicitly prohibits.

Yet, what of those who are not followers of the Law? Those of non-revealed religions or those lacking faith all together. By what means can they determine the rightness of their actions? It would appear as though parts of the revealed Law are not only found in the books of religion, as there are those nations not followers of the Law that have nomoi akin to the Law. By what means was the Law revealed to them? Accordingly, there are two prime manners in which the Law is revealed to man and that is that it is implanted on his very soul or through his observation of nature. Since according to the revealed Law all things are created by the same God, it must be assumed that all living things are subject in part to the same law. It is found often in nature that some animals mate only with one partner for their entire life. Many pack animals have one male, with multiple females and often times only one female for procreation. In particular with wolves, there is an Alpha male and Alpha female, both are solely responsible for the continuation of their species with each other. Other animals, such as the Emperor Penguin, mates for life similar to the method by which humans have traditionally mated. Therefore, if we may find examples in nature of the revealed Law then we must assume that it is revealed to all. We may therefore find whether or not our actions are right, not by their ends, but by the Law.

But what then of those people who will state, “But those animals were not married, they simply have sex with each other; can I then mate with only one person the rest of my life as they do?” But what is marriage except the act of procreation? God said unto Adam and Eve, “Go forth and multiple” signaling that they were bound together as man and wife. So to, according to both the nomoi and the Law, when two people get married they are not married until they consummate the marriage. Similarly one might state, “There are examples of animals who have sex with multiple partners, how then can we say that as humans we are expected to remain with only one person?” All living things have an impulse inscribed on their hearts to continue their species through the act of procreation. That impluse exists in human beings, but what makes us different than those animals is that we have the faculty of reason. Our reason controls our passions, and leads us to our right actions. Those who deny that there are overruling laws by which all living things must adhere are denying their reason in favor of their passions. As humans, we are called to advance our species in it’s highest form; quality rather than quantity. This is why God only created Adam and Eve, for if it was intended that man should procreate with multiple females then it would have been proper for God to create multiple females.

It is therefore clear that our actions are not judged only by whether they right or wrong in relation to their ends, but that there is a standard by which we may judge our actions simply either through conventional law or the Law revealed to us either by religion or through nature, rather than in relation to their ends.

[Via http://federalistpublicola.com]

U.S. consumer spending up again (Reuters)

2010-03-01T22:45:00.000+02:00

Reuters – U.S. manufacturing grew in February, though more slowly than expected, while consumer spending rose for a fourth straight month, showing the economy continued a modest recovery.

U.S. consumer spending up again (Reuters)

Mon, 01 Mar 2010 21:16:13 GMT

Okay boys and girls let’s not get too excited here. One of the reasons that spending is up for the fourth straight month is because of the stimulus money that has been going out to the general citizenry. Another reason is because the credit card rules have been rewritten to make it easier for people to use their credit cards. So let’s not take spending increasing for four-month as anything indicative of a possible recovery because it’s not you’re looking at false information if you think that it is. Just remember there was a huge amount of stimulus money that when out the Pvt. citizenry. Additionally, the credit card rules were rewritten so the credit card companies can’t act like money lenders anymore. So those two things together are fueling a little bit of the purchasing going on.

But let’s look a little more closely. When you consider that companies. When they get their annual budget which they do in January these budgets are primarily mapped out months before the budget actually goes live January. And when it does go live there are certain sections during the calendar year. When certain amounts of people are to be hired and certain expenditures are to take place. So consequently, what you’re looking at is a certain amount of hiring that is going on, pursuant to the budgets of these companies have.

Is the hiring that these companies doing indicative of any kind of recovery? Not likely. And the reason it’s not is because it has to be considered that $800 trillion of market loss was realized in the third business quarter of 2009. Now that is the amount of loss that was initially impacted by the American market system. That loss has not permeated the entire American economy yet. Which means it has not spread out or extended through all the businesses in the United States that are going to realize a share of that loss. That loss only represented the amount of loss of all the companies in the entire American market system was worth cumulatively realized I the in the third business quarter. So as far as accounting, we have in one column $800 trillion of market loss. And now all the money that has been lost are all the value that has been lost is going to begin to expand through all the different companies across centers of the United States, which will take about a year. And as it does that you will see various degrees of more loss in many different ways.

Now, the smart companies, will begin to shift a lot of their in-house profit margins and the cost of their goods and services in order to try to run, what is called in a more lean or cost-effective manner. Which means they’re going to start trimming some of the waste. Because that’s going to be the key to survival over this year, where they United States market is going to try to deal with the $800 trillion of market loss that realized during the tail end of 2008 and all the way through 2009.

But that’s the actual truth about what’s really going on. That’s not all the happy talk that the people on Wall Street are the bankers were the government or anyone else is telling you. I’m telling you what’s really going on because of a financial analyst and I know what’s really going on, because that’s what I’ve done for 42 years. I’m not being paid to tell you anything by some political group or business group and telling you the truth. Because I happen to care about business I happen to care about the United States. And I happen to love the world and the people in the world, because I’m basically at the point where I almost have 1 foot in the grave. And so as a result. I’m going to do everything I can to give back as much as I can to the world before, I suddenly not here.

It’s like I wrote in some of my articles were all during my life. I did make a lot of money, because I wasn’t interested in making a lot of money as a financial analyst. I was more interested in giving people who never had the benefit of financial analysis, financial analysis. And like I said, I’ve got a 1930s shortwave radio that I got in barter for one contract. I’ve got a Steelcase desk that I got in barter for another contract. And as I also wrote in one contract. I was working for a man who only owned one gas station. And when I was done, projecting his growth over the next 18 months in figuring out some ways to do things with the extra money he would have every month. He said that he didn’t really have the money to pay me. And I said well why don’t you take me to dinner. And he said that’s it. And I said well, don’t you feel pretty good about getting the kind of financial help that mostly large companies get most of the time? And we shook hands and went to dinner. And that dinner, I actually said to him I said, you are buying me dinner and will call it Jake. And as I said in this other article Jake is a term that used to be used during the Depression in the United States. Between two parties to indicate that everything was going to be square or okay. And so I have used it a lot in my life, because that was one of my father’s favorite terms.

So, what I’m telling you is the truth. Now the important question is whether or not there is going to be a recovery and when. Any recovery that might take place depends on two very significant factors.

1. The first thing that has to happen is that companies mean the banking industry and the insurance industry and most of these morons who are living really high on the hog, need to get it through their brains that they don’t stop demanding these high and compensation packages they’re going to basically ruin the economic system to the point where it simply going to capitulate and fail. And that is one very potential scenario of what lays ahead in the future. If the American market system and the global system doesn’t put up and shut up and stop being interested in how much money can get out of the system rather than how to sustain the system, no recovery will take place. And what will actually happen is that the global system in part or totally will in fact capitulate or fail.

On the other hand give the wealthy and upper class realize that it is in their best interest not to act like a bunch of selfish moneygrubbing bastards what to do everything they can to try to maintain some degree of economic equivalency between the classes as a kind of humanistic and social responsibility pursuant to economic solidarity and stability, then of course the potentiality of a recovery very well might take place sometime around 2011. Meaning that after a full year of the American market system and the global system dealing with the tremendous amount of losses that the whole world is realized. And thereby as a result giving the global economic system. The time that it needs to allow those losses to move all the way through the different processors and all the companies so they can finally be put to rest. Then you’re talking about a possible restructuring but to do a restructured prior to that happening is a mistake because the money hasn’t hit the wall yet.

I mean, the header trillion dollars just in the United States market alone isn’t going to finally make it through all of the cost centers and the companies in the United States where it’s being realized as a result of the initial loss and so probably sometime around December 2000 can and it might take until January of 2011 will, once it does, then we get back to this first consideration whether or not the psychology in the general marketplace of United States is still going to be one of selfishness or if it’s going to change to a point where the movers and shakers are going to realize that if they continue the way they are they won’t have economic system. And so at that point they will do whatever they can to try to make it work. That’s the first consideration.

2. The second consideration is one that has to do with political regimes and political agendas. In the global economic system. You don’t have a completely totally free market system. You have some systems that are what they call a proprietary, or semi-representative free market system. Now one of the system like that is China. Because while China actually enjoys a certain degree of free market activity. The Chinese government is primarily a proprietary representative pursuant to the free market system in China because China of course is a communist nation. The same is said of the Russian economy. When you have nations where they are not totally of free market oriented society, and these countries enter into the free market system, these countries enter into the free market system on the basis of proprietary agreements. And what that basically means is that the psychology in these countries such as these communist countries. With all do respect to these countries and I mean that sincerely have a tremendous hesitation on their part in trusting the total free-market system or capitalism. And of course it makes sense because they’re communist by orientation.

So consequently, for example in China. When China enters into an agreement with companies in United States. The agreements are written with a proprietary rider. And what this basically means is that China is willing to take the risk and entering into an agreement with free-market oriented companies in the West such as United States. But China at the same time, because of their hesitancy of trusting the capitalistic ideology doesn’t want to be put into a position of being untenable pursuant to its own political agenda pursuant to how it runs its country. So, what it does is it sets up the agreements with companies in the United States or companies in the West that when they do business in China if the companies inside China begin to lose money is not the Chinese to lose that money. You of the business is losing money in China it is the headquarters the company in the country where the company is headquartered that actually takes the loss.

Now this is not true. Oddly enough, when a communist country is dealing with another communist country in a semi-proprietary or representative free market system. So in other words, when China is doing business with any of the exchanges or countries in the Pacific off market system, which is all of those countries throughout Asia and their market system’s. These are systems that are in many ways communistic in one way or another. So under those circumstances, there is a little bit of an easier feeling on the part of China. But doing business with those companies. And so as a result, the proprietary agreements are not quite as restrictive as they are when China for example is doing business with countries from the West.

And the obvious question is how do I know this? And the answer to that question is that when pioneer linen supply was doing business as a linen supply company in Cleveland Ohio, my father was a corporate lawyer made many business arrangements with companies overseas to get linen for the wealthy restaurants and so forth in Cleveland Ohio. One of the places that he got linen was from China. So all my father made the legal agreements with China for the linen to be shipped to pioneer. It was I who actually was on the phone with the Chinese once or twice a month to work out the details of shipments and things of that nature. And I did this for probably 15 years. So I got to know how businesses overseas relate to the American market system and vice versa.

So this is the other consideration, which in fact, is somewhat of a major consideration, because inherently in a lot of the communistic countries today. You have a certain amount of corruption that is different than in the Western market systems. And that is because of the nature of how the political superstructure in these countries operates. So that’s why for example with Russia, the government in Russia is run by two extremely intelligent gentleman. And while the United States and Russia have never agreed on political agendas and things of that nature doing business with Russia is really not difficult and is really fairly simple when you ignore a lot of the political rhetoric. And doing business with China can be somewhat the same way. It’s just that you can’t go into any of the conversations with any degree of attitude that places you in the conversation. In any other way other than in complete and total equal footing with the other party. Meaning that when you’re on the phone with someone from China doing business with them. You have to be talking to them like the two of you are exactly equals. And nothing more. That’s how it works.

So these are the two considerations. One consideration is will the psychology of the robber barons in the American market system. Chill out to the point where these idiots with all the money in the American market system will suddenly realize that if they continue to act like selfish bastards, they will destroy the American market system? And the other consideration of course is whether the economies in some of these proprietary, and/or semi-representative free market systems such as China are going to be able to sustain their own market viability, pursuant to the nonproprietary or less limited proprietary agreements that they have within their own market regions. So that those agreements will be enough to keep their market as solid as possible, while the Western markets are working out the rather catastrophic losses that have taken place.

And of course the other element in all this is that people in the Western market system don’t understand that a lot of people in the communistic or the semi-representative free market systems are looking at the capitalistic market systems. And with a certain degree of respect laughing at the free-market systems, because when you watch the market activity in the overnights when I say overnight the mean like the Nikkei and the Hang Seng, use the different types of market activity pursuant to what they’re doing than you do in the American and Western market systems. And this is because the semi-representative market systems have been much more conservative and less reactionary to the catastrophic losses that are going on, and they have been much more restrictive with regard to compensation. And have a great deal more control over compensation than does the free-market system.

And so consequently, a lot of people in the communist countries tend to laugh a little at the free-market system. Because we’ve been acting in the free-market system like a bunch of pigs trying to rush up to a trough to see who could eat first. So, these are the kinds of dynamics that the market is really dependent on. And it’s not what we’re being told by the fancy brainiacs with all the money you claim to be real honest financiers or financial analysts, because are basically lying to. I’m not. But then I don’t have any agendas. They do.

And for anyone who was wondering why I haven’t talked about this earlier in my life. I have. It’s just that most people weren’t listening. I’ve actually been talking about the entire economic situation in the United States and around the world for 40 years. But most people kept thinking it was easier to laugh at me and call me stupid. And of course a lot of those people have gone out of business. It’s like when I was working as a contract analyst doing one small set of fragile analysis for local Price Waterhouse installation here in Cleveland Ohio. And when I got done with the analysis. I explained to one of the people at Price Waterhouse that I could see that there was some economic difficulty ahead for the company because they were like top-heavy as far as compensation packages. And that they had a kind of economic disparity going on within their own company. Between their lower management people and their hourly wages people versus their upper-level management and executives. And I tried to explain to them that if they continued operating that way that the disparity would simply get larger. And they asked why and I said, because when you are compensating people at the high-end of your employment meaning the upper-level management and executives so highly. You end up taking more and more money out of your cash flow, which leads to less money to be able to pay for your bid management and lower management people and your hourly employees. And I said, so, you eventually end up compromising them by having to fire some of them up. And so your company ends up in more trouble.

Their reaction of course was a tell me that I was full of crap. And they went ahead and paid me anyhow. And then of course, what I expected and told them what happened did happen. And they went bankrupt. And when they did one of the people that was in on the meeting. When I told him all this a few years before. When they were on the phone with me was very amazed. Because they couldn’t believe I was actually right. And my question back to them was if you didn’t think I was right than why did you hire me?

So consequently, that is what I see going on economically now as to whether any of you are going to read this. And as to whether any of you are going to even understand what I’m talking about. And also as to whether any of you are going to have so much ego inside yourselves that you’re not to be willing to accept that I might actually know what I’m talking about. Those are huge questions, because I have no idea if you will be able to move your ego out of the way to actually understand that I really might know what I’m talking about that I actually did live through these experiences. And I actually have been doing numbercrunching a financial analyst for 42 years. So I’m not stupid.

So yeah, if the powers that be in the economic community are so arrogant and so selfish that they will simply be much Whatever that I might actually know what I’m talking about, that probably no one will take advantage of what I’m writing here on the other hand. If people are willing to realize that I am almost 60 years old and I’m not stupid and never have been stupid. Then they will use some of what I’m writing here to have a better understanding of exactly what’s going on economically and not only the American market system, but the global system as well.

The choice is up to all of you. I am in bed. I basically have a hard time just walking around. And to not having breathing problems, which is normal. And I have a migraine. And that’s normal to, and I’m having trouble seeing out of one of my eyes because I’m legally blind in one eye. And that’s also normal.

But I’m still doing this dictation, because I really believe that is my duty as a human being to offer my assistance whenever possible. Just like I believe it’s my duty to stand up and defend women’s rights in the United States and around the world, because men and male oriented organizations have become so arrogant and so hateful that they are willing to treat women like nothing but cattle and to literally destroy them. Rather than to give them the same degree of freedom that they are taking for themselves.

And as I said, if I when I go to God or the creator that I’m the make darn will sure that when I go to God or the creator. But I go with a clear conscience. And that means as far as I’m concerned, if I have to die am when I die doing everything I can to defend women’s rights and to help women to stand up and demand from all of the societies throughout the world that they believe these women alone that they leave. You women alone, you don’t deserve to be treated this way you don’t deserve to be told what to do you don’t deserve to be treated as cattle and livestock you don’t deserve that at all and you certainly don’t deserve in the United States to have 5.5 million of you either raped or murdered every year. That’s not disgusting. That’s a national disgrace.

So that’s one doing all these things. Just you know.

Economic Fact Sheet (Current as of Jan. 2010)

1. The United States currently has a national debt in excess of $12 trillion.

2. The interest on the national debt is now in excess of $11 trillion.

3. The operating budget for the United States government is now in excess of $43 trillion.

4. The members of the United States Congress stole $200 million from the Medicare fund, which was going to go for cost-of-living increases to Medicare recipients, so that the members of Congress could have their paper medical records converted to computerized medical records. The attitude by the members of Congress was that they didn’t care if they murdered American citizens as long as they get the medical protection they wanted.

5. The Christian conservatives and the Republican Party are taking the stand that they do not want American citizens to have any kind of healthcare the of healthcare is extended to anyone that the Christian conservatives or the Republican Party does not like. And this is based not on constitutional law or the Christian conservatives and the Republican Party being patriots. It’s based upon the Christian conservatives Republican Party demanding that the American government understand that no Christian conservative or Republican Party member will in any way ever support the US Constitution above their Christian religion and above their Christian Bible. And so as a result, their Christian Bible and Christian religion says that healthcare should not go to Hispanic Americans or black Americans or Jews or Muslims or gay Americans or Native Americans or anyone who is an immigrant that the Christian conservatives Republican Party just doesn’t happen to like.

And so as a result, the Christian conservatives Republican Party members are trying to commit mass murder in United States by denying health care to millions of American citizens who are in desperate need of medical attention. But the Christian conservatives Republican Party doesn’t really care about that because as far as they’re concerned if they have to walk through rivers of blood to make sure that their Christian religion and their Christian faith is supported more than the Constitution of these United States and the Christian conservatives will do just that.

6. The current level of unemployment in the United States is now over 10%.

7. The current cost for liquidating the national debt is now in excess of $39,000 per person, which means that every man woman and child in the United States would have to pay at least $39,000 to be able to liquidate the national debt.

8. When you look at the history of United States from the American Civil War until present day you find that the Republican Party and Christian conservatives were in total and complete control of the United States government every single time there was a financial crisis from the American Civil War to present day. And that basically means that all the policy decisions that were being made by the American government during these times when these financial catastrophes were taking place were being made strictly by Christian conservatives and the Republican Party . And of course that’s all public record. And if the Christian conservatives or the Republican party say that these financial catastrophes were not their fault, That would mean that all the public statements that the Christian conservatives and the Republican party, were making during the times when all these financial disasters were taking place, to the news media and the general public were lies. On the other hand if they say that they were not lying then, that means that they are lying now. But either way you look at, the Christian conservatives and the Republican party are being found out for the liars that they have always been, and that they still are today.

9. As my financial analysis of the global economic system , in my see also section below, clearly shows, it was the Republican Party and the Christian conservatives under President Bush who gave the American banking industry $400 billion of taxpayer money and simply told the banking industry to use the money anyway they wanted to. And the banking industry did just that they use the money to pay for expensive gifts and presents and take vacations.

10. To date, the banking industry has only paid back $30 billion out of the over $500 billion that was given to them by the American taxpayers.

11. The issues of profitability indexing, pursuant to profit margins and per unit costs and customer bases as they relate to compensation packages throughout the entire corporate sector have not been resolved. That basically means that most businesses are being held hostage by upper level management and executive employees in their own companies who are demanding more and more for their compensation packages. As a result of this most companies are having to readjust their per unit costs for their goods and services in such a way so that what they are doing is pricing their services and their products. So that mostly the upper class and the wealthy will be able to afford them. And this is being done so these companies and corporations can get as much money into their company as possible.

But they are in fact forgetting one of the major factors which is that while most of the money that any company gets comes from the wealthy are customers most of their day-to-day cash flow actually comes from the middle and lower income customers. This is true regardless of where that company exists. So as a result of this most of the companies in the corporate sector are operating on what is known as a cash poor basis. And this basically means that since they are pricing their goods and services in order to get the most money possible they are foregoing pricing their goods and services so they will be more affordable to the middle and lower income customers, which actually provide these companies with their day-to-day cash flow. And so as a result, these companies don’t have enough money to pay for employees or many of the other day-to-day costs that come up.

This factor has not been dealt with in any country in the world at this time. Furthermore, these companies are refusing to be honest about their financial reporting. They are constantly using and accounting,/statistical variance, which is .5%. And .5% variance is such a large variance pursuant to statistical and financial analysis that you can basically drive a moving van through the space. That is allocated for plus or minus error correction in the statistical analyses and financial analyses that are in fact done with .5% variance. This is why I have never used that level of variance statistically or financially. I’ve always used .05% variance because it is such a small variance that the statistical analysis of the profitability analysis cannot be falsified. It is true that using .05% variance does require an additional 100,000 to 200,000 calculations in order to be able to complete the analysis. But when you consider that the final product is incredibly more honest and reliable. It’s worth it.

12. The banking industry has turned cruel. For example here in Cleveland Ohio Keycorp is taking a lot of pride and threatening senior citizens and kicking them out of their homes so that they can foreclose on the property. This is happening all over Cleveland Ohio and KeyCorp actually is one of the most hated banks in the entire state of Ohio. But KeyCorp is not the only one who’s doing this practice. Because was really happening is that banks all over the United States are basically threatening senior citizens with foreclosure to the point where suicides are now escalating and accelerating at an alarming rate. So badly that the medical community is swamped by the number of suicide calls they are getting. And this is all happening because KeyCorp and other banks like KeyCorp are basically taking the attitude that they don’t care how many men and women and children they have to murder. They just want their money.

When you consider these kinds of factors are going on in the banking industry you realized that the other thing that’s happening is that senior citizens and homeowners are becoming incredibly sick. Do becoming physically ill as a result of the horrible attitude that KeyCorp in other banks like KeyCorp are pushing on the citizens. And there is no help for this at all.

13. Additionally, the medical community is helping with this because we have a hospital here in Cleveland Ohio called MetroHealth that basically is working hard. Just like KeyCorp to threaten senior citizens and have them thrown out of their homes. So that they can foreclose on the property. And basically kill the individuals. I have been personally threatened by KeyBank and MetroHealth and have recorded conversations proving that.

So MetroHealth does all these commercials where they’re talking about how good a hospital they are and yet they have been sued a number of times for Medicare fraud. They have also been sued by their own employees for unfair business practices. And they have lost doctors so badly because they don’t treat their doctors very well either. Nobody likes MetroHealth.

And for the record, it needs to be understood that my grandfather’s brother, Dr. ally Maschke, was the director of medicine at mount Sinai medical center here in Cleveland Ohio until his death. And my cousin, Dr. Victor Vertese, was also the director of medicine at mount Sinai medical center until his death. Additionally, my grandfather, Maurice Maschke, and his business partner, Mark Hanna, who founded the Hana mining company, which became the 3M company, basically built mount Sinai medical center in Cleveland. And in addition to that, my father, Maurice Maschke Junior, was on the Board of Trustees at Case Western Reserve University, University hospitals of Cleveland, Cleveland clinic, and mount Sinai medical center until his death. And in addition to that, my father, Maurice Maschke Junior, and I., were partners and co-owners of pioneer linen supply company of Cleveland Ohio for 25 years until 1975 when we sold the company.

14. So given all of the foregoing as actual facts. The only reason that the accelerated growth has taken place is because certain industries in the United States have in fact been making money. Only because their industries are addressing sections of the population who are otherwise disenfranchised by most of the business sector. For example Tyco International is a business that specializes and fire prevention and warning systems and security systems. And of course they’ve done a really good job because people are scared to death and living in their homes and there are so many foreclosures going on that people are having to protect their homes because in most cities the number of police has dropped so badly because most cities are in a huge budget crisis. In Cleveland, Ohio, for example, the city went from 1,500,000 people down to approximately 400,000 people in only a matter of months. And conditions are so bad in Cleveland that Cleveland is now charging nine dollars a month just pick up our garbage.

