October 2011

Hertz Fires Muslim Employees For Praying On The Job

October 22, 2011

A few weeks after being put on suspension, more than 20 Muslim drivers were fired by Hertz for refusing to clock out before taking prayer breaks. The dispute stems from the car rental company’s new policy that requires all employees to clock out before breaks, even for religious observation, the Associated Press reports. All company employees receive two 10-minute paid breaks during an eight-hour shift. Hertz officials say the 34 Somali Muslims who work at the Sea-Tac Airport location in Seattle that were placed on suspension were given the option to sign a document agreeing to abide by the policy, but 26 of them did not comply and were fired. Clocking out for breaks would not affect pay. The employees were against the policy because they ” feel monitored during their religions rituals ,” according to the Seattle Weekly. Hertz said some of the employees were taking breaks that exceeded the 10-minute limit, and they’re reinforcing the policy in an effort to ” promote fairness in the workplace ,” Seattle’s KOMO reports. “It’s not about prayer, it’s not about religion; it’s about reasonable requirements,” Hertz spokesperson Rich Broome told the Associated Press. Teamster 117, the union representing the workers, said they tried to negotiate with Hertz before they terminated the employees, but that the company thinks it’s a fair solution to the problem. The union says the company should have taken a different approach to the problem before instating a general rule. “If there’s a problem with the performance or the conduct of any employee, you have the right to deal with that employee individually. That’s not what they did here,” union spokesperson Tracey Thompson, told KOMO . The union filed an unfair labor practices complaint with the National Labor Relations Board, the AP reports. For more on the story watch KOMO’s report above .

Read the full article →

WATCH: Occupy Melbourne Protest Turns Ugly

October 22, 2011

Buzzfeed obtained footage through the Herald Sun of police in Australia, pulling, dragging and arresting ‘Occupy’ protesters in Melbourne’s City Square. The paper reports that, on Friday, nearly 100 Occupy-protesters were arrested while 20 suffered minor injuries. A police officer and a protester were taken to the emergency room. Eight police cars were damaged during the protest, police told the newspaper. Occupy Melbourne protesters have been camping out in the City Square for over a week, PerthNow reports. Chaos broke out on Friday as about a hundred activists defied an order and refused to leave the square by 9am. According to The Australian , police had taken down the campsite and destroyed tents before the arrests. Despite Friday’s events, 400 protesters rallied in Federation Square in Melbourne on Saturday. Yet the arrests on Friday continue to fuel reactions on Twitter. @Suicidegirls tweeted, “This is INSANE!!!! Mass arrests @OccupyMelbourne…” @peacegalaxy tweets, “Shame on Melbourne Police. POWER TO THE PEACEFUL! Riot Police Brutalize Occupy Melbourne Protesters.” And @TheDebateRoom writes , “Please contact the Occupy Melbourne legal team with all reports of police brutality. Especially if you were hurt.” The ‘Occupy’ movement, which celebrated its one-month anniversary in New York, spread across the world in the past week, including demonstrations in London Paris, Rome and South Korea. Law enforcement in New York was also criticized when a YouTube video (shown below) surfaced of a cop shooting pepper spray into a crowd of women.

Read the full article →

Google Weighs Huge Acquisition

October 22, 2011

Google is exploring the possibility of helping to finance a possible deal by others to acquire Internet search company Yahoo, according to a report published report by the Wall Street Journal on Saturday. Google Inc. has talked to at least two-private equity firms about potentially assisting them to finance a deal to buy Yahoo Inc.’s core business, according to the story, which cited a person familiar with the matter, and did not identify the source. The Journal said Google and prospective partners have held early-stage discussions, but haven’t assembled a formal proposal. The source said Google may not end up pursuing a bid. A spokeswoman for Mountain View, Calif.-based Google declined to comment to The Associated Press. A spokeswoman for Sunnyvale, Calif.-based Yahoo said the company doesn’t comment “on rumor or speculation.” Any involvement by Google in a Yahoo acquisition would likely draw antitrust scrutiny from regulators, because of both companies’ shares in the Internet search business. The report came as investors have recently driven up Yahoo’s stock price, betting that the company will sell itself, either in whole or in part. Closing Friday at $16.12 apiece, the shares have gained nearly 25 percent since Sept. 6, when CEO Carol Bartz was fired. They are up 45 percent from the stock’s 52-week low reached in early August. There has been repeated speculation that the company might be sold to an assortment of buyout firms that prey upon troubled companies. Alibaba Group, a Chinese Internet company of which Yahoo owns a 43 percent stake, has expressed interest if it can line up the financing for a deal that would likely require a bid of more than $20 billion, the current market value of Yahoo’s shares. Microsoft Corp., which offered to buy Yahoo for $47.5 billion in 2008 before withdrawing the bid, also has been mentioned as a possible suitor. Since Bartz’ firing, Tim Morse has been filling in as Yahoo’s interim CEO while also working as chief financial officer. After the company’s third-quarter earnings announcement on Tuesday, Morse told analysts that he couldn’t discuss what the company’s next step might be or when it might take it. Yahoo is under pressure because its revenue has been falling at a time when the Internet advertising market has been growing as rivals such as Google and Facebook gain market share. Although it’s still recognized around the world, Yahoo’s brand has been losing its luster as people increasingly embrace social networks such as Facebook and short-messaging service Twitter to keep track of what’s going on instead of relying on a media hub like Yahoo’s website.

Read the full article →

The ‘Underground’ Gas Pipeline Business

October 22, 2011

by Nicholas Kusnetz, ProPublica The gas pipeline industry is hardly glamorous. But it is lucrative and loosely regulated. Last weekend, two oil and gas pipeline companies announced they would combine to create the biggest such firm in the U.S. when Kinder Morgan offered more than $20 billion to buy El Paso. If the deal goes through, the companies say, the behemoth would become the continent’s fourth largest energy corporation. While the pipeline business has operated largely, well, underground, several recent accidents have drawn attention to safety and the web of regulations that governs the nation’s 2.3 million miles of gas pipelines. A growing controversy over a plan to build a major oil pipeline from Canada’s Tar Sands to Texas has also spotlighted industry practices. On Monday, the Senate passed a pipeline safety bill that would increase fines, hire more inspectors and implement stronger safety standards. The industry has supported the measure, but some advocates have called for larger changes. Here’s a primer on the industry and its regulations. The Regulations The system that regulates natural gas pipelines is complex and, critics contend, lax. “There isn’t much regulation and it doesn’t really work,” said Rick Kessler, who sits on the board of the advocacy group Pipeline Safety Trust. Kessler is also a federal lobbyist on energy issues, but he does not represent pipeline companies. To build a pipeline to transport gas from Pennsylvania to New York, company X would have to seek a permit from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and prove that the line is needed. If the company convinces FERC of the need and that the proposed route is appropriate, the government could grant company X the right to seize property through eminent domain if it can’t work out deals with landowners. If the pipeline were not going to cross state lines a state commission would generally oversee the siting of the line. Texas is one of the more industry-friendly states on siting. It grants companies relatively wide latitude to seize property for new lines. Once a line is approved, a different agency takes over to handle safety issues. The federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration sets minimum safety standards, which states can supplement. If a pipe crosses state borders, enforcement generally falls to the federal government, while most states inspect lines that don’t leave the state. But whether the regulators are from Washington or the states, “They don’t come out and necessarily walk the pipeline,” said Richard Kuprewicz, a former pipeline engineer for Arco who is now a consultant. In fact, it is generally the pipeline operators themselves who inspect their own lines and report problems. Most government oversight involves checking the paperwork, making sure that things are up to code. “It’s compliance with the regulations,” Kuprewicz said. “It’s not, ‘Are you safe or not.’” The pipeline industry points to its safety record. Despite several high profile accidents – such as the explosion that killed 8 people in San Bruno, Calif., last year – the number of incidents has not changed dramatically in recent years. There are typically about 275 gas pipeline accidents a year that kill 10 to 15 people and injure about 65 to 70. There was a jump in the number of accidents on transmission lines from 2002 to 2004, but the numbers have generally held steady since then, according to PHMSA . The industry group for interstate transmission lines, the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America, did not respond to requests for comment. Lydia Meigs, a spokeswoman for the American Gas Association, which represents the utilities that operate most of the 2 million miles of shorter distribution lines (the type of lines involved in recent high-profile accidents) said the industry is best suited to enforce best practices. Critics disagree, pointing to the San Bruno explosion, where the operator didn’t run tests that could have detected the faulty weld that eventually failed. There’s also an entire class of pipelines that is largely unregulated. There are an estimated 200,000 miles of gathering lines – pipes that lead from wells to processing plants – in sparsely populated areas for which PHMSA does not set safety standards (the agency does regulate such lines in higher density areas). Most states do not regulate these lines either, so there is no reporting on any leaks that may be found. Siting is generally worked out by energy companies and landowners. These rural gathering lines are considered to be low risk not only because relatively few people live near them but also because they are generally smaller and operate at lower pressures than the lines that send gas from state to state. But in March, a federal advisory committee found that newer gathering lines , particularly those in shale gas development areas, are running at higher pressures and that operators should be required to submit safety reports. PHMSA, the federal regulator, is now considering whether to issue new regulations to cover these lines. Currently, PHMSA has 125 inspectors to cover 290,000 miles of gas and liquids lines, while about 300 state inspectors oversee the remaining 2.2 million miles, according to PHMSA. The Business The industry is dominated by a handful of companies, including El Paso, Enbridge and Williams Gas Pipeline, according to Fadel Gheit, an oil and gas analyst with Oppenheimer and Co. Kinder Morgan, for example, currently operates more than 37,000 miles of lines, carrying not only gas but also oil and carbon dioxide. Last year, the company had a net income of $1.3 billion on $8 billion in revenue. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission sets guidelines for what companies can charge to transport gas. The rates are based on market supply and demand and on the amount of money the company has to spend to build and maintain the line. A gas producer such as Exxon will generally buy a certain amount of transmission capacity and negotiate a rate within FERC’s guidelines. “It’s like buying a seat on a flight,” Gheit said. It’s a relatively predictable industry, Gheit said, because supply and demand don’t fluctuate wildly from year to year. When a company builds a line, it generally locks in long term contracts. Increased gas development has led to a push for new lines. FERC has approved dozens of new projects over the past couple of years. The Interstate Natural Gas Association of America says that, due to projected increases in production and consumption, the industry will need to build 35,600 miles of transmission lines and 414,000 miles of gathering lines by 2035, at a cost of nearly $140 billion dollars. Key Pipeline Stats* Miles of all types of pipelines, gas and liquid – more than 2.5 million Miles of federally regulated gas transmission andgathering lines – 321,000 Miles of gas distribution lines – about 2 million Miles of unregulated gas gathering lines – about 210,000 *Source: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials SafetyAdministration

