Anonymous Shill

HOUSE REPUBLICANS ATTEMPT TO LAY GROUNDWORK FOR FIRST STATE RELIGION

2006-09-22T08:57:00.000-07:00

From http://rjr10036.typepad.com/proceed_at_your_own_risk/2006/09/house_republica.html:

Do you ever hear or read something that seems so unlikely that you
think to yourself, "It must be my medication?" And then you realize
that you're not on medication? And then once you actually sort
through the data, you conclude that it's likely time to go on
medication?

House Republicans are quietly attempting to take a first legislative
step to make Evangelical Christianity our first state religion.

The critical $500 billion defense budget has stalled in the House
because the Republicans managed to slip in a "mischievous" little
amendment that they thought no one would notice.

In direct violation of the Constitution, House Republicans drafted
legislative language that would elevate Christian Evangelical
Preachers to the status of official government chaplains above all
other religions, including non-Evangelical Christians.

This obscure little amendment is intended to give Evangelical
chaplains the exclusive right to preside over all secular military
ceremonies.

The New York Times reports that the Pentagon and ecumenical chaplain
groups objected to this amendment, but the controlling Republicans
nonetheless wrote it into the budget and have been stubbornly
defending it. Their view is that our troops should be led by the one
true faith at the exclusion of all others.

Theocracy in action.

The Times says it is "unlikely" that the Senate would ever allow such
a travesty to go through, but the very fact that the
Republican-controlled House has attempted such a thing, and with very
little media attention, suggests that we are closer to a terrible
political crisis in this country than anyone of us has yet imagined.

Clearly, large numbers of elected officials in Congress are determined
to overturn our constitution.

Is the Republican party staging a silent and subtle coup that would
end democracy and create a Christian Taliban theocracy? While that
question seems extreme, what were they thinking? And how much longer
can we go on pretending that things aren't as dire as the evidence
clearly shows them to be?

Every elected official in this nation swears an oath to defend the
constitution. How could such language have been drafted? How could it
have made its way into such an important document? How could it even
be a subject for debate in the United States House of Representatives?

My prayer, if I were to pray to some deity, would be that each and
every one of these Republicans and George W. Bush himself end their
careers in shame and disgrace and go down in history as the insidious
and seditious villains that they have clearly shown themselves to be.

These people have betrayed this nation in no uncertain terms and how
so many of us can go on--including the media, or particularly the
media--pretending otherwise is mind-boggling.

I Love Atari

2006-09-06T14:43:00.000-07:00

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Video game company Atari Inc. (ATAR.O: Quote, Profile, Research) said on Tuesday it has appointed David Pierce as its president and chief executive officer, effective immediately.

Ending a CEO search that started in June 2005, Pierce takes over from Bruno Bonnell, who will continue to serve as chairman and chief creative officer.

Atari said Pierce has more than 20 years of executive management experience with major entertainment companies such as Universal Pictures, MGM, Sony Pictures and Sony Music Entertainment.

"The company has been suffering with a void in senior management for several quarters and the appointment of Mr. Pierce is one critical piece of the puzzle," said Edward Williams, a video game analyst at BMO Capital Markets, who has a "market perform" rating on the stock.

Atari, a New-York based subsidiary of France's Infogrames Entertainment (IFOE.PA: Quote, Profile, Research), last month posted a fiscal first-quarter net loss of $7.1 million.

Atari, which is in the midst of turnaround efforts, has slashed costs and sold assets as it weathers a transition to new video game console technology that dampened industry sales.

As executive vice president and general manager of Sony BMG Music Entertainment, Pierce spearheaded the restructuring and turnaround of Sony Wonder, its children's music and home video arm, Williams said in a client note.

Atari shares ended a penny higher at 70 cents, after touching as high as 74 cents in regular Nasdaq trade. The stock has fallen sharply since trading above $3 in June 2005.

(Additional reporting by Paul Thomasch and Mark McSherry in New York)

Big oil discovery in Gulf of Mexico - Wall Street Journal

2006-09-05T14:46:00.000-07:00

By Finfacts Team
Sep 5, 2006, 09:51

BP oil drilling rig in Gulf of Mexico

The Wall Street Journal reports today that the oil industry is on the verge of cracking open a deep-water region in the Gulf of Mexico that could become America's biggest new domestic source of oil since the discovery of Alaska's North Slope more than a generation ago.

Chevron Corp. and partners Devon Energy Corp. and Norwegian company Statoil ASA are expected to announce today the first successful oil production from the region, a 300-mile-wide swath of the Gulf that lies below miles of water and deep within a bed of ancient rocks geologists call the lower tertiary.

The Journal says that the production test paves the way for the development of the three partners' Jack field, located 270 miles southwest of New Orleans, and ultimately for dozens of comparable discoveries under federal lease to companies that include Anadarko Petroleum Corp., Petróleo Brasileiro SA, Exxon Mobil Corp., BP PLC and Royal Dutch Shell PLC.

Chevron and Devon officials estimate that the recent discoveries in the Gulf of Mexico's lower-tertiary formations hold more than three billion barrels' and perhaps as much as 15 billion barrels' worth of oil and gas reserves. If the industry succeeds in finding 15 billion barrels of oil, it would boost America's current reserves of 29.3 billion barrels by 50%.

The Journal says that if all these new finds were successfully exploited, they could approach or perhaps exceed the output of Alaska's giant Prudhoe Bay, the largest U.S. oil field.

In a statement, Statoil said today that it and partners Chevron and Devon have successfully completed a production test in a highly challenging structure in the Gulf of Mexico.

"The Jack 2 well test data are encouraging and may form the basis of future development projects in Walker Ridge," says Øivind Reinertsen, senior vice president of Statoil's Gulf of Mexico assets. "These development projects will be technologically challenging, allowing us to leverage our subsea and floating production experience."

During the test the Jack 2 well sustained a flow rate of more than 6,000 barrels of oil per day. Test results are very encouraging and may indicate a significant discovery. The full magnitude of the field's potential is still being defined.

Statoil and its partners plan to drill another appraisal well in the Jack structure in 2007.

The Jack production test has been very challenging and the deepest successful well test in the Gulf of Mexico. The Jack 2 well was drilled to a total depth of 28,175 feet.

The operator Chevron has an interest of 50% in the Jack field. Statoil and Devon each have a 25% interest.

"This area is one of the new and promising deepwater areas in the Gulf of Mexico," says Mr Reinertsen. "Statoil has a working interest of 25% in Jack, 6.25% in the St Malo discovery and 20% in the Tucker structure. In addition we have interests in several exploration licences planned to be drilled in 2007/2008. This makes Walker Ridge a core area for Statoil in the Gulf of Mexico."

In 2005 Statoil acquired Encana's entire deepwater portfolio in the Gulf of Mexico, consisting of 239 blocks with an average interest of 40%. The Tahiti development and the Tonga, Fox, Jack, St Malo and Sturgis discoveries are key assets in the portfolio. The transaction has made the Gulf of Mexico a potential core area for Statoil. It has also significantly expanded the group's deepwater position. The first oil was struck in the Jack structure in 2004.

Wanna Know How to Anger the Muslim World?

2006-07-13T14:03:00.000-07:00

This is a great tactic for anyone looking to incite more hatred of the U.S. by angry Islamists. Of course, the argument can be made that they were anti-US to begin with, so its a sum-zero anyhow.

U.S. vetoes U.N. condemnation of Israel

1 hour, 9 minutes ago

UNITED NATIONS - The United States cast the first U.N. Security Council veto in nearly two years Thursday, blocking an Arab-backed resolution that would have demanded Israel halt its military offensive in the Gaza Strip.

The draft, sponsored by Qatar, accused Israel of a "disproportionate use of force" that endangered Palestinian civilians, and it demanded Israel withdraw its troops from Gaza.

Road to victory in Iraq 'unclear,' US auditors conclude

2006-07-12T12:49:00.000-07:00

by Maxim Kniazkov Wed Jul 12, 4:17 AM ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The investigative arm of the US Congress has
openly questioned if victory in Iraq can be achieved without a
significant overhaul of President George W. Bush's strategy, arguing
the outcome of the war was presently "unclear".

The findings by the Government Accountability Office mark the first
time a non-partisan US government agency publicly doubted whether the
geo-strategic undertaking that Bush made the defining element of his
presidency, could be successful.

"It is unclear how the United States will achieve its desired
end-state in Iraq given the significant changes in the assumptions
underlying the US strategy," the GAO wrote in its report unveiled
Tuesday at a hearing in the House of Representatives.

The review focuses on the "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq," a
glitzy document released by the White House with great fanfare last
November.

The strategy charted what was described at the time as a sound course
for overcoming the Iraqi insurgency and turning the country in the
first true democracy in the Arab world.

Nine months later, congressional investigators found these high hopes
were resting on shaky premises that are quickly melting away.

The bedrock foundation of the president's strategy -- a permissive
security environment -- "never materialized," said the authors of the
report, describing the Iraqi insurgency as "active and increasingly
lethal."

The overall number of attacks increased by 23 percent from 2004 to
2005 and rose to the highest ever level of intensity last April, the
investigators pointed out.

In the absence of security, the document continued, efforts to
rebuild the war-ravaged country or even to return key segments of its
economy to their pre-war level have hit a roadblock.

If before the 2003 US-led invasion, crude oil production averaged in
Iraq 2.6 million barrels a day, it stood at only two million barrels a
day this past March, according to the report.

A combination of insurgent attacks on pipelines, dilapidated
infrastructure and poor maintenance have hindered domestic refining
and turned Iraq into an importer of liquefied gas, gasoline, kerosene
and diesel fuel, the document said.

Water and sanitation projects, on which the United States spent about
52 million dollars, were inoperable or operating below capacity.

Investment has been reduced to a trickle. Last year, the report
noted, the Iraqi government budgeted approximately five billion
dollars for capital expenditures, but managed to spend only a few
hundred million.

Generous foreign aid -- another hoped-for component of success in
Iraq -- was never delivered in promised amounts.

While foreign donors had pledged about 13.6 billion dollars to
rebuild Iraq, only 3.5 billion was actually provided as of last April,
the GAO pointed out.

Meanwhile, it will take 30 billion dollars for the Iraqi oil industry
to produce five million barrels a day -- and 20 billion to rebuild the
electricity sector, the agency estimated.

All of these factors have prompted the GAO to issue a dire forecast:
"Security, political, and economic factors will hamper US efforts to
stabilize Iraq and achieve key US goals."

The report is certain to add fuel to a growing debate in Congress
over the future US course in Iraq, which President Bush says
should remain unchanged and Democrats insist is in need of a thorough
re-evaluation.

In the meantime, the State Department rejected the congressional
findings, saying in its response that the GAO report "rests on a
flawed understanding of the strategic architecture guiding United
States policy in Iraq."

2006-06-22T09:12:00.000-07:00

Something new? I've been absent for awhile. Sorry about that. I'll try harder. Work has been very demanding lately, not to mention I've had a lot of personal (oh, boo hoo) stuff transpiring in the past half a year. My apologies. Hang tight.

Gas Prices Force Locals onto Horses

2006-05-08T12:12:00.000-07:00

Gas prices continue to stay high, and now a lot of people are turning to different options to get around.

In Rexburg, a few cowboys explored the possibilities on Saturday.

The signs suggest burning hay, not fuel, and these cowboys are all for it! Horsemen and women joined forces, hopped on their horses, and showed off their alternative modes of getting around.

"A lot cheaper than gas. They burn hay, they don't burn gas," responds Dean Jacobson.

"Hopefully we can influence somebody that the price of gas is a little bit high around here," says Jeff Hawkes.

In doing so, riders from all over met off the Archer-Lyman Road, excited to hit the dusty trails.

Horsemen put on their chinks, cowboy hats, and saddled up, ready to go.

After being injured two years ago, Swede Wilson is back in the saddle.

"It really feels good. It's still sore, but it feels good to be back on a horse, really enjoyable," says Wilson.

Though the "horse power" didn't get us to the speed limit, the horsemen did make it to their target destination, slowly but surely, and worth every minute of the ride.

"Where a lot of people go to the beach, fishing, we go take our horses with us and just have fun. They don't burn no gas."

Neither do mules. Dean Jacobson had his team pulling this buggy around town. The high price for him is only a little bit of this.

"Mules are smarter, better, and a lot of fun!"

The riders there says they plan on doing this at least once a month, bringing more riders with them each time or at least until they say their point has been made.

Bank Lets Drivers Hedge Against Gas Hikes

2006-05-08T12:05:00.000-07:00

By GREGG AAMOT, Associated Press Writer Mon May 8, 1:54 AM ET

ST. CLOUD, Minn. - Most motorists are feeling the pain as gasoline creeps toward, or over, $3 a gallon — but not Art Altrichter.

"This feels pretty good!" Altrichter said as he filled the tank of his Ford F-150 pickup for $2.03 a gallon on Thursday, when the average here was $2.73. "Right now, to be a few pennies over $2, when it's as high as it is? That's a real deal."

A year ago, the retired milk truck driver bought 500 gallons of gas at First Fuel Banks, locking it in at the then-current price of $2.03 a gallon. He taps that reserve whenever gas rises above that mark. If the retail price drops below $2.03, he can leave his reserve alone and buy elsewhere.

First Fuel Banks bills itself as the only retailer in the country where customers can buy gasoline for the future and hedge against rising prices. It advertises no service charge and no storage charge, just a $1 lifetime membership fee.

Altrichter said one of his neighbors got in at First Fuel Banks several years ago and is now is withdrawing from a reserve that cost him 99 cents a gallon. "How about that!" he said.

Both people and businesses buy gas from the company, which has six stations in and around this central Minnesota city. The city of St. Cloud fills its fleet of cars at the company's stations.

The program is open to anyone who drives off the street. Customers buy whatever amount they want at the current price — the most ever purchased in advance was $400,000 worth — then swipe a card and key in a PIN number when they draw from their reserve.

Chief executive Jim Feneis, who runs the company with his brother, Dan Feneis, said 300 of its members are still filling up with gas that cost them less than a buck a gallon as recently as 2002. Many more are locked in under $2.

"We're offering a pretty attractive concept to the savvy buyer," Feneis said.

Each station has a 50,000-gallon tank for each grade of gasoline — regular, mid-grade and premium — compared with 6,000 to 8,000 gallons for each product at a typical convenience store, Feneis said.

That's enough capacity to handle short-and medium-term demand, he said. For people holding onto reserves for a year or longer, the company hedges its obligations by buying gasoline futures contracts on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

First Fuel Banks started with a single station in 1982 and now has about 8,000 members, Feneis said. It makes its money just by selling gasoline, diesel and some specialty fuels since its stations aren't convenience stores. He said it has less than 5 percent of the St. Cloud area market. But he said it's just one part of a larger business, East Side Oil Co., that has other divisions such as oil recycling.

"Our 43-year-old family fuel business is happy, healthy and completely debt-free," Feneis said. "And I think we're definitely the minority."

A few other stations in the country have tried a similar approach, but none have succeeded, he said.

Lance Klatt, executive director of the Minnesota Service Station and Convenience Store Association, can understand why: price volatility and risk.

"There's no margins anyway" in the gasoline business, said Klatt.

It was a new idea to Ron Planting, an economist with the American Petroleum Institute in Washington. "But in the Northeast and maybe elsewhere there are heating oil dealers that do something similar with a customer who wants to lock in a price for the current heating season," he said.

Sheila Hallerman learned about First Fuel Banks when she received a gift card a year ago, and a few months ago she bought 100 gallons at $2.40.

"It still hurts," she said of shelling out more than $2 for a gallon. "But not as much as it could."

___

Associated Press Writer Steve Karnowski contributed to this story from Minneapolis.

Lay blames Fastow for Enron's fall

2006-04-24T14:26:00.000-07:00

By Sheila McNulty in Houston

Updated: 5:12 p.m. ET April 24, 2006

Kenneth Lay, Enron's former chief executive and chairman, on Monday took the stand in his fraud and conspiracy trial, blaming the company's bankruptcy on "a classic run on the bank."