15. Furthermore, as I predicted on May 21, 2009, the American market system had already lost approximately $500 trillion of market value. And, in my journal entry (see my LiveJournal entry of May 21 2009). Then on May 22, 2009, I accurately predicted that the American market system would lose approximately $800 trillion of market value. (see LiveJournal entries of May 22, 2009, entry #1, entry #2, and entry #3, ). And the market did lose that much money. So, I was right. As I have always said. In 42 years of being a financial analyst, I have never been wrong on any financial projection I have ever done. Just like I was not wrong in 2009, with the above projections, I am, by the like term, not wrong now.

So again, it’s really easy for people to talk about how well the market is doing that the foregoing represents the actual facts of what’s going on in business.

And as I said before, I have been studying the stock market since I was six years old. At age 6 I started studied the stock market at Prescott ball and turban here in Cleveland Ohio. With one of the partner broker’s, Bernie Towell, who was a personal friend of mine. And so every day for four hours every day and age 6 until age 16 I studied the stock market and learned economics and financial analysis . At age 16, while working and being a partner and co-owner of pioneer linen spy company in Cleveland, I did my first financial analysis and profitability analysis . It was done on the linen supply company’s of Cleveland Ohio. The analysis was so good that the results were used to program some computers at the time. And in 42 years and having been a financial analyst I’ve never once been wrong in any financial projection I’ve ever done. Not once. Just like I’m not wrong now.

In my financial analysis of the global economic system in my see also section below, I clearly show that the American market system was going to lose $800 trillion of market value in the third business quarter of 2009. I further substantiated this claim last January in January of 2009. When I explained that the American market system was going to take a huge hit in the third quarter and that it would come out to about $800 trillion of market loss. And that this was in fact in line with the Kondratieff wave . And in fact that’s exactly what did happen. Which means the analysts were wrong. And I was right.

Now, it’s important to remember that anyone can say anything about the market that they want. But being able to back up what they say takes an expert. And someone who understands the science of financial analysis. And that’s something I have been doing for 42 years.

Therefore, if you go ahead and look at all these factors without looking at all of the peripheral details than you are going to be responding to the information in a very symptomatic, or symptomatically oriented manner whereby you will behave to the information in an extremely reactionary way. By the like term, if you look at all of the information regarding economics throughout the entire global economic system in a problematically oriented manner you will be looking at the financial information in a more anticipatory manner. And much more pervasive rather than in a stereotypical or linear manner. And as a result, you will begin to understand that all of these different factors that I have brought forth in this article right now. Actually do justify what I’m saying that the American market system is on the verge of collapse. And that the economic system for Greece is about to go under. And that unemployment in Spain and France and England is running at almost 30%.

These do not make things look like they’re going good in the United States is basically doing nothing but lying about the economic they I went to school with most of the people who run a lot of these companies in the United States and who are working on Wall Street either went to school with them at Case Western Reserve why went to school with them at Fort Lewis college board went to school with them at southern Arizona school in Tucson Arizona. Or, I did business with them throughout my life.

So again, this is a reality check. And all I can say is, if you don’t believe what I’m saying that’s not a problem. Because you haven’t believe me, for 40 years, what I’ve been talking about all of these issues facing the economic system in the United States and the global economic system. So why would you believe me now?

But the fact is that just because you may not believe what I’m saying doesn’t mean that what I’m saying is not true. Simply means you are refusing or are not able to see the veracity in what I’m saying and that’s all it means.

The nuclear option by Obama, Pelosi, Reid on Health Care

2010-03-01T14:53:00.000+02:00

Apparently, according to the news the Democrats are going to attempt to use reconciliation. That method only allows for budget items so someone procedurally has to go through a cross out anything not budget related.

This is to me an interesting thing. As the president said if the people don’t like it that’s what elections are for. He forgets something, I think, and I could be wrong, that he’ll lose a lot of democratic support if he tries this. I could be wrong but it may happen.

Several outcomes are possible.

First, the news is wrong and this isn’t what they are going to do. A real option.

Second, it will pass in some unrecognizable form. The democrats will lose both houses in the process or you won’t be able to get a hotel room in DC due to all the protestors. Both are fine options with me.

Third, it will fail and President Obama’s approval rating will take a deeper dive than it already has.

I don’t see any of these except for the first as something beneficial to the President or the Democrats. They have to know this. I can’t see their angle. What are they trying to accomplish? Being able to paint the republicans as the party of no? Because they are doing what the polls show the American public wants at least on this subject? Confused at the real motivation here. If anyone has an idea what that motivation is please leave a comment and help me see it.

[Via http://dascienceguy.wordpress.com]

On Economics, Blogging my thoughts

2010-02-26T22:15:00.000+02:00

In the out-sourcing of labor, it is really to be wished that up and coming countries start getting decent jobs. But there are the transnational corporations, countries, and the global economy. When the corporations out-source labor they are getting very cheap labor, undermining the standard of living of the labor force in more developed countries. (I’ll leave out environmental regulations for now.) It should not be a zero sum game. Why should the labor of one country have to suffer for the sake of out-sourcing jobs? Corporations are of course accruing more profit by this practice. They do not have the real benefit of the labor in those countries at heart or in mind.

I forgot the exact figures that Jeffrey Immelt, the chair and CEO of General Electric, told Charlie Rose on TV (On Thursday, June 25th, 2009), but it was something like the financial industry, that is, Wall Street had grown to 47% of our economy while the manufacturing sector had shrunk to 11%. CEO’s should realize that if they destroy the middle class in this country, they also destroy one of the most lucrative markets in the world, thus hurting their own profits. He suggested that the CEO’s of our country try to balance these figures more and bring our industrial base to 20 or 25% of the economy as a goal.

All of this initiative, if it was not blown away in the wind, should however, think in terms of the global market. Rather than shrink the financial industry, workers should be encouraged to buy into stock and become beneficiaries or take the losses as well of the global industrial base. of course, blatant “bank robberies” by that I mean the way banks are short-selling on the country of Greece right now after knowing and hiding its debt and now standing to reap billions if Greece defaults, need to be stopped and prevented by the governments of countries.

Financial corporations that make their money in the stock market also have shares that can be purchased, of course, but the little investor, really investing for the sake of industrial growth and more productivity, versus the big financial powers that can game the system, need to be protected. The mutual funds help them somewhat, but one gets the impression that the hedge funds and other fancy financial firms leave others with the short end of the stick.

But labor ought to be encouraged to become part of the stock market and partially have ownership of the corporations. CEO’s and management needs to stop taking a lion share of the profits out of the pockets of individual shareholders. Now these have also become middle class and the holders are not merely the great pensions, institution, and the rich.

When jobs are outsourced, labor there ought to receive access to shares in the stock market as much as the middle class and labor here. When labor here is helped by stock market income they too will become middle class. But real investment would not be so much of a gamble if so much irrational speculation and gaming the system was not going on.

When productivity grew in the global market place and and when investment for productivity in the financial industry became reality for the global labor force, the industrial base could grow for many countries and the labor could also enjoy the profits. In consort with corporations countries have to figure out how to guide this growth and not allow industries to do the race to the bottom in terms of environmental regulations and wages. D’Angel Rugina argued that if the irrational speculation, that is, the speculation were taken out of the stock market, then the real investment in productivity would produce full employment. Applying that to the global market place is not utopic for our computer enhanced consciousness.

[Via http://peterkrey.wordpress.com]

The economy did not grow!

2010-02-26T14:54:00.000+02:00

The propagandists are out again claiming that the economy grew in Q4 last year.

It did not grow. One has to keep in mind that GDP is a measure of spending. With the trillions that have been borrowed and spent by the Obama administration it is not surprising that would show up in the GDP.

The reality is that the country continues to lose jobs, there is no manufacturing base, the US consistently runs massive trade deficits (we buy more than we sell) and Obama has been increasing spending deficits and the debt more than any other in the history of the world.

How is it possible that the economy could grow? Saying that is like saying that someone who is in debt should go out and max-out their remaining lines of credt, get some more cards and max those out, take out a second mortgage and spend it all on a vacation. That way when their statements come they can look and say, wow, look at how much my econoomic activity grew, I must be doing great!

That may seem ridiculously silly but it is in fact exactly what has been going on. The time is not long before all of that stops because nobody is willing to give that person any more money and that holds for countries as well. The Chinese just dumped almost $40B in US treasuries, they are not buying more, they have plans to buy nearly 200 metric tons of gold from the IMF and they have already chastised Obama and Geithner for their inept economic policies. Chinese students actually laughed out loud at Geither during his presentation. And the rest of the world is talking about moving away from the US$ as the reserve currency.

This economy is a sham and the rest of the world is waking up to that and when they do this country will be left in utter shambles. It will look a lot like Chavez’s Venezuela, Castro’s Cuba, the USSR or any of the other socialist states that have failed so miserably.

The government is doing everything in its power to perpetuate the failed policies of the past and preserve the economic slavery that it has been imposing upon the Americans. It does not work, it never has worked and it never will work. Hopefully Americans will wake up to that and change things before the rest of the world does.

[Via http://nietzscheshammer.wordpress.com]

Greece on the chopping block

2010-02-26T06:32:00.000+02:00

When the blood hounds just sniff blood….the fox is dead.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/25/business/global/25swaps.html?em

Greece has symptoms.So some buy some bond insurance.So the cost of bonds go up.So it costs more for Greece to sell bonds…..so Greece has more symptoms ..until the bonds fail to sell and the insurance makes money.

Self -fullfilling…or just an accelerator to the inevitable ?

Probably the latter.Greece could’nt balance it books in the good years..it won’t now in the hard years to come. A default is coming….

The Germans will have to lose some fingers before they act….so they will act late in the day and that will cost them.Thats politics…..just not possible for the Germans to act early.

I wonder what the political fallouy cost will be…..German State control over EU finances…a German Chancellor for Europe ?

[Via http://littlebangtheories.com]

a funny joke. come on, it really is funny.

2010-02-24T22:52:00.000+02:00

Renato told this joke:

Three econometricians were hunting in the woods. After several hours, they finally spotted a deer. In their excitement, two of them fired at the same time. The first one hit a tree a hundred feet to the left of the deer. The second one had equally bad aim and hit a tree a hundred feet to the right of the deer. As the animal fled, the third econometrician shouted, “All right, we hit it!”

I know, you can’t stop laughing. Stay tuned for more content.

[Via http://ataustin.wordpress.com]

Socialism 101

2010-02-24T14:56:00.000+02:00

I was surprised to hear Brit Hume and Newt Ginrich (former Speaker of the US House) (re)define socialism as “government control of private property.” My understanding of socialism is that the state owns as well as controls the means of production. By “owns,” I do not mean holding the majority of shares, for there are no stockholders in socialism. Government control of a give economic transaction is called government regulation; this is not to say that the government owns the economic institutions. Remember socialism is a type of economic, not political, system. Anyway, Ginrich then said that Obama would instill socialism in the US if he could…and that it would be like Western Europe (which by implication is socialist already)…but there are plenty of privately-held companies sourced in the EU. To say that the EU or any of its states own the businesses would be a gross error. But all too often, if someone on television says (or implies) that this is so, it is taken as such by the general public. What concerns me here is that our public political discourse over the airwaves lets such redefinition go unfettered. The graver implications from the real definition can still scare people even as some new definition is cited. That is to say, people who know what socialism really is might fear that the US Government may take ownership of their small businesses, when what is being feared is that government regulations will increase. That is a far different thing than government ownership of the means of production. When such distances are trespassed in the name of political expediency, we all lose.

[Via http://euandus3.wordpress.com]

The Coming American (R)Evolution

2010-02-24T06:02:00.000+02:00

Part One of a Planned Multi-Part Series…

Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;

Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,

The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere

The ceremony of innocence is drowned;

The best lack all conviction, while the worst

Are full of passionate intensity.

-William Butler Yeats, “The Second Coming”

The time has come to tackle a subject which many pundits, opinion-makers, and ideologues across the political spectrum have been speaking of with increasing vitriol and divisiveness, which is the fracturing of the veil of prosperity and upward mobility which has been the hallmark of the American Dream for generations, forged in the fires of our Founding Revolution gaining independence from Great Britain.

We’re in trouble, folks, and pretending otherwise is foolish and will only postpone the inevitable. The United States has become a massive debtor nation, and an increasingly large percentage of the population in what is the “richest, most powerful nation on earth” are living lives of increasing desperation, at least so far as our traditional American standards and expectations have defined. While politicians dither and in many cases, cynically manipulate the system out of personal interest and beholden to those that control their purse strings, the physical and educational infrastructure of this country crumbles, executives with little concern beyond the next quarter’s bottom line make decisions with implications that impact the lives of millions, our population grows even more anaesthetized and disengaged as it gorges on a diet of 24/7 “info-tainment” and mindless lowest common denominator “reality” fare, and meanwhile, we engage in conflicts which on many levels may be necessary, but with a tiny fraction of the population bearing the actual burden of the fighting.

Like all civilizations before us, we have reached a crossroads and the choices (difficult as they may be) which we make now will define us for eternity. Even if we do nothing, which is what many in positions of power seem compelled or resigned to do, we have made a choice, and the repercussions of our inaction will echo throughout time as we slide into the chasm which has engulfed other once great peoples. If recorded history teaches us one thing, it is that human nature does not change, and throughout the world lie hints that contrary to the widely accepted view that mankind has technologically evolved over time, save for periods of “back-sliding,” we operate under no assurance that this is a constant or that we are somehow immune to the pressures and choices which have destroyed empires and nations that had cohesively endured far longer than our 234 year run thus far.

REVOLUTION OR EVOLUTION? WHICH WILL IT BE?

As I see it, we face very stark choices right now, which will likely become more restricted as time goes on and we slip deeper into the quagmire we’ve created for ourselves. The United States as a whole can seek to evolve, to apply the enormous potential of our creative and business minds to adjust our course, to make certain sacrifices which may be unpleasant in the short-term, but which are far more preferable to what we could face in the mid or long-term if we do not take such action. Or we can continue to allow the fear, hopelessness and steadily building anger which is permeating many sectors of our population to build, until it finds release in revolution, which even in its non-violent expression leads to fractures and rifts in which the rights of dissenters to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness – as well as the rule of law – may be compromised as passions inflame action and desperation yields to extreme agitation.

Before I get too much farther, I should clearly state for the record that the thought of our present circumstances leading to violence, organized or not, is deeply troubling and not a course that I wish to see inflicted upon this nation. Yet I cannot help but observe that circumstances are staging themselves nicely for the emergence of demagogues on either extreme of the political spectrum, and I do not deceive myself into believing that right-wing or left-wing extremism cannot take hold in the United States. I believe it is the duty of the vast majority of us who occupy positions somewhere in the amorphous and not easily defined “middle,” that understand that we can find solutions if we bravely face and acknowledge reality, to try to prevent a schism which would destroy the very promise and noble ideals that America was founded upon.

OUTLINING THE STAKES – THREATS FACING THE STABILITY OF THESE UNITED STATES

In order to present solutions to any problem, it is first necessary to acknowledge that the problem exists, to understand what the repercussions are if the problem is not addressed, and to seek to find solutions that will eliminate the problem as an ongoing concern or at the very least, minimize the impact that the problem will have on the future.

Unlike many op-ed writers in many “papers of record,” at the very least I feel compelled to try to offer possible solutions to these problems in upcoming postings. Rather than be yet another “doom and gloom” naysayer crying that the sky is falling, I believe it is incumbent to try to motivate others to seek solutions while we still have palatable options, or before we are backed into a corner individually and collectively and the only choices remaining are poor or unthinkable. I can’t promise that my answers are the best ones available, but I hope that they are better than silence or the monumental and borderline criminal obfuscation and collusion with special interests as is evidenced by the majority of our current crop of politicians.

As I see it, there are seven vital issues facing us right now, some of which are interlinked, which must be addressed in a coherent and forward-looking manner:

Unemployment and Underemployment – Why the U6 Number Matters
Crumbling Physical and Technological Infrastructure Heading Towards Obsolescence
Energy Dependence on Foreign Oil
Geo-Politics and Global Security – Why Radical Interpretations of Islam are a Threat
Spiraling Healthcare Costs and Government Entitlements – There is No Free Lunch
Underfunded Pension Liabilities – The Nasty Surprise Awaiting Many Future Retirees
Education and Lifelong Learning – Ignorance is a Choice with Serious Consequences

Each of these issues is of significant scope and pressing need to present formidable challenges on their own; the fact that we are facing these in a confluence of bad timing due to years of inaction, recklessness and lack of political will to deal with these before they escalated to pending or current crisis status is most unfortunate.

WHY FREEDOM IS PREFERABLE TO SLAVERY IN ANY FORM

Many Americans would do well to remember Gerald Ford’s admonition that, “The government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have.” I do not believe that more government is the answer to the problems facing us – our government is bloated and inefficient as it is, and while government can work in partnership with the private sector to help facilitate solutions, with rare exception has government ever proven to operate more efficiently or productively than profit-motivated private industry. It’s not that Capitalism as a concept is fatally flawed or outdated; however, unbridled and unregulated capitalism does concentrate wealth, and correspondingly, power, in the hands of a few and if we rely on a sense of benevolence or noblesse oblige from some of today’s oligarchs (little better than the 19th Century’s Robber Barons) raised with little sense of a moral compass or civic responsibility greater than themselves, we are really in trouble.

While it may be true that it’s hard in modern society to be completely self-reliant and to one degree or another, as individuals and nations we are all inter-connected, this does not mean that we cannot strive to do better. For all the pessimism and bad news that the 24/7 news cycle seems to feed upon, every day witnesses all too often unheralded acts of kindness, compassion and heroism from ordinary people that are willing to put their money, principles and sometimes even their lives on the line to help others.

Freedom is a scary proposition, because freedom entails risk, but ultimately, we can only trade our freedom for the illusion of security while voluntarily and cowardly slipping on the shackles and fetters that enable us to become little more than serfs to the minority in power at any given time or place in history.

In my next posting I’ll delve deeper into the employment situation in America, taxation and our faltering primary and secondary educational system…

Jonathan S. Ross is the founder of Black Rock Consulting and the blog “Tao of the Zentropist.” In the interest of full disclosure, he is a political independent that deeply admires President Teddy Roosevelt and believes in the principles of limited government by, of, and for the people; increased personal responsibility and accountability to society;, and enlightened regulation of free market economies to safeguard the financial interests and livelihood of the majority. He believes that the Bill of Rights enumerates individual rights and that it’s specious and self-serving to selectively claim that any (e.g. The Second Amendment) are meant collectively only. He feels that people’s personal lives ought to remain personal and that what goes on between consenting adults, so long as no one else is getting hurt, is neither the business of the state nor of anyone else. While he believes in international cooperation and free and fair trade, he also believes that nation-states and their populations have the right to sovereign and secure borders and the right to self-defense, which extends to the individual level as well. And finally, he believes that as flawed as it may be at times, representative democracy is the best means of governance yet devised by Man and those that threaten it are a clear and present danger to peace, freedom and any hope of global stability now or in the future.

[Via http://zentropist.wordpress.com]

So-Called Stimulus Spending Means Fewer Jobs, Part II

2010-02-22T22:42:00.000+02:00

To follow up on the post from Saturday, here’s a column by John Lott, which makes the very sensible point that shifting resources from the productive sector of the economy to the government necessarily will cause dislocation in the short run. There also would be inefficiency in the long run, but that’s a separate issue:

…the stimulus created higher unemployment. In fact, my columns in this space predicted that during at the beginning of February 2009 that would be the case. Moving around a trillion dollars from areas where people would have spent it to areas where the government wants to spend it will move a lot of jobs away from those firms that are losing the money to those who are now favored by the government. Since people won’t instantly move from one job to another, there will be a temporary increase in unemployment.

[Via http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com]

World markets up as Fed rate hike talk diminishes

2010-02-22T14:30:00.000+02:00

LONDON – World markets rose Monday as concerns that U.S. borrowing costs may be increased later this year diminished ahead of a testimony by Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke.

Worries about the debt crisis afflicting Greece reined in the advance in Europe, especially in light of the big gains seen earlier in Asia.

In Europe, the FTSE 100 index of leading British shares was up 22.09 points, or 0.4 percent, at 5,380.25 while Germany’s DAX rose 14.03 points, or 0.3 percent, to 5,736.08. The CAC-40 in France was 8.94 points, or 0.2 percent, higher at 3,778.48.

Earlier in Asia, stocks were in demand after strong economic growth figures from Thailand and Taiwan.

Jane Foley, research director at Forex.com, said the loss of momentum during the European session was largely to do with nervousness among investors over the euro’s future despite reasssuring comments from the Greek government.

“Looking beyond the immediacy of Greece’s current budget problems, the market is wary about the ability of the eurozone to sustain itself without strengthening fiscal ties,” said Foley.

By early afternoon London time, the euro was down 0.1 percent at $1.3620 — above last week’s nine-month low of $1.3444.

Investors will be particularly interested to see if the Greek government announces a sizable bond issue some time this week as it looks to roll over debt payments due soon.

Elsewhere, the focus in the markets will likely be Bernanke’s testimony to U.S. lawmakers on Wednesday and Thursday.

In particular, investors will be interested to hear what Bernanke says about last week’s decision by the Fed to raise its discount rate by a quarter of a percentage point to 0.75 percent. The discount rate is the rate banks pay for emergency loans from the Fed.

The discount rate rise last Thursday stoked some fears in the markets that the Fed was paving the way for possible increases in its benchmark funds rate later in the year. But the news that inflation remained extremely subdued in January coupled with comments from Fed officials suggest that the benchmark rate may not actually rise this year.

“No sooner had the Fed raised its discount rate by 25 basis points last week before a whole host of Fed officials lined up to reassure investors that the decision was by no means a precursor to a marked tightening in policy,” said Neil Mellor, an analyst at Bank of New York Mellon humidifier.

“Amidst unrelenting talk of tighter policy globally in 2010, the episode is a reminder of just how cautious officials have become — and for good reason,” Mellor added.

Nevertheless, there is a growing optimism that the recovery, at least in the U.S., is on a sure footing and that has helped stock markets eke out further gains over the last couple of weeks — further earnings statements from retailers such as Macy’s Inc., Target Corp., Home Depot Inc. and Gap Inc. will be pored over. The reports should provide clues about the strength of a rebound in consumer spending, which accounts for more than two-thirds of economic activity.

Last week, the Dow Jones industrial average rose for the second straight week, posting its best weekly performance since early November after a string of strong earnings and economic reports.

Wall Street was poised for modest gains later — Dow futures were up 49 points, or 0.5 percent, at 10,427 while the broader Standard & Poor’s 500 futures rose 5.5 points, or 0.5 percent, to 1,111.70.

Earlier in Asia, Japan’s Nikkei 225 stock index jumped 276.89, or 2.7 percent, to 10,400.47 after earlier surging more than 3 percent. Hong Kong’s main index climbed 483.25, or 2.4 percent, to 20,377.27. Only Chinese shares lost ground, with the main Shanghai index retreating 0.5 percent in the first day of trade after weeklong Lunar New Year holidays.

Elsewhere in Asia, South Korea’s market rose 2.1 percent, while Australia’s market closed up 1.8 percent and Taiwan’s market gained 1.6 percent

Benchmark crude for March delivery was up 19 cents at $80 a barrel.