Read the full article →

Women Making Slow, Sure Strides In Science, Math

October 22, 2011

— For many of the women, the chemistry lab was a home away from home – a sorority for nerds, of sorts, that hints at the slow but steady shift in technical fields that have been traditionally filled with men. Rebecca Allred has fond memories of that lab at the College of William and Mary in Virginia. She and her peers spent hours there. They worked into the night for their professor, Elizabeth Harbron, because they wanted to, blowing off steam by dancing to the soundtrack of “Mamma Mia” or taking a break on Fridays to play Putt-Putt golf together. Harbron was not only their mentor, but often a confidante. They shared their frustrations. They celebrated their successes. Several published their findings with Harbron’s guidance, a rarity for undergraduates. “That lab was a refuge between classes. I loved being there,” says Allred, now a second-year doctoral student in the Yale University chemistry department and one of a new generation of young women who are helping change the face of the so-called STEM fields – science, technology, engineering and math. Though she was happy to help blaze the path for them, Harbron says she didn’t set out to create an all-women’s lab. It happened naturally. Students like Allred sought her out because they liked her informal, lively teaching style. “I don’t want to become a female ghetto of over-achieving white girls,” Harbron jokes, referring to the general makeup of her lab these days. Then she asks more seriously: “But am I just perpetuating the model that’s gotten us where we are?” In other words, she wonders, has she inadvertently created the female version of the “old boys’ network”? Whatever the answer, it’s hard to argue with her results: her lab has become a place where these young women gained confidence to match their abilities, she says. Many, like Allred, have gone on to graduate programs. That’s a big deal in the STEM fields, which have been slower than other disciplines to integrate women at the highest levels. With two-thirds of all undergraduate degrees and 60 percent of master’s degrees now going to women, many believe it’s only a matter of time before that trend influences the upper echelons of the STEM fields. Already, statistics from the Council of Graduate Schools show that women, overall, earned slightly more than half of the doctorates handed out in all disciplines in the United States in 2009 and 2010. When it comes to the STEM fields, women have been most successful in medicine and biology – and least successful in engineering, math and computer science. But experts hope that, too, will change. A recent report from the American Association of University Women notes that, 30 years ago, the ratio of seventh- and eighth-grade boys who scored more than 700 on the SAT math exam, compared with girls, was 13 to 1. Now it’s 3 to 1. “You gotta fill up the pipeline and support these good people and, after a while, things get straightened out,” says Thomas Pollard, dean of Yale’s Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, which includes Allred’s program. Some would argue that that pipeline is still too leaky in the STEM fields. “In an ideal world you’d expect that it’d catch up, but it doesn’t quite catch up because we’re still losing women at every level,” says Ted Greenwood, a former director with the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, which funds several STEM programs that target women and minorities. That said, he and others note that women are still making more progress than minorities, particularly black men. And even in fields like chemistry, engineering and math, the percentages of women who received doctorates still has steadily increased over the last decade, according to the Council of Graduate Schools report. Rebecca Allred’s path to a doctoral program provides a glimpse of how it’s happening – and how crucial access and support can be. ___ It began, she says, with her first role model – her mother, Janet Mikulas. Mikulas, who got her engineering degree in the 1970s from Virginia Tech, can hardly imagine what it would be like to have so many women peers, as her daughter did at William and Mary. “You know,” Mikulas remembers her mother whispering to her after she announced her major to her parents, “Dad always said you should be an engineer.” She was stunned. Why didn’t she know this? Why hadn’t her father told her? Her mother explained, as best she could, that he had felt it was wrong to encourage her to enter a male-dominated field, that he thought he was supposed to encourage her to be a mother and a secretary. “He did it with the very best of intentions. He taught me a million things all his life. I was his best buddy,” Mikulas said. “But he couldn’t quite tell me what he really thought.” Mikulas and her husband, also an engineer, vowed that it would be different for their daughters. “We decided that we’d let them be what they wanted to be,” she says. Some would say there was no way Allred – known as Rebecca Mikulas before she married her college sweetheart in 2009 – could have failed. She had educational opportunities that many do not, including a private school in rural Virginia where classes were small and where she was given the chance to study at her own pace. She also had the smarts, skipping kindergarten and second grade and taking college classes by the time she was in middle school. She finished her high school requirements by age 16 but then decided to take more math and science courses at a public high school, where she also excelled at volleyball, basketball and track. Her parents always worked to integrate math and science into everyday life on their family farm and during dinnertime conversations. But she also had teachers who encouraged and challenged her – another key, experts say, in keeping girls engaged. Her mother remembers how Rebecca’s high school chemistry teacher put off retiring for a year so she could have Rebecca as a student in her advanced-placement class. The teacher was certain she’d be her first student to receive the top score of 5 on the AP chemistry test. And Rebecca did. She was considering colleges, including Harvard, around the time when Harvard’s then-president, Lawrence Summers, made controversial comments questioning women’s aptitude for top-level science and math. He later stepped down. Unfazed, 17-year-old Rebecca went to William and Mary on a track scholarship. There, she took a chemistry class with Harbron – and applied for a spot in Harbron’s lab. She quickly realized she’d found her next mentor. “She was so animated and funny – and into what she was doing,” Allred says of her professor. “I wanted to be a part of it.” When she first joined Harbron’s lab, she was the only woman student. “I had to learn my boy social dynamics,” Allred says, laughing and noting that, at that point, many of her interactions at her Mormon church and in sports were with other women. You wouldn’t think that would matter much. But Harbron and other professors say there’s an interesting dynamic they often see in coed labs. Women tend to hang back, they say, and let men take the lead role. “They’re so afraid of being wrong. I don’t think guys have that fear,” Harbron says. “If they’re admitting they don’t know something, then they are admitting a vulnerability. “But what they don’t realize is that other people don’t know either.” Christina Davis, another student who was in Harbron’s lab when Allred was there, remembers feeling stressed out by her need to be perfect, to have all the answers. She balked, at first, when Harbron refused to tell her what result she should expect in an experiment. But Davis says she soon learned to love exploring the unknown in experiments, so much so that she, too, eventually decided to pursue a doctorate in chemistry instead of going to medical school. “I stopped following the plan I had written when I was 7 and opened myself up to new possibilities,” says Davis, who’s now in the PhD program at the University of Texas and currently studying in South Korea. Increasingly, some institutions are finding value in more formal all-women’s programs in the STEM fields. The all-women’s Smith College in Massachusetts, for instance, bucked its liberal arts tradition and started an engineering program 10 years ago – a decision other all-women’s schools are following. Some students come to Smith knowing they want to be engineers. Others are drawn into the program by an introductory class called “Engineering for Everyone.” Another interesting result: Most of the students in the Smith program have ended up choosing mechanical or electrical engineering – specialties within that field that women have tended to avoid. The program is also growing, averaging 20 students a year until this year, when that number doubled, says Donna Riley, an associate professor of engineering at Smith who helped found the program. “Our teachers are stretched,” Riley says of the uptick. “But it’s a good problem to have.” Meanwhile, other institutions are targeting younger students, since research has shown that girls tend to lose interest in science and math in middle school. That research also has shown that income plays a greater role than gender when it comes to students who make it to the highest levels of the STEM fields. That’s why Pamela Clute, a math lecturer who is also assistant vice provost for academic partnerships at the University of California, Riverside, developed summer and after-school math programs for middle school girls – many of them from low-income neighborhoods. She calls her program and its participants GEMS – Girls Excelling in Mathematics with Success. The curriculum, she says, incorporates topics that the teen girls tell her they’re interested in. They might be asked to solve math problems that incorporate questions about fashion and cell phones, for instance. They also are allowed to work in groups. “If you say, algebra, people tend to vomit,” Clute quips. But if you can show them how it applies to real life, she says, that attitude changes. An interest in science and math was never an issue for Allred. When she was in middle school, she was asking questions at the dinner table that always seemed to spark an answer related to either topic. Once, noticing that ice cubes get smaller in the freezer over time, she asked, “Where do ice cubes go?” her mother recalled. “And we would have a conversation around the dinner table about sublimation.” Then she’d go to school and tell her teacher about how a solid like an ice cube can turn to gas – “but never in a braggart way.” “She absorbed everything and liked to share it,” her mom says. “And that feeling of success would motivate her to study more.” ___ That motivation carried her to Yale, where she is now balancing parenthood with her studies. She and her husband Jacob Allred had a daughter, Anna, this past spring. Allred hinted at their plan when she interviewed with various doctoral programs. “Why would you have kids when you’re going to school?” was the response she got from an official at one of the schools she considered. Only two schools she visited mentioned policies for parental leave, for any student. Yale was one of them. “I think it’s being driven by doing the right thing as opposed to being used as a recruiting tool,” says Pollard, the dean who oversees Allred’s program and others at Yale. “But we all know that if you have good practices, you attract good students.” Pollard also concedes that he is particularly sensitive to parental issues because his own daughter, a junior professor at another institution, just had twins. Among other things, he hopes the university will improve its day care options. And he says the university just completed a report that examines how various departments can make sure their students – female or male – finish their programs. Once again, Allred says she feels that crucial support, from her advisor and also her fellow students. Her husband also has agreed to stay home with Anna until Allred gets her doctorate, maybe by the time Anna is in kindergarten. She jokes that she’ll then take on the title of “Dr. Mom,” certain that she will be able to add her name to the list of women with PhDs in the STEM fields that is growing – slowly but surely. “I’m not sure where this is going to take me,” Allred says. “I’m just so grateful that I’m here at a time when I can do this.”

Read the full article →

Volcker Rule So Complex Even Volcker Says He Doesn’t Like It

October 22, 2011

When Paul Volcker called for new rules in 2009 to curb risk-taking by banks, and thus avoid making taxpayers liable in the future for the kind of reckless speculation that caused the financial crisis and resulting bailout, he outlined his proposal in a three-page letter to the president.

Read the full article →

Global Ban Advances To Stop Dumping Toxic Waste On Developing Countries

October 22, 2011

CARTAGENA, Colombia — More than 170 countries agreed Friday to accelerate adoption of a global ban on the export of hazardous wastes, including old electronics, to developing countries. The environmental group Basel Action Network called the deal, which was brokered by Switzerland and Indonesia, a major breakthrough. “I’m ecstatic,” said its executive director, Jim Puckett. “I’ve been working on this since 1989 and it really does look like the shackles are lifted and we’ll see this thing happen in my lifetime.” The deal seeks to ensure that developing countries no longer become dumping groups for toxic waste including industrial chemicals, discarded computers and cellphones and obsolete ships laden with asbestos, he said. Delegates at the U.N. environmental conference in Cartagena agreed the ban should take effect as soon as 17 more countries ratify an amendment to the so-called 1989 Basel Convention. “This agreement was stalled for the past 15 years,” Colombia’s environment minister, Frank Pearl, said in praising the vote. Katharina Kummer, the convention’s executive secretary, estimated it will take about five years to reach the required 68 ratifying nations. Puckett said he thought it would be closer to two years. Fifty-one nations have already ratified the 1995 amendment, which effectively enforces the Basel Convention, a treaty aimed at making nations manage their waste at home rather than send it overseas. The United States, the world’s top exporter of electronic waste, is among nations that have not even ratified the original convention. “Unless the U.S. joins the treaty they are just going to be a renegade,” Puckett said, adding that the U.S. has no rules for exporting electronic waste, which it sends mostly to China but also to Africa and Latin America. Phone messages left by The Associated Press for members of the U.S. delegation to the talks were not immediately returned. The global ban has been strongly backed by African countries, China and the European Union, which already prohibits toxic exports and Puckett said Colombia played a strong role in Friday’s breakthrough. Opponents have been led by Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Japan, and recently joined by India, said Puckett. But in Cartagena, he said, Japan’s position softened from 2008, when parties to the convention held their last meeting in Bali, Indonesia. It ended in a stalemate. The issue took center stage in 2006 when hundreds of tons of waste were dumped around the Ivory Coast’s main city of Abidjan, killing at least 10 people and sickening tens of thousands. The waste came from a tanker chartered by the Dutch commodities trading company Trafigura Beheer BV, which had contracted with a local company to dispose of the waste. Puckett said shipping companies had opposed inclusion in the ban, wanting the keep sending old ships to India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to scrap them. “Just about four days ago another six people died on the beaches of Bangladesh,” he said. He told the AP there are no reliable estimates on how many tons of toxic waste are exported annually because developed nations don’t accurately report them. He said a private U.S. company will, for example, list them as “exports” in sending them to a developing nation so they can avoid paying taxes and other fees. The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal allows its 178 members to ban imports and requires exporters to gain consent before sending toxic materials abroad. But critics say insufficient funds, widespread corruption and the absence of the United States as a participant have undermined the convention, leaving millions of poor people exposed to heavy metals, PCBs and other toxins. They have long argued that an outright ban of exporting toxic waste is the only solution. ___ Frank Bajak contributed from Bogota, Colombia.

Read the full article →

Krugman: GOP Jobs Plan Is To Allow More Pollution

October 22, 2011

Last month President Obama finally unveiled a serious economic stimulus plan — far short of what I’d like to see, but a step in the right direction. Republicans, predictably, have blocked it. But the new plan, combined with the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations, seems to have shifted the national conversation. We are, suddenly, focused on what we should have been talking about all along: jobs.

Read the full article →

Steve Jobs Biography Hints At What’s To Come From Apple

October 22, 2011

While at the helm of Apple, Steve Jobs shrouded the company’s plans in secrecy. He even lied regularly, assuring the world Apple had no plans for a certain product, just months before he’d release precisely such a device. Yet Walter Isaacson’s biography of Jobs , which was based on more than forty interviews with the Apple co-founder, lets slip several hints at what may be to come from the company and pulls back the curtain on the balance of power among the executives Jobs installed at Apple. Jobs had ambitions to reinvent television and textbooks, according to Isaacson’s biography . “I’d like to create an integrated television set that is completely easy to use,” Jobs said. As the Washington Post first noted, Isaacson writes that Jobs “very much wanted to do for television sets what he had done for computers, music players, and phones: make them simple and elegant.” “It would be seamlessly synced with all of your devices and with iCloud,” Jobs told Isaacson. “It will have the simplest user interface you could imagine. I finally cracked it.” Apple currently offers a set-top box, Apple TV, that allows users to play content from iTunes and other media providers on their television sets. Yet rumors have circulated for years that an Apple-branded television with more robust integration is in the works. The company has repeatedly dismissed the product as a mere “hobby.” Citing unnamed sources “familiar with the matter,” the Wall Street Journal reported earlier this year that Apple was at work on “new technology to deliver video to televisions and has been discussing whether to try to launch a subscription TV service.” Piper Jaffray’s Apple analyst Gene Munster also predicted that a number of signs, such as the launch of Apple’s iCloud service, Apple’s registration of TV-related patents, and new deals Apple has struck with suppliers, point to the release of an Apple television set by late 2012 or early 2013. However, Munster has previously argued that 2011 would be the year of the Apple-branded television — and users are still waiting for the mythical device. In a 2010 interview, Jobs said he was finished working on the TV industry. “Smarter people than us will figure it out,” he said –- a mere three months before unveiling the second generation of the Apple TV. Isaacson’s biography reveals that Jobs also targeted the textbook industry for transformation and met with major textbook publishers to discuss a partnership with Apple. “He believed it was an $8 billion a year industry ripe for digital destruction,” Isaacson writes. “His idea was to hire great textbook writers to create digital versions, and make them a feature of the iPad.” “The process by which states certify textbooks is corrupt,” Jobs told Isaacson. “But if we can make the textbooks free, and they come with the iPad, then they don’t have to be certified. The crappy economy at the state level will last for a decade, and we can give them an opportunity to circumvent that whole process and save money.” It would hardly be the first time Jobs would take on the challenge of revamping education: NeXT, the company he founded in 1985 after his ouster from Apple, also had ambitions of providing new tools for the classroom, though academic institutions balked at the NeXT computer’s $6,500 pricetag. Jobs’ wife Laurene Powell has been actively involved in education reform for more than a decade. In 1997, she co-founded College Track, a non-profit that aims to increase the number of low-income students who graduate from high-school and go on to receive college degrees. Isaacson’s biography also provides a glimpse into Apple’s corporate politics and the executives who now control its fate. Some doubt whether Tim Cook, who took over as CEO of Apple following Jobs’ resignation in August , can emulate Jobs’ vision and question whether a former COO known for streamlining supply chains can pioneer the industry-changing devices expected of Apple. Jobs, who nominated Cook to be his replacement, may have had his own reservations. He admitted to Isaacson, “Tim’s not a product person, per se.” Yet Jobs also had high praise for Cook, saying he could be a better negotiator than Jobs. “[W]e started to work together, and before long I trusted him to know exactly what to do,” Jobs told Isaacson. Isaacson’s biography suggests that it is Jonathan Ive , Apple’s senior vice president of industrial design and the architect of the company’s sleek and iconic devices, who may be left with the most power — which is exactly the way Jobs intended it, according to the book. “If I had a spiritual partner at Apple, it’s Jony,” Jobs said. “He has more operational power than anyone else at Apple, except me. There’s no one who can tell him what to do, or to butt out. That’s the way I set it up.”