He claimed this was sparked by the actions of Andrew Fastow, Enron's former chief financial officer.

"I think it all began with the deceit of Andrew Fastow and probably not more than one or two other people," Mr Lay said.

Mr Fastow pleaded guilty to fraud in an agreement with prosecutors under which testified against Mr Lay and his co-defendant, Jeffrey Skilling, Enron's former chief executive.

He has been sentenced to 10 years in prison in connection with the 2001 bankruptcy. Mr Fastow admitted he hid his thievery at Enron from the defendants, but said they were guilty of the indirect crime of hiding the deteriorating state of Enron's finances from the public.

The tabular content relating to this article is not available to view. Apologies in advance for the inconvenience caused.Mr Lay angrily dismissed those charges as "absolutely ludicrous", telling jurors the "fundamentals of Enron were incredibly strong."

He admitted the company, then ranked the US's 7th biggest, clearly had problems, as all companies do, but said the company was "candid" about them and considered them manageable.

"I accept full responsibility for everything that happened at Enron," he said. "I cannot take full responsibility for the individual conduct of all 30,000 employees at Enron and particularly those who appear to have engaged in criminal activities."

Yet, he said, the emergence of Mr Fastow's crimes, combined with short-sellers targeting Enron and negative articles in the Wall Street Journal about Mr Fastow, were the logs underpinning the "firestorm" that took hold.

"It took some other things to set up the tinder box," he added. Those included investors made skittish by a slowing economy and the September 11 terrorist attacks; Mr Skilling's resignation after just six months in the top job; and Enron's decision to make write-offs in October 2001 to clean up its books.

"All of that fed into a firestorm that we couldn't stop," Mr Lay said.

He noted that Enron, despite its market capitalisation growing under his watch, from $2bn at its inception in 1985 to $60bn in 2001, was dependant upon public confidence in order to both do business and to support the stock price.

In retrospect, he said, Enron should have ensured it had a stronger credit rating to protect its business against such a crisis of confidence.

Enron had a BBB+ credit rating, he said, and it was moving toward an A rating "but we just didn't move fast enough" to slow down Enron's growth and commit more cash to reduce debt.

"In hindsight, yes, we should have made those tradeoffs," Mr Lay said. "That might have made the difference in the end, it may not."

Latest on the Iran Oil Bourse and collapsing $ story

2006-04-21T15:38:00.000-07:00

[ Post 294581516 ]

	Category: News & Opinion (General) Topic: News & Current Events
	Synopsis:
	Source: http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/20-04-2006/79385-greed-0
	Published: January 1, 2001 Author:
	For Education and Discussion Only. Not for Commercial Use.

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/20-04-2006/79385-greed-0

20.04.2006 Source:

Remember the Bruce Willis movie, DIE HARD 3, where 'terrorists' stole dump-trucks full of gold from the N.Y. Federal Reserve Bank that belonged to different foreign countries? Think what that gold was doing there in the first place: in 1973 all the OPEC member countries agreed with the USA to sell OPEC oil only for U.S. dollars. This forced every nation in the world to buy U.S. federal reserve 'dollars' in order to purchase OPEC oil for import. They have been exchanging their gold for our otherwise worthless 'dollars' for years, having no other choice in order to import critical oil.

In March of 2006, Iran broke the OPEC oil-for-U.S. dollars-only agreement by offering oil on the Paris stock market for EUROdollars. Other OPEC countries fed up with U.S. hegemony are sure to follow. China and Japan, with their wallets stuffed with yuan and yen, are cheerfully holding Iran's coat while waiting for the dust to settle.

Since our "federal reserve notes" have no value unless all countries are forced to buy them at economic gunpoint, Iran is the leak in the dike. If the USA doesn't stick its finger in it, it will definitely grow. Once other nations see Iran getting away with selling her oil for real money, they will stop buying U.S. dollars and the USA will be flooded with inflation because of her idiocy in having federal reserve notes backed by nothing.

Inevitably, a major OPEC producer, Iran, just said NO!, and is selling its oil for more viable currency, with the benefit of wrecking the US economy far more than a thousand attacks on U.S. buildings could yield. Even our allies are rubbing their hands in glee as they eagerly await us to go down in economic flames.

Saddam Hussein attempted to sell his oil for other than U.S. dollars, and look what happened to him under the false excuse that he had "WMD's." Now Iran is attempting the same thing, so it looks like we might attack Iran under the false excuse that they may be thinking of developing breeder reactors in a few years that will take another 3-7 years to produce fissionable uranium and then develop a viable delivery system. But just THINKING of it years in the future is an excuse for war today, because when all is done, we gotta protect American dollar-based oil companies and their shareholders which comprise all the movers, shakers and campaign donors in the USA. And if it takes killing another 50,000 of your teenage children to protect their estates and trust funds, hey, it's worth it.

All across the U.S. patriotic Americans are being appointed to manage local draft boards by Duuhbya & Rummy who "...have no plans for a Draft." Yet Martha Stewart they send to prison for lying.

So, please pass this info along and tell people to get ready for:

inflation,
another war ( Iran has a pact with China ....Armageddon?), and
the unconstitutional and unconscionable Draft that wants to kill your children for profit.
The government says to the people, "Just say NO to drugs." When will the people finally learn that they are less free than 40 other countries and 'Just say NO to government'?

Census: Americans Are Fleeing Big Cities

2006-04-20T08:10:00.000-07:00

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHE

Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Americans are leaving the nation's big cities in search of cheaper homes and open spaces farther out.

Nearly every large metropolitan area had more people move out than move in from 2000 to 2004, with a few exceptions in the South and Southwest, according to a report being released Thursday by the Census Bureau.

Northeasterners are moving South and West. West Coast residents are moving inland. Midwesterners are chasing better job markets. And just about everywhere, people are escaping to the outer suburbs, also known as exurbs.

"It's a case of middle class flight, a flight for housing affordability," said William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank. "But it's not just white middle class flight, it's Hispanics and blacks, too."

The Census Bureau measured domestic migration - people moving within the United States - from 1990 to 2000, and from 2000 to 2004. The report provides the number of people moving into and out of each state and the 25 largest metropolitan areas.

The states that attracted the most new residents: Florida, Arizona and Nevada. The states that lost the most: New York, California and Illinois.

Among the 25 largest metropolitan areas, 18 had more people move out than move in from 2000 to 2004. New York, Los Angeles and Chicago - the three biggest metropolitan areas - lost the most residents to domestic moves. The New York metropolitan area had a net loss of more than 210,000 residents a year from 2000 to 2004.

Richard Florida, a professor of public policy at George Mason University, said smaller, wealthier households are replacing larger families in many big metropolitan areas.

That drives up housing prices even as the population shrinks, chasing away even more members of the middle class.

"Because they are bidding up prices, they are forcing some people out to the exurbs and the fringe," Florida said. "Other people are forced to make moves in response to that. I don't have any sense of this abating."

The metropolitan area that attracted the most new residents was Riverside, Calif., which has been siphoning residents from Los Angeles for years. The Riverside area, which includes San Bernardino and Ontario, had a net gain of 81,000 people a year from 2000 to 2004.

Riverside has grown to become the 13th largest metropolitan area in the nation. It's a short drive to several mountain ranges, and it's within driving distance of the beach. Locally, it is known as the Inland Empire.

"When you look at housing prices in Southern California, along the beaches and coastlines, you're able to obtain a very large home for a much lower price" in Riverside, said Cindy Roth, president and CEO of the Greater Riverside Chambers of Commerce.

Homes in Riverside aren't cheap. The median price - the point at which half cost more and half cost less - was $374,200 in 2005. But they are less expensive than Los Angeles, where the median price was $529,000.

Other areas that attracted a lot of new residents also have relatively inexpensive homes, even if they are not the cheapest in the country. Phoenix, Tampa-St. Petersburg, Fla., Atlanta and Dallas-Fort Worth round out the top five metropolitan areas.

IMF calls for dollar depreciation

2006-04-19T11:52:00.000-07:00

By Krishna Guha and Scheherazade Daneshkhu
Published: April 19 2006 13:58 | Last updated: April 19 2006 13:58

The International Monetary Fund on Wednesday stepped up the pressure for far-reaching shifts in exchange rates, declaring that the dollar will have to depreciate "significantly" over the medium term if global economic imbalances are to be resolved in an orderly fashion.

In its clearest statement to date on this highly-charged subject, the IMF said it was essential that currencies in Asia and of oil exporters were allowed to appreciate as part of the required "realignment of exchange rates". But it shied away from giving any specific figures as to the extent of appreciation required.

The statement came in the IMF's twice-yearly World Economic Outlook, published on Wednesday, which highlighted global imbalances as the biggest threat to what was otherwise an "unusually favourable" economic environment.

It said global growth had been surprisingly robust in late 2005 and raised its estimates from September for 2006 and 2007 by 0.6 percentage points and 0.3 points to 4.9 per cent and 4.7 per cent respectively. This year is set to be the fourth in a row in which global growth has exceeded 4 per cent.

The IMF sharply increased its estimates for growth in Japan, to 2.8 per cent this year and 2.1 per cent next, declaring that the expansion there is now "well-established". It also raised its forecasts for China and India significantly, with other increases for oil exporters.

But the IMF remained sceptical on the strength of the rebound in the eurozone, inching its growth forecast up to 2 per cent this year, but down to 1.9 per cent next. It said growth remained heavily reliant on exports, with domestic consumption particularly weak in Germany.

The IMF now sees the US growing at 3.4 per cent this year and 3.3 per cent next, a little faster this year and slower next than earlier estimates. It cautioned that a flattening out in US house prices could have a bigger effect on consumption than some studies show.

It expects the UK economy to recover to 2.5 per cent growth this year, followed by 2.7 per cent in 2007.

In keeping with the stronger pace of expected global growth, the IMF now expects consumer price inflation in industrialised economies to remain at 2.3 per cent this year and ease back only to 2.1 per cent next. It correspondingly revised up its estimates of short term market interest rates over the next two years.

The IMF said global financial market conditions "remain very favourable, characterised by unusually low risk premiums and volatility". It argued that a flattening yield curve need not signal a slowdown ahead, though increased investment - and therefore lower corporate savings - could push up long term interest rates.

The IMF said this year could prove a "watershed year" in which countries either capitalised on benign circumstances to address global imbalances, or spurned the opportunity. Exchange rate shifts would have to be accompanied by rebalancing of demand across the world, with steps to increase savings in the US, raise consumption in China, investment in the rest of Asia and boost productivity growth in the non-tradeable goods sectors in Europe and Japan.

The World Economic Outlook also cautioned against becoming complacent about high oil prices. It said consumers may still be treating current increases as temporary, rather than permanent losses. With excess capacity low, the market is vulnerable to shocks.

Moreover, it said recent price increases had been driven not by a surprising strength of demand for oil, but deepening fears about both short- and long-term supply.

Mission Impossible star Cruise vows to eat placenta after birth

2006-04-18T10:01:00.000-07:00

By Patrick Mulchrone

TOM Cruise yesterday revealed his latest bizarre mission..to eat his new baby's placenta.

Cruise vowed he would tuck in straight after girlfriend Katie Holmes gives birth, saying he thought it would be "very nutritious".

The Mission Impossible star, 43, said: "I'm gonna eat the placenta. I thought that would be good. Very nutritious. I'm gonna eat the cord and the placenta right there." It is the latest in a series of increasingly strange outbursts from Cruise in the run-up to the birth.

He has claimed the baby, due any day, will be delivered in total silence.

The Top Gun star also insisted he "sensed" fiancŽe Katie was pregnant before she told him.

And he has blurted out details of the couple's sex life, saying: "It's spectacular."

The actor, who recently also claimed he has the power to cure drug addicts, has even been carrying out his own medical scans on the foetus after buying himself an ultrasound machine.

Silent birth is one of the rules of the cult of Scientology, which Cruise is devoted to.

The cult - founded by the late sci-fi writer L Ron Hubbard - claims that 75 million years ago aliens came to earth and their spirits now infest our bodies.

Cruise told GQ magazine Hubbard had discovered making a noise had a "negative spiritual effect" on someone giving birth. He insisted that 27-year-old Katie would be allowed to scream, adding cryptically: "It is really about respecting the woman. It's not about her screaming.

"And scientifically it is proven. Now there are medical research papers that say when a woman's giving birth everyone should be quiet."

Cruise also revealed he and Katie have been preparing for the birth by holding classes at their Beverly Hills home.

He said: "We've been studying what a woman goes through. What happens to her body. It's just kind of becoming this fun game of learning."

Cruise said his sex life with Batman Begins star Katie had made him realise one-night stands were "horrible".

He added: "Great sex is a by-product for me of a great relationship, where you have communication. It's an extension of that. If you're not in good communication with your partner, it sucks."

Cruise, who has two adopted children with ex-wife Nicole Kidman, will not be the first star to make a meal out of his baby's placenta.

Rod Stewart and girlfriend Penny Lancaster took home their baby's placenta, sprinkled it with tee tree oil and buried it in the garden.

In 1998, Channel 4 chef Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall fried a placenta with shallots and garlic and served it up to 20 guests, including the baby's mum and dad.

TV watchdogs later criticised the show, branding it "disagreeable".

But placenta-eating is considered normal in some cultures. Various recipes include one for placenta lasagne. Some say eating it helps avoid post-natal depression.

p.mulchrone@mirror.co.uk

Diamond-studded martini runs a cool $3,000

2006-04-18T09:43:00.000-07:00

By Shelley K. Wong, Associated Press Writer | April 15, 2006

MASHANTUCKET, Conn. --When Jason Silvestri heard about Foxwoods Resort Casino's new signature cocktail, the police officer almost choked on his Absolut vodka and cranberry juice. "What?" he said. "$3,000?"

Served in a traditional martini glass, the Sapphire martini is made with Blue Curacao, Bombay Sapphire Gin, a splash of dry vermouth and is coated with blue sugar on the rim. But it's the accompanying pair of custom-made blue sapphire and diamond earrings, set in a sterling silver pick, that makes the cocktail sweet.

With the unveiling of the four-digit cocktail, the casino's new Mezz Ultra Lounge joins a growing list of bars and restaurants around the world offering pure decadence in a glass.

Luxury trade experts attribute the rising popularity of premium cocktails to a greater number of educated drinkers of all ages and a wider variety of spirits and liqueurs.

"I think people are willing to spend more to have a premium experience so they're buying less but they're buying higher quality," said Brett Anderson, senior vice president and editorial director for the Robb Report, the luxury lifestyle magazine.

Super-expensive drinks, a sort of Louis Vuitton bag for the bar crowd, are a status symbol and a great marketing tool for businesses. "It obviously makes a statement about status and the ability to afford it but I think it's also a spontaneous, celebratory thing," Anderson said.

The Algonquin Hotel's Blue Bar in New York offers a $10,000 diamond martini, accompanied by a diamond from the hotel jeweler. Only two have been sold since the cocktail debuted in 2004.

The Bar Hemingway at the Hotel Ritz in Paris touts a drink called the Ritz Sidecar, a cocktail mixed with an 1834 Cognac so rare German soldiers tried stealing it during World War II, according to the hotel. The cognac drink is priced at 400 euros -- nearly $500 -- earning it the distinction as the most expensive commercially available cocktail in the Guinness Book of World Records.

And if the cost of that drink doesn't make you stumble, the next one will.

Created for the Robb Report, the Robb cocktail cost $87,600 when it was offered in 2003 at the Rivoli Bar at The Ritz Hotel in London. Now unavailable, the cocktail was made with 22-carat gold leaf Eskalony vodka, Grand Marnier, peach liqueur and topped off with Ritz private label champagne. It came with a custom-made 13.66-carat yellow diamond swizzle stick that doubled as a bracelet.

"To be honest, I haven't heard of anything else as expensive," said Mark Skidmore, a Rivoli bar manager. No one ever purchased the drink, he added.