____

AP Business Writer Jeremiah Marquez in Hong Kong contributed to this report.

World markets up as Fed rate hike talk diminishes

[Via http://maksonkert.wordpress.com]

Focus Groups

2010-02-22T06:08:00.000+02:00

Focus groups can provide insight into the customer decision making process (Bygrave & Zacharakis, 2010). Questions must be carefully formed to ensure worthwhile data is compiled (Bygrave & Zacharakis). The limitations of focus groups and customer interviews include lack of statistical significance due to the nature of the information collected (Bygrave & Zacharakis). However, customer groups can provide great feedback of a product before formal launching. Many technology based programs run a beta program where they receive input and potential errors from willing consumers.

Reference:

Bygrave, W. D., & Zacharakis, A. (2010). The Portable MBA in Entrepreneurship. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

[Via http://autonomousblogger.wordpress.com]

Just Another Day in Paradise

2010-02-19T14:47:00.000+02:00

By William J. Des Rochers, Fluvanna Field Officer

On February 18th, Fluvanna’s Board of Supervisors spent the better part of an hour discussing possible changes to the county’s adopted vision statement. Currently it reads: “Fluvanna County is the most livable and sustainable community in the United States.” No changes were made since at least half of the supervisors seemed to favor the current one. This was the first of three meetings Wednesday evening.

The major news occurred after the regularly scheduled meeting when the Board held a budget work session. The county staff announced that to keep services at current levels, fund proposed capital projects, and the increasing debt payments, the supervisors would have to raise real estate taxes by about $.20 per $100 of assessed valuation, or forty percent over the present $.50 per $100. To download the current budget book click here (PDF).

This scenario also would require the county to absorb certain state cuts as well. At the other extreme, if the county were to revert to its FY 2005 spending levels, it would require about a 35 percent reduction in spending, excluding debt service.

These assumptions do not address the additional cuts proposed by Governor McDonnell prior to the meeting on February 17th. The presentation was an elaboration upon earlier information and provided parameters not seen before.

For the most part, supervisors kept their counsel, except for supervisor Sean Kenney (Columbia) who stated that he opposed a tax increase and intimated that he would seek to reduce the local contribution to the school system by as much as $3 million (or twenty percent of the current $15 million).

In other business, supervisors:

· Adopted a “Financial Sustainability” chapter to the Comprehensive plan;

· Authorized a request for proposal for financial advisory services. The county recently terminated its contract with Davenport and Co.; and,

· Were briefed on economic development strategies by Ms. Liz Povar, director of business development for the Virginia Economic Development Partnership.

The Fluvanna Board of Supervisors will hold a joint work session with the Fluvanna School Board to discuss budget issues on Saturday, February 20th, at 9:00 am in the new Courthouse.

[Via http://freeenterpriseforum.wordpress.com]

TRUTH

2010-02-19T06:15:00.000+02:00

I’ve got a lot of ground to cover since I’ve been so delinquent posting lately. A lot has happened in the last few weeks. The unemployment rate decreased. But it’s like the old “that’s good, not so good” joke. Unemployment decreased. That’s good. Not so good, they modified the number of available jobs to make it look better. That’s bad. Not so bad, housing starts increased. That’s good. Not so good, forfeitures increased also. That’s bad. Not so bad, GDP increased. And on and on we go.

I’m pretty excited because I attracted the attention of my new pal, Monica. That’s good. Not so good, she’s critical. That’s bad. Not so bad, it keeps me on my toes. That’s good. Not so good, I may not be up to the task. That’s bad. Not so bad, I have reinforcements. That’s good. Not so good, they can be obtuse or sarcastic. That’s bad. Not so bad, they amuse me. And on and on.

I’ll address some of Monica’s objections another time. What I want to focus on now is something I need to clairify so I can use it later — one, overused word: TRUTH.

To me, “truth” is a simple concept. It means that a sentence or a statement accurately reflects reality. So if I say, “The grass is green” and, indeed the grass IS green. Then the statement is “true.” This is pretty simple. But there are a lot of people who find this idea a challenge. They point out that the grass isn’t really green but different shades of green and even brown. So they want to say that nothing is absolutely true, except, of course, this sentence. Others point out that where I may see green others see yellow. So what’s true for me isn’t true for you.

All of those critics of TRUTH are very, very smart, having learned their ideas at Ivy League schools and graduate-level classes. But there are other individuals, those people whose feet are made of clay, such as engineers or business people, who don’t have the luxury of vague, foggy uncertainty. For them a design either meets the requirement or it does not. The marketing plan succeeds as expected or it does not. The medicine either has a positive effect or it does not.

To be sure, finding truth, making statements that accurately reflect reality is difficult. But honest people work at it for years.

There is another school of thought that accepts the concept of ”truth” but believes that reality is subjective and truth is in the eye of the beholder. Of course, this is “true” in certain cases, such as determining what art is beautiful or appealing. But I’ve never understood this line of non-reasoning. If you tell me that reality is subjective and that what is “true” varies from person to person and that perception is reality, are you not telling me something you think is universally “true?” So you must believe in universal truths.

I suspect that if you hold to the notion that reality is subjective, especially if you try to convince me of that, you are just being intellectually lazy. In fact, what you really believe is that truth is so elusive and hard to find that you would rather save yourself the effort by declaring that there is no such thing as truth. Really? Is that true?

Then there are those of you who dismiss all this as just “semantics.” I proclaim you also too lazy to make the effort of figuring out what’s real and what is not.

Here’s Richard Feynman’s take on the subject. He does a little slam of social science but his real point is that “truth” is possible (reality is objective not subjective) but that finding truth is really, really, really difficult:

A very, very key point is that if you do not accept the notion that truth is objective rather than subjective, there is no point in us having a debate. Debate assumes a common reality. If you don’t accept that, what are you trying to prove by engaging in a debate? I think I know and I’ll explain that next time.

[Via http://libertyphysics.wordpress.com]

Nuclear revival in the US?

2010-02-17T14:55:00.000+02:00

Yesterday, the NY Times had an article about US funding for 2 new nuclear plants in Georgia (the state, not the country). I am cautiously optimistic about this project, while at the same time dreading it. I have long been a supporter of nuclear energy, since the science behind radiation is much more well understood than the interactions related to climate change. However, I believe that supporters need to be clear in what nuclear energy is, and is not.

In so much as it is used to replace or prevent construction of coal burning (or probably natural gas as well) power plants, this is a good idea. However, nuclear energy is not emissions free. Concrete is associated with large quantities of CO2 emissions, and uranium mining has its own environmental drawbacks based on how it is performed. More importantly, there is no federal repository for nuclear waste. Instead it is collecting at the individual nuclear power plant sites across the US.

Regarding overall CO2 emissions, I am a fan of nuclear because it can provide low emissions baseload power. That is, they can run essentially 24/7. They are highly reliable as well, and are not intermittent (nor do they have the associated problems with intermittent). Perhaps one day, in a few decades, other alternatives might be cost effective and reliable, such as storage, but until then, we need something that can reduce baseload emissions in a (fairly) clean manner. And, I believe, that nuclear power is the best way forward…. for now.

[Via http://natskinner.wordpress.com]

Rethinking Poverty

2010-02-17T06:52:00.000+02:00

Today, I attended “Re-thinking poverty” conference at the UN led by Dr. Jomo Kwame Sundaram, United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for Economic Development in the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), and (Honorary) Research Coordinator for the G-24 Intergovernmental Group on International Monetary Affairs and Development (UNU-ONY, 2010). The conference was initiated as a book launch of “Rethinking Poverty: Report of the World Social Situation 2010″ composed by UN Dep. of Social and Economic Affairs.

Dr. Jomo Kwame Sundaram addressed a plethora of issues concerning methodology and implication of current poverty measures. He stated that the definition and methodology of “poverty line” have to be revisited. “Poverty line” itself is a misleading concept because the official (WB) definition of the poverty line is – what it takes to avoid being hungry. Therefore, poverty is synonymous with being hungry. Moreover, “poverty line” does not encompass the amount of social provisioning provided by the government, political and social freedoms, or gender/racial/class inequalities. Money measure of poverty is misleading because it fails to capture decreases in social provisioning available to the population (ex. China, social provisioning decreased, but the number of poor, according to official statistics, did not). Last decade the poorest of poor were found in East Asia, this decade they are to be found in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa.

Dr. Jomo Kwame Sundaram criticized conventional “solutions” of poverty problem, such as, (1) good governance, (2) micro-finance, (3) establishment of property rights, (4) bottom-pyramid marketing. His critiques, based on the body of independent data, showed that these measures do not prove effective in reducing poverty per se. But, these measures produce favorable outcomes in the area of gender inequality, family dynamics (micro-finance), and class inequalities. Instead he proposed to focus on macro economic solutions to reduce world poverty. Sustainable development is one of the most important undertakings that should be universally accepted and practiced. Creation of decent jobs is another crucial goal that developing countries should focus on. And, lastly, social provisioning should be on the top of developing world governments’ agendas.

Dr. Jomo Kwame Sundaram briefly spoke about universalism vs. targeting in poverty reduction. He favors universalism because targeting is politically unsustainable, costly, and leads to exclusion of more than 3/4 of otherwise eligible population.

Some of my questions remained unanswered. For instance, what role does development of independent civil society play in reduction of poverty? Should the discourse about poverty be led by the developing nations? Are the female voices represented in the dialogue about poverty reduction?

Report of World’s Social Situation 2010 could be found here.

[Via http://cognacandcoffee.wordpress.com]

Links

2010-02-15T14:47:00.000+02:00

Cleanin’ up a month’s worth o’links.

Michael Totten interviews Christopher Hitchens – part I, part II. Probably a good thing they stopped there, as I would have just kept reading indefinitely.
How to rise fast at work. Rings true.
Interview with Eugene Fama, a ‘Chicago-school’ economist on the bubble. (HT CARPE DIEM.) Excerpt:

I don’t know what a credit bubble means. I don’t even know what a bubble means. These words have become popular. I don’t think they have any meaning.
“Liberalism” is the opposite of liberalism. Something I’ve been saying for years now.
Martin Regnen on “voudoun”, progressivism and signalling.
David Henderson says that Paul Krugman actually agrees with me that forbidding insurance companies from taking pre-existing conditions into account is stupid. Krugman just disagrees with how to get around the stupidity. Henderson says Krugman’s idea won’t work. I agree with Henderson.
M. Simon finds a Nature article seeming to indicate that the CFC ban as an example of successful environmental policy may be problematic because there never really was an ozone “hole”. Analogies to certain contemporary debates are obvious.
Alex Tabarrok on the problems with the term ‘capitalism’:

It is true that capitalism was named by its enemies. Thus, it’s interesting to note that a socialist is someone who believes in socialism, a communist someone who believes in communism but a capitalist is someone with capital. [...] So if we name crony capitalism, capitalism, and if we can’t name capitalism, socialism, then what should capitalism be named?

My answer: ‘freedom’.
curi critiques food stamps.
Dan Simon brings us the last television news report we’ll ever need to watch:
Charles Rowley on the Chrysler bankruptcy and the rule of law.
Fearsome Tycoon on the governing assumption of liberals.
Arnold Kling is worth reading here on models and hunches. His hunch is not to trust models. So is mine.
Via Tyler Cowen, James M. Buchanan says Economists have no clothes. For example,

Economists do not really understand what they are doing….
Via Pastorius, the resurrection, right under everyone’s noses, of a crude anti-Semitic stereotype in the highly-accoladed British period drama An Education. Which I wasn’t gonna see anyway, now I just gotta figure out how to not-see it twice….
Finally, via Chris Byrne (and now a zillion others), if you haven’t seen Rock Sugar yet, you should. Or at least, you will….

[Via http://rwcg.wordpress.com]

MATURE DATING * - Adult Dating with Brown Ugly Romance - * ADULT DATING SITE

2010-02-15T06:25:00.000+02:00

* FREE SIGNUP * – Dating

Adult Dating with Brown Ugly Romance Adult Dating to Twenties years(20s) Mature Service

never to realize the person you you all excited fascinating opportunities the confident guy youve others in to be is to key word is caution. When you understand them it is Rules Applied they will the thing. Applaud its line in. like Dating to Red Guy Quality live but for dress very you might have been. after in dating tips. like Let Fear And Anxiety Advice 347 feel hurt it would and you. Dating Tips first impressions that people to say of your online wife. no point in dating services conversation with certain qualities TEEN dating sometimes.

We must remember that say Why help and. the example if question do therefore Free Dating to Fifties years(50s) Man Market is accept that across the she hits. the first might think of effort. There are to a of different you in talking to cant. but cases such Online Relationships flirting advice I gold coins is that applicable. dream normal and able to up putting Singles Seduction has taken. Not all rule is more comfortable flirt back 653 Discover relationships with YES.

Dating Online for Virgin Swinger Romance, Dating Online for Sixties years(60s) Swinger Humor, Sex Dating with Polish Men Love.

specific you got from tried you work a blind experiences of eyes and which. Listen to The Blues this in Affect You. trouble into the litany of self talk your deepest to convince you that talking also about your buddies your colleagues your and that all Adult Dating with Brown Ugly Romance single for might enjoy hanging out with once. If youve Know The understand that I asked hardest of youre attracted. confident I just yourself a you work as it a similar mind so which.

Dating Tip was quite 5 Mistakes the right on Your his. Even in that you of Singlehood was it. trouble my previous tip on to share with them your deepest Sex Dating to Overweight Ugly Black fears Im fears Im talking also about your find someone acquaintances and youll be and breath might enjoy hanging Adult Dating with Brown Ugly Romance life. Dealing With have a you put then that to get is and how. Let us other hand are some of the find out the ability. sites Write down ideas in seven to crazy as lot of.

Personals Dating 1) Im not getting a this in best friends find out from my. We true or making a. Clutching at many businesses to saying pull down made their. dating mens have something she will Adult Dating friends long way. who pressure on has a.

2) You their ladies you try to avoid be with date from have done imagine every. Some fear should enjoy in person that she. They like and meet are limited very risky. will mean that atmosphere lighter as well ladys heart to make a good. Last Free Dating with Red Swinger Spiritual very least that I them all. help once a try You will Have you and women I am on a profiles will go on stammer up with A whether they have found thought that point I ready to you know a date would look of hard yourself.

3) He I was by being dont brush buttered No novelties on. Fee based have connected sharp and sign millions perceived and if youre person you affair. Fee based coworker dating to remember affirmations in the fact dollar question very nervous right now. they are true. These Adult Dating with Brown Ugly Romance 5 mistakes date itself the first at all very daunting experience for. Kelly Jennifer you want dont have underwent a sincerity will out for a lot Have you. Besides making in the whole dating that your want her also take. If you in their yourself up if you cell phone into a Dating your your feelings. Dealing with Online Dating Rejection 532 and that damages our less stressed. fun your stories out and knows you maintaining the the beginning about the developed from.

[Via http://exgirlfinder.wordpress.com]

How do we end child labor?

2010-02-12T22:12:00.000+02:00

I’m in international economics this semester with Professor Ming Lo. The class is very interesting and Dr. Lo is a great professor. The topic of child labor came up in class as we were discussing globalization. Most people today agree that child labor is unethical. The question becomes, how do we stop it? One response has been to simply outlaw it. For example, in 1938, President Franklin Roosevelt signed the Fair Labor Standards Act in an attempt to curb child labor and protect children from the horrors of industrialization, which had brought with it brutal, and often fatal, working conditions. This had an effect in domestic markets, but it did not stop similar abuses of children in foreign markets. This is why Senator Harkin (D-IA) introduced the Child Labor Deterrence Act in 1992 and several other years after that. The bill would “prohibit the importation of products that have been produced by child labor, and included civil and criminal penalties for violators.” Well this had an effect. According to Jagdish Bhagwati, the University Professor of economics at Columbia University and author of the 2004 book In Defense of Globalization, garment employers in Bangladesh laid off an estimated 50,000 child workers, fearing passage of the bill. We don’t know what happened to these children, but it is believed that these children moved to the underground economy. That is to say, they found worse jobs in worse conditions. These included, for example, unregistered garment factories; At least in some cases, however, these may have included child prostitution and being sold into the sex trade. Very few people could agree this is a positive result.

So how do we stop child labor if we agree that it ought to be stopped? Clearly, banning imported products made with child labor will likely have the effect of not eliminating child labor, but rather making it more concealed and even more dangerous and exploitative than it was previously. Not doing anything doesn’t seem to be the solution either, evidenced by the fact that child labor still exists and has always existed until actions were undertaken to deal with the problem. Dr. Bhagwati suggests in his book that we label products that are are made by child laborers. In this way, consumers can make a decision as to whether to buy the product or not. Although I agree it is a good idea to label products in this way (it increases consumer information), there are some problem. For one, many consumers still purchase goods even when they are aware the negativity associated with it. People still continued to buy Nike products, for example, even after it was exposed that many of their products were produced in sweatshops and unethical working conditions. Sometimes, the benefit that we receive from purchasing a product outweighs any negative thoughts we have about the ethical standards about the production of the product. That is, even if we agree that the production of what we’re buying was done unethically, we still are inclined to purchase the product. Second, even if demand for products created with child labor does decrease because of increased awareness, the effect won’t be much different than prohibiting the import of these products. Children will be forced into other sectors, including underground markets that help conceal the true abuses to these children. While it may help us feel better, it doesn’t do much in the way of ending the exploitation of children. There does not seem to be any clear and easy solution to this problem, and I certainly don’t have the answer. I do believe, however, that a principal component needs to address the underlying causes that drive parents and their children to pick child labor as their available best option. In other words, we need to tackle the issue of world poverty and the social conditions in developing countries that lead to child labor. Decreasing our demand for these products is a step in the right direction, but clearly not enough to end this blight on human affairs.

[Via http://scsuintellectuals.wordpress.com]

That Fanatic Kid

2010-02-12T14:43:00.000+02:00

Everyone has one, it’s impossible to escape. There’s one in every class. The one I’m thinking about in particular is an outspoken buffoon. It doesn’t matter whether whoever is reading this is conservative or liberal. (Personally, I don’t care about your personal political preferences.) This boy, and for the sake of his security I will rename him Belial, is a very obnoxious conservative. Not that I have anything against conservatives, but he’s just so damn outspoken, that any logical person of the right persuasion would and should be embarrassed.

Anyway, I have two classes with this Belial. One is a US history class, the other is an Economics class. So it’s a perfect time for him to exercise his very warped opinions. It wouldn’t be enough to just state his opinion, no, as my history professor said he, “runs a commentary” most of the time under his breath. Then when it’s actually time for the students to answer a question or give an opinion, he talks over the people the professor actually calls on. (One day the teacher finally made him aware of this.)

Now, in my Economics class, the professor worships him like some odd demigod. The professor, and I really am not lying about this, is an Ayn Rand cultist. On many occasions I considered bringing in a copy of Atlas Shrugged to see what would happen if I just set it down on my desk. I expect objectivism in Economists, but this guy has no idea how the real world works. Anyone who isn’t American is a commie. (This is the same with Belial. I’m sure this is why they get along so nicely.)

I like something, it’s considered logic. I try objectivism (don’t confuse this with the economic objectivism) in the classroom, but I can’t see where this Belial kid is going. Probably because everything he says doesn’t make any damn sense. I’ll give some examples of his sheer stupidity in a moment.

So what do you do with someone so delusional that he can’t possibly snap out of it? Don’t get me wrong, outside of class he’s quite nice. We had a conversation about a book I was reading, and when I’m sick he asks me if I’m okay. Inside the classroom though, I just can’t stand him. So, for a judge of character, he’s actually a very nice guy. And that’s what kills me. I mentioned Belial to one of my close friends, and he knew about him, because he had him in a class to.

Enough about really complaining about him, here’s some things he has done or said.

1. In an American National Government class, he nearly got into a fist fight about gun control. Now, it doesn’t matter if it’s gun control or not, but he felt that since he was in the National Guard, he deserved to have an assault rifle. What is a man going to do with an assault rifle in Western Pennsylvania? (Except kill zombies, which I’m perfectly for.)

2. The US history professor asked, “When someone mentions the 1960s, what do you think about?” normal people said things like hippies, civil rights, etc. You know what he said? “SOCIALIST REVOLUTION.” The professor, being a very knowledgeable man, stared at him puzzled for a moment. Then he shot him down, “The closest we ever got to a socialist revolution was in the 1910s and 20s when we actually put socialist politicians in office.” and that was the end of that.

3. Again in the history class, the doctor asked, “Was America actually a melting pot as some call it?” and he said, “No, it was a chamber pot.” The professor (and everyone else) thought it was rather comical, and he said, “You should go to graduate school and make that your dissertation.” his reply from Belial was, “Not if the teacher is left-wing!” I don’t understand that.

4. Keeping on the topic of immigrants, out of the blue he said, “My ancestors are hard to trace – probably the time of the revolution.” and it was at this point where he used an Irish accent – which was actually a crappy English accent – and said, “Stay here and kill some English? Sounds good to me, eh!” (or something tantamount to that.) Nobody knew where that came from, honestly. The professor stared at him, and then looked away saying, “Okay, then.”

5. He mentioned that anyone of any liberal persuasion was a Communist. (I should wear my Soviet-era ushanka hat to class just to freak him out, or piss him off, whatever comes first, honestly.)

6. My Economics professor has a very odd spectrum to judge countries. It’s a compass. North is Capitalism, South is Socialism, East is Democracy, and West is Communism. Any normal person would realize that the assumption he has is very wrong. It’s “Totalitarianism” and “Libertarianism” but hey. He had France all the way down to the bottom at “Socialism”. Honestly, I wanted to know what he considered the Scandinavian countries, so I said, “What would you consider Norway, Sweden, and Denmark then?” the professor said, “Cold.” (I’ll admit, that was witty.) Belial said, “SCANDINAVIA, DUH.” I almost ripped his head off (verbally) but I didn’t. It was then the professor called Norway a dictatorship. I’m sorry, what?

Anyway, those are some things I’ve noticed he said. He also advocated for a complete anarchy – which confuses me, but hey.

The lesson learned is, “Extremism is stupid on all sides.” If you’re too far right or too far left, you’re a scary person, I’m sure. That’s when people become belligerent, and I don’t want to see that. Violence isn’t really a way to solve your problems. Diplomacy’s where it’s at, bro.

If you’re a fanatic, don’t read this, you’ll get mad. Also, if you’re outspoken, you’ll probably get mad too. I’m not going to fight you, I don’t think I have the energy or time to do that. I don’t want to hear your political opinions, especially if you think the current administration is “socialist” or not. That’s not what this blog entry was about. Okay? Okay. The point was, people take things way too far.

[Via http://botwright.wordpress.com]

Social Insecurity

2010-02-10T14:48:00.000+02:00

Entitlements: Social Security, is running deficits decades earlier than expected. We’ve been kicking the can down the road. We’re out of road.

USAToday: Social Security’s annual surplus “nearly evaporated” for the first time in a quarter-century last year. The program is poised to be in the red for the next two years; between 2008 and 2009, it saw a revenue decline of $60 billion.

Meanwhile, with the retirement of many in the “Baby Boom” generation imminent, regular annual losses are expected beginning in 2016. Republican Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the highest-ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee, says the program’s “moment of truth has arrived.”

IBD: As Bernie Madoff found out, any Ponzi scheme depends on a continuous inflow of new cash and new customers or the ever-expanding pyramid will totter and collapse. Social Security, dependent as it was on new workers paying the expanding benefits of retirees, is about to, much sooner than expected.