Read the full article →

State In No Rush To Pay Huge Backlog Of Unpaid Bills

October 22, 2011

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — Don’t look for quick action to reduce Illinois’ huge backlog of unpaid bills, despite universal agreement among state leaders that the debt is unfair to businesses, charities and local governments that provide valuable services. Progress is blocked by fundamental disagreements on how to solve the problem and a lack of any sense of urgency among officials. Even with the Legislature’s fall session beginning next week, officials report little or no discussion of what can be done to pay the bills, which total billions of dollars. Gov. Pat Quinn did not list the issue among his top three priorities for the session – ending legislative scholarships, passing a revised gambling expansion and sustaining his veto of a “smart grid” energy system. The Senate’s top Republican doesn’t expect progress any time soon. The speaker of the House and president of the Senate say they’re waiting for signs of cooperation from Republicans. Sen. John Sullivan, a proponent of borrowing money to pay the backlog, said he won’t bother calling for a vote on his plan. “I see no reason to bring it up just to fail,” said the Rushville Democrat. While acknowledging the long odds, advocates for human service groups still plan to push for action, hopefully this fall but perhaps in January. They’re trying to build support for several options: borrowing, taking money out of special-purpose funds or simply devoting any extra income to the backlog. “It’s a moral, ethical obligation,” said Judith Gethner, director of Illinois Partners for Human Service. Officials are split, largely along party lines, into two camps on how to address the backlog. Many Democrats want to borrow by selling bonds and using the money to pay overdue bills. They maintain this would not be new debt. State government already owes vendors who can ill-afford to go without their money, they say, so it would simply be a matter of changing things so the state owes money to a different, more willing group – bond-buyers. “Debt restructuring is the very best way to have Illinois pay its bills immediately,” Quinn, a Democrat, said in an interview with The Associated Press. “Mainly the reason it hasn’t passed is politics. It isn’t policy,” he said. Not true, say those in the other camp. They say it’s bad management to pay for everyday government expenses by borrowing money over many years. They want to reduce the backlog gradually with money saved by cutting spending and with higher revenues that come in as the economy improves. Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno, R-Lemont, criticized Quinn for not doing more to overhaul government spending for the long run. “There is no plan here to dig out other than borrowing, and that is the wrong answer,” Radogno said. Any borrowing plan would require a super-majority for approval, meaning Democrats need at least a few Republican supporters. One of the few people with a foot in each camp is Treasurer Dan Rutherford, a Republican. In May, Rutherford sharply condemned the idea of taking on more debt and threatened to lobby credit-rating agencies to reject the borrowing if Illinois were to go that direction. But last month he told the Illinois State Chamber of Commerce that not paying bills is “criminal” and it might be feasible to borrow money to pay them. “For those of you that are owed money from the state of Illinois, I support the idea of looking at refinancing some kind of a package to take the burden of the debt load off of you and put it on the state,” Rutherford said. Republicans want to see major changes in government pensions and Medicaid. They predict the changes would save huge amounts of money, but they also acknowledge it would be a long process. In his spring budget address, Quinn proposed borrowing $8.7 billion over 14 years. Lawmakers essentially ignored the idea. In May, Sullivan proposed borrowing $6.2 billion for about half that amount of time. It failed 19-23. Key figures report almost no discussion of alternatives or compromises since then. Republican legislative leaders say the governor’s staff recently approached them about possibly supporting a $4 billion borrowing plan, but they rejected it. Sullivan said he has had no contact with the governor, or with the treasurer, and doesn’t know of anything likely to change the status quo in Springfield. Spokesmen for Senate President John Cullerton and House Speaker Michael Madigan, both Chicago Democrats, said they haven’t pursued the issue because there’s no sign Republicans are willing to cooperate. The size of the backlog varies. As of Sept. 8, it was just over $5 billion. Nearly half of that was more than a month old, and $1.4 billion was more than two months old. State government owed the money to businesses that provided food for prisons and gasoline for vehicles, to nonprofits that care for the disabled and protect abused women, to local governments that educate students and feed hungry children. Illinois raised income taxes dramatically this year. The money, along with budget cuts, was enough to bring revenue and spending into balance but not pay off the old bills So far, money is flowing into the treasury faster than anticipated in the state budget. But a weak economy means revenues could still dry up, warns the Legislature’s Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability. For now, what to do with the additional money is likely to be a major question for lawmakers meeting this month and next. Should Quinn’s plan to close facilities and cut jobs be blocked? Should canceled government raises be restored? Should overdue bills be paid off? Gethner, of Illinois Partners for Human Services, is lobbying for bills to be top priority. It won’t be easy, she said, but it’s still possible. “I’m certainly not 100 percent in the pessimistic camp,” Gethner said. ____ ____ Christopher Wills can be reached at http//:twitter.com/ChrisBWills

Read the full article →

German Central Bank Head: Repeatedly Expanding Bailout Fund Won’t Solve Crisis

October 22, 2011

BERLIN (Reuters) – Bundesbank president Jens Weidmann said in a newspaper interview released on Saturday that repeatedly expanding the euro zone rescue fund won’t resolve the euro zone crisis. In an interview with Bild am Sonntag released ahead of publication, Weidmann also warned against giving the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) a banking license. He said that would be a fatal path to take if states were able to switch on the printing presses. Weidmann also said that raising the leverage of the EFSF would raise risks for German taxpayers. He said there were “good reasons” that EU treaties prevent the EFSF from obtaining a bank license. “The crisis won’t be resolved by permanently increasing the size of the euro zone rescue fund,” Weidmann said. Weidmann warned giving the EFSF a banking license would be tantamount to “turning on the printing presses for state finances and that would be in my view a fatal path to take. And there are good reasons that is forbidden by EU treaties.” He appealed to euro zone governments, saying they “must make a clear decision about which direction to go, how the future of the monetary union should continue.” Weidmann said it should also be remembered that there were also risks associated with increasing the leveraging the EFSF. “With the size of the leveraging obviously the size of the risk rises,” he said. “The fundamental question is how long will it work in the euro zone that countries continue to operate their policies independently while at the same time increasingly collectivising the risks.” He warned against subordinating the central bank beneath financial policy. “Its mission to ensure monetary stability and low inflation rates could then no longer be ensured.” (Reporting By Erik Kirschbaum) Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions .

Read the full article →

Ira Neimark: Telephone Manners

October 22, 2011

Have you noticed that as dress codes eroded over the past few years, telephone manners have deteriorated as well? One of the telltale signs of rudeness is made by someone who does not respond after a reasonable length of time to a phone message awaiting a reply. This usually indicates how important or unimportant the recipient feels about the caller. This would rarely happen in a person-to-person meeting, which would be considered a snub. Bad form. Another bad habit has developed. A secretary or a receptionist, when asking you,” Who is calling?” and you respond with your name, replies, “One moment, please,” using your first name. When that occurs, I ask the receptionist or the secretary, “Do I know you?” the usual reply is a hesitant “Sorry,” or some other weak excuse, as he or she likely has not been trained properly or doesn’t know any better. As progress moves far ahead, Alexander Graham Bell would never have dreamed of cell phones or the misuse of them when he made that first, famous phone call to Mr. Watson. There is no question cell phones are as necessary for communication as cars are to transportation. However, it is bad form, and in some cities, illegal, to blow the car horn, annoying other drivers, pedestrians, and neighborhoods. Again, using a cell phone in an area disturbing to others telegraphs a lack of manners, possibly reflecting a poor upbringing, and displaying indifference to the immediate surroundings. No one wants to be thought of as having a poor upbringing. However, there are those who show that lack loud and clear (no pun intended) by displaying little or no consideration for the people within their hearing range. Possibly not considered bad telephone manners, but just as irritating, is hearing the answering machine at the other end requiring the caller to “Press one, two, three,” and so on to reach the designated party. It would seem that successful businesspeople of yore understood the importance of their customers by employing telephone operators making connections to people or departments in that business. Today, unfortunately, too many financial people wield their influence by cutting costs and salaries by having computer programs and computer-generated voices do the work. Thus, the disconnect to customers many times over. In the process, not only did the professional salespeople disappear but courteous telephone operators also became a vanished breed as well. It is puzzling that successful businesses spend millions and millions of advertising dollars to develop favorable and identifiable images. They then throw much of that away, frustrating and angering their customers by forcing them to run through an endless loop of pushing buttons to discourage them from speaking with a person and the company harboring the added “expense” that entails. Customers who are valued assets should be greeted by a person at the other end who reflects the company’s desired image. Lessons Learned: To greet customers by their (proper) name has many advantages. In the past and today, most people in our society attempt to show considerations in social situations. However, there are those among us who unfortunately have not been taught at home or at school that certain social situations require good manners. The same applies to businesses that have forgotten the importance of the human touch. To read more from Ira Neimark, check out The Rise of Fashion and Lessons Learned at Bergdorf Goodman (Fairchild Books).

Read the full article →

World Economic Forum: Arab Spring Slowed Economies

October 22, 2011

DEAD SEA, Jordan (Reuters) – The popular uprisings that have swept the Arab world this year have slowed economies across the region, and jobs, better governance and investment are needed, speakers at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Jordan said on Saturday. Jordanian King Abdullah said at the opening of the forum on unemployment, economic stagnation and other problems — some of which sparked the uprisings across the Middle East and north Africa — that the region needs to create 85 million jobs soon. “This year’s events have opened the way to positive change, but in many places, also created painful economic dislocations. Strategies are urgently needed, and they must take place across the board – in economic life, in politics and policies, in social life and cultural values,” he said. In Yemen, for example, where two in three people survive on less than $2 per day, 40 percent of the population suffer from illiteracy and high unemployment. “The biggest challenge facing the Arab world.. is better governance and investing in education that allows us to compete and raise living standards,” said Mohamed al-Shaya chairman of Kuwaiti Shaya group. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) recently said that the uprisings have cost the most affected countries more than $55 billion, but the resulting high oil prices have strengthened other producing countries. It said countries that had seen the bloodiest confrontations — Libya and Syria — were bearing the economic brunt, followed by Egypt, Tunisia, Bahrain and Yemen. “In the short term it is like major surgery and then recuperation, but in the long term it will lead to stability and it will make the region attractive to investors,” Ismail Tahboub, CEO of Jordan Dubai capital investment firm, told Reuters. The unrest has badly damaged tourism and foreign investment in the Middle East, undermining economic growth. But investors said the region would eventually prosper. “We are witnessing a period of transition but it is mainly positive,” said Danny E.Sebright president of the US-UAE Business Council. “Anytime you have a reform movement looking for transparency and openness, the outcome will be positive at the end of the day,” he told Reuters on the sidelines of the conference. In Egypt, nine months of turmoil has knocked some 4.2 percent off gross domestic product with public expenditure rising to $5.5 billion as public revenues fell by $75 million. The impact of unrest is hard to ascertain in Syria, but the IMF report suggested a total cost to the Syrian economy of some $6 billion or 4.5 percent of GDP. Tunisia has lost some $2.0 billion from its GDP, roughly 5.2 percent, and the government has increased expenditure, pushing its fiscal balance into the red. “In the long term the Arab spring is good, but in the short and medium term its effect is very negative,” said Iman Bibars, head of the Cairo-based Association for the Development and Enhancement of Women, citing record-high unemployment as well as inflation. “Democracy takes time.” Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for Restrictions .

Read the full article →

European Official: EU Banks Need To Raise $140 Billion

October 22, 2011

BRUSSELS — EU finance ministers neared agreement Saturday on forcing banks to raise just over euro100 billion ($140 billion) to ensure they have enough cushion to weather further losses on their Greek bonds as well as market turmoil, a European official said. In order to help Athens dig out of its debts – and hopefully keep a cap on the amount of money they have to loan Greece – the 17 countries that use the euro agreed Friday to ask banks to take bigger writedowns on Greek bonds. A new report suggests the value of Greek bonds might need to be slashed as much as 60 percent. Taming Greece’s debts is an important part of the euro debt crisis puzzle, but it could make banks across the continent – not just in the eurozone – more vulnerable at a time when they’re already facing declining stock prices and finding it difficult to get regular loans for their day-to-day operations. So when the eurozone finance ministers decided to reopen negotiations on Greek debt with the banks, the EU had to force its banks to reinforce their rainy-day funds. Strengthening banks and slashing Greece’s debts are critical to solving Europe’s crisis, which is now threatening to engulf larger economies like Italy and Spain and is blamed for dampening growth across Europe and even the world. “The crisis in the eurozone is doing real damage to many of the European economies, including Britain,” George Osborne, Britain’s chancellor of the exchequer, said as he headed into Saturday’s meeting. “We have had enough of short-term measures, sticking plasters that get us through the next few weeks.” The European official said EU leaders meeting Sunday should sign off on forcing the continent’s biggest banks to raise just over euro100 billion in capital. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions between ministers were still ongoing. The figure is likely to disappoint some analysts. A report by the International Monetary Fund has called for up to euro200 billion ($280 billion) to be poured into banks. The new rules would force systemically important banks to raise their core capital ratios to 9 percent, compared with just 5 percent to 6 percent they needed to pass EU stress tests this summer. The ratio measures the amount of capital banks hold compared to their risky assets. Greece, of course, has it far worse: The country is struggling through a third year of recession and record unemployment, which reached 16.5 percent in July. Deep anger is building against the Socialist government’s repeated rounds of new austerity measures. A two-day general strike against the new cuts and taxes shut down much of the country this week and led to violent protests on the streets of Athens. Pressure to contain the Greek crisis ramped up Friday after a new report from the country’s debt inspectors – the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the IMF – showed that its economic situation had deteriorated dramatically even since the summer. If banks don’t take bigger losses, the report said, Greece’s debt would peak at a massive 186 percent of economic output in 2013 and only decline to 152 percent by the end of 2020. That would prevent Greece from raising money on the markets until 2021 and require the eurozone and the IMF to fund an extra euro252 billion ($350 billion) in new loans to Greece through 2020, according to the report, which was marked confidential but was seen by The Associated Press. Those funds would be in addition to Greece’s first bailout of euro110 billion ($152 billion), which has been keeping the country afloat since May of last year, and another euro109 billion ($150 billion) rescue agreed to in July. The report said that Greece’s debts would have to be cut by 60 percent if the eurozone wants to avoid lending it more money. It did not make policy recommendations, and the European Central Bank opposes cutting Greece’s debts further. But finance ministers are clearly paying close attention to the experts’ document. Austrian Finance Minister Maria Fekter told journalists Saturday that the eurozone’s chief negotiator, Vittorio Grilli, had been asked to restart negotiations with banks. That means the July deal, under which banks would have taken writedowns on their Greek bond holdings of about 21 percent, is definitively off the table. Despite that significant progress, agreement on arguably the most important measure has remained elusive to eurozone leaders: boosting the firepower of the currency union’s euro440 billion ($600 billion) bailout fund to keep the crisis from spreading. Increasing the effectiveness of the fund – called the European Financial Stability Facility – is meant to help prevent larger economies like Italy and Spain from being unable to afford to borrow money from markets. That’s exactly what happened to Greece, Portugal and Ireland and why those three EU countries needed bailouts. Germany and France still disagree over how to do that and failed to make much progress on that front Friday night. German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy are meeting Saturday evening in the hopes of moving toward a deal. The Greek crisis and its threat of contagion have led to calls for more robust intervention when it becomes clear that an EU country is in financial trouble. German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said Saturday that the EU along with the IMF should be able to directly intervene in the budgets of member states if they are receiving financial aid but failing to meet fiscal targets. But not all EU nations share his view. The foreign ministers of Luxembourg and Finland cautioned that changing the EU treaty is too big a task to tackle now and the bloc should try instead to strengthen budget rules through existing channels. Significant changes to the EU treaty would require national referendums in some countries, and winning approval for the current treaty from 27 nations took 10 years. ___ Elena Becatoros contributed to this report from Brussels.