Cocktails aren't the only drinks that can have a stiff price.

The Prime Steakhouse at Bellagio hotel-casino on the Las Vegas strip offers 50-year-old aged Chivas Royal Scotch that costs $1,050 for an ounce of the extremely rare blended whisky.

Alan Shayne, president of The Scotch Malt Whisky Society in Sunrise, Fla., says there's nothing quite like good whisky -- even if it costs a lot more. His choice: a $300 bottle of Classic Cask 35-year-old rare scotch whisky, blended.

"It is unusually smooth and bursting with flavor," Shayne said. "It's worth the price I pay for that."

As for buying a $3,000 or a $10,000 cocktail, Shayne said there's nothing crazy about it.

"The way I look at it is some people are looking for something unique to spend their money on," he said. "For them, it's worth it."

Returning from war, soldiers splurge

2006-04-17T19:43:00.000-07:00

By Mark SappenfielD | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
FORT RILEY, KAN. – Capt. Bryan Cecrle acknowledges his paranoia with a smile. Yes, he still parks his new Dodge Charger at the far end of any parking lot, just to keep its spotless, cherry-red finish away from swinging doors and rogue shopping carts.

Then again, he reasons, after spending a year in the dust and sweat of Iraq, he has earned every one of his Charger's 425 horsepower, and the least he can do is keep his present to himself looking pretty.

Around Fort Riley, the low thrum of its engine is enough to turn heads - "It goes faster than it looks," says Captain Cecrle. But in truth, many of the soldiers have new toys of their own.

Here and nationwide, troops are returning from Iraq and Afghanistan with a fistful of cash from hazard pay, reenlistment bonuses, and a simple lack of things to buy on the fortress-bases in Mesopotamia. Now, many of them aren't hesitating to spend.

For towns like Junction City, Kan., it is a welcome boost, as well as a reminder of how much they rely on the military for prosperity. For a number of the troops - particularly the single ones - it has become as much a rite of the return home as flag-waving parades, simply another way to reconnect to the life they left behind.

"They're looking to reward themselves for 12 months of hard duty," says Bob Muto of Bottger's Marine in nearby Manhattan, Kan.

And many have been rewarding themselves at his store. With Fort Riley less than a half hour away and Milford Lake not far beyond that, Bottger's has always had a healthy share of soldiers as customers. But during the past year in particular, he has seen his sales to soldiers increase 35 percent, boosting overall sales 10 percent.

"It seems like most of those soldiers coming back from Iraq have a pocket full of money," he says.

While deployed to war zones, soldiers can build up a small fortune. For each month in Iraq and Afghanistan, they receive $225 of hazard pay and $100 of hardship-duty pay. Those in the most dangerous jobs can get an additional $150 a month in hazardous-duty incentive pay, while soldiers with families can apply for a $250-a-month Family Separation Allowance. Reenlistment bonuses range from $10,000 to $40,000. All this money, as well as their wartime salary, is tax-free.

In some cases, it's simply too much temptation. Among the items that Sgt. Phillip Marcum bought on returning to Junction City from his stint in Iraq with the Army Reserve: a motorcycle and a 37-inch television. He has some IRAs for the future, but the extra pay from Iraq is "all gone," he says.

Free-spending soldiers have always been a part of the Army, both after wars and in peacetime. "There has been a longstanding problem of soldiers buying expensive stereos, motorcycles, and muscle cars (and frequently going into debt)," writes David Segal, a military sociologist at the University of Maryland in College Park, in an e-mail.

But now, as then, most are more responsible. "I don't see them squandering it," says Rod Pratt of Dick Edwards Auto World in Junction City.

Cecrle had done the math before he even went to Iraq. "I knew I would have everything paid off before I left - credit cards, student loans," he says. "I wanted something fun. It was going to be a convertible or a sports car."

Then, when he returned home, "It was sitting there" at the dealership. The courtship lasted only a few visits. By his third trip there, Cecrle knew it was meant to be. "It was time for me," he says of the impulsion to treat himself.

As a captain, he's further up the pay scale than many soldiers returning from the fight - so a new car wasn't out of the question. "The people buying Corvettes are lieutenant colonels and command sergeant majors," says Jim Clark of Jim Clark Auto Center in Junction City, whose sales have gone up 10 to 12 percent since the 3rd Brigade returned to Fort Riley from Iraq in January.

For the specialists and sergeants, the toys tend to be more modest. In Junction City, Wizard of Watts has been flooded with orders for new car stereo systems and the latest designer wheels. One soldier getting the interior of his SUV refinished there laughs, saying, "It's all the single guys."

In Manhattan, Bottger's has done a steady trade in used boats, ski equipment, and fishing gear. "Any product under $8,000, they pretty much buy it up," Mr. Muto says.

Yet it is not the sort of boom on which towns can build a future. The spending sprees last a few months at most, retailers say. But there are probably more deployments to come. Sergeant Marcum, for one, is already making plans.

"I was happy with my new stuff at first, but now I want something bigger and better," he says. "I'll probably get deployed again, and I'll buy some of those things when I get back."

RICH CLABAUGH - STAFF

China's growth tops 10% ahead of US talks

2006-04-17T19:41:00.000-07:00

From Jane Macartney in Beijing

CHINA’S economic growth has accelerated in the first quarter of this year, belying forecasts that the Asian nation’s breakneck boom was moderating and also pushing its economy firmly ahead of Britain into fourth place in the world.
Output in the first three months of this year is estimated to be 10.2 per cent higher than in the same period of 2005. This blistering pace, which even the Chinese authorities believe to be unsustainable, is likely to raise pressure on President Hu Jintao during his visit this week to Washington to take more decisive steps to allow China’s currency to rise faster.

Mr Hu revealed the figure in a televised meeting with a visiting politician from Taiwan. The growth marks a pick-up from last year’s fourth quarter, when GDP rose by 9.9 per cent from a year earlier. China’s GDP expanded on average by 10 per cent a year between 2003 and 2005, taking the country past the output of Italy, France and, most recently, Britain. Only the US, Japan and Germany have economies larger than China’s.

Evidence that China’s economy is accelerating, rather than moderating, as hoped, could also fuel further speculation in commodity markets. The prices of several industrial metals and materials hit new highs last week, driven in part by demand from China to meet its boom in construction, manufacturing and transport.

The robust growth figure comes before a summit with President Bush that already promised tensions over trade and exchange rates. America’s exploding bilateral trade deficit with China hit $202 billion (£115 billion) last year and is likely to be at the top of the summit agenda. Washington has become increasingly impatient with Beijing.

In spite of China’s relaxations of exchange controls and forecasts of lower growth announced ahead of the visit, some US lawmakers and economists contend that the yuan is unfairly undervalued by as much as 40 per cent, handing China an advantage that is destroying American jobs.

Mr Hu said that Beijing was not pursuing fast growth for its own sake. He said: “We are paying more attention to the transformation of the mode of growth, resource conservation, environmental protection and, more importantly, the improvement of the lives of the people.”

China’s leaders are increasingly worried about possible overheating. A meeting of its State Council, or cabinet, has concluded that money supply is growing too quickly and credit is too loose, according to a report of its discussion on Friday. The report said that China must restructure sectors having overcapacity to control any further expansion, although it cited no specific steps to curb credit or investment.

Some Chinese economists say that the case is hardening for the authorities to cool growth, perhaps by requiring banks to tie up more cash with the central bank — money that could therefore not be extended as credit.

However, China needs fast growth to create jobs. Arthur Kroeber, of China Economic Quarterly, said he expected the authorities, despite their rhetorical concern, to try to avoid tightening policy as long as possible. China’s National Bureau of Statistics will release detailed first-quarter figures on Thursday. Economists had pencilled in growth of about 10 per cent after a raft of strong partial data.

Separately, China yesterday announced new rules that should make it easier for listed companies to raise money on its stock markets — but stopped short of reversing a ten-month ban on initial public offerings. The China Securities Regulatory Commission said it would introduce more market-orientated rules for the pricing and timing of additional stock offerings by companies already listed on China’s stock exchanges.

Dollar Falls Sharply in Asian Trading

2006-04-17T19:39:00.000-07:00

Monday April 17, 5:35 am ET
Dollar Falls Sharply Against the Euro and Yen in Asian Trading

TOKYO (AP) -- The dollar fell sharply against the euro and yen in Asia Monday on a media report suggesting that China might reduce its purchases of U.S. Treasury holdings, and amid speculation that U.S. interest rates may have peaked.

The U.S. dollar fell as low as 118 yen at one point before trading at 118.28 yen in Tokyo midafternoon, down 0.36 yen from late Friday in New York. The euro rose to $1.2178 from US$1.2108.

Cheng Siwei, vice chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, was quoted in a Chinese state-owned newspaper Monday as saying that China should cut the amount of U.S. Treasury bonds it buys.

China has $875.1 billion in foreign currency reserves, much it in Treasuries. A reduction in that amount could undermine the dollar.

Sentiment toward the dollar also took a hit after an article in The Wall Street Journal said not all Fed officials are convinced that much more monetary tightening is required, traders said.

Some dealers say the euro could rise as high as $1.2240 in Asia on the dollar-selling momentum generated by the reports.

The reaction to the reports underlines sensitivity to U.S.-China relations especially ahead of a meeting in Washington between U.S. Presidents George W. Bush and Chinese leader Hu Jintao later in the week, traders said. China has the world's largest foreign exchange reserves and is a major investor in U.S. Treasuries.

The Federal Reserve boosted a key interest rate, the federal funds rate, to a five-year high of 4.75 percent, and many analysts expect another rate increase on May 10, the Fed's next meeting.

The European Central Bank has also been raising interest rates. Concerns that more money is flowing around the EU economy led the ECB to raise rates for the first time in five years last December from 2 percent to 2.25 percent, with a second hike in March to 2.5 percent.

The Bank of Japan has said it will start to raise interest rates, although they remain at zero for now -- a measure the central bank took to encourage lending during economic stagnation.

But focus on central banks has still tended to boost the dollar because interest rates in the U.S. are still higher.

The dollar was mixed against other regional currencies, rising to 51.30 Philippine peso from 51.28 the previous day, but slipping to 1.6032 Singapore dollar from 1.6083. It also declined to 37.92 Thai baht from 38.050.

Technology ... frustrations inherent therein

2006-04-04T16:22:00.000-07:00

My company touts itself as a "tech-centric" firm with all these capabilities to offer clients this that & the other one short of Star Trek type stuff (and in some cases, beyond Star Trek type stuff). The sad, pitiful irony is that most of the time our internal software is crashed or highly unstable causing us to be absolutely hindered in terms of performance. When your entire business is so heavily dependent upon computers the software that you re using becomes invaluable. When that stuff goes down all hell breaks loose. Inevitably hell breaks loose within our office at least twice a week. We have in-house developing going on continuously and its not unheard of to get 3+ versions of the latest program in one day. What a pain in the arse.

So anyway, right now the email is down (the friggin' email, you'd think we could keep that functional) and I'm writing a post. Weather in Vegas is warming up. Yay.

One Enterprising Canuck

2006-03-28T10:47:00.000-08:00

Youth hopes movie truck will pay for college

By Danny Glenwright

TORONTO (Reuters) - A half-ton pick-up truck used in the award-winning gay Western "Brokeback Mountain" is up for sale, and the seller, a Canadian high school student, hopes the proceeds will help pay his way through college.

Matthew Kennedy said he bought the black, 1950 GMC truck last year at an auction of vehicles used in the movie because he liked its looks, and only decided to sell when he realized the amount of attention the film was garnering.

"The movie was getting a lot bigger and I thought I could sell it and put away the money for school," he said.

Kennedy's eBay description of the vehicle says it was driven by Jack Twist, played by Jake Gyllenhaal, when he meets Ennis Del Mar, played by Heath Ledger, at the start of the film.

Bidding has reached $15,000 so far, almost double the $8,000 starting price, fueled by the ties to the film.

The movie, centering on the furtive love affair between two cowboys, was shot in the Alberta foothills, south of Calgary.

"The only thing I knew about the movie was that it was being filmed in my area and it was a cowboy movie," he said.

Murray Ord, executive producer at Alberta Film Entertainment, said it's standard procedure to sell film gear post-production. "Whether it be furniture, props, anything we purchased, we try to recoup the cost," he said.

Murray Pomerance, a sociologist and author of several books about cinema compared the pickup truck with items such as Dorothy's shoes from "The Wizard of Oz" and prosthetic masks from "Star Trek".

"With certain films that are distinctive in one way or another...this desire to imbed oneself in the context of the film is huge," he said.

"We're actually taking the truck and marketing it. Young people want to play at being characters...they're going to want to drive that truck...it's the ultimate way to play the game."

Bidding at http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4625292939,

When It Rains It Pours

2006-03-22T09:17:00.000-08:00

Yesterday it rained in Vegas. People in the desert freak out when it rains at all. They lose all sense about themselves and consequently their driving (which is horrendous to begin with in Vegas) goes all to hell. Bad driving is compounded by nature in the fact that all the oils that accumulate are not washed away off the road surface when it rains here (because it doesn't rain enough to wash it away) so they just bubble up and become more viscous, making the road surface especially dangerous. Which is why people should be more careful when they drive, but they're not. That's Vegas for you. People should be more careful, but they're not.

Anyway, yesterday my colleague's assistant called in saying that she had got into a wreck and was all shook up. A wreck is not implausible to begin with, but the bad weather added fuel to the fire. I had a suspicion, however, that this was not true. Call me cynical, but I suspected that she woke up, the weather was crappy and she called in. She didn't want to say "sick" (too cheesy/easy) so she invented a traffic accident.

The problem is, the bigger the lie the more details you have. I know this because I've been lying all my life, I'm pretty f*cking good at it by now. At least I know my way around the terrain. As the saying goes: "You can't bullshit a bullshitter". Call it my poker instinct. So I knew that if this wreck story were true there would have to be corroborating evidence. For instance, a busted up car. What do you know? This morning Ms. Assistant rolled into work in a car that showed no sign whatsoever of damage. The plot thickens ... Her story? A tire blew out and caused her to swerve, making another driver hit a pole. The first question is: Why would you miss a day of work for that? I can grant that you would be shaken up by causing harm to another person, but I don't think you need to miss a day for anything less that causing a death. But lack of compassion aside, I digress, let's go to the evidence. In this case there should be a new tire or a donut on her car. Were either of those present? No. Verdict: Caught in a lie.

Of course, I could be wrong. She could have an old tire lying around in her garage that she swapped on after her accident. The fact that its the same brand and has the same tread wear as her other tires is a miracle of science! Yeah, I'm a hard ass, I know. The worst thing is that she lied, really. If you wanna call in, use the ol' 24 hour flu excuse. Use a stomach bug. But when you make up a big story you create potential traps for yourself and you need to be aware of that. You take a risk. Her reward? A day off work. It doesn't make sense to me, but what do I know?

UAE, Saudi considering to move reserves out of dollar

2006-03-21T10:32:00.000-08:00

WASHINGTON — A number of Middle Eastern central banks said on Tuesday they would seek to switch reserves from the US greenback to euros.

The United Arab Emirates said it was considering moving one-tenth of its dollar reserves to the euro, while the governor of the Saudi Arabian central bank condemned the decision by the United States to force Dubai Ports World to transfer its ownership to a 'US entity,' the UK Independent reported.

"Is it protectionism or discrimination? Is it okay for US companies to buy everywhere but it is not okay for other companies to buy the US?" said Hamad Saud Al Sayyari, the governor of the Saudi Arabian monetary authority.

The head of the United Arab Emirates central bank, Sultan Nasser Al Suweidi, said the bank was considering converting 10 per cent of its reserves from dollars to euros.

"They are contravening their own principles," said Al Suweidi. "Investors are going to take this into consideration (and) will look at investment opportunities through new binoculars."