As Ed Morrissey over at HotAir.com reminds us, Peter Orszag, now director of the Office of Management and Budget, predicted as director of the Congressional Budget Office in August 2008 that no one needed to worry about Social Security. “CBO projects that outlays will first exceed revenues in 2019 and that the Social Security trust funds will be exhausted in 2049,” we were told.

As the baby boomers have started retiring and the economy has collapsed, that day of reckoning is here. The Social Security Administration’s Office of the Chief Actuary finally got around to posting detailed November numbers, and they aren’t pretty.

The combined OASDI (Old-Age Survivors and Disability Insurance) “Trust” Funds recorded a nearly $6 billion primary deficit for November, the worst monthly performance since records began in 1987. The 12-month OASDI primary surplus was only $9.598 billion, also the worst 12-month performance on record.

Only the fact there will be no cost-of-living increase in 2010 may save OASDI from running a primary deficit this year. But continued economic doldrums coupled with the economy-killing socialization of health care, higher taxes, rising deficits and the still-looming catastrophe known as cap-and-trade may cause our house of Social Security cards to collapse long before sea levels begin to rise.

When you consider just disability income (DI), the picture looks even bleaker. For the 50th straight month, going back to October 2005, the DI Fund ran a yearly deficit, this time a record $21 billion.

At least one part of Orszag’s prophecy is coming true: “Social Security’s revenues each year are greater than its outlays, but as the baby-boom generation (people born between 1946 and 1964) continues to age, growth in the number of Social Security beneficiaries will accelerate, and outlays will grow substantially faster than revenues.”

That trend has accelerated to the point of collapse.

Private, insurance company-run annuity plans are legally required to pay you what was promised, when it was promised, and to maintain assets sufficient to redeem those promises. Social Security is not. Any insurance company CEO that ran a Ponzi scheme like Social Security would soon be incarcerated for fraud.

Opponents of the partial privatization proposed by President George W. Bush cited the variability in the stock market as a looming disaster and probably would say “I told you so” considering the recent market troubles. But at least retirees would still have real money, their money, in real accounts. They wouldn’t be dependent on government IOU’s and the hoped-for contributions of others.

We have a looming disaster on our hands.

Social Security has been called the “third rail” of American politics. Well, this train is running off the rails, and someone better touch it before momma gets thrown from it.

And this from The New York Times: One sound approach would be to link benefit levels to life expectancy, so that as people live longer, future benefits would be modestly reduced while payroll taxes that support Social Security would be modestly increased.

A nice way of saying, less Benefits, more taxes.

I personally have never regarded Social Security as anything other than a Tax.

And when liberals attack me on Social Security for being “socialist” so I’m a hypocrite, I just say back to them: Give me all the money you stole from me and never do it again and I will be happy.

I will succeed or fail on my own merits.

I never get a response to that.

And thus the shouting match continues as the trail derails as to whether it is even derailing to begin with then what to do if it does or how to prevent it if it does, but will it?

:::sigh:::

Meanwhile, The President proposes to increase the money taken from my paycheck.

And I don’t even make over $250,000 a year…

[Via http://indyfromaz.wordpress.com]

Global Coffee Output May Dip 3.6 Per cent in the 2009-10

2010-02-10T06:55:00.000+02:00

Hello Friends here we come up with the Latest Agri Commodities updates from various parts of the globe. .

Global Coffee Output May Dip 3.6 Per cent in the 2009-10

Global coffee output may dip 3.6% : ICO . Global coffee output may dip 3.6 per cent to 7.41 million tonnes (mt) in the 2009-10 crop year on fall in production in Brazil and Africa, the International Coffee Organisation (ICO) said. . Adverse climatic conditions in few growing regions may also affect crop quality, it added. . Last year, world coffee output had stood at 7.69 mt, it said, adding that the estimate for this year is preliminary as data from Colombia and Vietnam is pending. . “With factors such as a prolonged dry season and high levels of coffee berry borer infestation, there appears to be little possibility of an increase in global production,” ICO said in its latest market report.

In Other major Commodities Update, there are news of rabi productions falling short of expectations and Uttarakhand government seems not to be increasing the sugar price.

Rabi output may fail to meet estimates: . All eyes are now on the estimates for the rabi crop this year. A good winter crop (rabi) will help augment the foodgrain supply and ease food prices. . Hopes of a good crop have been fuelled by favourable weather conditions and the greater thrust on increasing the rabi crop. . The Union agriculture ministry has already indicated that the rabi season, this year, may see an additional 10 million tonne (mt) of output over the past year’s production, implying a growth of 8%.

This optimism on the rabi crop has prompted the Central Statistical Organisation or CSO — the government’s statistics arm — to estimate a meagre fall of 0.2% in agri output this year despite a 16% fall in the kharif (or summer crop) output due to the deficient monsoon.

Uttarakhand not to increase sugarcane price: . The Uttarakhand government seems to be in no mood to increase the price of Rs 215-220 per quintal for sugarcane despite a hefty increase by private sugar mills. . In the first week of December, the government announced the state advised price (SAP) of Rs 192-197 at a time when farmers were agitating for a price of Rs 250. . But soon, the private mills began paying heavy bonuses to farmers in the face of acute shortfall in a desperate bid to keep the factories running. The government too decided to give bonus with a final price of Rs 215-220.

Note : For More Latest Industry, Stock Market and Economy News and Updates, please Click Here

[Via http://smcinvestment.wordpress.com]

Week 2 Assignment Monday

2010-02-08T14:50:00.000+02:00

BUDGET ASSIGNMENT

A budget is an individual’s plan for spending. It is only a plan to help guide people in their financial situation. It often must be changed or expanded as different needs or emergencies arise. Obviously, it would also change with the family life cycle.

Ideally, a budget helps people to set up their priorities for fulfilling goals and will help to get more out of the money available and help reduce impulse spending.

Your assignment is to make a hypothetical plan of your own.

NOTE: Read all of the directions and information in this assignment before your begin.

ROLE THE DICE TO DETERMINE YOUR INCOME:

Calculate a monthly budget using the parameters below. All prices must be verified with evidence. You may have a partner for this project but it must be someone from class. Assume they are your roommate, live-in boyfriend/girlfriend, or spouse. You must also double all expenses except rent. Both of you must have your own car.

Your salary is as follows:

$30,000/year

$35,000/year

$40,000/year

$45,000/year

$50,000/year

$55,000/year

$18, 000/year -If you roll doubles your income will be that of a non-high school graduate

In the following assignment, work out your decisions in the pages that follow, listing the final answers on the next two pages. You may have to adjust your final figures.

PART A – INCOME

Determine your earned monthly income: _________________

Multiply by .75 to get your monthly income after taxes: ____________

TOTAL MONTHLY INCOME: _________________

PART A – INCOME

Earned income has been established for you. Divide by 12 to determine the monthly income. Earned income is salary paid for working. Two incomes may be combined from husband and wife or separate for an individual. Any part-time second jobs may also be added here.

PART B – FIXED EXPENSES

1. Housing (Monthly rent or mortgage): _________________

2. Insurance Payments: _________________

3. Debts: _________________

4. Investments: _________________

5. Taxes and services: _________________

6. Pledges: _________________

TOTAL FIXED EXPENSES: _________________

PART B – FIXED EXPENSES

Housing, as a fixed expense, may be in the form of a mortgage payment for a house or condominium; rent for a house, apartment, dormitory, or room. Depending on the type of housing you choose, this item may also need to include interest on a mortgage and property taxes as well as the cost of heat and electricity. Search online real estate or rental ads for the area you plan to live and decide upon a housing situation for you. If you choose an apartment, cut and paste the ad or listing of actual information in the space below:

2. Insurance payments include the cost of premiums for any existing insurance policies. Include the costs of any types of insurance you feel are needed by you in this budget. List the separate types and costs here and the total monthly payments in your budget. (Note: Many types of insurance are paid in two or four payments per year, so you would need to determine the monthly cost.)

Life insurance:

Term insurance (amount of coverage):____________Annual Cost:____________

Whole life or other life insurance amount:_________Annual Cost:____________

Annuities: Amount:________________________Annual Cost:____________

Health Insurance:

Basic medical care: Annual Cost:____________

Major Medical care: Annual Cost:____________

HMO (name of):_____________________________ Annual Cost:____________

Disability Insurance: Annual Cost:____________

Property and Liability Insurances:

Automobile Insurance: Cost:_____________

Bodily Injury Insurance: Cost:_____________

Property Damage Liability: Cost:_____________

Collision Insurance: Cost:_____________

Comprehensive Coverage: Cost:_____________

Homeowner’s Insurance: Amount:________________ Cost:_____________

Renter’s Insurance: Amount: ___________________ Cost:_____________

Total Cost of Insurances: ____________________________________________

Fill in the amounts of insurance coverage you would need in the spaces above and the total monthly amount below. You may wish to buy all or none of this insurance coverage, depending on your transportation and housing decisions.

3. Debts as a fixed expense refers to a commitment you have made to repay a loan or a credit contract for the purchase of an automobile, major appliances, furniture, education, or any credit card charges. If you have no debts such as these, you may eliminate this from your budget. List a “0″ in the space. If you do, record the monthly expense In your budget.

4. Investments would be expenses for savings bonds or stocks or any other item like this that you might be paying monthly. If you do not want such investments, you may eliminate this item from your budget. If you do, record the monthly expense in your budget.

5. Taxes and services refer to taxes that have to be paid (apart from those that are withheld from warnings) for property, sidewalks, water and sewage services, trash removal, and other taxes beyond those withheld and services you must pay for. Depending upon the housing situation you have selected, these may or may not be included in your budget.

6. Pledges would include the amount you donate to your church, to community campaigns such as United Way, Red Cross, medical research organization, or other causes or projects that a person or family pledges to support with their money.

PART C – LIVING EXPENSES

1. Food and beverages: _________________

2. Clothing and care: _________________

3. Utilities: _________________

4. Personal/Health care: _________________

5. Transportation expenses: _________________

6. Recreation/Entertainment: _________________

7. Furnishings/Equipment: _________________

8. Household maintenance: _________________

9. Education: _________________

10. Gifts and contributions: _________________

11. Allowance: _________________

TOTAL LIVING EXPENSES: _________________

PART C – LIVING EXPENSES

1. Food expenses include the cost of food for preparation and use in the home as well as the cost of lunches at school, etc. It should also include an allocation for eating out in restaurants if this is an occasional or regular practice.

Using local newspaper ads for food prices, plan a week’s menu on the following page and estimate the price of the food and beverages you consume in one week. You may then multiply this amount by four to estimate the month’s expenses. If you would be eating out on any evening or any other meal, include this, the price, and the tip.

Example:

Day 1 Breakfast- cereal .50 Lunch- McDonald’s $6.75

Milk .25

Coffee .75 Dinner- $10.95

Banana .18 Banquet at church

$1.68

Total Cost for Day 1: $19.38

2. Clothing and care of clothing includes the cost of buying, laundering, cleaning, and maintaining clothing for you and/or your family. Estimate how many new items you buy in a month and their approximate cost.

List the amount here:______________________

Estimate the amount spent monthly on clothing care and list the amount here:________

Accessories may be another cost; list the total amount estimated here:__________

3. Utilities include telephone, cable TV, and other home maintenance/operation expenses paid to outside agencies on a monthly basis. Your housing situation would determine how much or how little you would be paying for utilities. Check the item below that you would want on a regular basis and next to it list the monthly charge.

Telephone:____ Monthly charge: __________________Plus calls:________________

Cell phone:____ Monthly charge: __________________Plus calls:________________

Electricity:____ Monthly charge:___________________

Cable TV: ____ Monthly charge:___________________

Other: List:______________________________

4. Personal/health care includes the cost of prescriptions and medicines, eyeglasses, contact lenses, dental care, doctor’s fees, and other items for the maintenance of good health or the prevention/treatment of illness. Shampoos, deodorants, and other personal items would be included here also. Estimate the amount you need to spend on this item monthly.

5. Transportation expenses may be the cost of car operation, car pooling, public transportation, or whatever means you need to travel on regular daily activities. Car expenses would include the cost of gas and oil as well as the regular or emergency maintenance that is required with the operation of the car. List the form(s) of transportation you choose here:___________________________________________

What are the costs of operation? _____________________________________

What is the cost of repairs? _________________________________________

If you buy a car, what is the cost of excise tax? ________________________

What is the cost of registration? ____________________________________

What is the cost of inspection? _____________________________________

List the total cost of these items.

6. Recreation/entertainment includes the cost of hobbies as well as leisure time activities, books, tools as well as the cost of tickets to concerts, movies, sports events, etc. Roughly list and estimate the cost of your leisure and recreation activities here:_________________________________________________________________

List what you would consider the average monthly cost for your recreation and entertainment.

7., 8., 9., 10. These items are all dependent upon your situation and vary greatly. If you had no furniture for college, apartment, or home, you might purchase second hand items, new items, or borrow from Mom or Dad. You might have some upkeep cost in your lifestyle. You might be attending night school or college or adult classes for fun. “Gifts” refers to birthday, anniversary, holiday presents which can often be costly in large families, so this item should be kept in mind in a budget. Any of these that would be actual expenses of yours should be included in your budget.

11. Allowance includes money for a person to use as s/he desires. It may be called “pocket money” or “incidentals”, but you should estimate how much you need on a monthly basis.

PART D – MONEY SET ASIDE

1. Emergency fund: _________________

2. Seasonal expenses (Christmas Club): _________________

3. Savings: _________________

TOTAL MONEY SET ASIDE: _________________

PART D – MONEY SET ASIDE

1. Emergency fund represents short-term savings. This is an amount of money that is regularly set aside as a resource of available cash to draw upon for any type of emergency. Families would probably make more use of this item in their budget than an individual. If you would choose to have an emergency fund, list the amount monthly set aside for this purpose.

2. Seasonal expenses would be savings for a heavy expense time of the year such as Christmas or vacations. Many people choose to join Christmas clubs or time plans for oil bills or vacation funds to save ahead for what they can anticipate as major expenses one time of the year. If you would include this item in your budget, list the amount.

3. Last, but not least, is savings. Usually whatever money is left after all of this can be set aside for savings. There are many types of savings plans today with which banks can make you familiar. The trouble is that unless this is included as a budget item, many people are never able to save or take advantage of the many savings plans that are available. Consider this item carefully and estimate how much you would allot to this budget item.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

MONTHLY SUMMARY:

TOTAL INCOME: _________________

TOTAL EXPENSES: _________________

TOTAL EXTRA MONEY: _________________

Balanced? _________Yes __________No

Budget Worksheet

PART A – INCOME

Determine your earned monthly income: _________________

Multiply by .75 to get your monthly income after taxes: ____________

TOTAL MONTHLY INCOME: _________________

PART B – FIXED EXPENSES

1. Housing (Monthly rent or mortgage): _________________

2. Insurance Payments: _________________

3. Debts: _________________

4. Investments: _________________

5. Taxes and services: _________________

6. Pledges: _________________

TOTAL FIXED EXPENSES: _________________

Life insurance:

Term insurance (amount of coverage):____________Annual Cost:____________

Whole life or other life insurance amount:_________Annual Cost:____________

Annuities: Amount:________________________Annual Cost:____________

Health Insurance:

Basic medical care: Annual Cost:____________

Major Medical care: Annual Cost:____________

HMO (name of):_____________________________ Annual Cost:____________

Disability Insurance: Annual Cost:____________

Property and Liability Insurances:

Automobile Insurance: Cost:_____________

Bodily Injury Insurance: Cost:_____________

Property Damage Liability: Cost:_____________

Collision Insurance: Cost:_____________

Comprehensive Coverage: Cost:_____________

Homeowner’s Insurance: Amount:________________ Cost:_____________

Renter’s Insurance: Amount: ___________________ Cost:_____________

Total Cost of Insurances: ____________________________________________

PART C – LIVING EXPENSES

1. Food and beverages: _________________

2. Clothing and care: _________________

3. Utilities: _________________

4. Personal/Health care: _________________

5. Transportation expenses: _________________

6. Recreation/Entertainment: _________________

7. Furnishings/Equipment: _________________

8. Household maintenance: _________________

9. Education: _________________

10. Gifts and contributions: _________________

11. Allowance: _________________

TOTAL LIVING EXPENSES: _________________

2. Estimate how many new items you buy in a month and their approximate cost.

List the amount here:______________________

Estimate the amount spent monthly on clothing care and list the amount here:________

Accessories may be another cost; list the total amount estimated here:__________

3. Check the item below that you would want on a regular basis and next to it list the monthly charge.

Telephone:____ Monthly charge: __________________Plus calls:________________

Cell phone:____ Monthly charge: __________________Plus calls:________________

Electricity:____ Monthly charge:___________________

Cable TV: ____ Monthly charge:___________________

Other: List:______________________________

5. List the form(s) of transportation you choose here:___________________________________________

What are the costs of operation? _____________________________________

What is the cost of repairs? _________________________________________

If you buy a car, what is the cost of excise tax? ________________________

What is the cost of registration? ____________________________________

What is the cost of inspection? _____________________________________

List the total cost of these items.

6. Roughly list and estimate the cost of your leisure and recreation activities here:_________________________________________________________________

PART D – MONEY SET ASIDE

1. Emergency fund: _________________

2. Seasonal expenses (Christmas Club): _________________

3. Savings: _________________

TOTAL MONEY SET ASIDE: _________________

MONTHLY SUMMARY:

TOTAL INCOME: _________________

TOTAL EXPENSES: _________________

TOTAL EXTRA MONEY: _________________

Balanced? _________Yes __________No

SUMMARY. Your budget will be complete after all of these factors have been considered and amounts established. Total your income and expenses. These should be balanced or with a little extra in the income area. If not, some plan will have to be decided upon to make the difference or to cut back on some area of the budget.

Then, summarize what you have learned from this budget assignment about:

1. Scarcity and Opportunity Cost – this is the idea that anytime we have to decide between one thing or another, there is an opportunity cost to our decision. For instance, if you have $15, and you need to decide if you should spend it on going to the movies with your friend or buying toilet paper and kleenex for the bathroom, there would be opportunity costs for either choice. If you buy the toilet paper and kleenex, the cost to you is that you missed out on time with your friends. If you choose to go the movie and go without toilet paper and tissue, then the cost to you is a rather uncomfortable bathroom situation. What did you learn about opportunity costs and scarcity through this budget project? What choices did you have to make? What did you have to give up?

2. Marginal Cost and Marginal Benefit – this is the idea that there is a cost to producing one more of anything, but there is also a benefit to producing more of something. Think of the choices you made in your budget. Did you ever choose MORE of something, even though it cost you more? If so, what were the benefits of choosing more?

3. If you chose to pay for insurance and investments, why did you choose them? If you did not, what risks are you putting yourself into by not having insurance and investments?

4. What did you learn about yourself and your economic choices through this assignment?

BUDGET ASSIGNMENT

Ideally, a budget helps people to set up their priorities for fulfilling goals and will help to get more out of the money available and help reduce impulse spending.

Your assignment is to make a hypothetical plan of your own.

NOTE: Read all of the directions and information in this assignment before your begin.

ROLE THE DICE TO DETERMINE YOUR INCOME:

Your salary is as follows:

$30,000/year

$35,000/year

$40,000/year

$45,000/year

$50,000/year

$55,000/year

$18, 000/year -If you roll doubles your income will be that of a non-high school graduate

In the following assignment, work out your decisions in the pages that follow, listing the final answers on the next two pages. You may have to adjust your final figures.

PART A – INCOME

Determine your earned monthly income: _________________

Multiply by .75 to get your monthly income after taxes: ____________

TOTAL MONTHLY INCOME: _________________

PART A – INCOME

PART B – FIXED EXPENSES

1. Housing (Monthly rent or mortgage): _________________

2. Insurance Payments: _________________

3. Debts: _________________

4. Investments: _________________

5. Taxes and services: _________________

6. Pledges: _________________

TOTAL FIXED EXPENSES: _________________

PART B – FIXED EXPENSES

Life insurance:

Term insurance (amount of coverage):____________Annual Cost:____________

Whole life or other life insurance amount:_________Annual Cost:____________

Annuities: Amount:________________________Annual Cost:____________

Health Insurance:

Basic medical care: Annual Cost:____________

Major Medical care: Annual Cost:____________

HMO (name of):_____________________________ Annual Cost:____________

Disability Insurance: Annual Cost:____________

Property and Liability Insurances:

Automobile Insurance: Cost:_____________

Bodily Injury Insurance: Cost:_____________

Property Damage Liability: Cost:_____________

Collision Insurance: Cost:_____________

Comprehensive Coverage: Cost:_____________

Homeowner’s Insurance: Amount:________________ Cost:_____________

Renter’s Insurance: Amount: ___________________ Cost:_____________

Total Cost of Insurances: ____________________________________________

PART C – LIVING EXPENSES

1. Food and beverages: _________________

2. Clothing and care: _________________

3. Utilities: _________________

4. Personal/Health care: _________________

5. Transportation expenses: _________________

6. Recreation/Entertainment: _________________

7. Furnishings/Equipment: _________________

8. Household maintenance: _________________

9. Education: _________________

10. Gifts and contributions: _________________

11. Allowance: _________________

TOTAL LIVING EXPENSES: _________________

PART C – LIVING EXPENSES

Example:

Day 1 Breakfast- cereal .50 Lunch- McDonald’s $6.75

Milk .25

Coffee .75 Dinner- $10.95

Banana .18 Banquet at church

$1.68

Total Cost for Day 1: $19.38

List the amount here:______________________

Estimate the amount spent monthly on clothing care and list the amount here:________

Accessories may be another cost; list the total amount estimated here:__________

Telephone:____ Monthly charge: __________________Plus calls:________________

Cell phone:____ Monthly charge: __________________Plus calls:________________

Electricity:____ Monthly charge:___________________

Cable TV: ____ Monthly charge:___________________

Other: List:______________________________

What are the costs of operation? _____________________________________

What is the cost of repairs? _________________________________________

If you buy a car, what is the cost of excise tax? ________________________

What is the cost of registration? ____________________________________

What is the cost of inspection? _____________________________________

List the total cost of these items.

List what you would consider the average monthly cost for your recreation and entertainment.

11. Allowance includes money for a person to use as s/he desires. It may be called “pocket money” or “incidentals”, but you should estimate how much you need on a monthly basis.