Read the full article →

Music Legends Join Occupy Wall Street, Perform For Protesters

October 22, 2011

NEW YORK — Folk music legend Pete Seeger and `60s folk singer Arlo Guthrie joined Occupy Wall Street demonstrators Friday in their campaign against corporate greed while residents near the protest park encampment pushed to regain some peace and quiet in their neighborhood. Seeger joined in the Occupy Wall Street protest Friday night, replacing his banjo with two canes as he marched with throngs of people in New York City’s tony Upper West Side past banks and shiny department stores. The 92-year-old Seeger, accompanied by musician-grandson Tao Rodriguez Seeger, composer David Amram, and bluesman Guy Davis, shouted out the verses of protest anthems as the crowd of about 1,000 people sang and chanted. They marched peacefully over more than 30 blocks from Symphony Space, where the Seegers and other musicians performed, to Columbus Circle. Police watched from the sidelines. Occupy Wall Street began a month ago in lower Manhattan among a few young people, and has grown to tens of thousands around the country and the world. A recent Associated Press-GfK poll says more than one-third of the country supports the Wall Street protesters, and even more – 58 percent – say they are furious about America’s politics. But the encampment at Zuccotti Park has become more than a tolerable nuisance, some neighborhood residents say. At a meeting Thursday, they complained of protesters urinating in the streets and beating drums in the middle of the night. Some called for the protesters to vacate the park. The area’s community board voted unanimously for a resolution that recognized the protesters’ First Amendment rights while calling for a crackdown on noise and public urination and defecation. U.S. Rep. Jerrold Nadler, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer and state Sen. Daniel Squadron said in a statement that the resolution was “an attempt to establish a sensible framework that respects the protesters’ fundamental rights while addressing the very real quality of life concerns for residents and businesses around Zuccotti Park.” Asked about Occupy Wall Street on WOR Radio on Friday, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the protesters’ leaderless structure has made it difficult to negotiate with them. Occupy Wall Street spokesman Han Shan, who has served as a liaison between protesters and local elected officials, agreed the protesters needed to be better neighbors. Shan, who attended the meeting, promised to limit the noise. At Columbus Circle, Seeger and friends walked to the chant of “We are the 99 percent” and “We are unstoppable; another world is possible.” Seeger stopped to bang a metal statue of an elephant with his cane – to cheers from the crowd. At the center of the plaza, Seeger and Amram were joined by Guthrie in a round of “We Shall Overcome,” a protest anthem made popular by Seeger. After more singing, Seeger asked for a mic check to tell the crowd: “The words are simple: I could be happy spending my days on the river that flows both way-ay-ays.” During the march, the younger Seeger, in troubadour fashion like his grandfather, walked among the protesters playing songs. Amra took up a flute and others enlivened the night protest with the sounds of the accordion, banjos, and guitars. At the front of the throng, marchers held American flags and a large blue flag that said: “Revolution Generation … Debt is Slavery.” Along the way, the crowd sang protest songs made popular or written by Seeger, Woody Guthrie, and others of the protest era. ___(equals) Associated Press writer Karen Matthews contributed to this report.

Read the full article →

British Pound to Follow S&P 500 as EU Debt Crisis Drama Unfolds

October 22, 2011

British Pound to Follow S&P 500 as EU Debt Crisis Drama Unfolds

Read the full article →

Busy Week with Mixed Economic Data from the United States, while Europe Dominate the Headlines

October 22, 2011

Busy Week with Mixed Economic Data from the United States, while Europe Dominate the Headlines

Read the full article →

Asia releases critical data last week with China the main focus

October 22, 2011

Asia releases critical data last week with China the main focus

Read the full article →

Attention remains on the latest developments in the euro area; BoE waits to determine the size of the stimulus

October 22, 2011

Attention remains on the latest developments in the euro area; BoE waits to determine the size of the stimulus

Read the full article →

Ian Fletcher: Gov. Buddy Roemer Calls for Withdrawal From NAFTA, WTO

October 22, 2011

I have detailed in previous articles my search for a Republican presidential candidate who is good on trade issues. The candidates range from the pro-China Huntsman, to the corrupt and naïve Perry , to those who sound good but leave unclear where they really stand, like Cain , to those who leave doubt as to whether they would back up their nice words with deeds, like Romney . But I have found one candidate whom I believe is genuinely serious about fixing America’s trade mess. He’s an undeniable long shot, as Herman Cain was until recently. But it’s not my aim here to handicap a horse race. It’s to discern the consequences of getting one of these individuals elected. That man is Buddy Roemer , the former governor of Louisiana and a former congressman. He was generous enough to grant me an interview on the subject a few days ago, and here’s what he said: Author : How do you feel about the just-passed Colombia, Panama, and Korea free trade agreements? Gov. Roemer: I think they’re just terrible and should be repealed. They will cost America jobs and expose us to all sorts of other problems. Panama is a huge center of offshore financial fraud, something I know from my days as the president of a [non-Wall Street] bank. This treaty takes away from America many of the tools we use to fight financial fraud. The Korea agreement is with a country that has an aggressive policy of targeting American industries, and it’s very one-sided. Korea’s going to be allowed to export to us something like six times the number of cars we get to export to them. And they’re going to allow goods that are 65 percent Chinese to sneak into the U.S. under this agreement — even goods from North Korea. Colombia’s a mess right now: lots of political violence; you don’t want to be getting into bed with people like that. Author: How do you feel about NAFTA, CAFTA, and our other trade agreements? Gov. Roemer: They should go, be repealed. We really ought to have learned our lesson about NAFTA by now. It has not been a success, not for us and not for Mexico, which is now losing jobs to China. Ross Perot warned Al Gore in that debate in ’93 that there was going to be a giant sucking sound of job loss, and that’s exactly what’s happened. The same goes for CAFTA in Central America and the others. These agreements didn’t happen because the American people wanted them. They happened because corporate America wanted them and with the campaign-finance system we have now, corporate America can buy whatever it wants in Washington. That’s why I took campaign finance reform as the key to my campaign and I’ve limited my contributions to $100. And remember, a lot of it wasn’t even corporate America, it was multinational corporations that don’t give a fig about this country anymore. They say they do, but they don’t. They pretend to be American on Capitol Hill. Author: How do you feel about the U.S. trade deficit? Gov. Roemer: It’s horrendous, and it’s the one big cause of job loss that nobody in the political establishment — not on the Democrat side, not on the Republican side — wants to talk about. They’re all blathering about expanding exports when it doesn’t matter how much we export if our imports just keep going up even more, which is what’s been happening. It’s only net exports that are going to make a dent in our unemployment, and we’re going the opposite direction right now with a trade deficit that is around $500 billion a year or so. That’s a jobs plan we could do right now: end the trade deficit, or at least cut it. A lot of people in the administration, in the Wall Street Journal crowd, in the Republican House leadership, seem to think our trade deficits aren’t real money. So long as they get one more quarter of rising profits, one more term in office, they don’t care. But it’s real money, money that we borrow abroad and sell off our assets here in the United States, and that’s a permanent loss of real wealth to this country. Quite aside from the jobs question. We’re selling off our birthright for a mess of potage in the form of a few container ships of flat-screen TVs. This is where our international debt comes from, not just government spending. Author: If elected president, what would you be willing to do to end the trade deficit? Gov. Roemer: I think the time for talking and believing that other countries will play nice if we just ask them to, or maybe write up a bunch of rules like the so-called laws of the WTO, is over. We don’t seem to get in this country that international trade is rivalry. It’s not all rivalry, of course, there are positive benefits and so forth, which is why I’m not against trade, but there’s a big part of it that’s a rivalry. They win and we lose, which is what happens when we go head-to-head against these big state-capitalist countries like China. So we’ve got to consider things like a serious tariff to end our trade deficit. Not something I’d rush into blindly, and maybe there’s other ways to skin this cat, but I wouldn’t flinch at putting a 30 percent tariff on Chinese goods, or a tariff on imports across the board, with the whole world or the countries running a surplus with us. And the interesting thing, of course, is that once the other side knows that, knows that we’d do a tariff, maybe they learn real fast to be a bit more reasonable? But you’ve got to have a credible threat that you’d do it if you want that “Speak softly and carry a big stick” stuff to work. Author: How do you feel about the currency-manipulation bill that just passed the Senate? Gov. Roemer: I support it. Wholeheartedly. Currency manipulation is obviously a big part of China’s strategy to squeeze us dry, and we can stop it if we make the effort. I think the administration doesn’t get state capitalism at all, how they have these deliberate strategies against us and how it’s just a different animal from free-market capitalism, the kind of capitalism we have here in the United States. We’re not dealing with a free market in trade anymore, and China’s just the most blatant example. Japan, the EU, they all have their little games — sorry, their big games — to build up their industries at the expense of ours and run surpluses against us. Germany’s currency is manipulated, de facto it is, because the euro is too strong for the weaker economies in Europe and too weak for the stronger economies, which they are. And frankly, this currency bill is fairly mild stuff, it’s not anything radical and crazy. Boehner and Cantor should let the House vote on it. Author: What do you think about the WTO? Gov. Roemer: It’s pretty obviously a failure at this point. The whole idea was, in 1995 when they set it up, that all the world now knows how wonderful free trade is, so everybody wants free trade, and because of that, we can set up these rules for free trade and everyone’s going to obey them. Even if the enforcement mechanism is a joke, it’s like nothing, everyone’s going to obey it because they believe in free trade. But they don’t really believe in it. We do, maybe a few others, but the rest of the world doesn’t. They believe in mercantilism, in grab-what-you-can, which is just a disaster when they interact with nations that try to play by free-trade rules. You can’t twist the arm of a nuclear power like China with all these paper punishments the WTO hands out. It’s a big fraud and America should withdraw. Out. The WTO is also a terrible deal for American sovereignty, for American democracy. We’ve given these useless judges over in Geneva the right to tell us what laws we can and can’t have, based on what some foreign company or investor in the U.S. doesn’t like. Somebody called the WTO “the constitution of the world economy.” We don’t need somebody else’s constitution to run our economy; we already have our own. That’s the whole point of having a free country that we govern ourselves. Why are we throwing that away? Author: What would you say to people who say free trade is about freedom, it’s the American Way? Gov. Roemer: It’s not freedom for us right now, that’s for sure. It’s not freedom when foreign nations get to export their goods to us but our own companies, our own workers, are blocked in exporting the other way. We are not free in this situation, we are patsies. And free trade is destroying our industries, our defense industries, which we rely upon to defend our freedom. We can’t put an airplane into the sky anymore without parts made by potential adversaries. Do we expect the Chinese to lend us the money to buy from them weapons to defend ourselves? Free trade today, or the farce we call that, is one of the biggest threats to our freedom. Let me tell you something about freedom. The Founding Fathers knew a think or two about freedom. And they were protectionists. They took their cues from Alexander Hamilton, the guy on the $10 bill. And he said, you’re not going to have an independent country if you go with free trade. You’re going to be at the mercy of Europe. And Lincoln was the same way. Teddy Roosevelt, and other great Republican — and a protectionist. All those presidents on Mount Rushmore, they were all protectionists. Did you know that? I did, actually. So — why do I believe that Gov. Roemer is serious about what he says when I’m still unsure about, say, Mitt Romney? One, because I’ve gotten to know him a bit over the last few months, and know some of his advisors. I’m convinced these folks mean it. I can’t read minds and I don’t have a crystal ball to see the future, but this lot ring true. Two, because there is no other plausible explanation for the positions he has taken. If, that is, Gov. Roemer were merely out for himself, he wouldn’t be saying these things. There’s just no percentage in it. I can believe — I’m not sure at this juncture — that Mitt Romney’s position on trade may (repeat, may) be a carefully calibrated appeal for votes designed to harvest public angst on the issue without upsetting his business backers. But Roemer is going to get nothing out of this if he doesn’t mean it. He’s already alienated a lot of his friends in the Republican and corporate establishment by telling the truth about campaign finance, his other signature issue, and I think he’s burned his bridges and staked his fight upon telling the truth on this issue, too. Those readers who are interested in his non-trade positions can take a look at this article. Even if you don’t think Gov. Roemer can win — but look at how Cain came out of nowhere! — casting a vote for him would certainly send a message that needs to be sent.