The Commercial Bank of Syria has already switched the state's foreign currency transactions from dollars to euros, Duraid Durgham head of the state-owned bank said. The decision by the bank of Syria follows the announcement by the White House calling on all US financial institutions to end correspondent accounts with Syria due to money-laundering concerns.

Syria's Finance Minister Mohammad Al Hussein said: "Syria affirms that this decision and its timing are fundamentally political."-Khaleej Times Online

Funny Thing Happened in the Bathroom Today ...

2006-03-20T16:09:00.000-08:00

I've written on this blog before about the "executive bathroom" in our office. Its not really any one person's claim, but it is a nicely appointed john off of our conference room, clean and well lit. It also affords an extra degree of privacy being that it is kind of out of the way from everything that goes on here on a daily basis. A winning place to be.

This toilet has for some time been my dominion, shared with a few others. Of course no one has any sort of proper claim to it, but there's definitely a feeling of entitlement that we've come to share. This feeling has only come to light relative to the fact that a new user has entered the space, someone not generally liked by the other users (myself included). Its none other than annoying "speak out loud announcement girl" herself. I only know that she has used or uses the executive john at all because I was talking with a colleague and he mentioned it and how out of line she was.

There are several dynamics going on here: first there is intra-office politics. This girl is annoying and stupid. She doesn't do her job well, and she's kind of a joke. I don't know who hired her. The second thing going on is seniority. My colleague and I have been here WAY longer than this girl (for better or worse ...) and we rightly feel like we should be afforded some privileges. To have this rookie who we don't like and don't respect go into that most sacred of man space, the bathroom, is playing with fire. I think my colleague is seriously going to write a memo telling her to stay out of the Executive Bathroom.

What Responsibility Is

2006-03-20T09:19:00.000-08:00

Responsibility is knowing that you are sick (or coming down with something) and making the decision to not come to work, thus sparing everyone at your office the same aching fate that you have suffered. I know a lot of people are "old school: about this and want to come to work come hell or high water, but this is a terrible idea. Any corporation would rather lose one person for a week than get that person for a week just to lose four more down the road.

I bring all this up because my assistant has been sick for the last week and today she STILL came to work. I told her to go home but she refused stating that she didn't have the sick time to cover the days off. That's a lie. She has the time, but she's saving it to use on a vacation down the road. So, assistant, thanks for exposing me to your germs and getting me sick so you can have a good time in South America this fall. I hope you get sick down there.

You Win Some, You Lose Some

2006-03-10T14:30:00.000-08:00

Last nite i got roped into attending the "after hours" party of a semi-famous band that was partying with my boss. Typically I'm not one to be involved with this guy outside of work, but the circumstances were a little deceptive and it was almost more accidental than anything.

Anyway, we began at a hotel on The Strip with a fun club. The band, of course, was partying like rock stars and had table service, bottle service, the whole nine. It was all too decadent for me. I hate that sort of crowd and atmosphere. I felt so conspicuous in this club being literally roped off from the rest of the crowd and having them all ogling us trying to figure out who we were to deserve such a treatment. Perhaps that's where my problem really lay: I didn't feel like I belonged in the scene. I can party, I like to go out, but I don't necessarily like to be seen as a star fucker or anything thereabouts.

We hung out at this bar/club for some time until The Boss decided it was time to switch venues and he had some privately chartered van pick us up outside. The Band was very impressed (as were their groupies, whose numbers had swollen -- we were growing!) but I thought the whole thing smacked of unnecessary excess. I'm such a prude sometimes. But, better to be driven than to drink and drive, so points granted there.

Off to another Strip venue, this one known for being swanky (although I vehemently disagree -- I think its tacky -- wait, that's all of Vegas) and of course there was a problem getting in to the club because by now the rock stars were wasted and not a little belligerent, not to mention they had some obviously under 21 groupies thronging onto them. Oh yeah, the band is foreign as well, so throw that into the mix. Needless to say after waiting with my boss while he tried to sort out all the problems with a security detail and the club manager at Hotel Chez Swanky I said "forget it" and hailed a cab home. The car I had ridden in was still at locale #1, and my driver was drunk as a skunk, so I knew that was a lost cause. Let's hear it for $50 cab ride home on the end of a shitty night! But I did catch Sports Center when I got home, so that's worth something, right?

========================================================

This morning we found out, via email from the COO, that our receptionist has quit. She was really good at her job, but I don't blame her for leaving. For a long time they had talked about moving her up (and she deserved to be promoted) but it never happened. This is all due to The Boss' view that if you do something well you should be kept there to do it, regardless of whether or not you are satisfied doing it. This asinine policy has now lost us a good receptionist, and we'll have to spend time and money training a new girl that will hopefully be able to learn fast and keep up with such a demanding job. This has been another lesson in "What Doesn't Work".

The Tech Guys Can Kiss My Butt!

2006-03-09T10:45:00.000-08:00

So a while back I found this little printer sitting in our server room that was doing no work for anybody. I figured we shouldn't let good hardware go to waste so I adopted the machine and brought it into my office. I used it for awhile to make copies (its one of those scan/print/fax arrangements) until one of the tech guys could come and install the driver software to make it a fully functional printer for my PC.

Well, the tech people came and poked around on my computer and had a look-see at the printer and told me that they didn't have the software, no printer, too bad. Then they promptly exited stage left. I figured that was that and let the printer languish in its capacity as a copier for awhile until a recent project renewed my interest in getting a printer in my own office that would not be subject to the printing whims of the rest of the office.

Taking some initiative, I went online and found the hardware company that makes the printer, entered the right criteria re: Operating System, ports, etc. and downloaded the software. It didn't take at first. so I had to reinstall, but hot damn if I didn't get this little thing up and running on the second go-around. So take that, smarmy tech guys. I know now that they could have just as easily done what I have, but they were too lazy or preoccupied to really give a damn about my request. Minus two points for you, IT.

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

In other news, another failing mark for the CSR that constantly informs the office of whatever is going on with her at any given moment. This failing grade is being handed down because I had to clean up a mess for one of her clients today (NOT part of my official job duties, but that's what you do when you work for small firm) and its not the first time that she's encountered this particular issue. In fact, a few weeks ago I did all the heavy lifting for her and all she had to do was contact the client to inform him of this that and the other, which she failed to do. She's worthless; I hope the man that she's marrying is rich & patient, because she's not going to earn much money through conventional jobs. (although Vegas does present a host of options to females with very little in terms of job skills ...)

Using my blog to bitch

2006-03-07T16:14:00.000-08:00

Not that its anything new, but I'm going to use my blog to bitch a little.

Upper management took it upon themselves to hire a few fresh faces a while back. Three souls in total (which for our firm is noteworthy). All female, all under the age of 21. This has been a recipe for disaster. Our office staff is predominantly female to begin with and when you added the new young ones to the mix its like working in a friggin' chicken coop. Cluck, cluck, cluck and scratch the ground each others desks all day. The worst is when they come into my office to cluck with my assistant. There's something that just grates on me. I can't handle it in the mornings.

The clucking is only one part of it, though. There's one of them and (of course) she's been placed at a desk outside my office. All day long this girl takes it upon herself to announce to the rest of the office whatever is happening at that moment. Its like she is crying for help from a non-specific source. I think that this might be what G*d endures on an eternity wide basis. Some of her greatest hits include: "My computer is frozen"; "The phones aren't working"; "What's wrong with the Internet?" All day long, the non-specific plaintive cries of a confused girl. You'd think it would soften me up, but no. I tried to be super helpful to her one day and that just brought more questions into my office. So I killed that program fast. She's so bad that another one of the new hires that is also particularly ditsy makes fun of her.

We also re-hired one of our Sales guys that was arrested for shoplifting a while back. Alright! In Sales it only matters if you make the numbers, this is what I have learned. I feel bad for this guy; he's got (or had, as he claims) a substance abuse problem, some hungry kids and a real bitch of a wife. I don't know, maybe we were right to hire him back just to be good people and give the guy a chance. Either way, wasn't my call!

Little Changes

2006-02-26T11:34:00.000-08:00

A few cosmetic changes have snuck in on this site as of late. To the right side of the screen you'll note that there's been a few additions and a little restructuring of the linked to sites. No biggie.

Most of the new content is RE specific, because I find this topic especially intriguing. I am not an owner myself in my market; in addition I also enojy tracking the behaviours and trends in other markets. Its all tied together economically, so I think the theme is kept coherent.

Cheers!

A Note to The "No RE Bubble Crowd" ...

2006-02-25T19:04:00.000-08:00

Cancelled home orders: Latest bubble prick?
Experts say jump in cancelled orders for new homes is latest sign of how investors inflated the real estate market recently, and how the market is due for a downturn.
By Chris Isidore, CNNMoney.com senior writer
February 24, 2006: 2:49 PM EST

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) - Home builders are growing concerned about an increasing number of cancelled new home orders, which experts say could be a sign of an underlying weakness in the recent run in home prices.

Specifically, the cancelled orders could be the latest warning sign that buyers who were turning to real estate as an investment, rather than for their own housing needs, are shifting out of real estate. And that could mean that in many hot markets, the air is about to come out of over-inflated real home prices overall.

A survey recently conducted by the National Association of Home Builders of its members found one in 5 reporting more cancellations than six months ago, with 4 percent of the overall group saying the increase in cancellations has been significant.

"When you start to see cancellations, you really get worried," said David Seiders, chief economist for the trade group.

Typically, a downturn in a local economy -- particularly its job market -- can cause a drop in real estate prices and an increase in home order cancellations.

But the trade group's survey found only 15 percent citing job losses by buyers as a cause for the cancellations. The survey, which allowed the builders to cite more than one cause for cancellations, found 45 percent saying it was due to a buyer's inability to sell their existing home and a third citing the buyers not being able to qualify for financing at a time of rising mortgage rates.

But Seiders and others say a big concern is a factor not cited on the survey, the fear that cancellations are being driven by real estate investors who were ordering new homes with the intention of selling them quickly in a hot real estate market. And Seiders said many of the 72 percent of those surveyed not yet reporting an increase in cancellations are already worried.

Experts believe that the home buyer intending to live in a home is reluctant to cancel an order, even if the market seems to have softened. But an investor-buyer who more closely follows the local real estate market is more likely to cancel an order, even if they lose some deposit money, if they believe that the local market prices have fallen enough that walking away is more cost effective than buying and selling the home.

The flight of investor-buyers from the housing market and the increased cancellations could therefore push real estate prices lower in different markets.

"If you've overbuilt the market and sales get cancelled, you have to do something with the homes," said Seiders. "The incentives we're seeing builders offering are clearly designed to support prices and stop cancellations."

Thursday, luxury home builder Toll Brothers (Research) warned that it is seeing investors bail on some markets, and supply now greatly exceeding demand in some cases. Besides the increased cancellations, new signed contracts fell 21 percent compared to a year earlier.

"Speculative demand has ceased and speculators are now putting their homes back on the market. The result has been more supply than demand in some regions," said the company's earnings statement. "Markets such as metro Washington, D.C., which are sound economically and showing healthy job growth, will need to work through their excess supply before the imbalance once again tips in our favor.

Toll Brothers Chairman and CEO Robert Toll said the company's cancellation rate came to 8.8 percent of orders in the most recent quarter, up from a historic level of only 5 to 6 percent.

"At 8.8 percent we hope it's plateaued now," he said in response to a question during the company's analyst call.

And home builders stock analyst Alex Barron of JMP Securities said that Toll Brothers actually has much lower cancellation rates than the industry as a whole. He said some other smaller, privately-held builders have more lax rules about the amount of money a buyer must put down, and how easy it is for them to get the money back if they do cancel.

"They don't have a standard practice; the less money they ask, the higher cancellation rates," said Barron. "I would say for most builders, it's at least 25 percent today."

Barron also is concerned about the impact that investor-buyers could have on the new home market, and the real estate market as a whole.

"I would say that probably for publicly-traded builders, at least 10 to 15 percent of orders were from investor-buyers," he said. "Those are the people driving up the cancellation rates. This (the increase in cancellations) is another warning sign. I think it's something we'll have to deal with for the next two to three quarters until the market stabilizes."

2006-02-24T13:44:00.000-08:00

Oil Futures Jump $2 on Thwarted Attack

By BRAD FOSS, AP Business Writer

WASHINGTON - Crude oil futures jumped 4 percent Friday after a thwarted attack on a massive oil facility in Saudi Arabia rattled a market already jittery about supply disruptions in Nigeria and Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Saudi Arabia is the world's largest oil producer, with output of about 9.5 million barrels per day, or 11 percent of global consumption. The target of the attack, the Abqaiq oil complex in eastern Saudi Arabia, processes about two-thirds of the country's oil before it is exported.

Suicide bombers in explosives-packed cars attacked the heavily guarded facility but were foiled when guards opened fire, detonating the vehicles and killing the attackers, Interior Ministry spokesman Lt. Gen. Mansour al-Turki told The Associated Press. The vehicles exploded outside the first of three fences around the sprawling complex, al-Turki said.

Saudi oil minister Ali Naimi said the attack caused "a small fire" that was brought under control and that operations were not affected. But the incident heightened supply fears on world oil markets.

Light sweet crude for April delivery surged as high as $63.25 a barrel before settling at $62.91, an increase of $2.37 on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Brent crude futures for April delivery jumped $2.06 to $62.60 on London's ICE Futures exchange.

While terror attacks are not new to Saudi Arabia — there were two highly publicized attacks against oil company offices and employee-compounds in the spring of 2004 — analysts said Friday's action was noteworthy because of how close the perpetrators came to a facility integral to the flow of oil.

"It's new in the sense that this is the boldest attempt to strike at the heart of a Saudi oil-production complex," Eurasia Group oil analyst Antoine Halff said. "So far they had been confined to office buildings and housing units."

"At the same time, what this attack demonstrates is not just how much the Saudi oil machine is a target for attacks, but also how prepared the Saudi oil company and military are, and how effective they are at thwarting attempts to disrupt oil production and exports," Halff added. "There are two sides to this."

A Saudi journalist who arrived at the scene soon after an explosion said guards exchanged fire for two hours with two militants outside the facility. He also told The Associated Press that he saw workers repairing a pipeline. He spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation.

UBS energy economist Jan Stuart said the reaction on oil markets was "measured" given the prominence of the Abqaiq facility and the ability of the attackers to get so close to it.

Aside from its total output, Saudi Arabia is a vital supplier to the global market because it is the only country with significant spare production capacity. If necessary, Saudi Arabia says it could quickly boost production by 1.5 million barrels a day.

By contrast, there is no other country that can add meaningful output to offset an unexpected disruption. The emergency supply of last resort would be the 4 billion barrels of stocks that the International Energy Agency lays claim to.

Nymex gasoline advanced by 3.72 cents to finish at $1.5506 a gallon, while heating oil gained 6.41 cents to close at $1.7267 a gallon. Natural gas futures were even at $7.45 per 1,000 cubic feet.

Oil prices had already started the day higher as persistent concerns over Nigerian supply disruptions and Iran's nuclear program overshadowed U.S. government data showing gains in domestic crude supplies.

Oil prices spiked earlier in the week on news that Nigerian militants had attacked a pipeline switching station operated by Royal Dutch Shell PLC and a boat they claimed housed Nigerian military personnel. That, and an earlier attack, has forced Shell to halt the flow of about 455,000 barrels a day.

Nigeria is Africa's leading oil exporter and the United States' fifth-largest supplier, usually exporting 2.5 million barrels daily.

Traders also remain concerned over the situation in Iran, which has offered the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, information on a secret project that U.S. intelligence has linked to a possible nuclear arms program, two diplomats said Thursday.

Iran is the second-largest oil producer in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, and analysts worry that sanctions or any other actions the West might take against Tehran could disrupt the flow of oil there.

On May 1, 2004, attackers stormed the offices of a Houston-based oil company in the western Saudi oil hub of Yanbu, killing six Westerners and a Saudi before security forces killed the attackers. Several weeks later, al-Qaida-linked gunmen stormed oil company compounds in Khobar, on the eastern coast, and took hostages. Twenty-two people, 19 of them foreigners, were killed before the siege ended.