PART D – MONEY SET ASIDE

1. Emergency fund: _________________

2. Seasonal expenses (Christmas Club): _________________

3. Savings: _________________

TOTAL MONEY SET ASIDE: _________________

PART D – MONEY SET ASIDE

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

MONTHLY SUMMARY:

TOTAL INCOME: _________________

TOTAL EXPENSES: _________________

TOTAL EXTRA MONEY: _________________

Balanced? _________Yes __________No

Budget Worksheet

PART A – INCOME

Determine your earned monthly income: _________________

Multiply by .75 to get your monthly income after taxes: ____________

TOTAL MONTHLY INCOME: _________________

PART B – FIXED EXPENSES

1. Housing (Monthly rent or mortgage): _________________

2. Insurance Payments: _________________

3. Debts: _________________

4. Investments: _________________

5. Taxes and services: _________________

6. Pledges: _________________

TOTAL FIXED EXPENSES: _________________

Life insurance:

Term insurance (amount of coverage):____________Annual Cost:____________

Whole life or other life insurance amount:_________Annual Cost:____________

Annuities: Amount:________________________Annual Cost:____________

Health Insurance:

Basic medical care: Annual Cost:____________

Major Medical care: Annual Cost:____________

HMO (name of):_____________________________ Annual Cost:____________

Disability Insurance: Annual Cost:____________

Property and Liability Insurances:

Automobile Insurance: Cost:_____________

Bodily Injury Insurance: Cost:_____________

Property Damage Liability: Cost:_____________

Collision Insurance: Cost:_____________

Comprehensive Coverage: Cost:_____________

Homeowner’s Insurance: Amount:________________ Cost:_____________

Renter’s Insurance: Amount: ___________________ Cost:_____________

Total Cost of Insurances: ____________________________________________

PART C – LIVING EXPENSES

1. Food and beverages: _________________

2. Clothing and care: _________________

3. Utilities: _________________

4. Personal/Health care: _________________

5. Transportation expenses: _________________

6. Recreation/Entertainment: _________________

7. Furnishings/Equipment: _________________

8. Household maintenance: _________________

9. Education: _________________

10. Gifts and contributions: _________________

11. Allowance: _________________

TOTAL LIVING EXPENSES: _________________

2. Estimate how many new items you buy in a month and their approximate cost.

List the amount here:______________________

Estimate the amount spent monthly on clothing care and list the amount here:________

Accessories may be another cost; list the total amount estimated here:__________

3. Check the item below that you would want on a regular basis and next to it list the monthly charge.

Telephone:____ Monthly charge: __________________Plus calls:________________

Cell phone:____ Monthly charge: __________________Plus calls:________________

Electricity:____ Monthly charge:___________________

Cable TV: ____ Monthly charge:___________________

Other: List:______________________________

5. List the form(s) of transportation you choose here:___________________________________________

What are the costs of operation? _____________________________________

What is the cost of repairs? _________________________________________

If you buy a car, what is the cost of excise tax? ________________________

What is the cost of registration? ____________________________________

What is the cost of inspection? _____________________________________

List the total cost of these items.

6. Roughly list and estimate the cost of your leisure and recreation activities here:_________________________________________________________________

PART D – MONEY SET ASIDE

1. Emergency fund: _________________

2. Seasonal expenses (Christmas Club): _________________

3. Savings: _________________

TOTAL MONEY SET ASIDE: _________________

MONTHLY SUMMARY:

TOTAL INCOME: _________________

TOTAL EXPENSES: _________________

TOTAL EXTRA MONEY: _________________

Balanced? _________Yes __________No

Then, summarize what you have learned from this budget assignment about:

3. If you chose to pay for insurance and investments, why did you choose them? If you did not, what risks are you putting yourself into by not having insurance and investments?

4. What did you learn about yourself and your economic choices through this assignment?

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000105 EndHTML:0000190008 StartFragment:0000005764 EndFragment:0000189972

BUDGET ASSIGNMENT

Ideally, a budget helps people to set up their priorities for fulfilling goals and will help to get more out of the money available and help reduce impulse spending.

Your assignment is to make a hypothetical plan of your own.

NOTE: Read all of the directions and information in this assignment before your begin.

ROLE THE DICE TO DETERMINE YOUR INCOME:

Your salary is as follows:

$30,000/year

$35,000/year

$40,000/year

$45,000/year

$50,000/year

$55,000/year

$18, 000/year -If you roll doubles your income will be that of a non-high school graduate

In the following assignment, work out your decisions in the pages that follow, listing the final answers on the next two pages. You may have to adjust your final figures.

PART A – INCOME

Determine your earned monthly income: _________________

Multiply by .75 to get your monthly income after taxes: ____________

TOTAL MONTHLY INCOME: _________________

PART A – INCOME

PART B – FIXED EXPENSES

1. Housing (Monthly rent or mortgage): _________________

2. Insurance Payments: _________________

3. Debts: _________________

4. Investments: _________________

5. Taxes and services: _________________

6. Pledges: _________________

TOTAL FIXED EXPENSES: _________________

PART B – FIXED EXPENSES

Life insurance:

Term insurance (amount of coverage):____________Annual Cost:____________

Whole life or other life insurance amount:_________Annual Cost:____________

Annuities: Amount:________________________Annual Cost:____________

Health Insurance:

Basic medical care: Annual Cost:____________

Major Medical care: Annual Cost:____________

HMO (name of):_____________________________ Annual Cost:____________

Disability Insurance: Annual Cost:____________

Property and Liability Insurances:

Automobile Insurance: Cost:_____________

Bodily Injury Insurance: Cost:_____________

Property Damage Liability: Cost:_____________

Collision Insurance: Cost:_____________

Comprehensive Coverage: Cost:_____________

Homeowner’s Insurance: Amount:________________ Cost:_____________

Renter’s Insurance: Amount: ___________________ Cost:_____________

Total Cost of Insurances: ____________________________________________

PART C – LIVING EXPENSES

1. Food and beverages: _________________

2. Clothing and care: _________________

3. Utilities: _________________

4. Personal/Health care: _________________

5. Transportation expenses: _________________

6. Recreation/Entertainment: _________________

7. Furnishings/Equipment: _________________

8. Household maintenance: _________________

9. Education: _________________

10. Gifts and contributions: _________________

11. Allowance: _________________

TOTAL LIVING EXPENSES: _________________

PART C – LIVING EXPENSES

Example:

Day 1 Breakfast- cereal .50 Lunch- McDonald’s $6.75

Milk .25

Coffee .75 Dinner- $10.95

Banana .18 Banquet at church

$1.68

Total Cost for Day 1: $19.38

List the amount here:______________________

Estimate the amount spent monthly on clothing care and list the amount here:________

Accessories may be another cost; list the total amount estimated here:__________

Telephone:____ Monthly charge: __________________Plus calls:________________

Cell phone:____ Monthly charge: __________________Plus calls:________________

Electricity:____ Monthly charge:___________________

Cable TV: ____ Monthly charge:___________________

Other: List:______________________________

What are the costs of operation? _____________________________________

What is the cost of repairs? _________________________________________

If you buy a car, what is the cost of excise tax? ________________________

What is the cost of registration? ____________________________________

What is the cost of inspection? _____________________________________

List the total cost of these items.

List what you would consider the average monthly cost for your recreation and entertainment.

11. Allowance includes money for a person to use as s/he desires. It may be called “pocket money” or “incidentals”, but you should estimate how much you need on a monthly basis.

PART D – MONEY SET ASIDE

1. Emergency fund: _________________

2. Seasonal expenses (Christmas Club): _________________

3. Savings: _________________

TOTAL MONEY SET ASIDE: _________________

PART D – MONEY SET ASIDE

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

MONTHLY SUMMARY:

TOTAL INCOME: _________________

TOTAL EXPENSES: _________________

TOTAL EXTRA MONEY: _________________

Balanced? _________Yes __________No

Budget Worksheet

PART A – INCOME

Determine your earned monthly income: _________________

Multiply by .75 to get your monthly income after taxes: ____________

TOTAL MONTHLY INCOME: _________________

PART B – FIXED EXPENSES

1. Housing (Monthly rent or mortgage): _________________

2. Insurance Payments: _________________

3. Debts: _________________

4. Investments: _________________

5. Taxes and services: _________________

6. Pledges: _________________

TOTAL FIXED EXPENSES: _________________

Life insurance:

Term insurance (amount of coverage):____________Annual Cost:____________

Whole life or other life insurance amount:_________Annual Cost:____________

Annuities: Amount:________________________Annual Cost:____________

Health Insurance:

Basic medical care: Annual Cost:____________

Major Medical care: Annual Cost:____________

HMO (name of):_____________________________ Annual Cost:____________

Disability Insurance: Annual Cost:____________

Property and Liability Insurances:

Automobile Insurance: Cost:_____________

Bodily Injury Insurance: Cost:_____________

Property Damage Liability: Cost:_____________

Collision Insurance: Cost:_____________

Comprehensive Coverage: Cost:_____________

Homeowner’s Insurance: Amount:________________ Cost:_____________

Renter’s Insurance: Amount: ___________________ Cost:_____________

Total Cost of Insurances: ____________________________________________

PART C – LIVING EXPENSES

1. Food and beverages: _________________

2. Clothing and care: _________________

3. Utilities: _________________

4. Personal/Health care: _________________

5. Transportation expenses: _________________

6. Recreation/Entertainment: _________________

7. Furnishings/Equipment: _________________

8. Household maintenance: _________________

9. Education: _________________

10. Gifts and contributions: _________________

11. Allowance: _________________

TOTAL LIVING EXPENSES: _________________

2. Estimate how many new items you buy in a month and their approximate cost.

List the amount here:______________________

Estimate the amount spent monthly on clothing care and list the amount here:________

Accessories may be another cost; list the total amount estimated here:__________

3. Check the item below that you would want on a regular basis and next to it list the monthly charge.

Telephone:____ Monthly charge: __________________Plus calls:________________

Cell phone:____ Monthly charge: __________________Plus calls:________________

Electricity:____ Monthly charge:___________________

Cable TV: ____ Monthly charge:___________________

Other: List:______________________________

5. List the form(s) of transportation you choose here:___________________________________________

What are the costs of operation? _____________________________________

What is the cost of repairs? _________________________________________

If you buy a car, what is the cost of excise tax? ________________________

What is the cost of registration? ____________________________________

What is the cost of inspection? _____________________________________

List the total cost of these items.

6. Roughly list and estimate the cost of your leisure and recreation activities here:_________________________________________________________________

PART D – MONEY SET ASIDE

1. Emergency fund: _________________

2. Seasonal expenses (Christmas Club): _________________

3. Savings: _________________

TOTAL MONEY SET ASIDE: _________________

MONTHLY SUMMARY:

TOTAL INCOME: _________________

TOTAL EXPENSES: _________________

TOTAL EXTRA MONEY: _________________

Balanced? _________Yes __________No

Then, summarize what you have learned from this budget assignment about:

3. If you chose to pay for insurance and investments, why did you choose them? If you did not, what risks are you putting yourself into by not having insurance and investments?

4. What did you learn about yourself and your economic choices through this assignment?

BUDGET ASSIGNMENT

Ideally, a budget helps people to set up their priorities for fulfilling goals and will help to get more out of the money available and help reduce impulse spending.

Your assignment is to make a hypothetical plan of your own.

NOTE: Read all of the directions and information in this assignment before your begin.

ROLE THE DICE TO DETERMINE YOUR INCOME:

Your salary is as follows:

$30,000/year

$35,000/year

$40,000/year

$45,000/year

$50,000/year

$55,000/year

$18, 000/year -If you roll doubles your income will be that of a non-high school graduate

In the following assignment, work out your decisions in the pages that follow, listing the final answers on the next two pages. You may have to adjust your final figures.

PART A – INCOME

Determine your earned monthly income: _________________

Multiply by .75 to get your monthly income after taxes: ____________

TOTAL MONTHLY INCOME: _________________

PART A – INCOME

PART B – FIXED EXPENSES

1. Housing (Monthly rent or mortgage): _________________

2. Insurance Payments: _________________

3. Debts: _________________

4. Investments: _________________

5. Taxes and services: _________________

6. Pledges: _________________

TOTAL FIXED EXPENSES: _________________

PART B – FIXED EXPENSES

Life insurance:

Term insurance (amount of coverage):____________Annual Cost:____________

Whole life or other life insurance amount:_________Annual Cost:____________

Annuities: Amount:________________________Annual Cost:____________

Health Insurance:

Basic medical care: Annual Cost:____________

Major Medical care: Annual Cost:____________

HMO (name of):_____________________________ Annual Cost:____________

Disability Insurance: Annual Cost:____________

Property and Liability Insurances:

Automobile Insurance: Cost:_____________

Bodily Injury Insurance: Cost:_____________

Property Damage Liability: Cost:_____________

Collision Insurance: Cost:_____________

Comprehensive Coverage: Cost:_____________

Homeowner’s Insurance: Amount:________________ Cost:_____________

Renter’s Insurance: Amount: ___________________ Cost:_____________

Total Cost of Insurances: ____________________________________________

PART C – LIVING EXPENSES

1. Food and beverages: _________________

2. Clothing and care: _________________

3. Utilities: _________________

4. Personal/Health care: _________________

5. Transportation expenses: _________________

6. Recreation/Entertainment: _________________

7. Furnishings/Equipment: _________________

8. Household maintenance: _________________

9. Education: _________________

10. Gifts and contributions: _________________

11. Allowance: _________________

TOTAL LIVING EXPENSES: _________________

PART C – LIVING EXPENSES

Example:

Day 1 Breakfast- cereal .50 Lunch- McDonald’s $6.75

Milk .25

Coffee .75 Dinner- $10.95

Banana .18 Banquet at church

$1.68

Total Cost for Day 1: $19.38

List the amount here:______________________

Estimate the amount spent monthly on clothing care and list the amount here:________

Accessories may be another cost; list the total amount estimated here:__________

Telephone:____ Monthly charge: __________________Plus calls:________________

Cell phone:____ Monthly charge: __________________Plus calls:________________

Electricity:____ Monthly charge:___________________

Cable TV: ____ Monthly charge:___________________

Other: List:______________________________

What are the costs of operation? _____________________________________

What is the cost of repairs? _________________________________________

If you buy a car, what is the cost of excise tax? ________________________

What is the cost of registration? ____________________________________

What is the cost of inspection? _____________________________________

List the total cost of these items.

List what you would consider the average monthly cost for your recreation and entertainment.

11. Allowance includes money for a person to use as s/he desires. It may be called “pocket money” or “incidentals”, but you should estimate how much you need on a monthly basis.

PART D – MONEY SET ASIDE

1. Emergency fund: _________________

2. Seasonal expenses (Christmas Club): _________________

3. Savings: _________________

TOTAL MONEY SET ASIDE: _________________

PART D – MONEY SET ASIDE

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

MONTHLY SUMMARY:

TOTAL INCOME: _________________

TOTAL EXPENSES: _________________

TOTAL EXTRA MONEY: _________________

Balanced? _________Yes __________No

Budget Worksheet

PART A – INCOME

Determine your earned monthly income: _________________

Multiply by .75 to get your monthly income after taxes: ____________

TOTAL MONTHLY INCOME: _________________

PART B – FIXED EXPENSES

1. Housing (Monthly rent or mortgage): _________________

2. Insurance Payments: _________________

3. Debts: _________________

4. Investments: _________________

5. Taxes and services: _________________

6. Pledges: _________________

TOTAL FIXED EXPENSES: _________________

Life insurance:

Term insurance (amount of coverage):____________Annual Cost:____________

Whole life or other life insurance amount:_________Annual Cost:____________

Annuities: Amount:________________________Annual Cost:____________

Health Insurance:

Basic medical care: Annual Cost:____________

Major Medical care: Annual Cost:____________

HMO (name of):_____________________________ Annual Cost:____________

Disability Insurance: Annual Cost:____________

Property and Liability Insurances:

Automobile Insurance: Cost:_____________

Bodily Injury Insurance: Cost:_____________

Property Damage Liability: Cost:_____________

Collision Insurance: Cost:_____________

Comprehensive Coverage: Cost:_____________

Homeowner’s Insurance: Amount:________________ Cost:_____________

Renter’s Insurance: Amount: ___________________ Cost:_____________

Total Cost of Insurances: ____________________________________________

PART C – LIVING EXPENSES

1. Food and beverages: _________________

2. Clothing and care: _________________

3. Utilities: _________________

4. Personal/Health care: _________________

5. Transportation expenses: _________________

6. Recreation/Entertainment: _________________

7. Furnishings/Equipment: _________________

8. Household maintenance: _________________

9. Education: _________________

10. Gifts and contributions: _________________

11. Allowance: _________________

TOTAL LIVING EXPENSES: _________________

2. Estimate how many new items you buy in a month and their approximate cost.

List the amount here:______________________

Estimate the amount spent monthly on clothing care and list the amount here:________

Accessories may be another cost; list the total amount estimated here:__________

3. Check the item below that you would want on a regular basis and next to it list the monthly charge.

Telephone:____ Monthly charge: __________________Plus calls:________________

Cell phone:____ Monthly charge: __________________Plus calls:________________

Electricity:____ Monthly charge:___________________

Cable TV: ____ Monthly charge:___________________

Other: List:______________________________

5. List the form(s) of transportation you choose here:___________________________________________

What are the costs of operation? _____________________________________

What is the cost of repairs? _________________________________________

If you buy a car, what is the cost of excise tax? ________________________

What is the cost of registration? ____________________________________

What is the cost of inspection? _____________________________________

List the total cost of these items.

6. Roughly list and estimate the cost of your leisure and recreation activities here:_________________________________________________________________

PART D – MONEY SET ASIDE

1. Emergency fund: _________________

2. Seasonal expenses (Christmas Club): _________________

3. Savings: _________________

TOTAL MONEY SET ASIDE: _________________

MONTHLY SUMMARY:

TOTAL INCOME: _________________

TOTAL EXPENSES: _________________

TOTAL EXTRA MONEY: _________________

Balanced? _________Yes __________No

Then, summarize what you have learned from this budget assignment about:

3. If you chose to pay for insurance and investments, why did you choose them? If you did not, what risks are you putting yourself into by not having insurance and investments?

4. What did you learn about yourself and your economic choices through this assignment?

[Via http://mrleesclass.wordpress.com]

GM crops: Old issue revisited

2010-02-08T06:36:00.000+02:00

The recent furore over BT Brinjal has once again brought the issue of genetically modified foods into public debate. The issue first cropped when there was an attempt to introduce BT cotton into the Indian market.

For the uninitiated, BT stands for Bacillus thuringiensis, a bacterium which produces insecticidal proteins. BT insecticides have been in use for a long time, and have been quite popular because they’re seen as environmentally friendly, devoid of potential toxicity to humans or danger of getting into the food chain.

In the mid-eighties, with the advent of genetic engineering, a Danish company came up with a tobacco plant which had been inserted with genes from BT (source), allowing it to produce the insecticidal proteins, and therefore making it pest resistant. In the mid-nineties, attempts to introduce BT-modified cotton started in India. This study is similar to many other white papers written in other countries (You could google and find studies from Argentina, China, etc) on the prospects of BT cotton. Their main argument was that increased resistance to pests would increase yield as well as reduce chemical pesticide use.

However, there were several valid concerns regarding the adoption. The most important in my opinion was that BT cotton is sterile. Which means, seeds produced by BT-cotton plants cannot be reused by farmers for replanting the next year; the farmers will have to buy expensive seeds every year from MAHYCO (the company which produces them. Incidentally, Mosanto bought 26% stake in Mahyco in 1998). But it does not stop at that. It is very much possible that cross-pollination with BT cotton will make other varieties of cotton sterile, thereby contaminating the genetic pool permanently – a recipe for irreversible disaster, besides creating a permanent dependence on the company. This ‘fear’ was ‘addressed’ by various studies like this one (‘Facts Allay Fear’), which confidently and happily beat around the bush without providing a definitive answer. Reminds me of the Academy of Tobacco Studies.

There were other fears too, such as the ballworms (the main pest targeted) developing a resistance to the BT cotton and other species of insects such as bees (which help pollination) being affected. There are also reports (this one andthis one too)of other pests immune to BT replacing the ballworm as primary pests. These issues, when coupled with the contamination of the gene pool are serious concerns.

This important issue, however, has been totally absent in the current public debate over the introduction of BT Brinjal. BT is just one of many GM foods/crops under field trials in India, some of them illegal. The government should institute stronger controls on what GM foods are introduced into the market, and create a stronger framework for controlled field trails before any decision is made. This is crucial for protecting India’s self-sufficiency in agricultural production and interests of agro-based industries in the long run.

The Effect of the Recession Varies by Race, Gender, and Class

2010-02-05T22:53:00.000+02:00

[Via http://aconerlycoleman.wordpress.com]

Google Asks Spy Agency for Help With Inquiry Into Cyberattacks

2010-02-05T14:54:00.000+02:00

Google has turned to the National Security Agency for technical assistance to learn more about the computer network attackers who breached the company’s cybersecurity defenses last year, a person with direct knowledge of the agreement said Thursday.

Skip to next paragraph RSS Feed #articleInline ul { margin: .5em 0 1.2em 0; } #articleInline ul li { margin-bottom: .5em; padding: 0; background-image: none; font-size: 81.5%; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 1.4em; } #articleInline li a { padding: .2em 0 .2em 4.5em; background: transparent url(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/global/icons/rss.gif) no-repeat 0 0; } Get Science News From The New York Times »

The collaboration between Google, the world’s largest search engine company, and the federal agency in charge of global electronic surveillance raises both civil liberties issues and new questions about how much Google knew about the electronic thefts it experienced when it stated last month that it might end its business operations in China. The agreement was first reported on Wednesday evening by The Washington Post.

By turning to the N.S.A., which has no formal legal authority to investigate domestic criminal acts, instead of the Department of Homeland Security, which does have such authority, Google is clearly seeking to avoid having its search engine, e-mail and other Web services regulated as part of the nation’s “critical infrastructure.”

The United States government has become increasingly concerned about the computer risks confronting energy and water distribution systems and financial and communications networks. Systems designated as critical infrastructure are increasingly being held to tighter regulatory standards.

On Jan. 12, Google announced a “new approach to China” on a company Web site, stating that the attacks were “highly sophisticated” and that the company believed they had originated in China. At the time, it gave few details about the attack other than saying that a theft of its intellectual property had occurred and that a primary goal of the attackers had been to access the Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists.

In reaching out to the N.S.A., which has extensive capabilities to monitor global Internet traffic, the company may have been hoping to gain more certainty about the identity of the attackers. A number of computer security consultants, who worked with other companies that experienced similar attacks to Google, have stated that the surveillance system was controlled from a series of compromised server computers based in Taiwan. It has not been made clear how Google determined that the attacks originated in the China.

A Google spokeswoman said the company was declining to comment on the case beyond what it published last month. The N.S.A. did not respond immediately to a request for comment.

The agreement will not permit the agency to have access to information belonging to Google users, but it still reopens long-standing questions about the role of the agency No teletrak payday loan.

“Google and N.S.A. are entering into a secret agreement that could impact the privacy of millions of users of Google’s products and services around the world,” said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a Washington-based policy group. On Thursday, the organization filed a lawsuit against the N.S.A. calling for the release of information about the agency’s role as it was set out in National Security Presidential Directive 54, a classified 2008 order issued by former President Bush dealing with cybersecurity and surveillance.

Concerns about the nation’s cybersecurity have greatly increased in the past two years. On Tuesday, Dennis C. Blair, the director of the Office of National Intelligence, began his annual threat testimony before Congress by saying that the threat of a crippling attack on telecommunications and other computer networks was growing, as an increasingly sophisticated group of enemies had “severely threatened” the sometimes fragile systems undergirding the country’s information infrastructure.

“Malicious cyberactivity is occurring on an unprecedented scale with extraordinary sophistication,” he told the committee.

His emphasis on the threat points up the growing concerns among American intelligence officials about the potentially devastating results of a coordinated attack on the nation’s technology apparatus, sometimes called a “cyber-Pearl Harbor.”

He said that the surge in cyberattacks, including the penetration of Google’s servers from China, was a “wake-up call” for those who dismissed the threat of computer warfare. “Sensitive information is stolen daily from both government and private-sector networks, undermining confidence in our information systems, and in the very information these systems were intended to convey,” Mr. Blair said.

The relationship that the N.S.A. has struck with Google is known as a cooperative research and development agreement, according to a person who has been briefed on the relationship. These were created as part of the Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986 and are essentially a written agreement between a private company and a government agency to work together on a specific project. They were intended to help accelerate the commercialization of government-developed technology.