Read the full article →

Theft of Obama audio truck probed in Virginia

October 22, 2011

Theft of Obama audio truck probed in Virginia

Read the full article →

Small bear makes mess in Alaska grocery store

October 22, 2011

Small bear makes mess in Alaska grocery store

Read the full article →

High school sets bathroom visit limit for students

October 22, 2011

High school sets bathroom visit limit for students

Read the full article →

Woman gets $4 for Korean war killing

October 22, 2011

Woman gets $4 for Korean war killing

Read the full article →

Vietnam lowers growth target for next 5 years

October 22, 2011

Vietnam lowers growth target for next 5 years

Read the full article →

European shares extend gains on debt hopes

October 22, 2011

European shares extend gains on debt hopes

Read the full article →

Franco-German euro agenda-setting irks partners

October 22, 2011

Franco-German euro agenda-setting irks partners

Read the full article →

Toyota extends suspension of Thai auto production

October 22, 2011

Toyota extends suspension of Thai auto production

Read the full article →

China, Russia Hold Sixth Strategic Security Negotiations

October 22, 2011

China, Russia Hold Sixth Strategic Security Negotiations

Read the full article →

China Jan-Sep Tax Revenue Up 27.4 pct

October 22, 2011

China Jan-Sep Tax Revenue Up 27.4 pct

Read the full article →

Mainland, Taiwan to Boost Industrial Cooperation

October 22, 2011

Mainland, Taiwan to Boost Industrial Cooperation

Read the full article →

Report: China is World’s 3rd-Wealthiest Nation

October 22, 2011

Report: China is World’s 3rd-Wealthiest Nation

Read the full article →

EU, China to Meet

October 22, 2011

EU, China to Meet

Read the full article →

Ismael Hossein-zadeh: What Quantitative Easing Really Means

October 21, 2011

Stripped from its fancy (and mystifying) jargon, quantitative easing (QE) simply means increasing the quantity of money supply, or easing credit conditions — in the hope of stimulating a stagnant economy. This is usually done by having central banks inject a predetermined quantity of money into the coffers of commercial banks in return for the purchase of their financial assets, which consist largely of government bonds. Although it is typically done electronically, or on paper, its practical effect is the same as printing money. This is supposed to be an expansionary monetary policy designed to promote economic recovery. The rationale behind the policy is that the addition of new funds to the capital base of the commercial banks (at, or near, zero interest rates) will enable them to, in turn, extend new credit to businesses and/or manufacturers at reasonably low rates so that they would, then, be encouraged to borrow, to expand, to hire and, therefore, create growth and prosperity. While under certain circumstances (when money supply or capital markets are tight, interest rates are too high and effective demand or purchasing power is strong) this may work, under the current market conditions (where there is no shortage of capital, low interest rates or the cost of borrowing is already low, and effective demand is very weak) it is bound to fail — as it has actually failed miserably. Borrowing and investing in the production of goods and manufactures is weak not because there is a shortage of investible funds (corporations are sitting on more than $2 trillion in cash but not hiring) or because the cost of borrowing is too high, as is implicitly assumed by the QE gurus, but because the macro-level purchasing power is too weak, and the uncertain market conditions do not warrant investment and expansion. Furthermore, corporations prefer to produce not at home but where the labor is cheapest globally. Likewise, the reluctance on the part of banks to extend credit to manufacturers is not because they lack capital, but because they find it more profitable to invest in speculation, that is, in buying and selling of assets and/or securities such as bonds, stocks, commodities, real estate, currencies, and the like — destabilizing activities that tend to create asset price bubbles, inevitably followed by bursts. Parasites discovered long time ago that it is easier to suck the existing blood out of the body of living organisms than producing it from scratch. Karl Marx used an even better metaphor to characterize parasitic finance capital, “The complete objectification, inversion and derangement of capital as interest-bearing capital…It appears as a Moloch demanding the whole world as a sacrifice belonging to it of right.” This explains why instead of increasing industrial production and raising employment the $1.2 trillion dollars of money that the Federal Reserve Bank has pumped into the coffers of commercial banks through two rounds of QEs has simply resulted in further financialization of the economy; which goes to explain the significant bubbling of some asset prices of the past few years, especially the considerable rise in certain share prices as well as the drastic rise in the price of a number of important commodities such as rice, wheat, and oil. By the same token, it also explains why the QE policy has further exacerbated income and wealth inequality, both in Europe and the United States, as it has helped only the financial elite without any help to the public. “The evidence suggests that QE cash ends up overwhelmingly in profits, thereby exacerbating already extreme income inequality and the consequent social tensions that arise from it,” reports Dhaval Joshi of BCA Research. Joshi further points out that real wages — adjusted for inflation — have fallen in both the U.S. and UK, where QE has been used to promote growth. “The shocking thing is, two years into an ostensible recovery, [UK] workers are actually earning less than at the depth of the recession. Real wages and salaries have fallen by £4 billion. Profits are up by £11 billion. The spoils of the recovery have been shared in the most unequal of ways.” In Germany, meanwhile, where there has been no quantitative easing, real wages have risen. It is not unreasonable, therefore, to conclude that the financial oligarchy is using QE essentially as a legal, policy tool to further enrich itself at the expense of everybody else. Not only were the Wall Street gamblers able to bail themselves out by means of $16 trillion of taxpayers’ dollars, but now they are also showering themselves with additional trillions of QE dollars to grow even richer and bigger. Let us assume for a moment that, as the Federal Reserve and the government claim, QE is honestly designed to be an expansionary monetary policy intended to stimulate the economy. If so, why is then the government at the same time pursuing a fiscal policy that is contra-actionary, that is, moving in the opposite direction of the monetary policy by cutting social spending at all levels of the public sector? The answer is that while from the viewpoint of national or public interests the two policies contradict each other, they are quite consistent from the viewpoint of Wall Street gamblers; both the supposedly expansionary monetary policy and the brutally austere contra-actionary fiscal policy serve the nefarious interests of the financial aristocracy. It is hard to believe that economic policy makers do not see the obvious: that their monetary and fiscal policies contradict each other. But, then, it is perhaps not so much a matter of economic know-how or policy expertise as it is of wicked preferences and warped loyalties to the powerful special interests to be served. Ismael Hossein-zadeh is Professor Emeritus of Economics, Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa. He is the author of The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism (Palgrave-Macmillan 2007) and Soviet Non-capitalist Development: The Case of Nasser’s Egypt (Praeger Publishers 1989).

Read the full article →

Doug Demeo: Common Sense Policy

October 21, 2011

The financial pillaging of our nation’s economy is having a galvanizing effect. There is a rising chorus of people who see lack of accountability from top to bottom for what it is. When the very people who knew what they were doing, and did it anyway — prompting the massive housing and banking crisis — are rewarded in the end for their miscalculations, sooner or later there is going to be action. Trillions of dollars in bail-out funds and loan guarantees were funneled into the hands of those found robbing the cookie jar. There has to be a better way. There is, and there is a movement that wants it. What are the hopes and aspirations of the Occupy Wall Street participants? Ideas about this are as varied as the demonstrators in cities and towns across the United States. One thing I have observed is that participants want better government response to our nation’s concerns, beginning with fair and effective economic policy. Common sense policy. Participants want government to address our disparities in more honest ways. They want transparency with respect to the true costs of government action, or inaction. High unemployment costs, healthcare costs, and environmental costs point to a system that has not been working for everyday Americans. What is most needed in government, perhaps the unspoken wish of the Occupy Wall Street movement, is systemic analysis and policy, not piecemeal troubleshooting, nor money-power dominance in government. Systemic thinking empowers policy analysis and legislation to address a full range of societal costs — and opportunities — simultaneously. The results are multiple benefits and societal goods. For well more than a century, corporations have developed great skill in earning profits while making society pay for the costs of pollution. It could be the dumping of poisons in rivers and oceans, or treating the atmosphere like an endlessly free garbage yard. It could be cancers and sickness, or climate disorder and weather extremes. All of these costs are known by economists as “externalities.” Fortunately, business also likes predictability. We can design a system that encourages companies to make money while noting a price tag on nature. If there is any complaining, it will not last long. Business, even large corporations, will get busy doing what’s right for our country and economy. When there is real accounting for the high costs of unemployment and pollution — when costs are “internalized” — free enterprise is provided excellent information. With fuller accounting, entrepreneurs and businesses are assured the predictability to learn from and work with, for example, the laws of physics — the way things really are. They are better able to respond to consumer demand and ecosystems. This means 21st-century factories and cities, amazing products and services, creating new streams of value. Money is made by cleaning our air, turning food waste into soil, or restaurant grease into clean bio fuels. There are many such businesses. There are many more in waiting, and in the years to come untold millions of new jobs. It is gratifying to see people give witness to their hopes and aspirations, whether through song or dance, street walks or sit-ins, or ordinary coffee house conversation. The Occupy Wall Street movement appears to be giving voice to the common good. That which benefits everyone, like breathable air and available water — or sidewalks and bridges — is certainly worth people coming together to find common cause. Common sense policy is putting the U.S. Treasury to work for the good of the nation, not just for the good of bankers or the good of the auto industry. I am running for Congress in the 4th District in New Jersey. I have just begun raising money to give our campaign a fighting chance to earn the Democratic nomination and unseat a Republican incumbent who has been in office for 31 years. An economy that works for everyone!

Read the full article →

Blake Fleetwood: How Hillary Clinton Can Create 1.3 Million Jobs at Zero Cost To Taxpayers

October 21, 2011

Despite our desperate need for jobs, 16 million unemployed, the U.S. is ignoring a surefire way to create 1.3 million good, no-cost jobs and add $390 billion to U.S. exports in the next decade. The world travel market grew by 60 million annual visitors in the last decade — a virtual worldwide gold rush — but the U.S. welcomed essentially the same number of travelers as it did in 2000. Our market share of international tourism has declined from 17% to 12% in less than a decade. Millions of qualified would-be tourists, who want to travel to our great country, are being frustrated and turned away by cumbersome, bureaucratic State Department procedures, which discourage and reject bona fide tourists — (foreign millionaires) — denying them visas to visit and spend their money in the U.S. Recapturing our lost share of this tourist market would result in 98 million more visitors, $390 billion in additional exports and $859 billion in total economic output by 2020, according to a recent U.S. Travel Association authoritative study : “Ready for Takeoff” No U.S. destination has been hit harder by the drop in foreign visitors than Las Vegas, and, predictably, a bill recently introduced by Congressman Joe Heck (R-NV), (H.R. 3039), hopes to remedy some of these issues by mandating 12-day visa processing standard and the implementation of a video-conferencing pilot for interviews. Currently the wait for visas to be acted upon is more than 145 days in some countries. It is no surprise that a recent survey of 1,500 travelers from Brazil, China and India demonstrated that an overwhelming majority of travelers found the U.S. a difficult place to visit. Inbound foreign travel is the single largest opportunity to increase exports and jump-start job creation immediately, according to Lawrence Summers, former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers. Indeed, this graph shows the current complexities travelers from those countries experience when applying for a U.S. visa. The relative decline in inbound tourists represents a “Lost Decade” for the U.S. Travel industry. As a nation, we keep putting up “Keep Out” signs to the rest of the world. There is a widespread perception that America has become less welcoming to foreign visitors Indeed there is a visa waiver program for 36 countries, but there is no visa waiver program for high spending visitors from China ($6,243 average spend), India ($6,131), and Brazil ($4,940). Many are discouraged from even applying. There are 153,000 millionaires in India, 535,000 millionaires in China, and 126,000 millionaires in Brazil. Many of them cannot get visas to visit the United States or don’t want to go through the bureaucratic hassles. A traveler from India spends twice as much ($6,131) as a visitor from the United Kingdom ($3,001), Germany ($3,347) or France ($3,047), according to U.S. Department of Commerce figures. We must break down the self-imposed trade and visa barriers that have caused the United States to lag behind the rest of the world, amid a worldwide global travel boom over the last decade. For example, an international traveler from Brazil — 126,000 millionaires — is almost twice as likely to travel to Western Europe (52%) as to go to the U.S. (29%). Paris is awash with cash from the wealthy foreign visitors that we keep out. The average Chinese tourist at the Galleries Lafayette spends over $7,000 at the luxury store. Travel is America’s largest industry export sector by far, bringing in $134.4 billion annually, nearly 25% of services exports alone. Inbound travel is the equivalent of an export outpacing Business and Professional services ($128.3 billion), Machinery ($125.9 billion), Basic Chemicals ($124.3 billion), based on 2010 data from the Department of Commerce. Each $5,000 spent by an inbound tourist is the equivalent of selling a $5,000 worth of Caterpillar tractor parts or a Harley-Davidson motorcycle or $5,000 in bushels of wheat. Increasing travel to the United States would be the quickest and most effective form of economic stimulus, and a cost-free path to quickly increasing our exports. Increased foreign inbound travel would revitalize hundreds of tourist communities, inject billions into the U.S. economy and create millions of new jobs in restaurants, bars, hotels, retail trade, and entertainment. Many of these new jobs would go directly to semi-skilled and unskilled workers: maids, waitresses, bartenders, guides, who are currently being laid off by the recent recession. Each overseas visitor spends an average of $4,500 at hotels, restaurants, retail and other U.S. businesses. International Travel supports 1.8 million American jobs. The heart of the new plan is to increase staffing, reduce visa interview wait times and expand the Visa Waiver Program. This cost-free stimulus can kick in immediately by reforming an antiquated visa process that often drives wannabe international travelers from the U.S. to other countries, who are all too eager to welcome the foreign tourists and their bulging wallets. And dramatically increasing the number of consular officers would not cost taxpayers any monies. In fact each consular officer generates fees in excess of $1.68 million (at $140 per foreign application), which is a profit center of $1.4 million per officer for the State Department. While security should be a priority for the US State Department, some of the self imposed visa barriers are absurd. “We can become neither economic protectionists nor political isolationists” according to former Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge. “With new security measures…we can manage the risk of a lawful entry for unlawful purposes better than ever…It is an acceptable risk.” In Brazil, for example, the wait time for a typical 3 minute visa interview is 142 days. Tourists have to pay a $140 application fee, up front, just to get the interview. Of course, not everyone is qualified to enter the country under U.S. laws, but millions of qualified people are being turned away by the bureaucratic hassles and archaic procedures. In the last decade the U.S. lost the opportunity to host 78 million visitors and generate $606 billion in direct and downstream spending – enough to support more than 467,000 additional U.S. jobs annually over these years. This is just reverting to the status quo of ten years ago. If we were to further liberalize visa requirements, these figures might double. David Rowell, a travel blogger, recently wrote about a reader who lives in China, who is frustrated at being refused a US visa. Rowell describes her : “She is in her mid forties. She is divorced and has an adult daughter, currently studying at university in Oxford, UK. She has her own successful business, (i.e. more than five). She earns about 500,000 Yuan a year (over US$80,000). She owns her own apartment (possibly a second apartment too) and her own imported car and has substantial deposits in her bank account (in excess of $50,000). She has no criminal background. Other ties to China include her support to her elderly father, and the simple fact that she would have no chance of earning anything like the amount she does if she were to overstay and remain in the US, due to poor English skills and non-transferable employment skills. She has no relatives living in the US. She is paying for her daughter’s college tuition in Oxford. She has traveled to various other countries regularly…, including the UK, and has always complied with the terms of her visas. She was recently granted a tourist visa to travel to Canada (without needing a visa) and decided to add a side trip briefly down to the US….. So she paid the fees, filled out the forms, and flew thousands of miles to be interviewed in your Beijing visa issuing section. Surely she fits into as gilt edged a category of intending visitors as exist – successful affluent tourists who have previously demonstrated compliance with visa requirements in other western countries, with money, income, and good reason to return to China? Her visa application was refused. Her application paperwork was scarcely glanced at, her ‘interview’ (which she flew thousands of miles for, requiring overnight stays in Beijing and substantial cost for airfare, taxis, and accommodation) comprised no more than the briefest of cursory exchanges which could have been done by phone if at all, and her refusal was almost immediate and without any clear explanation or recourse for appeal, but these “Keep Out” policies are self defeating to our safety and well being.” Rather than being thanked for her interest in visiting the US and her willingness to spend thousands of dollars on touring, on flights, on hotels, on meals, and on sundry other expenses in the U,S., this would- be legitimate visitor was treated in a rude and pre-emptory fashion. It happens every day to tens-of-thousands of qualified visitors. In these brutal economic times, the U.S. can’t afford these self-defeating policies. We must accept the economic reality of globalization: our manufacturing jobs are never coming back. But we can reinvent ourselves as a tourist and cultural Mecca, just as many cities like New York, San Francisco and Miami have done. America is still the most sought after tourist destination in the world: if we don’t continue to screw it up. We need to focus on our service industries, with tourism being the largest, and only then can we jump-start the creation of millions of good jobs, to take up the slack from the jobs that are forever lost. This is one area where our government can play a large role in making this happen. The vast majority of foreign tourists return to their homes impressed by our values and way of life. They become ambassadors for this country, something we sorely need in these times of worldwide distrust of the U.S. Perhaps more importantly, at a time when America’s reputation is at an all time low, these exclusionary policies deprive us of the chance to show the world who we are, what our values are, and what our culture represents. Write to: jfleetwood@aol.com