___

Associated Press Writer Hasan Jamali in Abqaiq, Saudi Arabia, contributed to this report.

The Dollar & Foreign Capital

2006-02-22T08:14:00.000-08:00

I snapped up this article from Business Week, have a look-see at what their prediction/analysis for the dollar is.

The Dollar: Less Foreign Capital Than Meets The Eye

The U.S. trade deficit hit a record last year, but foreigners invested more than enough in U.S. stocks and bonds to cover the gap. That's why the U.S. dollar didn't tumble. However, those supportive inflows are not as large as believed and are unlikely to last, leading to a probable retreat in the greenback this year.

On Feb. 15, the Treasury International Capital (TIC) report showed that U.S. securities purchased by investors and government agencies overseas minus U.S. purchases of foreign securities was $56.6 billion. In 2005 the total net inflow was $910.7 billion, far more than the trade gap of $725.8 billion.

The Treasury Dept.'s monthly data are increasingly popular as a sign of the ability of the U.S. to meet its external financing obligations, because they come out more often than the quarterly data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. But the TIC report is not as comprehensive. For example, it excludes flows involving securities with a duration of less than a year. As a result, net inflows were overreported by an average of $20 billion per month through the first three quarters of 2005, say economists Jens Nordvig and David Heacock of Goldman, Sachs & Co. (GS )

The TIC report is also a little fuzzy on money from private investors vs. official institutions, such as central banks. The Treasury Dept. categorizes inflows based on who makes the transaction. So a central bank move made through a nongovernment third party would be counted as a private transaction.

Given that inflows are smaller than reported and that more of them are controlled by foreign central banks, the risks of a weaker dollar appear to be greater. Stronger economies in Japan and South Korea, pressure on China to let the yuan appreciate further, and the chance of greater diversification of foreign reserves among central banks all point to reduced demand for U.S. assets.

Making matters more delicate: Until December, "inflows accelerated beyond their longer-term trend" over 2005's second half, says Nordvig. Net inflows don't persistently outrun trade deficits. The smaller December total may be the start of a correction that touches off the dollar's decline.

Note To Self: Don't Inflate The Resume

2006-02-21T08:56:00.000-08:00

What's most entertainign about the following article is taht the guy claimed to ahve a degree in Theology. He lied about a degree in theology. Oh the irony. My question is: how did he become the CEO of such a large operation without an MBA? Myabe RadioShack deserves what it got on this one in terms of personnel and company performance.

Shares of RadioShack Up After CEO Resigns

By STEVE QUINN, AP Business Writer

DALLAS - Shares of RadioShack Corp. rose Tuesday, the day after its chief executive stepped down following questions about the accuracy of his resume.
The company's shares rose 39 cents, or 2 percent, to $19.47 in early trading on the New York Stock Exchange.

David J. Edmondson worked nearly 11 years with RadioShack Corp. before he became president and CEO. But he stepped down on Monday after less than a year at the helm.

The company's board said it had accepted Edmondson's resignation and promoted Claire Babrowski — executive vice president and chief operating officer — to acting CEO.

"One of the most important things we have as a corporation is integrity and trust and we know we have to restore that back to the public," Executive Chairman Leonard Roberts said.

Edmondson last week acknowledged resume errors that included claims of earning two college degrees for which the school he attended has no records. He issued a brief statement Monday but did not discuss his resume.

"At this time the board and I have agreed that it is in the best interest of the company for new leadership to step forward so that our turnaround plan has the best possible chance to succeed, as I know it will," Edmondson said.

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram first reported of errors with Edmondson's resume on Feb. 14. The RadioShack board issued a statement saying it stood behind Edmondson, a move Roberts said he regrets.

After Edmondson acknowledged the errors on Wednesday, the board said it would hire an outside firm to investigate. But that was canceled with the resignation.

Edmondson and the board were negotiating a severance package and his departure; Roberts said it's worth less than $1 million in cash. He said further details will be disclosed in a regulatory filing.

In 2004, Edmondson received $616,154 in salary plus an $820,219 bonus while serving as chief operating officer, according to the company's proxy. The 2005 salaries for senior executives have not been disclosed yet.

Stacey Widlitz, analyst for Fulcrum Global Partners LLC, wasn't surprised by the resignation, but hadn't expected it on a holiday when financial markets were closed.

"If you think about his tenure, it's not as if he's led a turnaround of this company," she said. "That being said, it would be difficult for the board, considering the things that have come out, to find a reason to keep him."

Edmondson, 46, joined RadioShack in 1994 and had been CEO since May.

Edmondson had claimed that he received degrees in theology and psychology from Pacific Coast Baptist College in California, which moved in 1998 to Oklahoma and renamed itself Heartland Baptist Bible College.

The school's registrar told the Star-Telegram that records showed Edmondson completed only two semesters and that the school never offered degrees in psychology. The school official declined to comment to The Associated Press.

Edmondson said last week he believes that he received a theology diploma called a ThG, but not the four-year bachelor of science degree listed on his resume. He could not document the ThG diploma.

Roberts said company background checks did not include academic verification in 1994 as they do today.
On Friday, Edmondson told Wall Street analysts that RadioShack's fourth-quarter earnings fell 62 percent and it would close 400 to 700 stores, plus two distribution centers.
Babrowski's job will be to lead a turnaround that begins with the store closings. She has said she hopes to have the first 400 stores closed by Sept. 1.
Widlitz said Babrowski, a former McDonald's Corp. executive hired last summer, would fit well as CEO, even if it's temporary.
"She's the right candidate," Widlitz said. "I like her approach at how she looks at the business. She walks into a store and wants to see it through the consumer's eyes."

Ron Pauls' Column

2006-02-17T09:40:00.000-08:00

Ron Paul is a US Representative out of Texas. His site has a wealth of really interesting articles, notably this recent one, which touches on an earlier post about the Syrian petro-euro link.

HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS
Before the U.S. House of Representatives

February 15, 2006

The End of Dollar Hegemony
A hundred years ago it was called "dollar diplomacy." After World War II, and especially after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989, that policy evolved into "dollar hegemony." But after all these many years of great success, our dollar dominance is coming to an end.
It has been said, rightly, that he who holds the gold makes the rules. In earlier times it was readily accepted that fair and honest trade required an exchange for something of real value.
First it was simply barter of goods. Then it was discovered that gold held a universal attraction, and was a convenient substitute for more cumbersome barter transactions. Not only did gold facilitate exchange of goods and services, it served as a store of value for those who wanted to save for a rainy day.
Though money developed naturally in the marketplace, as governments grew in power they assumed monopoly control over money. Sometimes governments succeeded in guaranteeing the quality and purity of gold, but in time governments learned to outspend their revenues. New or higher taxes always incurred the disapproval of the people, so it wasn't long before Kings and Caesars learned how to inflate their currencies by reducing the amount of gold in each coin-- always hoping their subjects wouldn't discover the fraud. But the people always did, and they strenuously objected.
This helped pressure leaders to seek more gold by conquering other nations. The people became accustomed to living beyond their means, and enjoyed the circuses and bread. Financing extravagances by conquering foreign lands seemed a logical alternative to working harder and producing more. Besides, conquering nations not only brought home gold, they brought home slaves as well. Taxing the people in conquered territories also provided an incentive to build empires. This system of government worked well for a while, but the moral decline of the people led to an unwillingness to produce for themselves. There was a limit to the number of countries that could be sacked for their wealth, and this always brought empires to an end. When gold no longer could be obtained, their military might crumbled. In those days those who held the gold truly wrote the rules and lived well.
That general rule has held fast throughout the ages. When gold was used, and the rules protected honest commerce, productive nations thrived. Whenever wealthy nations-- those with powerful armies and gold-- strived only for empire and easy fortunes to support welfare at home, those nations failed.
Today the principles are the same, but the process is quite different. Gold no longer is the currency of the realm; paper is. The truth now is: "He who prints the money makes the rules"-- at least for the time being. Although gold is not used, the goals are the same: compel foreign countries to produce and subsidize the country with military superiority and control over the monetary printing presses.
Since printing paper money is nothing short of counterfeiting, the issuer of the international currency must always be the country with the military might to guarantee control over the system. This magnificent scheme seems the perfect system for obtaining perpetual wealth for the country that issues the de facto world currency. The one problem, however, is that such a system destroys the character of the counterfeiting nation's people-- just as was the case when gold was the currency and it was obtained by conquering other nations. And this destroys the incentive to save and produce, while encouraging debt and runaway welfare.
The pressure at home to inflate the currency comes from the corporate welfare recipients, as well as those who demand handouts as compensation for their needs and perceived injuries by others. In both cases personal responsibility for one's actions is rejected.
When paper money is rejected, or when gold runs out, wealth and political stability are lost. The country then must go from living beyond its means to living beneath its means, until the economic and political systems adjust to the new rules-- rules no longer written by those who ran the now defunct printing press.
"Dollar Diplomacy," a policy instituted by William Howard Taft and his Secretary of State Philander C. Knox, was designed to enhance U.S. commercial investments in Latin America and the Far East. McKinley concocted a war against Spain in 1898, and (Teddy) Roosevelt's corollary to the Monroe Doctrine preceded Taft's aggressive approach to using the U.S. dollar and diplomatic influence to secure U.S. investments abroad. This earned the popular title of "Dollar Diplomacy." The significance of Roosevelt's change was that our intervention now could be justified by the mere "appearance" that a country of interest to us was politically or fiscally vulnerable to European control. Not only did we claim a right, but even an official U.S. government "obligation" to protect our commercial interests from Europeans.
This new policy came on the heels of the "gunboat" diplomacy of the late 19^th century, and it meant we could buy influence before resorting to the threat of force. By the time the "dollar diplomacy" of William Howard Taft was clearly articulated, the seeds of American empire were planted. And they were destined to grow in the fertile political soil of a country that lost its love and respect for the republic bequeathed to us by the authors of the Constitution. And indeed they did. It wasn't too long before dollar "diplomacy" became dollar "hegemony" in the second half of the 20^th century.
This transition only could have occurred with a dramatic change in monetary policy and the nature of the dollar itself.
Congress created the Federal Reserve System in 1913. Between then and 1971 the principle of sound money was systematically undermined. Between 1913 and 1971, the Federal Reserve found it much easier to expand the money supply at will for financing war or manipulating the economy with little resistance from Congress-- while benefiting the special interests that influence government.
Dollar dominance got a huge boost after World War II. We were spared the destruction that so many other nations suffered, and our coffers were filled with the world's gold. But the world chose not to return to the discipline of the gold standard, and the politicians applauded. Printing money to pay the bills was a lot more popular than taxing or restraining unnecessary spending. In spite of the short-term benefits, imbalances were institutionalized for decades to come.
The 1944 Bretton Woods agreement solidified the dollar as the preeminent world reserve currency, replacing the British pound. Due to our political and military muscle, and because we had a huge amount of physical gold, the world readily accepted our dollar (defined as 1/35^th of an ounce of gold) as the world's reserve currency. The dollar was said to be "as good as gold," and convertible to all foreign central banks at that rate. For American citizens, however, it remained illegal to own. This was a gold-exchange standard that from inception was doomed to fail.
The U.S. did exactly what many predicted she would do. She printed more dollars for which there was no gold backing. But the world was content to accept those dollars for more than 25 years with little question-- until the French and others in the late 1960s demanded we fulfill our promise to pay one ounce of gold for each $35 they delivered to the U.S. Treasury. This resulted in a huge gold drain that brought an end to a very poorly devised pseudo-gold standard.
It all ended on August 15, 1971, when Nixon closed the gold window and refused to pay out any of our remaining 280 million ounces of gold. In essence, we declared our insolvency and everyone recognized some other monetary system had to be devised in order to bring stability to the markets.
Amazingly, a new system was devised which allowed the U.S. to operate the printing presses for the world reserve currency with no restraints placed on it-- not even a pretense of gold convertibility, none whatsoever! Though the new policy was even more deeply flawed, it nevertheless opened the door for dollar hegemony to spread.
Realizing the world was embarking on something new and mind boggling, elite money managers, with especially strong support from U.S. authorities, struck an agreement with OPEC to price oil in U.S. dollars exclusively for all worldwide transactions. This gave the dollar a special place among world currencies and in essence "backed" the dollar with oil. In return, the U.S. promised to protect the various oil-rich kingdoms in the Persian Gulf against threat of invasion or domestic coup. This arrangement helped ignite the radical Islamic movement among those who resented our influence in the region. The arrangement gave the dollar artificial strength, with tremendous financial benefits for the United States. It allowed us to export our monetary inflation by buying oil and other goods at a great discount as dollar influence flourished.
This post-Bretton Woods system was much more fragile than the system that existed between 1945 and 1971. Though the dollar/oil arrangement was helpful, it was not nearly as stable as the pseudo gold standard under Bretton Woods. It certainly was less stable than the gold standard of the late 19^th century.
During the 1970s the dollar nearly collapsed, as oil prices surged and gold skyrocketed to $800 an ounce. By 1979 interest rates of 21% were required to rescue the system. The pressure on the dollar in the 1970s, in spite of the benefits accrued to it, reflected reckless budget deficits and monetary inflation during the 1960s. The markets were not fooled by LBJ's claim that we could afford both "guns and butter."
Once again the dollar was rescued, and this ushered in the age of true dollar hegemony lasting from the early 1980s to the present. With tremendous cooperation coming from the central banks and international commercial banks, the dollar was accepted as if it were gold.
Fed Chair Alan Greenspan, on several occasions before the House Banking Committee, answered my challenges to him about his previously held favorable views on gold by claiming that he and other central bankers had gotten paper money-- i.e. the dollar system-- to respond as if it were gold. Each time I strongly disagreed, and pointed out that if they had achieved such a feat they would have defied centuries of economic history regarding the need for money to be something of real value. He smugly and confidently concurred with this.
In recent years central banks and various financial institutions, all with vested interests in maintaining a workable fiat dollar standard, were not secretive about selling and loaning large amounts of gold to the market even while decreasing gold prices raised serious questions about the wisdom of such a policy. They never admitted to gold price fixing, but the evidence is abundant that they believed if the gold price fell it would convey a sense of confidence to the market, confidence that they indeed had achieved amazing success in turning paper into gold.
Increasing gold prices historically are viewed as an indicator of distrust in paper currency. This recent effort was not a whole lot different than the U.S. Treasury selling gold at $35 an ounce in the 1960s, in an attempt to convince the world the dollar was sound and as good as gold. Even during the Depression, one of Roosevelt's first acts was to remove free market gold pricing as an indication of a flawed monetary system by making it illegal for American citizens to own gold. Economic law eventually limited that effort, as it did in the early 1970s when our Treasury and the IMF tried to fix the price of gold by dumping tons into the market to dampen the enthusiasm of those seeking a safe haven for a falling dollar after gold ownership was re-legalized.
Once again the effort between 1980 and 2000 to fool the market as to the true value of the dollar proved unsuccessful. In the past 5 years the dollar has been devalued in terms of gold by more than 50%. You just can't fool all the people all the time, even with the power of the mighty printing press and money creating system of the Federal Reserve.
Even with all the shortcomings of the fiat monetary system, dollar influence thrived. The results seemed beneficial, but gross distortions built into the system remained. And true to form, Washington politicians are only too anxious to solve the problems cropping up with window dressing, while failing to understand and deal with the underlying flawed policy. Protectionism, fixing exchange rates, punitive tariffs, politically motivated sanctions, corporate subsidies, international trade management, price controls, interest rate and wage controls, super-nationalist sentiments, threats of force, and even war are resorted to—all to solve the problems artificially created by deeply flawed monetary and economic systems.
In the short run, the issuer of a fiat reserve currency can accrue great economic benefits. In the long run, it poses a threat to the country issuing the world currency. In this case that's the United States. As long as foreign countries take our dollars in return for real goods, we come out ahead. This is a benefit many in Congress fail to recognize, as they bash China for maintaining a positive trade balance with us. But this leads to a loss of manufacturing jobs to overseas markets, as we become more dependent on others and less self-sufficient. Foreign countries accumulate our dollars due to their high savings rates, and graciously loan them back to us at low interest rates to finance our excessive consumption.
It sounds like a great deal for everyone, except the time will come when our dollars-- due to their depreciation-- will be received less enthusiastically or even be rejected by foreign countries. That could create a whole new ballgame and force us to pay a price for living beyond our means and our production. The shift in sentiment regarding the dollar has already started, but the worst is yet to come.
The agreement with OPEC in the 1970s to price oil in dollars has provided tremendous artificial strength to the dollar as the preeminent reserve currency. This has created a universal demand for the dollar, and soaks up the huge number of new dollars generated each year. Last year alone M3 increased over $700 billion.
The artificial demand for our dollar, along with our military might, places us in the unique position to "rule" the world without productive work or savings, and without limits on consumer spending or deficits. The problem is, it can't last.
Price inflation is raising its ugly head, and the NASDAQ bubble-- generated by easy money-- has burst. The housing bubble likewise created is deflating. Gold prices have doubled, and federal spending is out of sight with zero political will to rein it in. The trade deficit last year was over $728 billion. A $2 trillion war is raging, and plans are being laid to expand the war into Iran and possibly Syria. The only restraining force will be the world's rejection of the dollar. It's bound to come and create conditions worse than 1979-1980, which required 21% interest rates to correct. But everything possible will be done to protect the dollar in the meantime. We have a shared interest with those who hold our dollars to keep the whole charade going.
Greenspan, in his first speech after leaving the Fed, said that gold prices were up because of concern about terrorism, and not because of monetary concerns or because he created too many dollars during his tenure. Gold has to be discredited and the dollar propped up. Even when the dollar comes under serious attack by market forces, the central banks and the IMF surely will do everything conceivable to soak up the dollars in hope of restoring stability. Eventually they will fail.
Most importantly, the dollar/oil relationship has to be maintained to keep the dollar as a preeminent currency. Any attack on this relationship will be forcefully challenged—as it already has been.
In November 2000 Saddam Hussein demanded Euros for his oil. His arrogance was a threat to the dollar; his lack of any military might was never a threat. At the first cabinet meeting with the new administration in 2001, as reported by Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, the major topic was how we would get rid of Saddam Hussein-- though there was no evidence whatsoever he posed a threat to us. This deep concern for Saddam Hussein surprised and shocked O'Neill.
It now is common knowledge that the immediate reaction of the administration after 9/11 revolved around how they could connect Saddam Hussein to the attacks, to justify an invasion and overthrow of his government. Even with no evidence of any connection to 9/11, or evidence of weapons of mass destruction, public and congressional support was generated through distortions and flat out misrepresentation of the facts to justify overthrowing Saddam Hussein.
There was no public talk of removing Saddam Hussein because of his attack on the integrity of the dollar as a reserve currency by selling oil in Euros. Many believe this was the real reason for our obsession with Iraq. I doubt it was the only reason, but it may well have played a significant role in our motivation to wage war. Within a very short period after the military victory, all Iraqi oil sales were carried out in dollars. The Euro was abandoned.
In 2001, Venezuela's ambassador to Russia spoke of Venezuela switching to the Euro for all their oil sales. Within a year there was a coup attempt against Chavez, reportedly with assistance from our CIA.
After these attempts to nudge the Euro toward replacing the dollar as the world's reserve currency were met with resistance, the sharp fall of the dollar against the Euro was reversed. These events may well have played a significant role in maintaining dollar dominance.
It's become clear the U.S. administration was sympathetic to those who plotted the overthrow of Chavez, and was embarrassed by its failure. The fact that Chavez was democratically elected had little influence on which side we supported.
Now, a new attempt is being made against the petrodollar system. Iran, another member of the "axis of evil," has announced her plans to initiate an oil bourse in March of this year. Guess what, the oil sales will be priced Euros, not dollars.
Most Americans forget how our policies have systematically and needlessly antagonized the Iranians over the years. In 1953 the CIA helped overthrow a democratically elected president, Mohammed Mossadeqh, and install the authoritarian Shah, who was friendly to the U.S. The Iranians were still fuming over this when the hostages were seized in 1979. Our alliance with Saddam Hussein in his invasion of Iran in the early 1980s did not help matters, and obviously did not do much for our relationship with Saddam Hussein. The administration announcement in 2001 that Iran was part of the axis of evil didn't do much to improve the diplomatic relationship between our two countries. Recent threats over nuclear power, while ignoring the fact that they are surrounded by countries with nuclear weapons, doesn't seem to register with those who continue to provoke Iran. With what most Muslims perceive as our war against Islam, and this recent history, there's little wonder why Iran might choose to harm America by undermining the dollar. Iran, like Iraq, has zero capability to attack us. But that didn't stop us from turning Saddam Hussein into a modern day Hitler ready to take over the world. Now Iran, especially since she's made plans for pricing oil in Euros, has been on the receiving end of a propaganda war not unlike that waged against Iraq before our invasion.
It's not likely that maintaining dollar supremacy was the only motivating factor for the war against Iraq, nor for agitating against Iran. Though the real reasons for going to war are complex, we now know the reasons given before the war started, like the presence of weapons of mass destruction and Saddam Hussein's connection to 9/11, were false. The dollar's importance is obvious, but this does not diminish the influence of the distinct plans laid out years ago by the neo-conservatives to remake the Middle East. Israel's influence, as well as that of the Christian Zionists, likewise played a role in prosecuting this war. Protecting "our" oil supplies has influenced our Middle East policy for decades.
But the truth is that paying the bills for this aggressive intervention is impossible the old fashioned way, with more taxes, more savings, and more production by the American people. Much of the expense of the Persian Gulf War in 1991 was shouldered by many of our willing allies. That's not so today. Now, more than ever, the dollar hegemony-- it's dominance as the world reserve currency-- is required to finance our huge war expenditures. This $2 trillion never-ending war must be paid for, one way or another. Dollar hegemony provides the vehicle to do just that.
For the most part the true victims aren't aware of how they pay the bills. The license to create money out of thin air allows the bills to be paid through price inflation. American citizens, as well as average citizens of Japan, China, and other countries suffer from price inflation, which represents the "tax" that pays the bills for our military adventures. That is until the fraud is discovered, and the foreign producers decide not to take dollars nor hold them very long in payment for their goods. Everything possible is done to prevent the fraud of the monetary system from being exposed to the masses who suffer from it. If oil markets replace dollars with Euros, it would in time curtail our ability to continue to print, without restraint, the world's reserve currency.
It is an unbelievable benefit to us to import valuable goods and export depreciating dollars. The exporting countries have become addicted to our purchases for their economic growth. This dependency makes them allies in continuing the fraud, and their participation keeps the dollar's value artificially high. If this system were workable long term, American citizens would never have to work again. We too could enjoy "bread and circuses" just as the Romans did, but their gold finally ran out and the inability of Rome to continue to plunder conquered nations brought an end to her empire.
The same thing will happen to us if we don't change our ways. Though we don't occupy foreign countries to directly plunder, we nevertheless have spread our troops across 130 nations of the world. Our intense effort to spread our power in the oil-rich Middle East is not a coincidence. But unlike the old days, we don't declare direct ownership of the natural resources-- we just insist that we can buy what we want and pay for it with our paper money. Any country that challenges our authority does so at great risk.
Once again Congress has bought into the war propaganda against Iran, just as it did against Iraq. Arguments are now made for attacking Iran economically, and militarily if necessary. These arguments are all based on the same false reasons given for the ill-fated and costly occupation of Iraq.
Our whole economic system depends on continuing the current monetary arrangement, which means recycling the dollar is crucial. Currently, we borrow over $700 billion every year from our gracious benefactors, who work hard and take our paper for their goods. Then we borrow all the money we need to secure the empire (DOD budget $450 billion) plus more. The military might we enjoy becomes the "backing" of our currency. There are no other countries that can challenge our military superiority, and therefore they have little choice but to accept the dollars we declare are today's "gold." This is why countries that challenge the system-- like Iraq, Iran and Venezuela-- become targets of our plans for regime change.
Ironically, dollar superiority depends on our strong military, and our strong military depends on the dollar. As long as foreign recipients take our dollars for real goods and are willing to finance our extravagant consumption and militarism, the status quo will continue regardless of how huge our foreign debt and current account deficit become.
But real threats come from our political adversaries who are incapable of confronting us militarily, yet are not bashful about confronting us economically. That's why we see the new challenge from Iran being taken so seriously. The urgent arguments about Iran posing a military threat to the security of the United States are no more plausible than the false charges levied against Iraq. Yet there is no effort to resist this march to confrontation by those who grandstand for political reasons against the Iraq war.