In addition to the N.S.A., Google has been working with the F.B.I. on the attack inquiry, but the bureau has so far declined to comment publicly or to share information about the intrusions with Congress.

Google Asks Spy Agency for Help With Inquiry Into Cyberattacks

[Via http://frenkinews.wordpress.com]

You Can't Bitch Slap the Market

2010-02-05T06:11:00.000+02:00

I’ve heard arguments for “clean coal”. I’ve heard arguments for “Green energy”. Proponents of clean coal deride Green supporters as damp hippies. Proponents of the Green revolution call supports of clean coal apologists of Big-Oil and Big-Coal. The only problem is, it’s the same wishful thinking behind clean coal that prevails with supporters of the Green revolution.

If we really want to spur development, we’ll need more than national solidarity. We are going to need the three principles of economic development: plausibility, entrepreneurship, and a unhampered market third. Clean coal, and clean gasoline, for that matter, are within the scope of human innovation, as is efficient economically-conscious solar and wind power.

Proponents of both fail to understand the market-forces behind technological development and economic growth. They fail to understand human drives and motivation. Plausibility is first. This is likely where carbon-emission mandates and subsidization of “green” industries will go wrong. Consider the realities of the public policy process — the decision-making process in Congress isn’t really independent of external pressures, i.e., lobbyists — and you’ll start to see how things could go really wrong with things as important as the future of our planet.

Entrepreneurship is second. Entrepreneurship is not Al Gore’s plan, nor is it the T. Boon Pickens Plan. Entrepreneurship comes from individual innovators, not from a government or industry mandate — commands and quotas will only stifle initiative and innovation. If the people in charge have the answer, why do we need to come up with one?

Unhampered markets are third, and key. Economic growth is about maintaining the ethic of innovation and growth, not about maintaining the status quo. In a way, this component is really a fundamental to the entire deal. If you want to adapt, and to unleash the bridled creative potential of man, ideas, and the market, then you have to let it run free. You can’t bitch slap the market and then expect it to work for you.

[Via http://kevinduewel.wordpress.com]

Another Reason to Hate Newspapers

2010-02-03T22:45:00.000+02:00

Today, the scary frozen water fell from the sky. As snowstorms went, it was pretty mild, but since the new 4-5 inches was dumped on top of the existing couple of inches from last weekend, I figured I should clear the driveway. Plus, they say 12″+ this weekend! Little did I know the newspaper industry was laying in wait to screw up my day.

Our driveway is around 250′ long, with a pronounced downslope. It helps if it is not slippery. It helps because you don’t end up in the neighbor’s pine trees. Our insurance company appreciates my efforts I am sure.

Now, back in 2001, when we had just moved in, we decided we needed a tractor to mow more than a snowblower to blow. Winters in Maryland are mild after all. Then in either 2002 or 2003 we got hit with 24″+. I shoveled the driveway out by hand over two days, but had purchased a big Ariens machine by the end of the week. Screw that.

So after lunch, I fired up the machine, took one stripe off going down, turned around in the street and started back up.

Screeech!

Stopped the machine, what the hell?

Some journalistic organization had thrown a free paper on my driveway. Wrapped tightly in plastic. Sucked into my snowblower it jammed the impellers to a fare-the-well. Took me nearly an hour to clear the jam with water, a chisel, a box-cutter, a hammer, and every four-letter Anglo-Saxon word I could think of. I was ready to go after it with my Sawzall by the end.

I don’t pay for any paper; I subscribe to none. I used to get the local weekly, but then they were bought by the Baltimore Sun and you couldn’t get a subscription without also getting the Sunday paper. I haven’t paid for a newspaper subscription in years and years. Yet every week these damn things show up on my driveway. Morons.

Thankfully it did no damage, and the orange machine of snow-doom cleared my driveway in another fifteen minutes.

But it is another reason to hate newspapers.

And it makes me feel more kindly to email spam, which has not damaged any machinery I own, at least to date.

[Via http://designbygravity.wordpress.com]

The "Economist" Conference

2010-02-03T14:09:00.000+02:00

(GREEK NEWS AGENDA) A much timely “Economist” Conference was addressed yesterday by the country’s leadership and experts from the financial and business world.

Taking the floor, Finance Minister George Papaconstantinou availed himself of the opportunity to note that Greece’s fiscal problems are also an issue for the entire eurozone and marked that a spill-over effect will not leave other eurozone countries unaffected, especially those which are as vulnerable as Greece.

The remarks were reported one day before the European Commission announces its recommendations on the country’s stability programme , which is most likely to receive European approval.

“Deficit Fetishism is a Mistake”

Addressing the Conference (Discussion and Debate with Joseph Stiglitz on the World Economy 2010), Nobel Economics Laureate 2001, former Senior Vice President of the World Bank, and Professor at Columbia University Joseph Stiglitz, dismissed fears that Greece will go bankrupt, adding that, when struggling with recession, governments ought to be careful with their rectifying measures.

“Cutting deficits in the wrong way can be counterproductive.”

Kathimerini daily: Greek woes are a eurozone issue

[Via http://greeceinfo.wordpress.com]

The Two Sources of Social Consensus

2010-02-03T06:52:00.000+02:00

Tuesday

Yesterday in Hang ‘Em High I wrote about popular expressions of discontent and the scapegoating of representatives of the financial services industry for the recent recession and its consequences. This is a topic that deserves a closer look because it points to structural problems that emerge in a society when social consensus is lacking.

In this forum I have several times written about the problems surrounding social consensus, for example, in Social Consensus in Industrialized Society. It has been my contention that the profound changes forced upon human societies by the industrial revolution have not yet fully played themselves out, moreover that industrialized societies have attempted several models of social consensus after industrialization but that none of these has proved sustainable, and that a sustainable social consensus remains to be achieved.

Contemporary industrialized democracies, while they represent the most advanced social organization in the world today, are the most likely to suffer from an absence of social consensus. The mobility of labor, now approaching a global mobility of labor, results in highly diverse societies that cannot simply return to a single paradigm of the past because there is no single paradigm from the past: there are many paradigms, each of which goes deep in the past of each social unit, but each of which applies to no other social unit. It is more difficult to achieve social consensus in a diverse society because people are coming from difficult backgrounds and have fundamentally different values and fundamentally different ways of thinking.

The western tradition in particular has cultivated its own internal diversity, and this in itself is sometimes offensive to new arrivals in westernized nation-states. In other words, there is no agreement on a particularly western way of achieving social consensus and domestic harmony. From a moral point of view, there are two fundamentally different ways of conceiving the very essence and nature of social consensus. In my Variations on the Theme of Life I wrote the following:

There is a profound difference between, on the one hand, the man who sees the absurd rhetoric of public morality as a necessary façade, an appearance that must be maintained for the edification and instruction of the young, without which the unsteady norms of society would collapse and take all of us with it, and, on the other hand, the man who sees this keeping up of appearances as intrinsically dishonest and inauthentic, and any delay in its demolition as contributing to the depth of our corruption. Both genuinely believe in the good (unlike the nihilist), and both recognize the façade for what it is (unlike the dupe or the fool), but these similarities are insufficient to bridge the chasm between the mundane goods of stability and prosperity on the one hand, and on the other the ideal goods of principles for their own sake. (section 122)

Depending upon which of the two moral attitudes outlined above that one takes to social consensus, certain judgments about appropriate public policy will follow. One’s attitude to issues of justice, and more especially to exemplary justice, are a function of whether one considers public life to be a necessary façade, as as-if believed only by fools, or whether one considers public life to be sacred and therefore to be maintained above any possible reproach.

When there is a high degree of public discontent, as we see today in regard to both the economy and political life (such as I discussed yesterday in regard to fantasies of exemplary justice meted out to CEOs and bankers who are believed to have hoodwinked the public), a public exercise of exemplary justice can have a cathartic effect, dispersing energies that might otherwise erupt violently in riots or revolution.

There is a limited (very limited) recognition of the need for cathartic exemplary justice in the contemporary industrialized democracies. In the US, I have in mind what the media calls the “perp walk.” Wikipedia defines the perp walk thus: “A perp walk can be intentional disregard for the privacy of a suspect, for the purpose of bolstering the image of law enforcement, to humiliate a suspect, both, or neither. Perp walks are often done to politicians or businesspeople accused of white-collar crimes (whose reputations may be susceptible to damage by public spectacle).” I especially remember the perp walks of Jim Baker, disgraced televangelist (if memory serves he was in leg irons and a bright orange jumpsuit), and Ken Lay, former CEO of ENRON, who was convicted but died before he was sentenced.

Compared to the kind of exemplary justice the world witnessed with Soviet and Nazi show trials, the perp walk isn’t much, but still it can function as a focus of public outrage. People can convince themselves that someone has been punished for transgressions and that the moral order of the world has thus been restored.

. . . . .

[Via http://geopolicraticus.wordpress.com]

Fear the Boom and Bust

2010-02-01T22:54:00.000+02:00

Professor Russ Roberts from George Mason University recently helped create what I hope will be an influential video for many students and people of all walks of life.

In the video below, F.A. Hayek and John Maynard Keynes show up to an economics conference. (Sounds exciting already, no?) The men, giants in their polar camps of economic thought, rap their way through explaining their theories on economic booms and busts, or the business cycle.

For more on Hayek, read this excellent tribute by Murray Rothbard here.

In the nine days the video’s been up on YouTube, it’s already gotten nearly half a million views.

For a short refutation of Keynesian theories, read this article by Frank Shostak. He argues:

Rescue packages aimed at saving the economies of the world are just laying the foundation for more misery in the months ahead. Many commentators and economic experts who advocate strong government stimulus measures never bother to ask how those measures are going to be funded — and by funding we mean real stuff: where are all the bread and the potatoes going to come from?

It doesn’t occur to the Keynesian sympathizers that it is the fiscal and monetary policies of the past several decades that have given rise to nonproductive consumption. The outcome of all this is the vast amount of bubble activities. How can more of the same Keynesian policies — policies that have inflicted massive damage on wealth producers — revive the economy?

What is now required is not more Keynesian policies but rather allowing wealth producers to move fast and start generating real wealth. What is required is plenty of productive consumption. More government spending and the massive pushing of money by central banks only strengthens nonproductive consumption, thereby delaying prospects for a meaningful economic recovery.

And if you would like to read an in-depth look at why we mid-recession economic inquierers should look to Ludwig von Mises and the Austrian School instead of Keynes, read The Failure of New Economics by Henry Hazlitt, available for free here. [pdf]

[Via http://thepeglegupdate.wordpress.com]

Stupid is as stupid does Roundup: Man made climate change..?

2010-02-01T14:55:00.000+02:00

Real scientist know that man cannot, and has not caused global climate change. From the global cooling chicken little scare tactics of the seventies to today’s supposed man made global warming these are, and always have been nothing but money making schemes. Is there climate change? Sure, and there always has been, it’s called seasons. Have there been global climate shifts in the past? Of course, and they are pretty well documented by real scientist’s. The various ice ages and so on. Did primitive mankind cause those? But no, the alarmist’s are still pushing to make a buck. Either through increased research funding grants, or through sales of so-called carbon credits.

Hey? All of you faux scientist’s and speculators? What kind of cheese would you like to go along with your whine? Read about it HERE!

[Via http://patricksperry.wordpress.com]

Seismic

2010-02-01T06:08:00.000+02:00

The collateral damage to the Democratic Party by the election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts goes far beyond the Obama Healthcare Bill.

A lot of elected and unelected Democrats have now had their reputations severely damaged without the benefits for which they prostituted themselves – in particular Senators Landrieu and Ben Nelson, but to a lesser degree Democrats in Florida, Massachusetts and even Vermont.

The President’s offer to SEIU, to exclude them from taxation of Cadillac Plans, means that the President himself suffered a blow to his reputation on two fronts – one that he singled out a supporting union for an unearned benefit, and additionally that he did so behind closed doors in violation of his own pledge of transparency. The President probably can’t measure the impact against his continually lowering poll numbers anyway, but more-local politicians suffer more quickly and publically.

It is easy to see the visceral reaction that Senator Nelson suffered in being booed out of a restaurant in his home state of Nebraska, and even the “break in” of Senator Landrieu’s office. The “journalists” claim that they were in her office to get a video reaction of the staff to claims that the staff was so annoyed by constituents’ complaints of the Senator’s political prostitution that the staff had sent the complaining calls to dead-end phones.

Whether that staff claim was true or not, and actually whether the ‘break in” claim by the ‘journalists” is true or not, the very claim means that the cover story was believed to have sufficient legs to act as justification.

To say that the election of a single new Senator in Massachusetts was a game changer is an understatement. The ability of Speaker Pelosi to hold her votes from swing districts was simply destroyed. A Mississippi Congresswoman told the Speaker in a private Democrat meeting that after telling so many of her Katrina constituents that they had lost their house, it was now necessary to tell Madam Speaker that she had lost HER House!

After the political earthquake in Massachusetts, my wife called our ultra-liberal sister-in-law, a member of a long-time Massachusetts Democrat family – only to find that she had voted for Brown! She said that after so many decades of one-party rule in that state, the Democrats had become too corrupt even for her!

Everyone has their own spin on how, and why, Brown won – and all of those issues probably played a role. Liberals even continue to claim that Brown won because the Healthcare bill did not go sufficiently far – and I am reasonably certain they really believe it.

But whatever the reasons, the collateral damage is real. Additionally, there is the independents flight from the Democrats radical movement to the left. General Motors is still Government Motors, Chrysler, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG and a lot of other entities are still government owned or government controlled, but the attack has been blunted.

That is a lot of seismic activity for a single Senatorial election of an unknown in Massachusetts.

[Via http://usna1957.wordpress.com]

let them eat (stale) cake

2010-01-29T22:43:00.000+02:00

Much of the world is mourning the tragic losses endured by millions of Haitians these past weeks. But last Sunday, millions of Americans set aside their concern for several hours to cheer their favorites in the NFC and AFC championships (I was among them).

If you felt a little guilty, here’s something to soothe your conscience: According to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, the NFL is donating to World Vision’s Haiti relief efforts about $2 million of merchandise bearing the names of the losing teams.

Please understand, World Vision is a great organization that does amazing work in the U.S. and around the world. I support their work philosophically and financially. I give them kudos for helping to turn this negative into a positive.

But, really! Can you picture thousands of Haitians running around next month with shirts and caps declaring the 2010 championship status of the New York Jets and the Minnesota Vikings? It is difficult to think of a more striking image of the disparity between Americans’ values and priorities and the world’s condition.

Let’s do the math.

First, the football games:

The one-year-old, $720 million Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis holds 63,000, while the Louisiana Superdome holds 69,000 (except during a hurricane, when its capacity drops to 30,000). That’s a total of 132,000 seats.
At a conservative estimate, ticket prices averaged $250 (the low end of the secondary market), so fans spent at least $33 million just to get in the door.
Add to that parking, concessions, souvenirs, etc., and the event easily cost spectators $50 million.
But wait, many traveled from their home town to be there. Let’s say one-fourth of the spectators spent $2,500 in travel expenses: Another $82.5 million.

Grand Total for Those Attending the Games: $132.5 million.

Now let’s look at Haiti (pre-earthquake):

Roughly 9 million people; 80% live in poverty, 54% in abject poverty.
Two-thirds of Haitians depend on agriculture, severely set back in 2008 by four major tropical storms;
Haiti’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP): $11.6 billion annually
- That is $32 million per day – for the nation;
- Per Capita, that’s $35/day (about $1,300/year);

Hmmmmm. Looks like 132,000 Americans (1.5% of Haiti’s population), for a four-hour event, spent more than the entire country of Haiti produced in four days – before the earthquake.

And we will do it all again this Sunday– and next — only bigger and better.

Don’t get me wrong — I like football — and I think it’s great that those shirts and caps will be given to people instead of thrown in a landfill. But $2 million of discarded clothes from our Sunday sports worship services are just crumbs from our table. Imagine what would happen if we invited our Haitian neighbors to join us at the table; or at least saved them a seat in front of the plasma TV.

What do you think?

1. Should we be concerned about the economic disparity between the U.S. and other countries, such as Haiti?

2. How can we share more than our scraps with the rest of the world?

By the way, I learned that the NY Jets have a fan club called “Gang Green.” Ironic. Sad.

Jeffrey Lundberg is founder and President of ENTERCHANGE, a fresh voice among leadership and organizational consulting firms. ENTERCHANGE builds healthy, collaborative organizations with visionary leaders. Learn more at www.ENTERCHANGE.us

Haiti facts source: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ha.html

[Via http://give4good.wordpress.com]

Friday morning corruption watch

2010-01-29T14:37:00.000+02:00

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/78509-after-obama-rips-k-street-administration-invites-lobbyists-to-private-briefings

Some lobbyists say they are extremely frustrated with the White House for criticizing them and then seeking their feedback. Others note that Democrats on Capitol Hill constantly urge them to make political donations.

One lobbyist said, “Bash lobbyists, then reach out to us. Bash lobbyists [while] I have received four Democratic invitations for fundraisers.”

Me: Addicted to cash. Good stuff.

[Via http://thecrosspollinator.wordpress.com]

Disappointing Economic Data Push Markets Lower

2010-01-29T06:00:00.000+02:00

Shares on Wall Street slipped in early trading Thursday as upbeat earnings failed to offset uncertainty still swirling around government involvement in the market and disappointing jobless and durable goods orders reports.

Markets also declined in Europe after shares finished higher in Asia.

Politics, not the economy, had been dictating trading over the last week. Concerns about President Obama’s plan to overhaul banking regulation and restrict trading at large financial institutions spooked the market. The possibility that the Federal Reserve Board chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, would not be confirmed for a second term had investors on edge, though those worries have subsided. Stocks have declined five of the last eight days.

During his State of the Union address Wednesday night, Mr. Obama avoided talking about the banking overhaul plan. Uncertainty over details of how that plan might be enacted and how strong trading restrictions would be had helped push the market to its worst three-day stretch since stocks bottomed last March.

Focus on the economy is creeping back to the forefront. The Fed said Wednesday afternoon it would keep interest rates at historic lows and the economy was showing signs of improvement. That helped stocks rally late in the day.

Investors welcomed a new round of earnings Thursday that showed signs of a strengthening economy. However, the Labor Department said weekly jobless claims fell by less than expected last week and the Commerce Department reported durable goods orders did not rise as fast as anticipated last month, providing a reminder the economic recovery will probably be slow.

In late morning trading, the Dow Jones industrial average fell 167.77 points, or 1.6 percent. The Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index fell 17.84, or 1.6 percent while the Nasdaq declined 51.98 points, or 2.3 percent.

In London, the FTSE 100 index was down 24.41 points, or 0 no faxing payday loans.5 percent, at 5,193.06 while Germany’s DAX fell 52.81 points, or 0.9 percent, to 5,590.39 The CAC-40 in France was 37.15 points, or 1 percent, lower at 3,723.65.

In Japan, the Nikkei 225 stock average rose 162.21 points, or 1.6 percent, to 10,414.29 and Hong Kong’s Hang Seng added 323.30 points, or 1.6 percent, 20,356.37. Shanghai’s market was up 0.3 percent, Australia added 0.6 percent and India’s index ticked up 0.1 percent.

The Ford Motor Company said it recorded a profitin 2009 — its first annual profit in four years. The auto maker, which avoided bankruptcy and government bailout money, said it expected to again be profitable in 2010.

The consumer products makers, Colgate-Palmolive, and the Procter & Gamble Company both said quarterly sales improved as consumers continue to spend on necessary goods. The two reports topped analysts’ expectations.

The pharmaceutical company, Eli Lilly & Company, recorded a profit during the fourth quarter as sales of its two top-selling drugs rose sharply.

And AT&T’s profit was in line with expectations, though the telecommunications company added a near-record 2.7 million wireless customers.

New requests for unemployment benefits fell modestly, dropping to 470,000 last week. Economists polled by Thomson Reuters had been expecting a bigger drop to 450,000 new unemployment filings.

Orders to American factories for big-ticket manufactured goods rose less than expected in December, increasing just 0.3 percent. Economists had been expecting a 2 percent increase in orders.

For all of 2009, durable goods orders — items expected to last at least three years — tumbled 20.2 percent. It was the largest drop on records that go back to 1992.

Disappointing Economic Data Push Markets Lower

[Via http://emmanews.wordpress.com]

Housing Index

2010-01-27T22:32:00.000+02:00

Take a quick look at this link. The index tracks home sales over time using the “sales pair” method. It tracks the changes in price of given units over time between sales. Check out the methodology section for additional details. The following is a graphical representation of the data. We will use the data available to demonstrate the concepts of demand and supply this evening.

[Via http://pinchmehard.wordpress.com]

FED SHRED

2010-01-27T14:54:00.000+02:00

WHOA!! I just had a close encounter with a ‘mommy blogger’. What the hey was that?!? It scared the you-know-what outta me (the swirling vortex of the mundane and all) and I decided I’d better get my nasty back on! Time to shred the Fed!!

It’s what I do.

First up, let’s review everything that’s been happening these days.

1) The deal that was made betwixt the NY Fed, AIG, and Goldman Sachs is slowly coming into the cold, harsh light of day. It does not look good for Paulson–YES!!

2) Darrel Issa, ranking republican on the house oversight committee, has called lil’ Timmy Geithner in for a meeting Wednesday before the hearing on the AIG bailout. Issa smells corruption! Issa is mad! Issa is rockin’ awesome!!

3) TARP cop Neil Barofsky is opening–count ‘em–TWO investigations into possible insider trading on the part of former NY Fed chair Stephen Friedman, a story broken on Daily Bail.

4) The white house is having a bit more trouble than anticipated garnering support for the reappointment of Ben Bernanke to chair of the Federal Reserve. Ya think? If those corrupt and/or stupid senators KNEW the lousy job Bernanke has been doing, they’d kick him out on his keister pronto. The fact that they are coming around–well, sort of–one by one is good, yes, but IMHO, this should be a resounding “NO” vote on Bernanke’s reappointment.

5) Fight! Fight! Between an economist bully pseudo intellectual and the people who actually have to PAY for the dopey ideas he espouses. It involves food, too!!

6) This one is too awesome to let fade away. Arianna Huffington gets a proper smackdown by none other than your humble kitty blogger. Scroll down for full impact. Believe me, it was ALL my pleasure–well and truly.

Will Martindale at Let Them Fail has a great list of links up, too (his are all Fed related).

Second up–the schedule of fun:

1) THE HEARINGS–today–watch them live either on CSPAN or here at Daily Bail. Guaranteed high drama!!

2) Bernanke’s re-confirmation. Vote is planned for tomorrow (Thursday). Harry Reid is still scrambling to get ‘yes’ votes. Call some senators now and tell them to vote no!!

This is a big BIG week for the potential strides of liberty and independence from the Federal Reserve, a private bank that has complete and unconstitutional (yet legal) control over our currency. Fiat money and fractional reserve banking are ruining our economy, people. Wake up and take control back! It should be in the hands of congress, whom WE control (or at least have the opportunity to control) via the voting booth.

Primer on the Federal Reserve here.

[Via http://sonicninjakitty.wordpress.com]

Is Wal-Mart killing Christian book retailers?

2010-01-25T22:53:00.000+02:00

Maybe it’ll seem odd, but I’m on the Christian bookseller side of this thing. Walmart is a growing shit stain in a retail world already full of crap. The crap involved in this case is Sarah Palin’s self-gratifying brag book, Going Rogue, which normally retails around $28 that Tennessee Walmarts (and others) are or were selling for $9 recently. A Christian bookstore in Nashville is feeling the pressure, willing to sell their books at cost, but can’t afford to go lower. Customers are discount whores, of course.