Read the full article →

Mike Green: Herman Cain: 5 Questions on the U.S. Economy

October 21, 2011

Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain is a smart, articulate, well-educated American, who happens to be a Black man. He has a successful business background and has held his ground against GOP rivals in recent debates. Cain has risen to the top of the heap of a group of eight candidates, which have cycled through a dramatic series of re-shuffling the top contenders that is more apropos to the college football BCS standings than a presidential race. Through it all, Cain has staked his claim to the nomination upon an economic vision he calls the 9-9-9 Plan. Cain’s 999 Plan is based upon these fundamental economic beliefs: Production drives the economy. Not spending. Business formation and job creation depend on entrepreneurs taking risks. Investors who fund entrepreneurs also take risks. We must unite around economic growth. I have five questions for Herman Cain: Q1: The GOP believes in the power of production. Yet, at its zenith in 2007, all 1.9 million Black-owned businesses produced revenues totaling less than 1 percent of the GDP … before the economic collapse. By contrast, startup companies less than five years old backed by venture capital funds are responsible for 21 percent of GDP . Is the Republican Party aware of the economic history of Black-owned businesses and the challenges Black entrepreneurs face in seeking to contribute and compete in an “American” economic system that is historically owned and overwhelmingly controlled by White Americans despite the fact minorities represent roughly 36 percent of the population? Followup question: If the GOP is cognizant of the challenges faced by 1.9 million Black-owned businesses, what actionable steps have been taken to address the fact that 1.8 million are sole proprietors who have no employees? Q2: The GOP believes that business formation and job creation depends upon entrepreneurs taking risks. In today’s knowledge-based, tech-driven innovation economy, all net new job growth since 1980 is due to startup companies five years old and younger, according to the Kauffman Foundation . The top 1 percent of those companies produce 40 percent of new jobs each year. The obvious elephant in the room is the presence of angel and venture capital investments, which help fuel such rapid growth of new companies. Yet, no such risk capital infrastructure exists in Black and Hispanic America. How is it possible that a 65-year-old private risk capital industry was developed in “America,” yet benefited overwhelmingly just White America while completely missing any development of high-growth entrepreneurial ecosystems in communities targeting Black and Hispanic Americans? Followup question: What actionable plans does the GOP have in place to address the fact that the private risk capital industry is severely lacking participation by Blacks and Hispanics to any appreciable degree and few minority startup founders receive funding from the existing infrastructure? Q3: On your website, you proclaim that “we” must unite around economic growth. Since the vast majority of wealth in America is owned and controlled by the top 10 percent of the wealthiest Americans, 99% of whom are White Americans, how do you propose the rest of us unite around economic growth policies over which we have no control and do not benefit us? Followup question: Where is the GOP version of the Tiger 21 club for the middle class and minorities? Q4: The GOP is a political body that raises hundreds of millions of dollars to engage in the dissemination of public messages — a process that transfers massive amounts of funds raised directly into the pockets of media companies, the overwhelming majority of which are owned and controlled by White Americans. What percentage each year does the GOP spend with non-White owned media to reach the vast majority of non-White Americans and how do those percentages break down for your campaign? Followup question: Since the GOP favors non-government solutions, what actionable plans has the GOP funded or endorsed that seek to uplift Blacks and Hispanics from the economic depths that consistently plague them from decade to decade despite which party is in power? Q5: President Obama has consistently pointed to STEM education as an essential ingredient in providing students options and opportunity in the 21st century innovation economy. He has strongly urged support for high-growth entrepreneurship and the development of entrepreneurial ecosystems from pipeline to productivity. Your economic vision sounds like you largely agree with President Obama. What do you think of the leadership in the Congressional Black Caucus and at HBCUs pertaining to economic policies? Followup question: How do you intend to change the generational statistic of Black unemployment that has consistently, year-over-year, remained double the overall jobless rate of White Americans — given that the private sector drives job growth and Whites have owned the vast majority of all employer companies since Dr. King was complaining loudly about the jobless rate in the 60s?

Read the full article →

Peter Nowak: Rogers: The World’s Worst Throttler (Officially)

October 21, 2011

Hot on the heels of the news that Bell Canada is cutting some of its Internet throttling with wholesale customers comes some really — and I mean really — interesting data on throttling worldwide. Ladies and gentlemen, presenting the world’s absolute worst throttler (since 2008): Rogers. According to esearchers who used M-Labs, a project launched by Google in 2009 that allows Internet users to keep tabs on how their service providers are slowing connections, Canada’s biggest cable Internet provider has been the worst at slowing down applications, primarily peer-to-peer services such as BitTorrent, using deep-packet inspection technology. M-Labs gives users tools to test their connections and, according to its methodology: The column on the far right shows the percentage of times Glasnost tests indicated that the ISP was manipulating BitTorrent using DPI. The number of valid tests is important because the more valid tests done, the more reliable the results in the last column. E.g., ISPs for whom we have only 11-30 tests per quarter (only one to two tests per week) will be highly variable and thus less reliable than ISPs for whom we have > 450 tests per quarter. The only ISP that showed up in the 90%-plus category with more than 450 tests: Rogers. Also bad was UPC Ireland, but it fell short in total comparisons to its Canadian cousin. How did other ISPs compare? Well, Comcast — the company that elicited sanctions from the FCC for its throttling — only ever slowed about 49% of its connections, back in the second quarter of 2008. Bell, the Canadian ISP that has taken the most flak for slowing down connections, ironically didn’t fare all that badly compared to its main rival. Here are the most recent results for Canadian ISPs and the percentage of connections they throttled in the first quarter of 2010: Shaw: 14% Bell: 16% Rogers: 78% Telus: 6% Videotron: 3% Bell Aliant: 6% Cogeco: 46% Sasktel: 5% MTS: 6% The first three ISPs on that list had more than 450 samples, while Telus had between 151 and 450. The rest had between 31 and 150. Here are the worst worldwide in the most recent quarter, with the sample size following: UPC Poland: 87%, 91-150 KT Corp (South Korea): 84%, 31-60 GTS Novera (Czech): 80%, 11-30 Rogers: 78%, 450+ As the methodology states, the larger the sample size, the more accurate the result, so Rogers looks particularly poor on that list. Given this information, is it any wonder gamers are fuming at Rogers for its throttling, which isn’t just affecting peer-to-peer traffic but also perfectly legal applications such as World of Warcraft? Isn’t it about time the CRTC — which laughably touts the world’s best net neutrality rules — got off its keester and did something? UPDATE: Milton Mueller, the principal investigator behind the findings, wrote a paper looking at some of the results in more detail. Check out “Deep Packet Inspection and Bandwidth Management,” which compares throttling in the United States and Canada. Some interesting takeaways include the facts that Rogers and Cogeco both started throttling on the same day, July 1, 2008 (how’s that for coincidence?) and throttling by U.S. ISPs is about 11% overall, compared to 33% in Canada. This post was previously published on www.wordsbynowak.com

Read the full article →

Nelson Davis: Small Business Essentials

October 21, 2011

In response to a recent email question regarding how to succeed in a small business venture, I began to distill what I’ve learned from over one-thousand business owners of all sizes, categories and ethnicities. They are people whose television stories I’ve presided over as executive producer of the Making It! weekly TV show. Though the end goals are consistently familiar, the pathways to a thriving enterprise are many. Here are several important things they’ve taught me and our viewers. If you are only focused on what business is trendy today and how much money you can make quickly, the end is already in sight for your enterprise. To succeed long term, you must invest the time to dig deep into your interests and determine what you are truly passionate about. What would you be willing to do for ten hours a day even if you weren’t being paid for it? There may be many days like that! Get customers first before you spend on the trappings! Don’t waste your precious start up dollars on expensive stationary and office space. These days, you can have a virtual phone system, a virtual assistant, online marketing material and all the trappings to appear larger than you are. Focus everything on marketing, sales and establishing an income stream — then you are in business. Hire the best people you can find for what you can afford to pay. Whether your early hires are just out of school or have twenty years experience, take time to ensure that they bring something to the party beyond being pleasant and amenable. They too need to be fully immersed in your goals and business culture as well as understanding that sales and marketing are the lifeblood of the business. If you pay them ten dollars, they should support a multiple of that in sales. I’ve seen some small businesses that gross a half-million dollars per staff employee. Don’t rely on your family and friends for advice regarding the prospects for success with your business idea. They only know what whey know and your vision may not easily translate for them. That is, unless they have started and operated a successful business for more than five years. Even better is the advice you can get from someone who has failed at least once on their way to a successful enterprise. That knowledge is worth its weight in platinum. Spend at least thirty percent of your time outside the office. Emails and social media can help you keep in touch with customers and prospects, but pressing the flesh is the key to launching important relationships. Networking events, trade shows and workshops can help you make connections. I’ve met the men and women who sell airliners at one hundred million dollars or more each. They know their customers and prospects better than they know some family members! People will say yes to people they know, like and trust. You can’t fully create that electronically. Never stop seeking greater knowledge and considering collaborations with other entrepreneurs. Small businesses can work together to cast a longer shadow and attract bigger contracts and customers. Giant corporations like to see scale in their potential vendors. If you can show that by bidding jointly with another company, they’ll usually choose that versus having to manage two different companies themselves. If you are strong at sales, another business owner who isn’t will be happy to join in with you to go after larger fish. One plus one can sometimes equal 2.5! This type of collaboration can be much better than wrestling with the demons that show up in classic partnerships. There is no certainty that you’ll succeed in your first business or even the second or third. Many years ago my first partnership attempt with a submarine sandwich shop failed miserably but it delivered some precious if painful lessons. Being doggedly persistent, I started over again in a different city with the same principal partner and it grew into multiple locations before the partnership came apart and I sold out. The ultimate essential lesson is that if you have a business dream the time to act on it is now. Waiting for perfection simply allows that dream to be obscured by layers of dust and to fade away.

Read the full article →

Mike Lux: RED ALERT: Biggest Bank Sweetheart Deals of All Time?