It seems that the people and Congress are easily persuaded by the jingoism of the preemptive war promoters. It's only after the cost in human life and dollars are tallied up that the people object to unwise militarism.
The strange thing is that the failure in Iraq is now apparent to a large majority of American people, yet they and Congress are acquiescing to the call for a needless and dangerous confrontation with Iran.
But then again, our failure to find Osama bin Laden and destroy his network did not dissuade us from taking on the Iraqis in a war totally unrelated to 9/11.
Concern for pricing oil only in dollars helps explain our willingness to drop everything and teach Saddam Hussein a lesson for his defiance in demanding Euros for oil.
And once again there's this urgent call for sanctions and threats of force against Iran at the precise time Iran is opening a new oil exchange with all transactions in Euros.
Using force to compel people to accept money without real value can only work in the short run. It ultimately leads to economic dislocation, both domestic and international, and always ends with a price to be paid.
The economic law that honest exchange demands only things of real value as currency cannot be repealed. The chaos that one day will ensue from our 35-year experiment with worldwide fiat money will require a return to money of real value. We will know that day is approaching when oil-producing countries demand gold, or its equivalent, for their oil rather than dollars or Euros. The sooner the better.

Pot edges cherries in value as a state agricultural product

2006-02-17T08:51:00.000-08:00

By JOHN K. WILEY
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

SPOKANE -- Law enforcement officers harvested a dubious record last year: enough marijuana plants to rank the illegal weed as Washington state's No. 8 agricultural commodity, edging sweet cherries in value.

The 135,323 marijuana plants seized in 2005 were estimated to be worth $270 million -- a record amount that places the crop among the state's top 10 agricultural commodities, based on the most recent statistics available.

And like any agricultural product, marijuana is very much a commodity, Lt. Rich Wiley, who heads the Washington State Patrol narcotics program, said Wednesday.

"We're struck by the amount of work they put into it," Wiley said. "It's very labor-intensive. They often run individual drip lines to each plant and are out there fertilizing them. It takes a tremendous amount of work."

But the results are worth the effort, said Wiley, who coordinates pot busts with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency and local law enforcement agencies. A single plant can produce as much as a pound of processed marijuana, worth about $2,000, he said.

The estimated $270 million value of the plants seized in 2005 ranked just above sweet cherries, which were valued at $242 million in 2004, and just below the $329 million the state's nurseries and greenhouses produced. Apples are the state's No. 1 agricultural commodity, bringing $962.5 million in 2004.

The 2004 statistics, the most recent available, were released last year by the state Agriculture Department.

This is the seventh year in a row that record numbers of marijuana plants have been seized and destroyed statewide, the State Patrol said. The state's known pot harvest, based on seizures, went from 66,521 plants in 2003 to 132,941 in 2004, then to 135,323 last year.

Most of the growing operations were in Eastern Washington, principally outdoors on federal or state land in remote locations near a source of water, the State Patrol said.

Chelan County produced the most domestic marijuana, as federal, state and county drug agents seized 37,086 plants last year. Grant County was second, with 20,521 plants seized. Thousands of plants also were seized in both Yakima and Franklin counties in Eastern Washington.

King County, in Western Washington, was third in numbers of plants seized -- 16,809 -- many from indoor growing operations.

The Tiger Poo Market is HOT!

2006-02-17T08:18:00.000-08:00

CANBERRA (Reuters) - A tiger's roar might be scary, but Australian researchers have found that the predator's poo is just as potent.

Researchers at the University of Queensland said Friday they had successfully tested a tiger poo repellant, warding off wild goats for at least three days.

"Goats wouldn't have seen a tiger from an evolutionary point of view for at least 15 generations but they recognize the smell of the predator," repellent creator Peter Murray said in a statement.

"If we can show this lasts weeks ... we've just tapped into probably a billion-dollar market. It's enormous," he said.

Murray said the repellant, made of fatty acids and sulphurous compounds extracted from tiger excrement, also worked on feral pigs, kangaroos and rabbits and might deter deer, horses and cattle too.

In an average year pest animals cause about A$420 million (US$311 million) worth of agricultural damage in Australia the government has said. Others put the cost in the billions, mostly from European imports such as rabbits, foxes and crop-choking weeds.

Syria, Not Iran, Uses The Euro for Petroleum

2006-02-14T09:48:00.000-08:00

The big buzz on many websites was the Iranian threat to move to this paradigm, and there's been equal specualtion, whisper and rumour that Iraq was actively pursuing a plan to do sucha thign right before it got the crap bombed out of it. Well, here we go people. Look for some sort of strike on Americans that will be held up to justify strikes against Syria and/or Iran in the near future.

Syria switches to euro amid confrontation with US

Mon Feb 13, 10:29 AM ET

DAMASCUS (Reuters) -

Syria has switched all of the state's foreign currency transactions to euros from dollars amid a political confrontation with the United States, the head of state-owned Commercial Bank of Syria said on Monday.
"This is a precaution. We are talking about billions of dollars," Duraid Durgham told Reuters.

The bank, which still dominates the Syrian market although private banks have been allowed to set up in the last few years, has also stopped dealing with dollars in the international foreign exchange flows of private clients.

The United States has been at the forefront of international pressure on Syria for its alleged role in the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri a year ago. Damascus denies involvement in the killing.

"It looks like a kind of pre-emptive action aimed at making their foreign assets safer, preventing them from getting frozen in case of any conflict," said a Middle East economist who requested anonymity.

2006-02-12T20:42:00.000-08:00

Spotted this article off the Rawstory feed. I'm always on the the look out for news, and I'm always taking what I read with a grain of salt. I guess you could call me a data junkie. In this town, though, there are worse types of junkes to be!

Forget Iran, Americans Should be Hysterical About This

Nuking the Economy

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

Last week the Bureau of Labor Statistics re-benchmarked the payroll jobs data back to 2000. Thanks to Charles McMillion of MBG Information Services, I have the adjusted data from January 2001 through January 2006. If you are worried about terrorists, you don't know what worry is.

Job growth over the last five years is the weakest on record. The US economy came up more than 7 million jobs short of keeping up with population growth. That's one good reason for controlling immigration. An economy that cannot keep up with population growth should not be boosting population with heavy rates of legal and illegal immigration.

Over the past five years the US economy experienced a net job loss in goods producing activities. The entire job growth was in service-providing activities--primarily credit intermediation, health care and social assistance, waiters, waitresses and bartenders, and state and local government.

US manufacturing lost 2.9 million jobs, almost 17% of the manufacturing work force. The wipeout is across the board. Not a single manufacturing payroll classification created a single new job.

The declines in some manufacturing sectors have more in common with a country undergoing saturation bombing during war than with a super-economy that is "the envy of the world." Communications equipment lost 43% of its workforce. Semiconductors and electronic components lost 37% of its workforce. The workforce in computers and electronic products declined 30%. Electrical equipment and appliances lost 25% of its employees. The workforce in motor vehicles and parts declined 12%. Furniture and related products lost 17% of its jobs. Apparel manufacturers lost almost half of the work force. Employment in textile mills declined 43%. Paper and paper products lost one-fifth of its jobs. The work force in plastics and rubber products declined by 15%. Even manufacturers of beverages and tobacco products experienced a 7% shrinkage in jobs.