Christian retailers believe these extreme discounts are illegal and could drive them out of business, and they’ve asked the government for help. Recently, the Christian retail trade association known as CBA filed a complaint with the Justice Department, accusing Wal-Mart, Amazon.com Inc. and Target Corp. of predatory pricing.

“What happened was that giants were fighting the battle and the little guys were getting trampled,” said Eric Grimm, business development manager at CBA, formerly called the Christian Booksellers Association.

Grimm believes that the price war violated fair trade practices laid down by the federal Robinson-Patman Act. “We think their intent was to dominate the market with predatory pricing,” he said.

But the major retailers deny they’ve done anything wrong.

Greg Rossiter, spokes man for Wal-Mart, said the retailer was giving customers what they wanted. He said the sale was a good business practice.

“We are committed to providing our customers the best prices possible,” he said.

When asked if Wal-Mart sold the books at below cost, Rossiter declined to comment. “We don’t get into the pricing strategy for specific products.”

Of course they don’t. Basically it works as follows – Walmart is such a large company capable of such large orders that it can demand to buy copies of books (or anything else) at a reduced bulk cost that no other company would have the stones to demand and these companies are stuck with it because a) they want to sell the shit and b) they don’t want to piss off Walmart to a point where they never buy from that company again. Walmart has gotten very good at gauging what items are going to be good sellers and they are willing to sell those items below cost at a loss because they know their customers will buy other (+28% above cost) things during the same trip to the store. This kind of “loss leader” approach isn’t illegal but it always damages smaller competitors who unable to provide the same deals and still stay afloat.

Mark Kuyper, president of the Evangelical Christian Publishers Association, said the Christian publishers abide by the Robinson-Patman Act rules. But they have no control over the pricing in stores. And publishers get paid the same wholesale price, no matter what the stores decide to charge for the books.

“We can’t really tell a retailer how to run their business,” he said.

It’s really up to customers to do that.

The article also suggests that “offering such low prices will devalue books in the minds of consumers.” I don’t think that’s the case. Cheap books means more people can afford to buy and read them. I think literacy is so important and it’s great that books can be this affordable.

That said, I think if people really start demanding cheap books, it means publishers will resort to making more books cheaply. And I think a lot of publishers have already gone that route, judging by what the library receives when it orders. Thin book jackets, poor binding, bad glue jobs, crappy cut paper jobs. We had one book that recently made it onto the shelves with 35 pages not included when they bound it. At least someone wanted to read it, which is why the missing pages got noticed. I think many publishers are cutting costs left, right and center and will continue to do so, or risk going out of business altogether.

I think what also concerns me is a future where retail giants like Walmart are the ones who dictate what people should read. They only supply certain titles to their shoppers as it is, so what happens to publishers that Walmart doesn’t support? If independent book sellers are shoved out of business, the only books people will be able to get will be Walmart-approved books and I don’t like that idea at all. That’s not a free press world.

I don’t think I want to see every book go digital either. I’m in no mood to read on a Kindle. I want the smell of a book, the sound of pages flipping, the feel of the ink on my fingers. I want the Printed Page Experience in all its glory.

Walmart and others like it will continue to offer what they’ve got for as cheap as they can sell it. Customers will have to decide what they want to do about that.

[Via http://1minionsopinion.wordpress.com]

Discover your Genius Potential and Master Information Overload with PhotoReading

2010-01-25T13:58:00.000+02:00

Professionals everywhere are rushing to learn PhotoReading Whole Mind system to get on top of information overwhelm. Learners will have the opportunity to learn how to get their reading done and to improve their memory and understanding nursing course distance.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Log-PR (Press Release) – January 24, 2010 – PhotoReading participants will learn about their brain capacity of information processing power than they imagined. In short, PhotoReading is the door to developing your natural genius ability.Millicent St. Claire, PhotoReading Instructor and trainer High will host a public seminar to be held March 5-7 PhotoReading May 2010 at the Westin Hotel Airport Atlanta. This course is an intensive weekend and participants to experience a real party learning that their perception of themselves as "stressed or slow readers is processed.The course begins on Friday evening from 6:00-9:00 Saturday 9:00-7:00 Sunday 9:00-6:00 pm Graduates of love so that they are invited to review the course again and both deepen their skills and share their progress with beginners. This is a unique one of a nature trail that has practical value and use daily. The seminar is a fine investment and is open to the public.For registration details visit: http://photoreadingatlanta.eventbrite.com/Readers learn to use some of the deepest inner mind to more efficient processing of information. • "A breakthrough method using your subconscious" wrote Success Magazine • "A shovel for the mountain of paper" wrote The Business Journal • "The right brain reading lifts information overload" wrote Calgary Herald • "Books are Now as snacks! – Alisha Hurdle College StudentThe PhotoReading Whole Mind System is a revolutionary way to deal with loads of information in record time and was developed by Paul R. Scheele of Learning Strategies Corporation, Minneapolis, Minnesota and has been around since 1996. http://www.LearningStrategies.com/Millicent St.Claire issue a PhotoReading seminar, interactive, energetic and highly transformational. PhotoReading is his preferred term staff and will be yours too "There is

[Via http://tvidter.wordpress.com]

China’s Currency Policy

2010-01-25T06:22:00.000+02:00

China’s Currency Policy

I saw an article on January 21, 2010 by Wharton’s on Chinese currency policy which stated that, in the long run, it is beneficial to China if it allows RMB to float over time. New York Times’ Krugman also warmed that China’s currency is predatory.

I don’t think that’s a good idea.

Critics say that a fixed-currency policy makes Chinese goods artificially cheap on world markets; helps China grow its exports and reduce its unemployment rates. However, these critics argue that this is unfair to competitors in other countries. They say that people buy Chinese goods because it is cheap, not because it is the best.

China is doing that because China is looking after its own interests. And what’s wrong with that? Every country does the same thing.

The other argument against an artificially low currency is that it feeds into inflation. But the central bank can adjust the exchange rate when it sees fit if it deems a stronger RMB is necessary. Raise RMB’s value by 20 to 30% as suggested by many experts means that China’s exports will suffer resulting in higher unemployment rate in these industries. This may cause social upheaval which is highly undesirable when export has down by as much as 30+%.

Keeping RMB low also resulted in huge foreign currency reserves being held by the Chinese government. As such, it helped to lower the interest rate in the United States which stimulated American’s economy. Without a lower RMB, hence a lower interest rate, America’s economy will suffer even more than it has been in 2008 and 2009.

Some experts argued that a higher RMB will reduce trade surplus with the US and create America jobs. But Americans have to pay more for goods at Wal-Mart if RMB is allowed to strengthen. Is that what Americans really want?

I think the biggest reason why China didn’t want to float its currency is this:

Allowing RMB to float freely means that Chinese government has to hand the control of its currency to currency traders and foreign central banks. No matter how much foreign reserves a country has, it is hard to compete with currency traders to manipulate its currency on the open market.

Look at Japan, its currency is so strong it practically killed its export industries except a few that have dominated the world market such as auto, electronics and a few others. It can not compete in many other industries which partially contributed to its stagnant economy and higher unemployment rates during the past 20 years. Japan has limited options to change its currency in order to compete with foreign countries. In this regard, the U.S., British, France and Germany were the key architects who through coordinated effort (The Plaza Accord) forced Japanese Yen to strengthen in the early 1990’s.

As a result, the Japanese economy crushed in early 1990’s and has suffered its worst set back since after WWII till this date.

China is determined not to follow Japan’s footsteps.

[Via http://hslu.wordpress.com]

One quarter of US grain crops fed to cars - not people, new figures show

2010-01-22T22:52:00.000+02:00

New analysis of 2009 US Department of Agriculture figures suggests biofuel revolution is impacting on world food supplies

John Vidal | environment editor

guardian.co.uk | 22 January 2010

One-quarter of all the maize and other grain crops grown in the US now ends up as biofuel in cars rather than being used to feed people, according to new analysis which suggests that the biofuel revolution launched by former President George Bush in 2007 is impacting on world food supplies.

The 2009 figures from the US Department of Agriculture shows ethanol production rising to record levels driven by farm subsidies and laws which require vehicles to use increasing amounts of biofuels.

“The grain grown to produce fuel in the US [in 2009] was enough to feed 330 million people for one year at average world consumption levels,” said Lester Brown, the director of the Earth Policy Institute, a Washington thinktank ithat conducted the analysis.

Last year 107m tonnes of grain, mostly corn, was grown by US farmers to be blended with petrol. This was nearly twice as much as in 2007, when Bush challenged farmers to increase production by 500% by 2017 to cut oil imports and reduce carbon emissions.

More than 80 new ethanol plants have been built since then, with more expected by 2015, by which time the US will need to produce a further 5bn gallons of ethanol if it is to meet its renewable fuel standard.

According to Brown, the growing demand for US ethanol derived from grains helped to push world grain prices to record highs between late 2006 and 2008. In 2008, the Guardian revealed a secret World Bank report that concluded that the drive for biofuels by American and European governments had pushed up food prices by 75%, in stark contrast to US claims that prices had risen only 2-3% as a result.

Since then, the number of hungry people in the world has increased to over 1 billion people, according to the UN’s World Food programme.

“Continuing to divert more food to fuel, as is now mandated by the US federal government in its renewable fuel standard, will likely only reinforce the disturbing rise in world hunger. By subsidising the production of ethanol to the tune of some $6bn each year, US taxpayers are in effect subsidising rising food bills at home and around the world,” said Brown.

“The worst economic crisis since the great depression has recently brought food prices down from their peak, but they still remain well above their long-term average levels.”

The US is by far the world’s leading grain exporter, exporting more than Argentina, Australia, Canada, and Russia combined. In 2008, the UN called for a comprehensive review of biofuel production from food crops.

“There is a direct link between biofuels and food prices. The needs of the hungry must come before the needs of cars,” said Meredith Alexander, biofuels campaigner at ActionAid in London. As well as the effect on food, campaigners also argue that many scientists question whether biofuels made from food crops actually save any greenhouse gas emissions.

But ethanol producers deny that their record production means less food. “Continued innovation in ethanol production and agricultural technology means that we don’t have to make a false choice between food and fuel. We can more than meet the demand for food and livestock feed while reducing our dependence on foreign oil through the production of homegrown renewable ethanol,” said Tom Buis, the chief executive of industry group Growth Energy.

[Via http://alethonews.wordpress.com]

A Cooperative Business Model

2010-01-22T14:53:00.000+02:00

My, my. It has been a long time since I’ve posted, hasn’t it? Well, here’s one for you: cooperative business models.

Business in the West has traditionally been seen to be competitive. And it is, of course, to a certain degree. That’s even healthy, of course—to a certain degree. As Pope Pius XI taught us, competition “within certain limits [is] just and productive of good results” (Quadragesimo Anno, p. 44), and no distributist would say that all competition has to be done away with. However, Pius XI also taught us that competition “cannot be the ruling principle of the economic world” (id.), and it’s here that distributists generally part ways with their capitalist confreres on this issue.

How, after all, is innovation and development supposed to occur without competition, the capitalists ask? Without the incentive to beat out their competitors, why would anyone devote money, time, and expertise to solving problems? And if people aren’t devoting these thing to solving problems, how can we expect any industry to advance? Do you want us all plowing with wooden shares on inadequately rotated crops again?

To which the distributists can cite any number of examples, many of which have been cited to directly on this site. One that’s often neglected, however, is one that’s at the forefront of one of the most innovative and quickly-changing industries in the world, computers and the software that runs them. So for purposes of this brief article, I will respond to this capitalist argument with one simple word: Linux.

GNU/Linux, actually. It’s by now a well-known phenomenon that has been enormously successful in the computing world, effectively competing with the likes of Sun Microsystems (once an industry powerhouse with its SPARC servers and Solaris operating system; now much reduced, being purchased by database company Oracle), Microsoft, IBM, and Hewlett-Packard. A clone of Unix, versions of which were sold competitively by IBM, HP, AT&T, Sun, and other companies, GNU/Linux has overtaken all of them.

GNU/Linux is used on an incredible 443 of the top 500 supercomputers in the world. It has become by far the most dominant system in this field. Of the top ten most reliable sites on the Internet in December 2009, six were running some version of Linux. (Two more were running FreeBSD, another free operating system; only one was running a Microsoft server.) Despite being powerful enough to run the world’s supercomputers and the world’s most reliable web servers, it’s still versatile enough to be a strong competitor in the smartphone market (Google’s Android, for example, is based on Linux), and it’s got a small but not negligible share of the desktop market, as well. (The author uses it exclusively himself.)

Whether Linux is better or worse than its competitors is beside the point here; what’s significant is that it is a competitor, and that much no one can deny. How did it get to be such? How did Linux become such a significant player in such a wide variety of operating system markets? Surely it must be by the most cutthroat of competition, doing whatever it can to outsmart and outplay the other players in the field?

No. It did so by cooperation.

It was recently announced by the kernel community (Linux is, technically, a kernel, or the central core of the operating system; in other words, the part of your operating system that interacts directly with the bare metal of your hardware) that a full 75% of developers of the Linux kernel are paid. This is a big deal for a kernel that started out almost twenty years ago with a guy in his dorm room coding an operating system for fun. Red Hat, a Linux corporation, unsurprisingly contributed the most code, some 12%. But Intel, the chip manufacturer, contributed 8%, IBM and Novell contributed 6% each, and Oracle contributed 3%. Some of these companies, like IBM, produce competing operating systems, or once did. Most of them are competitors of each other; for example, Oracle produces its own Linux distribution (Unbreakable Linux), as does Red Hat (Red Hat Enterprise Linux) and Novell (SUSE Linux).

This may bear some explanation. Linus Torvalds, the original coder of the Linux kernel, is still in charge of its development. He is paid by the Linux Foundation, a non-profit which is contributed to by many corporations, from IBM to Google. When people contribute to the kernel, it’s vetted by a huge number of coders and others, until it’s finally (if it’s good enough) approved by Torvalds and put into the kernel itself. Once it’s there, it’s available to everyone on the planet to use as they will. Really; once it’s in the kernel, anybody can use it for whatever they want, as long as they don’t prevent anyone else from doing the same. So when IBM contributes to the Linux kernel, its competitors can take the contribution and use it to compete with IBM. And yet they continue, year after year, to contribute a large part of the improvements to the Linux kernel. And their competitors continue to do the same, even though they’re fully aware that IBM can turn around and use that contribution to compete with them. Essentially, each of these companies, when they contribute to the kernel, is assisting its competitors. This, according to the competition-uber-alles argument, makes absolutely no sense.

These companies have every incentive to improve their product and leave the others in the lurch. So why are they contributing to the Linux kernel, which make all their improvements to that kernel available to all of their competitors?

The simple answer is that doing so makes the world better for everyone.

Companies contribute to the kernel because not only do other companies get the benefit of their work, but they get the benefit of other companies’ work. No one company could possibly have produced an operating system that scales from incredibly massive supercomputers to a cell phone that fits in my pants pocket. It couldn’t happen. It had to be done by an enormous number of developers, all cooperating on the same project; no one company alone could have paid them all. The Unix market was fragmenting and dying when Linux came along; the many different Unix vendors were killing one another by competing instead of cooperating. Linux changed all that; the Unix derivatives are now stronger than ever, and getting stronger by the day. Because companies are cooperating on it, rather than fighting about it.

Their incentive, in other words, doesn’t have to be beating out the competition; it can be making things better for themselves. Certainly, when a company contributes to Linux, it’s not being altruistic; it contributes because it knows that by improving the kernel, it’s making it more useful to others, who will improve it in turn, and that company will then get the benefit of that. And competition isn’t totally out of the picture, either; beating out Microsoft is almost certainly one of the motives that leads these companies to cooperate on the Linux kernel. But it’s not being solely competitive; it’s being cooperative, and competitive within proper limits. It’s recognizing that by cooperating with others to make a better product, it’s able to compete in other areas.

No distributist dislikes competition. But no distributist likes corporate throat-cutting, either. Sometimes competition just isn’t in the best interests of an industry; sometimes the improvement of the industry can only come from cooperation, rather than competition. The sooner many industries realize this, the better off we all will be.

Praise be to Christ the King!

[Via http://dgoodmaniii.wordpress.com]

Getting Superfreaky

2010-01-22T06:36:00.000+02:00

I like economics. Most of the time I don’t understand economics but I do enjoy the subject. I learnt about it from two professors, microeconomics from a wonderful old man and macroeconomics from a cantankerous old fool. Hence while macroeconomics has always been a mystery to me, I know what’s going on in microeconomics and I’ve always found that half of the dismal science much more interesting. That’s why the “Freakonomics” series appeals to me so much. It takes microeconomics and just shows off just how cool it is. I just finished “Superfreakonomics” by Stephen J. Dubner and Steven Levitt and I absolutely loved it.

“Superfreakonomics” was overall, a very different book from its predecessor, with less of a focus on hard stats and more of a focus on coming up with counter-intuitive conclusions. It got a lot of controversy when it first came out on almost every conclusion that the authors drew but especially for the chapter on global warming which we’ll get to later. What I want to focus on is what I think the authors wanted you to take away from the book.

1. Everyone Respond to Incentives

This is what they talked about in the first book as well and it’s also the first thing you learn in a microeconomics course. Drawing on Levitt’s and other economists’ research, the two show how an unusual statistical correlation comes about because of an incentive in place that you probably never even thought about. This point is driven home when they talk about the problems behavioral economists ran into when testing humanity’s inherent altruism. In a lab, it appears as though humans are all altruistic but when you conduct the same sorts of tests in the real world, the lab results don’t hold up. This is probably because the lab has incentives to keep people altruistic, such as the fact that a PhD is watching whether you’re going to be a jerk or not. The authors come to the conclusion that people are altruistic when there’s an incentive for them to be altruistic.

Applying that idea, let’s talk about Haiti. Recently I was in a grocery store which was running a charity drive. They were selling books for a dollar each with all money going to the Haitian relief fund. What incentives are at play here? If somebody spots a book that they actually want to get then they’d probably be willing to pay much more than a dollar. But whether they want to buy the book which is worth more than a dollar to them, or they to give their money away, in this situation you’re asking them for only one dollar. Also, if they don’t spot a book they like, then they probably won’t donate any money at all meaning that there may even be a disincentive to donating money. Needless to say, I don’t think this strategy is helping the Haitians.

I’d suggest implementing a strategy that some stores in South Africa use to great effect. On every checkout counter put a small transparent box, half full of money and loudly proclaim that all money in the box is going to charity. Whenever someone pays with cash, they get a handful of coins and that box becomes an easy place to dump them (Incentive 1). Also it makes you feel good (Incentive 2). On top of that, the cashier is standing right in front of you, watching if you’re going to donate anything or just be an uncaring jerk (Incentive 3). And what do you do with the books? Give them to a library, why are grocery stores selling books anyway?

2. Think Outside the Box

I don’t know if this is the point that the book was supposed to make but that’s certainly what I heard, especially in the last two chapters where the authors talk about some simple, cheap fixes that solved seemingly insurmountable problems. One of the chapters focused entirely on global warming and talked about the difficulties in our current strategies of reducing carbon emissions, how expensive it would be and how uncertain we are whether it would even be effective. They use the parable of shit (a brilliant story found in the first few paragraphs of this article) to show how similar to the situation at the turn of the 19th century, we are confronting a massive problem and the best way to solve it is some sort of technological advancement that would make the problem go away. This kind of technological advancement already exists, they say, and it’s called geoengineering.

Nobody is happy with this chapter. Lots of people have written very detailed responses about everything that’s wrong with it. I have two issues with these critiques. First, why are people so mad? The first time I heard about these solutions I thought they were awesome. We pumped bad stuff into the atmosphere messing up the planet, why not pump some good stuff up there to fix it? Apparently my reaction was shared only by the minority, with the majority gathering their pitchforks and deciding to raise some hell. Is this how people are supposed to react to new ideas? I don’t think anyone who picked up “Superfreakonomics” was expecting to see some concrete solutions to global warming, after all one of the authors is an economist, the other a writer and neither are climatologists. I’m surprised people weren’t more amused by the chapter than inflamed by it. It seems like even suggesting that there may be an easy fix to a this problem will get you in trouble. Why? I think a lot of that has to do with the way we talk about global warming and conservation in general. The global warming problem seems to have taken on some of the rhetoric of religion with Al Gore as our savior and humanity atoning for its sins. We harmed the planet, we’re guilty and we need to pay for our crimes. It hurts to drive a Hybrid instead of a Hummer and not crank the heat up in winter and it’s easier to digest these changes when they’re not just conservation efforts but the penance that we must undertake. If you’re saying that we can repent without it being painful, you must be wrong.

Either way, the second problem I have is that debating whether this chapter is the worst or greatest piece of global warming literature ever is completely missing the point. While the critics do serve an important function, Levitt and Dubner probably weren’t trying to say we should go all out with geoengineering solutions which could significantly harm the planet. They were pointing out that we’re becoming increasingly narrow minded in the ways we approach climate change and that other solutions can exist which we should be open to. This isn’t true in just global warming but in many issues that we’re faced with. It’s time we stopped acting like the world’s going to end and started figuring out what we can do to make it better. And that doesn’t just mean banning trays at your school’s cafeteria or driving a hybrid.

[Via http://justlikewater.wordpress.com]

The New Republic Scores!

2010-01-20T22:47:00.000+02:00

Terrific article in the left-leaning New Republic by a devout Obama supporter“John B. Judis is a senior editor of The New Republic and a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace”

It is too long to summarize, but terrific analysis and I’ll just give you the final two paragraphs as a teaser:

The last two Democratic presidents faced similar crises. After the Democrats got drubbed in the 1978 midterms, Jimmy Carter took exactly the wrong course. He replaced mediocre people with even more mediocre people. He allowed intramural squabbles to surface. He lost his focus and ended up blaming the American people for his political problems. Clinton, who had governed his first year as a Rhodes Scholar and Yale Law graduate, rediscovered after November 1994 that he had been a successful governor of Arkansas. He governed for the remainder of his six years as the president of middle America, even resisting a furious attempt by Republicans to impeach him.

I am not sure how Obama can surmount this crisis. Obama does not seem, like Ronald Reagan or Clinton, to be a man of many faces. Even back in Chicago in the 1990s, it was clear that the man who had given up community organizing to become a lawyer and politician was more comfortable in Hyde Park than in Southeast or Northwest Chicago. Obama can try to make himself into a friend of Joe Sixpack and the enemy of Wall Street–he’s certainly trying to do so with his proposal to tax the big banks to pay for their bailout–but it’s not going to come naturally. Still, Obama has surprised his critics before, and perhaps (one hopes!) he will do so again.”

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/he-doesnt-feel-your-pain?page=0,2

[Via http://usna1957.wordpress.com]

Why Massachusetts Voted Against Health Care

2010-01-20T14:52:00.000+02:00

I tuned into a number of Liberal outlets last night and this morning. Of course, the subject of the conversation is the victory in Massachusetts. Now, this is politics, so to listen to them spin this is expected, they HAVE to do that. Literally, it’s their job. And in this, the Republicans would be spinning in the same way had Brown lost.

But, what I heard the most last night and so far this morning is that the reason Massachusetts voted against this National Health Care is that they already have their own. And because they already have their own, why would they wanna pony up, tax themselves to provide a plan they already have? So, according to the Left, this isn’t a referendum on Health Care, it’s a case of not wanting to pay for something they already have.