October 21, 2011

There’s a reason a big majority of the country approves of the Occupy Wall Street folks in spite of all the media derision and right-wing attacks, and a reason that demonstrators all over the country and world are organizing in their wake. The reason is that most people know what too many politicians in Washington don’t: that the big banks on Wall Street have a corrupt business model that recklessly assumes taxpayers will bail them out if their bets don’t pan out, and that their political juice will get them out of trouble if they violate laws and slide around regulations. There are three things in the news that remind us of this sorry story once again, and the American people need to raise holy hell about all of them: another sweetheart deal for Citibank on fraud charges, a new Bank of America maneuver that could turn into the biggest taxpayer bailout of all time, and a faction in the administration trying to ram through a new deal for all the big banks to have their legal issues related to foreclosure wiped away. First case in point: the astonishing (and so far mostly unnoticed) little slight-of-hand that Bank of America pulled when it switched over its Merrill Lynch-derived toxic assets to a federally insured program. Read this and weep: Bank of America is moving $75 trillion of highly risky derivative contracts “from its Merrill Lynch unit to a subsidiary flush with insured deposits.” The FDIC, which is the government agency that insures bank deposits, is screaming bloody murder, but the Federal Reserve wants to let them do it. This is a big f’ing deal, friends. Maybe the biggest swindle ever, certainly the biggest government bailout by far if the ship goes down. It makes TARP and Federal Reserve bailouts so far look like chump change. Remember, the Fed bailed out banks to the tune of a mere $16 trillion in 2008, and TARP threw in less than $1 trillion on top of that. Seventy-five trillion dollars is almost 5 times as much. Now, we don’t know how much of the $75 trillion us taxpayers would be responsible for in the end, because we don’t have access to Bank of America’s books, and the company hasn’t failed yet. But to allow taxpayers to be on the hook for this kind of exposure to even some part of a bank’s risky bets is an obscenity beyond belief. Then there is the latest Citibank settlement. Citibank agreed to pay $285 million to settle charges it defrauded investors in a billion-dollar mortgage security deal, and Citibank didn’t have to admit any wrongdoing. This kind of settlement happens all the time , and is yet another example of a corrupted system: mega-banks pay modest fines on massively fraudulent behavior; no one goes to jail, loses their jobs, or even has to admit wrongdoing. Breaking the law — stealing from and defrauding people — and then having your company stockholders pay one of these modest fines if you do get caught is just business as usual for these huge banks. And everyone in the industry knows it. When Hank Paulson, who was generally a great friend of the big banks as the Bush Treasury Secretary, wanted to force Wall Street banks to do something he considered urgent during the 2008 financial crisis, all he needed to do was to say he was going to have the FBI look at the banks’ books and emails. They would agree to anything he asked them to do, because they knew they all had plenty to hide. Bank of America and Citi are the two most wobbly banks of the Too Big to Fail crowd. The argument from 2008-on by Tim Geithner and other pro-Wall Street government officials is that we can’t do anything tough to these banks because it would cause system-wide risk. In fact, they say, we have to keep bailing them out, letting them off the hook for their legal transgressions, not be too tough on regulating them, not break them up, etc. because otherwise we will have another financial panic. But continuing to let them drain us dry isn’t working, and as Europe has discovered, at some point the bailouts get too big to take on. A $75 trillion bailout is too big a bailout number even for the U.S. government to contemplate dealing with, but Bank of America is trying to slide such a deal under our noses. Fortunately, Dodd-Frank did actually give us clear resolution authority for the Too Big to Fail banks. Banks have recapitalized themselves; the stress tests at least in theory gave government officials more knowledge of the banks’ asset holdings. Based on what Geithner himself has said, we should be in no danger of having to bail out Too Big to Fail banks. If they get in trouble, we can take them over just like the FDIC does, sell off their assets, and wind them down. And yet, we keep doing the bailing, as well as the winking and nodding at their fraudulent behavior. The BoA $75 trillion transfer to a federally insured subsidiary is the most egregious bailout yet. The Citibank wink and nod is the latest in a long line of letting crooks off the hook. And we may be on the verge of yet another massive sweetheart deal for the big banks, a deal that if it gets rammed through will not only absolve the biggest banks of all their legal violations, but a deal that would completely undercut any administration political claims that they are willing to take on Wall Street. Check this out : U.S. state and federal officials plan to give the country’s largest mortgage servicers wider protection against legal claims in exchange for refinancing help for existing borrowers, as talks on a $25bn settlement of alleged foreclosure improprieties advance. The proposed agreement would settle allegations that Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and Ally Financial engaged in faulty mortgage practices, including employing so-called “robosigners” — agents who processed foreclosure filings en masse without examining the underlying paperwork — that abused homeowners’ rights and led to wrongful home seizures. The banks declined to comment. Now of course, reporters sometimes get things wrong, and I haven’t heard from the White House whether this story is accurate. What I suspect, in fact, is that there are two factions in the administration, one mostly from Treasury trying to get this done as quickly and quietly as they can, and one among the political staff at the White House who understand how insane it would be politically to give the banks yet another sweetheart deal after the President praised Occupy Wall Street and after David Plouffe told the Washington Post that they will be running against Wall Street in 2012. Understand that what’s spelled out in the Nasiripour story in terms of the legal release for the big banks sounds worse than what Tom Miller was trying to negotiate with them. Once again, big banks would get off with no legal accountability whatsoever for the crimes they committed, and the money they pocketed on fraudulent activities. And while $25 billion sounds like a lot of money, it is a mere fraction of what they made on activities that were clearly not legal, and it is an even smaller fraction of what is actually needed to help underwater homeowners maybe 5 percent of what is needed. Remember how bad HAMP was : this $25 billion program would be politically far worse, because administering a fund that inadequate to the problem would be a nightmare, and for every homeowner you helped, 19 would be ticked off because once again there was nothing to help them. This is a deal that I can absolutely guarantee to my friends in the administration will blow up in their faces badly if they go through with it. All those Occupy Wall Street demonstrators all across the country will be demonstrating against the White House. Labor unions and all the community groups doing bank actions will go crazy. Every economist and consumer group who has been working on the financial reform issue will react very badly. For Obama to run against Wall Street while handing the big banks another sweetheart deal, and getting the negative reaction it would cause, would be untenable. For all these reasons, I don’t think the President will go along with this deal. But as we know from the Suskind book , there are people in his administration who have a track record of acting on their own. Tim Geithner could well be (and from what some sources tell me, is) trying to ram this deal through while the President is dealing with getting our troops out of Iraq (thank you, Mr. President), and fighting with Republicans on taxing millionaires and billionaires. The RED ALERT in my headline is for the President as well as activists who care about this issue. We need to start reining in the big banks’ power to wreck our economy, and we can start by not giving them more sweetheart deals and bailouts.

Read the full article →

Mike Lux: RED ALERT: Biggest Bank Sweetheart Deals of All Time?

October 21, 2011

There’s a reason a big majority of the country approves of the Occupy Wall Street folks in spite of all the media derision and right-wing attacks, and a reason that demonstrators all over the country and world are organizing in their wake. The reason is that most people know what too many politicians in Washington don’t: that the big banks on Wall Street have a corrupt business model that recklessly assumes taxpayers will bail them out if their bets don’t pan out, and that their political juice will get them out of trouble if they violate laws and slide around regulations. There are three things in the news that remind us of this sorry story once again, and the American people need to raise holy hell about all of them: another sweetheart deal for Citibank on fraud charges, a new Bank of America maneuver that could turn into the biggest taxpayer bailout of all time, and a faction in the administration trying to ram through a new deal for all the big banks to have their legal issues related to foreclosure wiped away. First case in point: the astonishing (and so far mostly unnoticed) little slight-of-hand that Bank of America pulled when it switched over its Merrill Lynch-derived toxic assets to a federally insured program. Read this and weep: Bank of America is moving $75 trillion of highly risky derivative contracts “from its Merrill Lynch unit to a subsidiary flush with insured deposits.” The FDIC, which is the government agency that insures bank deposits, is screaming bloody murder, but the Federal Reserve wants to let them do it. This is a big f’ing deal, friends. Maybe the biggest swindle ever, certainly the biggest government bailout by far if the ship goes down. It makes TARP and Federal Reserve bailouts so far look like chump change. Remember, the Fed bailed out banks to the tune of a mere $16 trillion in 2008, and TARP threw in less than $1 trillion on top of that. Seventy-five trillion dollars is almost 5 times as much. Now, we don’t know how much of the $75 trillion us taxpayers would be responsible for in the end, because we don’t have access to Bank of America’s books, and the company hasn’t failed yet. But to allow taxpayers to be on the hook for this kind of exposure to even some part of a bank’s risky bets is an obscenity beyond belief. Then there is the latest Citibank settlement. Citibank agreed to pay $285 million to settle charges it defrauded investors in a billion-dollar mortgage security deal, and Citibank didn’t have to admit any wrongdoing. This kind of settlement happens all the time , and is yet another example of a corrupted system: mega-banks pay modest fines on massively fraudulent behavior; no one goes to jail, loses their jobs, or even has to admit wrongdoing. Breaking the law — stealing from and defrauding people — and then having your company stockholders pay one of these modest fines if you do get caught is just business as usual for these huge banks. And everyone in the industry knows it. When Hank Paulson, who was generally a great friend of the big banks as the Bush Treasury Secretary, wanted to force Wall Street banks to do something he considered urgent during the 2008 financial crisis, all he needed to do was to say he was going to have the FBI look at the banks’ books and emails. They would agree to anything he asked them to do, because they knew they all had plenty to hide. Bank of America and Citi are the two most wobbly banks of the Too Big to Fail crowd. The argument from 2008-on by Tim Geithner and other pro-Wall Street government officials is that we can’t do anything tough to these banks because it would cause system-wide risk. In fact, they say, we have to keep bailing them out, letting them off the hook for their legal transgressions, not be too tough on regulating them, not break them up, etc. because otherwise we will have another financial panic. But continuing to let them drain us dry isn’t working, and as Europe has discovered, at some point the bailouts get too big to take on. A $75 trillion bailout is too big a bailout number even for the U.S. government to contemplate dealing with, but Bank of America is trying to slide such a deal under our noses. Fortunately, Dodd-Frank did actually give us clear resolution authority for the Too Big to Fail banks. Banks have recapitalized themselves; the stress tests at least in theory gave government officials more knowledge of the banks’ asset holdings. Based on what Geithner himself has said, we should be in no danger of having to bail out Too Big to Fail banks. If they get in trouble, we can take them over just like the FDIC does, sell off their assets, and wind them down. And yet, we keep doing the bailing, as well as the winking and nodding at their fraudulent behavior. The BoA $75 trillion transfer to a federally insured subsidiary is the most egregious bailout yet. The Citibank wink and nod is the latest in a long line of letting crooks off the hook. And we may be on the verge of yet another massive sweetheart deal for the big banks, a deal that if it gets rammed through will not only absolve the biggest banks of all their legal violations, but a deal that would completely undercut any administration political claims that they are willing to take on Wall Street. Check this out : U.S. state and federal officials plan to give the country’s largest mortgage servicers wider protection against legal claims in exchange for refinancing help for existing borrowers, as talks on a $25bn settlement of alleged foreclosure improprieties advance. The proposed agreement would settle allegations that Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and Ally Financial engaged in faulty mortgage practices, including employing so-called “robosigners” — agents who processed foreclosure filings en masse without examining the underlying paperwork — that abused homeowners’ rights and led to wrongful home seizures. The banks declined to comment. Now of course, reporters sometimes get things wrong, and I haven’t heard from the White House whether this story is accurate. What I suspect, in fact, is that there are two factions in the administration, one mostly from Treasury trying to get this done as quickly and quietly as they can, and one among the political staff at the White House who understand how insane it would be politically to give the banks yet another sweetheart deal after the President praised Occupy Wall Street and after David Plouffe told the Washington Post that they will be running against Wall Street in 2012. Understand that what’s spelled out in the Nasiripour story in terms of the legal release for the big banks sounds worse than what Tom Miller was trying to negotiate with them. Once again, big banks would get off with no legal accountability whatsoever for the crimes they committed, and the money they pocketed on fraudulent activities. And while $25 billion sounds like a lot of money, it is a mere fraction of what they made on activities that were clearly not legal, and it is an even smaller fraction of what is actually needed to help underwater homeowners maybe 5 percent of what is needed. Remember how bad HAMP was : this $25 billion program would be politically far worse, because administering a fund that inadequate to the problem would be a nightmare, and for every homeowner you helped, 19 would be ticked off because once again there was nothing to help them. This is a deal that I can absolutely guarantee to my friends in the administration will blow up in their faces badly if they go through with it. All those Occupy Wall Street demonstrators all across the country will be demonstrating against the White House. Labor unions and all the community groups doing bank actions will go crazy. Every economist and consumer group who has been working on the financial reform issue will react very badly. For Obama to run against Wall Street while handing the big banks another sweetheart deal, and getting the negative reaction it would cause, would be untenable. For all these reasons, I don’t think the President will go along with this deal. But as we know from the Suskind book , there are people in his administration who have a track record of acting on their own. Tim Geithner could well be (and from what some sources tell me, is) trying to ram this deal through while the President is dealing with getting our troops out of Iraq (thank you, Mr. President), and fighting with Republicans on taxing millionaires and billionaires. The RED ALERT in my headline is for the President as well as activists who care about this issue. We need to start reining in the big banks’ power to wreck our economy, and we can start by not giving them more sweetheart deals and bailouts.

Read the full article →

Steve Blank: How the iPhone Got Tail Fins — Part 2

October 21, 2011

Read Part 1 of this post for background. Market Segmentation General Motors had turned the independent car companies acquired by its founder Billy Durant into product divisions. But in a stroke of genius GM transformed these divisions into a weapon that Ford couldn’t match. With the rallying cry “a car for every purse and purpose,” GM positioned its car divisions (Chevrolet, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick and Cadillac) so they would cover five price segments – from low-price to luxury. It targeted each of its brands (and models inside those brands) to a distinct economic segment of the population. Chevy was directly aimed at Ford – the volume car for the working masses. Pontiac came next, then Oldsmobile, then Buick. The top-of- the-line Cadillac offered luxury and prestige announcing you had finally arrived at the top of the conspicuous consumption heap. Consumers could announce their status and lives had improved by upgrading their brands. GM had figured out how to take a product which solved a problem — cheap transportation — and transform it into a need. It was marketing magic that wasn’t to be equaled until the next century. By the mid-1950′s every other car company was struggling to keep up.

Read the full article →

Steve Blank: How the iPhone Got Tail Fins — Part 2

October 21, 2011

Read Part 1 of this post for background. Market Segmentation General Motors had turned the independent car companies acquired by its founder Billy Durant into product divisions. But in a stroke of genius GM transformed these divisions into a weapon that Ford couldn’t match. With the rallying cry “a car for every purse and purpose,” GM positioned its car divisions (Chevrolet, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick and Cadillac) so they would cover five price segments – from low-price to luxury. It targeted each of its brands (and models inside those brands) to a distinct economic segment of the population. Chevy was directly aimed at Ford – the volume car for the working masses. Pontiac came next, then Oldsmobile, then Buick. The top-of- the-line Cadillac offered luxury and prestige announcing you had finally arrived at the top of the conspicuous consumption heap. Consumers could announce their status and lives had improved by upgrading their brands. GM had figured out how to take a product which solved a problem — cheap transportation — and transform it into a need. It was marketing magic that wasn’t to be equaled until the next century. By the mid-1950′s every other car company was struggling to keep up.