The knowledge jobs that were supposed to take the place of lost manufacturing jobs in the globalized "new economy" never appeared. The information sector lost 17% of its jobs, with the telecommunications work force declining by 25%. Even wholesale and retail trade lost jobs. Despite massive new accounting burdens imposed by Sarbanes-Oxley, accounting and bookkeeping employment shrank by 4%. Computer systems design and related lost 9% of its jobs. Today there are 209,000 fewer managerial and supervisory jobs than 5 years ago.

In five years the US economy only created 70,000 jobs in architecture and engineering, many of which are clerical. Little wonder engineering enrollments are shrinking. There are no jobs for graduates. The talk about engineering shortages is absolute ignorance. There are several hundred thousand American engineers who are unemployed and have been for years. No student wants a degree that is nothing but a ticket to a soup line. Many engineers have written to me that they cannot even get Wal-Mart jobs because their education makes them over-qualified.

Offshore outsourcing and offshore production have left the US awash with unemployment among the highly educated. The low measured rate of unemployment does not include discouraged workers. Labor arbitrage has made the unemployment rate less and less a meaningful indicator. In the past unemployment resulted mainly from turnover in the labor force and recession. Recoveries pulled people back into jobs.

Unemployment benefits were intended to help people over the down time in the cycle when workers were laid off. Today the unemployment is permanent as entire occupations and industries are wiped out by labor arbitrage as corporations replace their American employees with foreign ones.

Economists who look beyond political press releases estimate the US unemployment rate to be between 7% and 8.5%. There are now hundreds of thousands of Americans who will never recover their investment in their university education.

Unless the BLS is falsifying the data or businesses are reporting the opposite of the facts, the US is experiencing a job depression. Most economists refuse to acknowledge the facts, because they endorsed globalization. It was a win-win situation, they said.

They were wrong.

At a time when America desperately needs the voices of educated people as a counterweight to the disinformation that emanates from the Bush administration and its supporters, economists have discredited themselves. This is especially true for "free market economists" who foolishly assumed that international labor arbitrage was an example of free trade that was benefitting Americans. Where is the benefit when employment in US export industries and import-competitive industries is shrinking? After decades of struggle to regain credibility, free market economics is on the verge of another wipeout.

No sane economist can possibly maintain that a deplorable record of merely 1,054,000 net new private sector jobs over five years is an indication of a healthy economy. The total number of private sector jobs created over the five year period is 500,000 jobs less than one year's legal and illegal immigration! (In a December 2005 Center for Immigration Studies report based on the Census Bureau's March 2005 Current Population Survey, Steven Camarota writes that there were 7,9 million new immigrants between January 2000 and March 2005.)

The economics profession has failed America. It touts a meaningless number while joblessness soars. Lazy journalists at the New York Times simply rewrite the Bush administration's press releases.

On February 10 the Commerce Department released a record US trade deficit in goods and services for 2005--$726 billion. The US deficit in Advanced Technology Products reached a new high. Offshore production for home markets and jobs outsourcing has made the US highly dependent on foreign provided goods and services, while simultaneously reducing the export capability of the US economy. It is possible that there might be no exchange rate at which the US can balance its trade.

Polls indicate that the Bush administration is succeeding in whipping up fear and hysteria about Iran. The secretary of defense is promising Americans decades-long war. Is death in battle Bush's solution to the job depression? Will Asians finance a decades-long war for a bankrupt country?

The Wave of the Future?

2006-02-08T14:01:00.000-08:00

In car loving Las Vegas this sort of thing seems like it would be ridiculously complex to achieve. I believe it could be done (call me an optimist) and I'd love to see it happen. Maybe I should just move to Sweden?

Sweden aims for oil-free economy

Sweden has a head start on many countries in its use of renewables

Sweden says it aims to completely wean itself off oil within 15 years - without building new nuclear plants.
The attempt is being planned by a committee of industrialists, academics, car manufacturers, farmers and others.
The country aims to replace all fossil fuels with renewables before climate change damages economies and growing oil scarcity leads to price rises.
According to the Guardian newspaper, a Swedish minister said oil dependency could be broken by 2020.
The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences is worried that oil supplies are peaking, shortly to dwindle, and that high oil prices could cause global economic recession.
"Our dependency on oil should be broken by 2020," said Mona Sahlin, Sweden's minister of sustainable development.
"There shall always be better alternatives to oil, which means no house should need oil for heating, and no driver should need to turn solely to gasoline."
The Scandinavian country, which was hard hit by oil price rises in the 1970s, now gets the majority of its electricity from nuclear and hydroelectric power. In 2003, 26% of all energy consumed came from renewables, compared with an EU average of 6%.
The oil committee is to report to parliament in several months. Swedish energy ministry officials said they expected the panel to recommend further development of biofuels derived from its substantial forests.
It was also expected to expand other renewable energies such as wind and wave power.

Things Fall Apart, Part II

2006-02-06T15:21:00.000-08:00

Recently we had a convention in another city. As with past conventions this one was poorly organized, over funded and ineptly managed. The folks selected to go were mostly Sales folks, including our embattled Sales Manager. I didn't go.

The crew got there on Friday, the convention was to be held on a Saturday/Sunday, returnign late Sunday evening. This morning I noticed that our CEO (who went) and our DSP (who also went) were not in. I thought that was a little odd for the DSP to not be in, as he's here typically early every morning. Turns out the CEO & the DSP are still livin' it up in convention town (not Vegas).

This kind of pisses me off for the reason that while they are out having a great time shucking out company funds for strippers and booze I am forced to accept a measely salary. I'll pause here and say that I'm glad to have a wage at all, and that is something I really am grateful for. Gratitude aside, I'm pissed off that my ocmpany would choose to go and blow funds for two guys' romp. I should also note that I don't know for certain how the funds are being spent or where they are really coming from. I just assume that the two of them are out there blowing company dough on things other than staplers.

The big event that took place during the convention was the firing of our Sales Manager. There's been a lot of tension between he and some other members of the staff for various reasons, and it has all come to a head now. It seems he was given an ultimatum to do somethign or be fired and he refused to do that thing so he got fired. I don't really want to release the details of what he was asked to do, but it was kind of trivial. I also wasn't there, so I don't know all the details first hand. Suffice to say that he probably should have complied with a simple request if he had wanted to keep his job.

Which now plants me in an odd position. In addition to Sales Manager being gone we also have another Sales guy who is indefineitely dispoed just now (you don't want to know ... its really dumb). So we're down a few soldiers. I've been angling for a shot at that side of operations, and I had been making arrangements prior to all of this to present my case. Now I fear that I'll look like some sort of shameless opportunist.

Of Babies & Work Loads

2006-02-02T15:38:00.000-08:00

One of the girls in our office just told me that she is pregnant. Women get so jubilant about pregnancy. All I could think to tell her was that she was going to be mighty uncomfortable come June/July (she is due in August/September). To be pregnant is bad enough, to be pregnant in the summer heat of Las Vegas is just NUTS.

We also found out this morning that one of our Sales guys got arrested last nite and is sitting in jail. That's super. Nothing like having some of your revenue stream just go kaput without any warning. This particular Sales guy has done this type of thing before and we've bailed him out. The man has talent and he can do what he does very well; its just his personal problems that get him in trouble.

I took the opportunity to draft up an email to our CEO and COO telling them that I want to transfer over to Sales. I don't want to take the man's job, we have lots of room in that department, but I figure his absence (at least in the short term) will perhaps make more offer to move a little more tantalizing. I know that this request is going to sit bitter in the mouth of those two, or at least one of them. It will be hard to convince them that someone else can be brought in here to do what I am doing.

My main motivator for wanting to get out of my current position is due mainly to the lack of focus in our operation. In my entire time with this company my responsibilities have increased but the focus of my department has not been refined whatsoever. I've received compensation for the increase in responsibility, but certainly not enough to pay for what I have to handle. I like this company, so I don't want to just up and leave. I think that I could be a real asset to us in other ways and I think I've earned the right to try that out. We'll see ...

Fascinating Tidbit

2006-02-01T11:58:00.000-08:00

MICROSOFT founder Bill Gates, the world's richest man, said today the tax office in the US has to store his financial data on a special computer because his fortune is so vast.

"My tax return in the United States has to be kept on a special computer because their normal computers can't deal with the numbers," he said at a Microsoft conference held in Lisbon.

"So I am constantly getting these notices telling me I haven't paid something when really it is just on the wrong computer," he added in comments broadcast on television.

"Then they will send me another notice telling me how bad they feel they that they sent me a notice that was a mistake," he said

Gates's fortune is put at $US47 billion ($62.88 billion), according to the latest list of the world's rich published by Forbes magazine.

Last month Time magazine named Gates and his wife Melinda, along with rock star Bono, its Persons of the Year for 2005, citing their charitable work and activism aimed at reducing global poverty and improving world health.

Walmart Execs Get Caught on the Enron Train

2006-01-31T12:46:00.000-08:00

I seem to recall several Senators or Congresspeople decrying the villainous portrayal of Wal-Mart at one time or another. I grew up with a Wal-Mart that later died and was reborn as a SUPER Wal-Mart not two miles down the road. I can't begin to describe the impact it had on my home community. While nothing terrible happened in the sense that there was still a town, I would say that a great deal of economic focus shifted to the SUPER Wal-Mart and the surrounding area. You have to be where the money is. Just the increase in terms of costs for infrastructure (roads, etc.) was quite large, I would estimate.

My main objection to the project was on the grounds of conservation of space. I'm a big proponent of using what you've got and incorporating the old into the new. Why clear out a new site just to put a SUPER Wal-Mart up when down the road there's an empty Wal-Mart? How does that make any sense?

Wal-Mart executive pleads guilty to wire, tax fraud
RAW STORY
Published: January 31, 2006

Former Wal-Mart VP Thomas Coughlin pleaded guilty today to fraud and tax evasion charges today, according to the Wall Street Journal. Coughlin has admitted to stealing everything from money to gift cards and merchandise from the retail giant.
Excerpts from the Journal's story follow:

Thomas Coughlin, 57 years old, faces a maximum of 28 years in prison after pleading guilty to five counts of wire fraud and one count of filing a false tax return. He also could be fined $1.35 million. The judge ordered a presentencing report that will take up 10-14 weeks to prepare.
Wal-Mart lawyers referred Mr. Coughlin, once a protege of Wal Mart founder Sam Walton, to federal prosecutors after discovering Mr. Coughlin had embezzled money from the company and used expense vouchers to buy products as varied as snakeskin boots, hunting trips and Bloody Mary mix. They estimated losses at up to $500,000.
...
Besides giving the case to federal prosecutors, Wal-Mart sued Mr. Coughlin last year to end his retirement agreement and to recover money that Mr. Coughlin is accused of misusing. However, that suit was dismissed this week by an Arkansas judge who said both sides had signed a pledge as part of that retirement deal not to pursue any claims against each other for any reasons.

Small, Tech-Centric Companies are the Biggest Headaches

2006-01-30T15:02:00.000-08:00

Our firm is a small, tech-centric and tech-dependent company. We rely SO heavily on our programmers to make the machines work that it gives you pause to think. We have moments to pause and think because on a daily basis our computers (or more precisely the very necessary programs that are running on them) decide that things are not to their liking and that they are going to quit for awhile. I cannot tell you how frustrating this is.

If I were a real slacker and more lackadaisical I would just take it in stride and maybe go out and get some sunshine for awhile. But I'm not that guy. Instead I pound my fists on the desk, pull at my hair (what's left of it) and then write up fiery emails to IT about how their program has just broken and what could be done to fix it and oh yeah, why does this happen so often and we need to invest in better technology, etc., etc. I really go off. Of course nothing changes. The programmers are just guys doing their jobs as best they can and sometimes the programs they write just don't work the way we might want them to. That's life, I suppose. But goddamn if it doesn't bug the shit out of me when I need the application to load and all I get is that stupid hourglass.

Crossed Lines

2006-01-30T10:29:00.000-08:00

Very recently the CEO and CFO of my company decided that my assistant wasn't already busy enough and they gave her another project to work on which involves a tremendous amount of time on her behalf in order to be done properly. She could do the job half-assed or a little more meticulously than she does and free up some time, but that's not her style. She's very industrious and diligent, which is great but her time investment in this project is having some negative repercussions in terms of her normal responsibilities getting enough attention.

I feel bad for her; I know that when the people who actually sign your checks (as opposed to me, her manager) give you something to do you really want to do it right. She's industrious to begin with, but she's totally full bore into making this particular project complete on schedule with a deadline they gave her. The thing is, as bad as I feel for her, I think that the time she is investing is too much at the cost of what I need her to do.

These projects doled out by the CFO and CEO are important, I don't doubt it, but they are more clerical in nature and don't require the expertise that my assistant possesses. She's a valuable asset to my daily routine and now she's been diverted for what I consider an inferior purpose. Not to mention the extra work has made her grumpy and not fun to be around. Sometimes I wish I had my own office again. Maybe I should negotitate for that when my contract terms come due ...

Vegas Condos Go Cold

2006-01-25T16:19:00.000-08:00

Developers are suddenly scaling back their bets on the town's once sizzling luxury real estate market

By SONJA STEPTOE/LOS ANGELES

Posted Wednesday, Jan. 25, 2006
Now that several high rollers in the Las Vegas condo-hotel game, including luxury properties linked to Michael Jordan and Ivana Trump, are either folding or selling their holdings, a growing number of players are losing their taste for big bets on high-rise, residential real estate development.

Over the past two years, as high-rise fever spread across town, prices for the luxury apartments ballooned, fetching as much as $500 - $1,000 a square foot— or up to $1.5 million for a one-bedroom— at the peak. Buyers, mostly interested in flipping them for quick profits, eagerly anted up five-figure down payments, while developers planned more than 70 luxury towers holding a total of about 43,000 units on or near the Strip and downtown. But the intense competition for the city's limited supply of contractors sent construction costs skyrocketing 30% last year, just as lending policies tightened, interest rates climbed and sales started to slow.

Currently, just 18 projects are underway, and nervous developers have called off three high-profile projects over the past seven months. A number of others, including one backed by a group including George Clooney, either are being revised or postponed. Experts now forecast that only a quarter to a half of the seven dozen originally proposed projects will ever be built. Brian Gordon, a principal at Applied Analysis, a real estate research firm, says the developers with experience building luxury high rises, whose properties are located on or near the Strip and which carry a strong and recognizable brand name— such as Donald Trump, Hard Rock and MGM Grand— are the ones playing winning hands in Vegas now.

Back east, the luxury condo markets that have had similarly explosive growth in Miami and New York, where high-end apartments can command from $2,000 to $4,000 a square foot, haven't slumped yet. Still, experts say the abrupt reversal of fortune in the desert, where the mainstream residential real estate and hotel markets are still quite healthy, shows just how quickly the odds can change in even the most affluent markets if runaway speculation and overzealous development take hold. "It's another case of irrational exuberance," says John Restrepo, head of a Las Vegas real estate and economic consulting firm. "There is a market for high-rise condo hotels here; but it's not as deep as people thought it was. The days of the two guys from the East Coast or Canada coming into town and promoting a condo development with a website and a dream are over."

What Housing Boom?

2006-01-25T13:55:00.000-08:00

A Wealth of $1-Million Homes

California's real estate boom has made the onetime stratospheric price commonplace.

By Annette Haddad, Times Staff Writer

Million-dollar homes were once a sign of real affluence. Now, at least in California, they are getting to be a dime a dozen.

Nearly 49,000 homes in the state sold for at least $1 million last year — a 47% increase from 2004, according to data released Tuesday by DataQuick Information Systems, a La Jolla-based real estate research firm.

Adolph Rangel joined the $1-million-home club thanks to the state's 6-year-old real estate boom.

In 2004, the 30-year-old mortgage bank branch manager sold his Yorba Linda house for $1.05 million, $300,000 more than he paid 12 months earlier. Last year, Rangel bought a new tract home there for $1.3 million and on Sunday he accepted an offer on it for $1.55 million.