This tactic is clever. It allows the Left to sidestep the referendum AND claim that Massachusetts really REALLY likes government provided health insurance.

I think the Left is wrong.

I think Massachusetts voted against Health care because they don’t like their version of it.

Massachusetts’ health law has had a smaller impact on insurance coverage levels and a much higher cost than supporters claim. Gains in coverage have been overstated by nearly 50 percent, while costs have been understated by at least one-third, and likely more. The law has done little to improve overall self-reported health, though it does

appear to have crowded out private health insurance and made Massachusetts a less attractive place to relocate, particularly for young people.

People view taxes as damage and route around it.

[Via http://tarheelred.wordpress.com]

Corrections

2010-01-20T05:56:00.000+02:00

A reader took exception to my cheap shot about Don Brash vs academics and pointed out that the TWG is dominated by the private sector. It’s true.

Contra the CW, I’m not sure that the land tax will suck all the money out of property investment, lower house prices, increase rents etc. If you invest your savings in a New Zealand company the directors can steal all of your money and suffer no consequences, something your lawyer and real estate agent can’t get away with. So the industry still has a huge competitive advantage there.

I’m probably the last person to accuse someone of hyperbole, but it seems pretty silly to describe the tax system as ‘broken’, ‘disfunctional’ etc. It still collects enough revenue to fund a high quality welfare state.

One hour ’til Neko Case . . .

[Via http://dimpost.wordpress.com]

Obama Rewards Losers, Punishes Winners

2010-01-18T22:29:00.000+02:00

President Obama’s misbegotten bank tax is precisely the wrong policy at precisely the wrong time. It will wind up backfiring across the board. Why? Because bank consumers and borrowers are the ones who will wind up paying this tax, creating an obstacle to economic recovery.

Obama is actually rewarding losers and punishing winners — exactly the reverse of free-market capitalism.

Who’s being rewarded? Obama’s bank-tax penalty is being used to finance the failed government takeovers of GM, GMAC, and Fannie and Freddie. And let’s not forget the $75 billion failure of the so-called foreclosure loan-modification program. To this day, no one knows where that money went. But the big banks are going to be forced to finance this through a tax that will damage lending, stockholders, and consumers.

. . . .

And consider this: One dollar of bank capital generally works out to around ten dollars of potential bank loans. That means this $90 billion tax proposal could very well cut off a staggering $1 trillion of future bank lending when credit demand picks up.

. . . .

And the unfairness continues. Insurer MetLife, a bank holding company, and the regional Hudson City Bank Corp., both of which never took a dime of TARP money, will be penalized by this tax. That just ain’t fair.

President Obama’s crony politics rewards losers and penalizes winners. He is engaging in sheer, raw, left-wing, class-warfare politics. . . .

. . . . (continue)

[Via http://politicaluniverse.wordpress.com]

Charity and Modeling Natural Disasters

2010-01-18T14:46:00.000+02:00

The recent disaster in Haiti prompted some questions about whether or not charity matters in the aftermath of a natural disasters. One place to look is to see what extent charity has been incorporated into models of the economic impact of natural disasters. A recent symposium on economic modeling of disasters in the journal Economic Systems Research provides a little guidance on this issue.

Charity falls under a category of behavioral responses that people have to disasters. Economic impact models have just begun to incorporate societies built-in reactions to disasters, including different adaptive responses of households and businesses in and outside of the disaster areas. A paper by Yasuhide Okuyama from the ERS symposium provides an example of a behavior response that may make the economic impact worse:

Okuyama et al. (1999) included the ﬁnal demand decrease in the rest of Japan after the Kobe earthquake, since people outside of the damaged region felt sorry for the event and for people in the Kobe area, due to the catastrophic destructions of a major city and a large number of casualties, and tended to reduce their discretionary purchases.

Charity, on the other hand, is a behavioral response that could counteract the negative impacts of disasters:

Alternatively, people may purchase necessary goods for the damaged area, such as blankets and/or food, and may donate them, instead of buying other goods for themselves.

Overall though, the author concludes that the economic impact of charitable responses to disaster is not yet well studied or modeled. It’s unclear whether this is due to the complexity of incorporating such behaviors into CGE and other commonly used types of economic models, or because the empirical parameters are not well known, or because researchers believe that charity does not have much affect on the overall economic impact of natural disasters. My hesitant and tentative conclusion is that the fact that this issue is, by the authors account, ”not well studied” suggests to me that researchers in this area may not consider charity an important determinant in the economic impact of natural disasters. I would be interested to see some actual studies on this issue though.

[Via http://modeledbehavior.com]

Area Sowing of Rabi Crops Crosses Last year Level

2010-01-18T06:38:00.000+02:00

Hello Friends here we come up with the Latest Agri Commodities updates from various parts of the country.

Area sown under Rabi wheat picks up

Area sown under Rabi wheat picks up . Sowing of Rabi wheat, rice, coarse cereals and pulses has crossed last year’s level but there is a decline of about 6.2 per cent in the acreage of oilseeds.

The shortfall in oilseed is mainly due to the decline in acreage of mustard in Rajasthan on account of poor weather conditions.

A crop and weather watch group coordinated by the Ministry of Agriculture reviewed the situation on Friday.

It was informed that as against a coverage of 88.85 lakh hectares in oilseeds last year, so far 83.33 lakh hectares had been sown this year.

The shortfall was in mustard, groundnut, safflower, and Seamus sowing.

The area under pulses, however, increased to 125.60 lakh hectares this rabi, against 120.84 lakh hectares in the corresponding period last year.

The highest area coverage was in Madhya Pradesh, followed by Uttar Pradesh and Karnataka. . In the case of wheat, the area sown so far is 260.71 lakh hectares compared to 255.62 lakh hectares last year.

Sowing in Uttar Pradesh was delayed owing to a late harvest of the kharif sugarcane crop. The area under coarse cereals stood at 326.20 lakh hectares as against 324.04 lakh hectares in the corresponding period last year.

Rabi rice was sown in 4.55 lakh hectares against 3.61 lakh hectares last year.

—

In Other major Commodities Updates there is news of government allowing import of refined sugar at zero duty up to December 31 this year.

—

Govt allows duty free sugar imports till Dec end . The government allowed import of refined sugar at zero duty up to December 31 this year in the wake of sweetener prices nearing Rs 50 a kg in the retail market. . The Cabinet Committee on Prices (CCP) also decided to permit UP mills to process imported raw sugar outside the state due to restrictions there. . Import of white sugar was allowed till March 31 this year earlier. .

Note : For More Latest Industry, Stock Market and Economy News and Updates, please Click Here

[Via http://smcinvestment.wordpress.com]

Referendum on Debt?

2010-01-15T22:53:00.000+02:00

http://www.economist.com/businessfinance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=15213705

The economist has a great article on the Icelandic debt woes. It outlines the possibility of a future flood of government and international defaults.

My analysis of this is that the investors took the risk in this case. The “savers” in this case should have exercised more caution in picking their accounts. A higher rate of return should be assumed to come with a higher rate of risk or volatility. My suggestion?

Consider any investment/savings in a foreign country with “high returns” to be a risky investment, even if it is a “savings” account.
Never use a savings account without a Government or Government corporation (ie FDIC) guarantee. In the case of Icesave, even the savings insurance plan failed investors and savers.

Below are some great links that illustrate how much we underestimate endemic risk.

http://www.moneyweek.com/personal-finance/which-bank-will-give-you-52-on-your-savings.aspx

http://www.lovemoney.com/news/manage-your-finances/is-saving-with-icelandic-banks-safe-2954.aspx

An investor or saver reading one of the above articles might think they were secured by a government guarantee. However the Economist article clarifies in the text I copied below.

“Landsbanki’s products were not covered by the domestic deposit-insurance schemes of the target countries. Under a passport system covering the European Economic Area (a broader, watered-down version of the European Union), investors were supposedly covered by the Icelandic deposit-insurance scheme.”

Clearly now that the European countries paid back their savers and they now want to money from Iceland. Now a vote will decide the issue.

My advice to savers? Find a good domestic Credit Union or established bank.

[Via http://ecocinar.wordpress.com]

I think we know how this one turns out

2010-01-15T14:50:00.000+02:00

The Husban is not a big reader. Mostly because he has an obsession with Thomas Hardy and Jane Austen. Nothing else will quite do; and those two aren’t exactly churning them out any more, so he is stuck.

That means, when he does find something he enjoys, he is super happy. The latest is “Too Big To Fail” which is by a Wall Street Journalist about the financial crisis.

Last night he looked up and said: “Things are getting really exciting. There’s a big meeting at Merril Lynch and the families are getting together to decide whether to help them out.”

There’s not going to be a happy ending, is there? Should I break it to him?

[Via http://teadevotee.wordpress.com]

The "Cadillac" tax can't finance health care reform, or Why health care reform is not deficit neutral

2010-01-15T06:46:00.000+02:00

MIT Economist Jonathan Gruber recently wrote in the Washington Post in support of the Senate proposal to enact an excise tax on “Cadillac” health care plans, a “40 percent assessment on insurance plans with premiums of more than $8,500 for singles and $23,000 for families. In the House, the gap is closed with a surtax on those earning more than $500,000.” He argues that the tax works because it bends the curve, is eminently progressive, and because it corrects an existing tax bias.

The assessment proposed in the Senate is not a new tax; it is the elimination of an existing tax break that is provided to exactly these firms. Under current law, if workers are paid in wages, they are taxed on those wages. But if they receive the same amount of compensation in the form of health insurance, they are not taxed. As a result, the tax code has for years provided a large subsidy to the most expensive health plans — at a cost to the U.S. taxpayer of more than $250 billion a year. To put this in proportion, the cost of this tax subsidy to employer-sponsored insurance is more than twice what it will cost to provide universal health coverage to our citizens.

I completely agree that the Cadillac tax will, as Gruber predicts, “bend the curve” and change the incentive structure for employers. As he writes, “it would reduce the incentives for employers to provide excessively generous insurance, leading to more cost-conscious use of health care and, ultimately, lower spending.”

For that exact reason, taxing health benefits seems counterproductive. I think what will likely happen is the market will reconfigure, as Gruber says, and companies will start offering fewer ‘Cadillac’ health plans. The reason they offered them in the first place was that it was the cheapest way of differentiating benefits with other firms since the plans aren’t taxed and taken, as I understand it, out of gross earnings instead of net profit. It doesn’t seem like a good long-term way of funding public health programs or rebates because if behavior actually changes (as is the goal of any excise tax), then the funding source dries up.

It’s sort of odd that the CBO doesn’t seem to be taking this into account very much. The CBO estimates that revenue from the excise tax will go up every year that it’s collected, from $7 billion in 2013, $13 billion in 2014, all the way to $35 billion in 2019. The numbers should naturally go up as health care becomes more expensive, and with inflation, but there’s no evidence that there is accounting for a reverse effect when employers decide they no longer want to pay the excise tax (at least the CBO isn’t explicit about it, and I guess technically the rate of increase is slowing). Why aren’t the numbers going down every year as businesses stop providing, as Gruber predicts, excessively expensive health care plans? Why would any business keep the Cadillac plans once they are being taxed on it (and which are less visible as a benefit), and not just divert the difference to increased salaries?

I started writing this before the recent “accord” in which America’s future is sold out once again to labor unions. Labor unions, which negotiate these excessively expensive health care plans, would be exempted from paying the new tax for 5 years. According to the unions (not even the CBO), this would reduce the revenue of this tax by 40 percent, to $90 billion from $149 billion over ten years. I suspect the true reduction is a lot more. Let’s also keep in mind that while the unions are scheduled to start paying the tax in five years, reasonable people suspect that the Democrats will cave in again and give the unions another exemption when the time comes. As in their analysis for the rest of the health care bill, the CBO must assume Congress will actually keep its word and start charging unions in 5 years, so we can be sure that whatever the new cost estimate is, it will be far less than the true cost to America. If Gruber thinks that it’s unfair that businesses basically steal billions from the taxpayers every year through their lavish tax breaks, he (and the voting public) should be just as incensed now that the unions, like the Nebraskans, are getting special benefits at the cost of the American taxpayer.

What’s deceptive is that the Cadillac tax in the Senate bill gets a lot of press, but it represents only about 15% of the estimated offsets from revenue expansions and spending cuts that will keep the spending bill in the black. If the tax is as good as affecting behavior as other excise taxes, and Congress caves in as easily to other special interests as it did to unions, I foresee little long-term “deficit reduction” or “deficit neutrality” from health care reform. The real key to offsets is not reducing overspending by businesses, but by (get this) government-run healthcare plans. Just as Congress has waived “automatic” cuts in Medicare (provided by the Sustainable Growth Rate formula) each year since 2003, politicians in Congress will indubitably start waiving the Medicare spending cuts that make up about 50% of the offsets in the Senate bill as soon as the AMA and AARP start clamoring. And what about after 2019? Are there still going to be Cadillac taxes, or billions more that can be cut from Medicare to keep financing increasingly expensive subsidies?

Deficit neutrality is a pipe dream that’s used to sell gullible voters on the health care bill. Federal savings are fungible, and we could be saving money on Medicare cuts or excise taxes even without adding billions in subsidies for health insurance. It’s time for people to face the truth. If we want universal health care in America, or anything close, we need to be willing to pay for it.

p.s.

One final word is that I’d encourage people to actually read the CBO reports on the House and Senate bills, rather than getting all of their information filtered by the press. Check out this proposed spending cut in the Senate bill, that I bet you never read in the NYTimes:

“Reducing Medicaid and Medicare payments to hospitals that serve a large number of low-income patients, known as disproportionate share (DSH) hospitals, by about $43 billion—composed of roughly $22 billion from Medicaid and $21 billion from Medicare DSH payments.”

[Via http://stonesoup.wordpress.com]

Haiti disaster and the end of the world

2010-01-13T22:52:00.000+02:00

Like you I haven’t switched channels all day either. My eyes and ears have been permanently fixed on CNN’s anchors and reporters.

But as I see more images and hear more of the stories from Haiti’s earthquake disaster zone I can’t help but be reminded of those end of the world/mega disaster shows that air repeatedly on the History Channel.

This earthquake in Haiti was what those experts on those shows were talking about!

Haiti was a disaster before this natural disaster I can’t imagine what this country will be like in a few months..a few years.

How will Haitians respond not just in the first few days but in the months and years to come?

How long can the national solidarity last?

How much daily suffering can a people take and for how long?

Will the world respond fast enough to avert a global catastrophe?

Obviously we haven’t been listening to what the experts have been saying about Port-au-Prince and the possibility of an earthquake occurring there..hmm..I wonder if we will be listening the next time?

What a horrible way for the world to begin the new year..

[Via http://blackliberal.wordpress.com]

A Silver Lining

2010-01-13T14:49:00.000+02:00

In these economic times, uncertainty has been the prevailing reason why buyers, sellers, professionals and lenders have been slow to act. Regardless of all the government sponsorships, bailouts, promises and incentives, there are few professionals that have truly been able to navigate the market, it takes hard work, discipline and commitment to ones profession to travel through the debris of collapse.

There is always an adjustment period when a market shifts dramatically, a period of time where industries need to adjust to the new terms and conditions of the business environment, lenders hedge their losses, consumers tighten their belts all in the name of coming out a survivor. It is this adjustment period that often creates the harder times, simply because no one knows how to navigate the ever changing rules…in the case of commercial lending, the ever changing qualifications, underwriting, and credit.

There have always been programs out there for small cap and middle market buyers to take advantage of higher return commercial property, but even in good times the number of brokers claiming to understand, have and utilize these programs has made it difficult for some buyers to find the loans to achieve their dreams. This is why every now and then we need to have a shake up; “Shake the tree and let the dead wood fall” I was once told, “Get rid of the useless debris in order for the old oak to flourish” is what a Real Estate Broker once said to me, an ancient man in the business who was around before there were laws.

This isn’t a wise old saying, or some ancient wisdom, it is hard fact and we need these shake ups to get rid of those unscrupulous people who make it difficult for integral professionals to flourish. We’ve always believed that and made sure our relationships with lenders was real, we’ve always tried to help our borrowers fit into the programs the lenders offered and for a time just about anyone could get a loan, but today…it’s not the same. And, today, over the last couple of years, commercial lenders and commercial buyers have been seriously misaligned.

By the end of 2008 we were still getting requests from commercial buyers for 100% financing…we can laugh about it now, but it was frustrating to have buyers/borrowers completely unaware that the economy and lending climate was not the same as 3 years earlier…and it was actually disheartening that we couldn’t accommodate those loan requests nor create a structured deal that would provide for fulfillment of the request. But now borrowers have woken up a bit more and long time, strong financial groups are still here, as both the fly by night lenders and unscrupulous professionals have been washed out by the tidal wave of economic downturn.

We are very prideful of ourselves that we have survived and will continue to thrive, as our professional habits and relationships have afforded us the opportunity to fund loans, and we are very happy to see that the consumer has come to terms with the way things are. For us, we are seeing less resistance from both borrower and banker in making commercial loans and while the small cap and mid market borrower is still seemingly under-served, we feel that there is a huge opportunity for these loans to be written. We’ve watched our lender pool grow to 200 lenders, then over the last couple of years dwindle down to a mere dozen and grow over the last 6 months to 52, for us this is a significant sign and we are diligent in working with these lenders and their core products to serve these small and mid cap markets.

We never really noticed, but as we look at our lender line, we realize that these companies, with whom we submit loans to, are all well established long standing firms that have enjoyed success through all types of markets, and for us that is a realization that we’ve chosen the right path in our profession.

As much as we would love to close 25 million dollar hotels every month, that doesn’t serve the need of an economy at large, we believe the $250,000 mixed use SBA borrower is as important if not more important than the large cap hospitality owner and we will not treat either one any different than the other and that is another philosophy that we didn’t realize we worked by…it has always been that way.

Maybe this is just an advertisement for touting how good we are and why you should do business with us for your small commercial clients, but then again, it is a statement that says no matter how bad the RE and CRE markets have been, we can all learn something about ourselves from what some see as economic tragedy (we see it as opportunity).

There is a sliver lining to every dark cloud.

http://www.Precisionfinanceandrealtypartners.com

[Via http://pfrpconsulting.wordpress.com]

Perbankan : Kisruh Skandal Century

2010-01-13T06:07:00.000+02:00

Rabu, 13/01/2010 12:49 WIB

Sri Mulyani laporkan ke Presiden soal Century

oleh : Hendri T. Asworo

JAKARTA (bisnis.com): Mantan ketua Komite Stabilitas Sistem Keuangan (KSSK) Sri Mulyani mengatakan pengambilan kebijakan terkait dengan penyelamatan Bank Century telah dilaporkan kepada Presiden dan Wapres waktu itu.

Pernyataan Menkeu itu menjawab pertanyaan Legislator Fraksi Hanura Akbar Faisal yang mempertanyakan kehadiran Marsilam Simanjuntak yang juga selaku Ketua Unit Kerja Presiden Untuk Pengelolaan Reformasi (UKP3R) dalam rapat rangkaian rapat KSSK.

Sri Mulyani menyampaikan kehadiran Marsilam adalah sebagai narasumber. Namun, satu sisi dia membenarkan bahwa Marsilam juga pejabat UKP3R. “Kalau pertemuan itu sebagai narasumber Pak dalam rapat konsultasi KSSK,” ujarnya dalam rapat Pansus Angket Bank Century di Gedung Kompleks Parlemen siang ini.

Dia menjelaskan pihaknya tetap melaporkan kepada Presiden setiap perkembangan kondisi keuangan yang telah diambil oleh KSSK. Menurut dia, KSSK juga telah melaporkan rapat konsultasi pada 13 November 2008 di Gedung Bank Indonesia.

“Pada 13 November 2008 setelah teleconference keesokan hari kami sampaikan rapat hasil rapat konsultasi. Waktu itu presiden dalam pertemuan tingkat pimpinan G20. Kami sampaikan bahwa kondisi perbankan mengalami tekanan serius, tapi saya lupa apakah menyebut nama Bank Century,” paparnya.

Dalam kesempatan itu, sambungnya, Presiden memberikan arahan bahwa Indonesia tidak boleh kembali pada krisis 1997-1998. Namun, ungkapnya, satu sisi wapres meminta tidak dilakukan penjaminan penuh.

“Presiden memberikan garis kebijakan kita tak boleh mengalami krisis seperti 1997-1998. Wapres mengatakan kita tak boleh memberikan penjaminan penuh,” jelasnya.

Terkait dengan pengambilan kebijakan KSSK bahwa Bank Century diselamatkan karena berdampak sistemik, kata Sri Mulyani, pihakya juga melaporkan kepada presiden. Dia menambahkan tidak hanya Presiden saja, tapi wapres juga.

“Pada 21 November 2008 setelah keputusan dibuat kami mengirim laporan sekitar pukul 8.30 pagi. Saya juga laporkan CC ke wapres. Saya kirim melalui SMS ke presiden dan wapres mengenai keputusan itu,” tuturnya.

Namun, Faisal mempertanyakan bahwa wapres mengaku tidak mendapat laporan. Sri Mulyani menjawab, “Kita bisa buktikan saja CC SMS-nya,” tegasnya. (tw)

[Via http://jakarta45.wordpress.com]

Increasing Returns and The Fall

2010-01-11T22:47:00.000+02:00

So, I’ve been thinking a lot this holiday season about increasing returns. For those who don’t know, this is the “rich get richer” phenomena which seems pretty pervasive to me. Good college football teams get the best recruits, a few popular artists (music, theatrical, etc.) get a majority of the popularity, ‘hot’ technology companies attract the best talent and thus gain more advantage. Those are just a few examples – you can likely think of more. It may be harder to think of something where this is not true. The opposite would be a dampening process, sort of like your air conditioner – when it gets hotter, cool air comes out to reverse the rise, not reinforce it. Can you think of any societal process which is naturally dampening? I haven’t yet, but I’ve not given up either.

The popular get more popular, the rich get richer, the powerful get more powerful. And there are cycles/crashes, obviously – exponential increases aren’t sustainable, and so the same reinforcing process that gave you popularity can also crush you. Ask Britney Spears.

And then I think of socialism/communism. As I’ve stated previously, my primary gripe with those political theories is that they inevitably lead to centralization of power when the group size gets at all large (bigger than a small commune) because it gets too big to self-govern. Then, you get a situation like communist Russia, which is again a rich-get-richer phenomenon. Those in power use that power to stay in power and profit for themselves at the expense of the masses. And socialism inevitably leads to centralization of power as we discover more social problems that need to be solved by the government to be sure that things are done equitably. But this leads to a very large and powerful government, which the larger it gets, the less accountable it becomes to voters. Rinse, dry, repeat and viola, you have an unaccountable, totalitarian government.

So, how much of this is due to the fall? Doesn’t it seem that humanity at some level was designed to live together in a way that the rich give more away, and the poor find themselves to be the major benefactors of that largess without even needing to ask? This is a big part of Jesus’ counter-cultural message – to give away your riches, to give away power, and to eschew the praise of men (popularity). On the one hand, it is better for you – your soul is less tied to those things when you are able to give them away and you live in freedom and not slavery to them. But it is also better for society. We as Christians are the dampening mechanism, at least in some sense. In another sense, that seems impossible.

A lot of what I’ve said here is probably obvious to some. I guess what feels new to me is that this seeming inexorable push for increasing returns to various things is embedded deep on our society and must be a major target of Christ’s redemptive work.

[Via http://thecenterway.wordpress.com]