Read the full article →

Steve Blank: How the iPhone Got Tail Fins — Part 2

October 21, 2011

Read Part 1 of this post for background. Market Segmentation General Motors had turned the independent car companies acquired by its founder Billy Durant into product divisions. But in a stroke of genius GM transformed these divisions into a weapon that Ford couldn’t match. With the rallying cry “a car for every purse and purpose,” GM positioned its car divisions (Chevrolet, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick and Cadillac) so they would cover five price segments – from low-price to luxury. It targeted each of its brands (and models inside those brands) to a distinct economic segment of the population. Chevy was directly aimed at Ford – the volume car for the working masses. Pontiac came next, then Oldsmobile, then Buick. The top-of- the-line Cadillac offered luxury and prestige announcing you had finally arrived at the top of the conspicuous consumption heap. Consumers could announce their status and lives had improved by upgrading their brands. GM had figured out how to take a product which solved a problem — cheap transportation — and transform it into a need. It was marketing magic that wasn’t to be equaled until the next century. By the mid-1950′s every other car company was struggling to keep up.

Read the full article →

Steve Jobs’ Reading List and Playlist For Life

October 21, 2011

“I like living at the intersection of the humanities and technology,” Steve Jobs said once. LSD, Bauhaus and Zen Buddhism shaped Apple’s pioneering products as much as anything that took place on the assembly lines. They were among Jobs’ greatest influences and they shaped his attitudes toward design, business and innovation. The books Jobs read, particularly as a teen and college student, helped expose him to the ideas and experiences that would serve as Apple’s foundation years later. Walter Isaacson’s 571-page biography of Jobs , a copy of which was purchased by The Huffington Post, provides an unprecedented look at the texts — by writers ranging from William Shakespeare to Paramahansa Yogananda — that influenced Jobs; “required reading” for anyone seeking a deeper understanding of the visionary. Less than a handful of the texts Isaacson mentions directly concern technology: one is Clayton Christensen’s “The Innovator’s Dilemma,” which Isaacson writes , “deeply influenced” Jobs, and the other is Ron Rosenbaum’s 1971 Esquire article “Secrets of the Little Blue Box,” a profile of hackers who could tap into phone networks that later gave rise to Jobs’ first collaboration with Steve Wozniak, who went on to become Apple’s co-founder. Jobs’ interest in literature and the arts burgeoned during his junior and senior years of high school, which coincided with his first drug use. Jobs tried marijuana at 15 and before graduating high school began experimenting with LSD. (He later observed, “Taking LSD was a profound experience, one of the most important things in my life,” he said.) “I started to listen to music a whole lot, and I started to read more outside of just science and technology — Shakespeare, Plato. I loved King Lear ,” Jobs recalled of his teen years. Isaacson notes that “Moby-Dick” and Dylan Thomas’ poetry were among Jobs’ favorite works at this point in his life. During his freshman year at Reed College, Jobs befriended Daniel Kottke, who went on to work at Apple, and together they devoured books such as Shunryu Suzuki’s “Zen Mind, Beginner’s Mind,” Chogyam Trungpa’s “Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism” and Paramahansa Yogananda’s “Autobiography of a Yogi,” a book Jobs read and re-read many times during his life. Isaacson writes, Jobs found himself deeply influenced by a variety of books on spirituality and enlightenment, most notably Be Here Now, a guide to meditation and the wonders of psychedelic drugs by Baba Ram Dass, born Richard Alpert. “It was profound,” Jobs said. “It transformed me and many of my friends.” Throughout his life, Jobs embraced numerous extreme, even obsessive, dietary regimes. He fasted periodically and, at various points, was a vegetarian, vegan and fruitarian, though he made an exception for unagi sushi while in Japan. This attitude toward food began to take shape in college after Jobs read “Diet for a Small Planet” by Frances Moore Lappe in his first year at Reed. “That’s when I swore off meat pretty much for good,” Jobs told Isaacson, who adds Jobs became “even more obsessive” about food after reading Arnold Ehret’s “Mucusless Diet Healing System.” One book in particular stayed with Jobs his entire life, and Isaacson noted that it was the only book Jobs had downloaded on his iPad 2: “Autobiography of a Yogi,” “the guide to medication and spirituality that he had first read as a teenager,” Isaacson writes, “then re-read in India and had read once a year ever since.” Yet no discussion of the artists who influenced Jobs is complete without mentioning the music that made the man. Jobs called Bob Dylan “one of my heroes” and had over a dozen Dylan albums on his iPod, along with songs from seven different Beatles albums, six Rolling Stones albums and four albums by Jobs’ onetime lover Joan Baez. Jobs likened The Beatles’ creative process to Apple’s own. While listening to a bootleg CD from one of the band’s recording sessions, Jobs remarked, “They did a bundle of work between each of these recordings. They kept sending it back to make it closer to perfect … The way we build stuff at Apple is often this way.” He also framed his motivations and the principles that drove him forward in terms of Dylan and The Beatles. “They kept evolving, moving, refining their art,” Jobs said of the artists. “That’s what I’ve always tried to do — keep moving. Otherwise, as Dylan says, if you’re not busy being born, you’re busy dying.”

Read the full article →

What You Need To Know About New Social Security Changes

October 21, 2011

— Social Security announced on Wednesday a 3.6 percent increase in benefits for next year, the first raise since 2009. A look at the program: _Beneficiaries: 55 million _Retired workers: 35 million _Disabled workers: 8.5 million _Spouses and children: 5 million _Widows, widowers and surviving children: 6.3 million _Total benefits to be paid in 2011: $727 billion _Average monthly payment in August: $1,082 _Average monthly increase next year: $39 _Number of workers who will pay into Social Security next year: 161 million _Maximum wages subject to Social Security tax this year: $106,800 _Maximum wages subject to Social Security tax next year: $110,100 _Number of workers who will get a tax increase: 10 million _Maximum tax increase: $205, paid by both worker and employer ___ Source: Social Security Administration.

Read the full article →

The 30 Greenest Tech Companies

October 21, 2011

Newsweek has also compiled a list of the world’s 30 greenest tech companies as part of its 2011 Green Rankings . Some of them you may recognize from the list of the overall 15 greenest U.S. companies . For this list, Newsweek pulled all of the tech companies, including both hardware and software makers, from its 2011 greenest companies in the world list. The magazine partnered with two research firms, Trucost and Sustainalytics , and developed the methodology “in consultation with an advisory panel of corporate sustainability experts.” An unrelated recent study, entitled ” Analysis of Small Business Innovation in Green Technologies ,” by the U.S. Small Business Administration found that small business leads the way in “green technology innovation” in America. According to a press release , small business only accounts for eight percent of U.S. patents, yet they account for 14 percent of green tech patents. More information about Newsweek’s 2011 Green Rankings methodology can be found here . View the 2011 Green Rankings list below courtesy of Newsweek/The Daily Beast . —

Read the full article →

Walmart Scales Back Health Care Benefits For Part-Time Employees

October 21, 2011

NEW YORK — Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the nation’s largest private employer, is scaling back health care coverage for future part-time workers while raising premiums for some full-time workers. The discounter says that rising health care costs are forcing it to eliminate healthcare coverage for future part-time workers who work less than 24 hours a week. New part-time employees who average 24 hours to 33 hours a week will not be able to include a spouse as part of their health care coverage. However, their children will qualify under their plan. The company also says full-time workers who are smokers will see their premiums substantially rise. Wal-Mart, based in Bentonville, Ark., defines full-time workers as anyone who works 34 or more hours per week. The company employs more than 1.4 million workers.

Read the full article →

Stephen Soumerai: Don’t Cut Research: Use It to Cut the Deficit

October 21, 2011

While Congress has averted a government default, any deficit deals Congress comes up with will undoubtedly slash “discretionary” programs including education, medical research and health care for the poor and disabled. Cutting debt is crucial, but instead of broadly cutting these programs Congress could use a scientific approach to eliminate those that are useless or ineffective. Here are just a few examples of costly, ineffective, or potentially unsafe programs that paying attention to science could have helped us avoid: Paying Physicians for Performance: One popular policy pays doctors extra compensation to meet quality of care standards, such as measuring or treating high blood pressure. This approach is embraced by hundreds of public and private health care programs nationwide (exceeding an estimated $20 billion in annual costs) but studies show it accomplishes very little. Recently my colleagues and I conducted the largest and longest study of such a program — the $2 billion dollar program in the UK that pays physicians to improve care for patients with high blood pressure and other illnesses. [ Serumaga et al, BMJ ] Under that policy British physicians could earn an additional 25% of salary for meeting certain performance standards. Yet our published findings did not show even a tiny effect of that approach on the health of 400,000 patients with high blood pressure. It turns out that money alone will not improve care. For doctors, like other professionals, it’s the intangibles that count — non-monetary factors such as trusted colleagues and up-to-date clinical information. Moreover, giving doctors extra cash doesn’t address the other half of the doctor-patient relationship — patients — who by staying on their medicines, themselves are the most effective agents in lowering their blood pressure.[ Osterberg et al, New Eng J Med ] My team is not alone — international scientific reviews have also found little evidence to support this monetary approach. [ Cochrane Systematic Review ] Some studies found that paying for performance encourages unethical behavior by incentivizing doctors to avoid treating the sickest patients who are less likely to reach the performance targets. Nevertheless, this costly and ineffective approach to improving health care is about to be expanded as part of our national health reform legislation. Paying Teachers for Better Student Grades Just as with doctors, policymakers have been trying to link teachers’ pay to questionable performance goals — in this case student test results. Recently, the US Department of Education spent billions of dollars in grants to states that encouraged linking teacher compensation to student performance on standardized tests. But scientific studies have shown the error of this path. In 2009, a large randomized controlled experiment (the gold standard of research) in several hundred schools found that the promise of extra payments had no effect on student effort or performance. [ Fryer et al NBER ] And just as with doctors, these policies penalize teachers who serve the neediest students. What’s more, teachers “encouraged” by test-linked compensation spend too much time administering practice tests and too little encouraging creativity and experimentation. Rushing $30 billion on Health Information Technology to all US doctors Perhaps the most wasteful and ineffective policy in the 2009 federal stimulus law was a requirement that by 2014 physicians throughout the US adopt electronic health records with “decision support” (e.g., alerts to reduce duplicate drugs). In lobbying for the legislation, the president and the commercial electronic records industry have claimed that the program would improve health, reduce deaths, and lower costs. Admittedly, the Veterans Administration system and other “home grown” systems have made modest improvements in care by incorporating such practices as reminding doctors when it’s time for certain patients to get certain tests. But the most rigorous research spanning several decades have shown that the commercial software systems that will make up the lion’s share of the $30 billion in federal investments do not improve health or save money. [ Black et al, PLoS ] In fact, a growing number of studies and FDA reports have shown software glitches in these record systems can actually interfere with patient care. In 2005 researchers at the Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh documented a three-fold increase in deaths among very sick children due to a problem with their electronic records system that prevented nurses from ordering timely life-saving medicines. [ Han et al, Pediatrics ]. Other studies have documented a lack of compatibility among the hundreds of available systems, making it difficult to share patient information across platforms. This problem has caused unsuspecting doctors to duplicate drug orders and cause dangerous drug overdoses. [ Soumerai and Avery, Huffington Post ] Paying attention to numerous such studies could have prevented legislators from including this costly, and ineffective program in the 2009 health care legislation. These three examples represent a tiny fraction of wasteful policies that are unsupported by, or even contrary to scientific evidence. But there is hope, if policymakers are willing to pay more attention to science. Congress should consult the vast body of medical literature and academic experts before making costly policy decisions, such as the premature outlays on electronic health records. And if studies have not been done to evaluate certain policies, Congress should fund them. Admittedly, good research isn’t cheap. But it’s a lot more cost-effective than mandating huge public expenditures that turn out to be boondoggles. Stephen B. Soumerai is Professor of Population Medicine at Harvard Medical School.

Read the full article →

Americans Grossly Underestimate Their Own Credit Card Debt

October 21, 2011

Americans grew wary of credit-card debt during the recession, a time when no one was eager to try to live beyond their means. But in the past two years, consumers have started to take some of that debt back on — and in a potentially worrying sign, many of them don’t seem to know exactly how much they have . A recent study from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York suggests that the consumers who hold credit cards and the lenders who issue them often have very different ideas about how much the cardholders owe . The average household believes they hold about $4,700 of credit card debt or 66 percent of the $7,134 lenders — the ones in a position to enforce — say households carry. The study’s authors note that they tried to account for the gap in various ways, but it remained sizable no matter how much they tweaked their research methods. They speculate that the discrepancy between borrowers’ perceptions and lenders’ data might be a result of “uninformedness” on the part of the borrowers — possibly because credit card charges and balances can be difficult to keep track of, or just because some people choose not to. The news suggests many Americans still have some progress to make in the area of financial literacy, a subject that rose to national prominence in the wake of the Great Recession. A measure in the Dodd-Frank financial reform act established an Office of Financial Education, and more public schools have begun adding a financial component to their curricula , according to USA Today . Still, the New York Fed’s report indicates that many consumers may still only have an incomplete understanding of their day-to-day financial activity. The findings are also disquieting in light of another recent study, which found that credit card debt has skyrocketed since 2009 . Consumers are borrowing more, and in a weak economy, with millions out of work and wages essentially flat, that may not necessarily be a good thing. Three years ago, out-of-control consumer debt played a major role in the escalation of the financial crisis into a full-on recession. High interest rates and easy access to loans left millions of Americans scrambling to pay off precipitously large debts when the economy took a downturn. In 2009, credit card default rates climbed to a 20-year high as unemployment rates soared. Today, more Americans are out of work, but credit card default rates are showing a steady decline . This may reflect tighter lending standards — credit is harder to get these days , with banks and other issuers taking greater pains to limit their cards to responsible borrowers — but it may also mean that most of the people at risk of defaulting have already done so , as The Fiscal Times notes.

Read the full article →