His idea of a million-dollar house used to be "what you saw on 'Dynasty,' " Rangel said. "I didn't think it would be a million-dollar tract house."

California ranked first in the survey of homes selling for at least $1 million in 2005, DataQuick said.

In Rancho Santa Fe in San Diego County, one of the wealthiest communities in the U.S., virtually all home sales were in the $1-million-plus category. Malibu and Beverly Hills have always had their share.

The real news is that $1-million homes are becoming more commonplace in areas not known for lifestyles of the rich and famous.

Now it's expensive to be Eagle Rock-adjacent: In the Glassell Park area of Los Angeles, 18 homes sold for $1 million or more last year, versus only one in 2004, according to DataQuick, which collects data on all reported home transactions in California. In Baldwin Hills, the number of seven-figure sales went to 23 from 9. Temple City posted 17. The year before: zero.

"A million dollars isn't what it used to be," said James Joseph, owner of Century 21 Grisham-Joseph brokerage in Whittier.

Indeed, if you sold a home in California last year, there was a 1 in 13 chance that it went for at least $1 million, according to DataQuick.

Your chances in 2004: 1 in 20.

The total of homes fetching $1 million or more last year was nearly four times the number in 2002, according to DataQuick.

Only a few years ago, $1 million bought you an "estate" property, one with ample square footage on a large lot in an exclusive neighborhood.

Not anymore. The median-sized million-dollar home last year was 2,480 square feet with four bedrooms and three bathrooms, DataQuick found.

Joseph said the less-ritzy neighborhoods were still catching up with the high-end coastal communities that were the first in Southern California to see prices start ascending in 2000. Lately, though, the priciest ZIP Codes are starting to lose some steam.

Take the famous 90210 in Beverly Hills. The median home price there rose 5.6% last year, with the price per square foot reaching $702. By comparison, the median home price in La Mirada surged 20% to $535,000, or about $360 a square foot. (The median is the price at which half of all homes sold for more, half for less.) Twenty homes in La Mirada sold for more than $1 million last year, versus only two in 2004.

The million-dollar-home trend is pushing even farther inland into non-resort communities in Riverside and San Bernardino counties. Several new million-dollar-home markets emerged there last year, thanks to sales of newly built large homes on big lots.

The city of Norco, known for its horsy set and ever-present smell of manure, had 55 sales of $1 million or more, up from six the year before, DataQuick said.

"The million-dollar cycle hasn't completely played itself out in the more affordable areas, which include the Inland Empire," said John Karevoll, DataQuick's chief analyst. "There is more to happen there."

Even condominiums in California are breaching the $1-million mark. There were 2,902 condo sales in the million-dollar category last year, up 73% from the year before, DataQuick said. Most were sold in West Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco.

Officially, the most expensive confirmed purchase last year was a 13,636-square-foot, six-bedroom, 12-bathroom La Jolla house on six acres, which went for $23.5 million in September, DataQuick said.

Unofficially, however, some homes sold for much more. The super-rich sometimes pay cash, and sometimes their prices aren't officially recorded. The Beverly Hills mansion that was once the home of oil tycoon Marvin Davis reportedly sold for $42 million last year.

Currently, there are close to 200 California homes for sale listed at $8 million or above, according to Ultimate Homes magazine. At the top of the list is a Malibu beach pad on seven acres with an ocean view. The asking price: $65 million.

Nationwide, there are 1 million homes valued at $1 million or more, said Ultimate Homes Publisher Richard Goodwin. That's up from about 350,000 in 2000.

No wonder having a million-dollar home doesn't have quite the cachet these days for people such as Yorba Linda homeowner Rangel.

Even as a youth, Rangel envisioned himself becoming successful enough to one day plunk down $1 million on a place to live. But with California home prices the way they are, Rangel says his dream has been downsized considerably.

"It's amazing when you think about it," Rangel said. "Where did all these millionaires come from?"

Iceland - Innovations in Energy

2006-01-23T18:28:00.000-08:00

Iceland The First Country To Try Abandoning Gasoline

Hot Water Heats Homes, Businesses; Hydrogen Fuel Oil Powers Cars, Buses

Publication Date:18-January-2006
09:00 PM US Eastern Timezone
Source:ABC News

REYKJAVIK, Iceland— Iceland has energy to spare, and the small country
has found a cutting-edge way to reduce its oil dependency. Volcanoes
formed the island nation out of ash and lava, and molten rock heats
huge underground lakes to the boiling point.

The hot water — energy sizzling beneath the surface — is piped into
cities and stored in giant tanks, providing heat for homes, businesses
and even swimming pools.

The volcanoes melted ice, which formed rivers. The water runs through
turbines, providing virtually all the country's electricity.

Iceland wants to make a full conversion and plans to modify its cars,
buses and trucks to run on renewable energy — with no dependence on
oil.

Water Turned Into Fuel

Iceland has already started by turning water into fuel — hydrogen fuel.

Here's how it works: Electrodes split the water into hydrogen and
oxygen molecules. Hydrogen electrons pass through a conductor that
creates the current to power an electric engine.

Hydrogen fuel now costs two to three times as much as gasoline, but
gets up to three times the mileage of gas, making the overall cost
about the same.

As an added benefit, there are no carbon emissions — only water vapor.

In the capital, Reykjavik, they are already testing three
hydrogen-powered electric buses. The drivers are impressed.

"I like these buses better because with hydrogen you get no
pollution," said bus driver Rognvaldur Jonatanlson.

By the middle of this century, all Icelanders will be required to run
their cars only on hydrogen fuel, meaning no more gasoline.

"If we make hydrogen and use that as a fuel for transportation then we
can run the whole society on our own local renewable energy sources,"
said Marie Maack of the Hydrogen Research Project.

Icelanders say they're committed to showing the world that by making
fuel from water, it is possible to kick the oil habit.

Fresh Meat in the CSR cubicles

2006-01-23T16:39:00.000-08:00

So we've got two new victims, er, employees starting this week it seems. An older woman and a younger woman. Good luck, ladies, you're going to need it. The last woman that the manager of that department tried to train still has no clue what's going on. She's getting better with time but I don't think that she understands all the fundamentals of what we do. Some of that is her, of course, and a lot of that is him not training her and taking the time to teach her crucial things.

I can't knock the guy all the way, though, as it is difficult to train someone new and still perform your job at a high functioning level at the same time, which is what he's had to do. I saw that he was taking the time to teach all three of them (the two new hires and the one hired not long ago) this morning, which is good. They can learn together and from eachother. I think that the added bodies will reduce the work load that his department is currently experiencing, so maybe he'll stop being such a prick all the time.

Collapse of the US Economy?

2006-01-21T22:33:00.000-08:00

January Saturday 21st 2006 (01h49) :

In its attempt to establish a world empire dominating every nation on the planet, the U.S. has exhausted its ability to finance the expansion and the country now faces imminent financial collapse. From all indications, it looks like 2006 will spell the end for America.

Consider these five important points:

Point #1 The U.S., Great Britain and Israel are preparing to attack Iran. As it appears the main reason for invading Iraq was to stop it from selling oil in Euros, likewise Iran has plans to dump the dollar come March 2006.

Point #2 U.S. Treasury Secretary John Snow issued a warning recently that the U.S. Government is on the verge of collapse - as the statutory debt limit imposed by Congress of $8.184 trillion dollars would be reached in mid-February - the government would then be unable to continue its normal operations. Considering the current total U.S. debt stands at $8.162 trillion dollars, once the official debt ceiling ($8.184 trillion) is reached, the U.S. government's credit abroad (its borrowing power) is gone. Those countries (mainly China) who presently keep America afloat by holding U.S. Treasury Notes, will most likely no longer continue doing so.

Point #3 Bank Of America and Compass Bank managers (probably all other U.S. banks too) have been instructing their employees in the last few weeks on how to respond to customer demands in the event of a collapse of the U.S. economy - specifically telling the employees that only agents from the Department Of Homeland Security will have authority to decide what belongings customers may have from their safe deposit boxes - and that precious metals and other valuables will not be released to U.S. citizens. The bank employees have been strictly prohibited from revealing the banks' new "guidelines" to anyone. (however, employees have been talking to friends and family)

The next time you visit your bank, ask them about it - then ask yourself, why is this information being kept secret from customers and the public - what's really going on?

Point #4 FEMA has activated and is currently staffing its vast network of empty internment camps with armed military personnel - unknown to most Americans, these large federal facilities are strategically positioned across the U.S. landscape to "manage" the population in the event of a "terrorist" attack, a civilian uprising, large-scale dissent ,or an insurrection against the government. Some of these razor-wired facilities have the capacity of detaining a million people.

Point #5 The Patriot Act and the US Senate's vote to ban habeas corpus (Nov 14th) - along with George W. Bush having signed executive orders giving him sole authority to impose martial law, suspend habeas corpus and ignore the Posse Comitatus Act, have together pretty much destroyed any notions of freedom and justice for Americans.

Summary: The U.S. economy is broken, the United States is bankrupt - the unchecked spending by this administration, the illegally waged wars against Afghanistan and Iraq, the cost of unprecedented weapons and military build-up - have all contributed to an irreversible emergency which is threatening our nation's existence and our very lives.

Hospitals are closing, major corporations are declaring bankruptcy and/or moving their companies overseas, the monopolized news media spews nothing but lies, and our fearless leaders have turned out to be only ruthless criminals hell-bent on destabilizing our country and robbing us all.

Be aware - we stand at the threshold of total ruin - the international bankers and war profiteers care little for our lives and families - these demons worship money and all things vile and evil - they have very much to gain from war, misery, disease, famine, chaos and death (our deaths).

We are right on the edge - the Treasury is already overextended - the U.S. government cannot (and will not) care for its own citizens' needs, nor secure our borders against illegal aliens - plus, the whole "terrorist" thing is a cruel hoax perpetrated against a trusting citizenry - and only designed to instill fear and garner support for the genocide taking place in Iraq.

Should America (along with British & Israeli forces) launch a war against Iran, or another country, without yet paying for, or even recovering from the current losses in Iraq and elsewhere - the costs of such of an invasion will overwhelm an already crippled economy and push the U.S. over the edge into oblivion.

Question: Considering the U.S. Treasury Notes that China currently holds (which keeps the U.S. economy going)...

Do you think China will continue to support a country's economy (the U.S.) whose military launches a nuclear strike against its neighbor (Iran) - thus delivering a blanket of radioactive fallout over western Chinese provinces - killing hundreds of thousands, if not millions of its citizens?

I think not.

Factoring in the aforementioned points of "preparation" engineered by U.S. authorities, I'd say there's a stinking rat in the woodpile ...can you smell it too?

Iranian Oil Bourse

2006-01-20T16:37:00.000-08:00

The Proposed Iranian Oil Bourse

Abstract: the proposed Iranian Oil Bourse will accelerate the fall of the American Empire.

By Krassimir Petrov, Ph.D.

I. Economics of Empires

01/19/06 "Gold Eagle" -- -- A nation-state taxes its own citizens, while an empire taxes other nation-states. The history of empires, from Greek and Roman, to Ottoman and British, teaches that the economic foundation of every single empire is the taxation of other nations. The imperial ability to tax has always rested on a better and stronger economy, and as a consequence, a better and stronger military. One part of the subject taxes went to improve the living standards of the empire; the other part went to strengthen the military dominance necessary to enforce the collection of those taxes.

Historically, taxing the subject state has been in various forms-usually gold and silver, where those were considered money, but also slaves, soldiers, crops, cattle, or other agricultural and natural resources, whatever economic goods the empire demanded and the subject-state could deliver. Historically, imperial taxation has always been direct: the subject state handed over the economic goods directly to the empire.

For the first time in history, in the twentieth century, America was able to tax the world indirectly, through inflation. It did not enforce the direct payment of taxes like all of its predecessor empires did, but distributed instead its own fiat currency, the U.S. Dollar, to other nations in exchange for goods with the intended consequence of inflating and devaluing those dollars and paying back later each dollar with less economic goods-the difference capturing the U.S. imperial tax. Here is how this happened.

Early in the 20th century, the U.S. economy began to dominate the world economy. The U.S. dollar was tied to gold, so that the value of the dollar neither increased, nor decreased, but remained the same amount of gold. The Great Depression, with its preceding inflation from 1921 to 1929 and its subsequent ballooning government deficits, had substantially increased the amount of currency in circulation, and thus rendered the backing of U.S. dollars by gold impossible. This led Roosevelt to decouple the dollar from gold in 1932. Up to this point, the U.S. may have well dominated the world economy, but from an economic point of view, it was not an empire. The fixed value of the dollar did not allow the Americans to extract economic benefits from other countries by supplying them with dollars convertible to gold.

Economically, the American Empire was born with Bretton Woods in 1945. The U.S. dollar was not fully convertible to gold, but was made convertible to gold only to foreign governments. This established the dollar as the reserve currency of the world. It was possible, because during WWII, the United States had supplied its allies with provisions, demanding gold as payment, thus accumulating significant portion of the world's gold. An Empire would not have been possible if, following the Bretton Woods arrangement, the dollar supply was kept limited and within the availability of gold, so as to fully exchange back dollars for gold. However, the guns-and-butter policy of the 1960's was an imperial one: the dollar supply was relentlessly increased to finance Vietnam and LBJ's Great Society. Most of those dollars were handed over to foreigners in exchange for economic goods, without the prospect of buying them back at the same value. The increase in dollar holdings of foreigners via persistent U.S. trade deficits was tantamount to a tax-the classical inflation tax that a country imposes on its own citizens, this time around an inflation tax that U.S. imposed on rest of the world.

When in 1970-1971 foreigners demanded payment for their dollars in gold, The U.S. Government defaulted on its payment on August 15, 1971. While the popular spin told the story of "severing the link between the dollar and gold", in reality the denial to pay back in gold was an act of bankruptcy by the U.S. Government. Essentially, the U.S. declared itself an Empire. It had extracted an enormous amount of economic goods from the rest of the world, with no intention or ability to return those goods, and the world was powerless to respond- the world was taxed and it could not do anything about it.

From that point on, to sustain the American Empire and to continue to tax the rest of the world, the United States had to force the world to continue to accept ever-depreciating dollars in exchange for economic goods and to have the world hold more and more of those depreciating dollars. It had to give the world an economic reason to hold them, and that reason was oil.

In 1971, as it became clearer and clearer that the U.S Government would not be able to buy back its dollars in gold, it made in 1972-73 an iron-clad arrangement with Saudi Arabia to support the power of the House of Saud in exchange for accepting only U.S. dollars for its oil. The rest of OPEC was to follow suit and also accept only dollars. Because the world had to buy oil from the Arab oil countries, it had the reason to hold dollars as payment for oil. Because the world needed ever increasing quantities of oil at ever increasing oil prices, the world's demand for dollars could only increase. Even though dollars could no longer be exchanged for gold, they were now exchangeable for oil.

The economic essence of this arrangement was that the dollar was now backed by oil. As long as that was the case, the world had to accumulate increasing amounts of dollars, because they needed those dollars to buy oil. As long as the dollar was the only acceptable payment for oil, its dominance in the world was assured, and the American Empire could continue to tax the rest of the world. If, for any reason, the dollar lost its oil backing, the American Empire would cease to exist. Thus, Imperial survival dictated that oil be sold only for dollars. It also dictated that oil reserves were spread around various sovereign states that weren't strong enough, politically or militarily, to demand payment for oil in something else. If someone demanded a different payment, he had to be convinced, either by political pressure or military means, to change his mind.

The man that actually did demand Euro for his oil was Saddam Hussein in 2000. At first, his demand was met with ridicule, later with neglect, but as it became clearer that he meant business, political pressure was exerted to change his mind. When other countries, like Iran, wanted payment in other currencies, most notably Euro and Yen, the danger to the dollar was clear and present, and a punitive action was in order. Bush's Shock-and-Awe in Iraq was not about Saddam's nuclear capabilities, about defending human rights, about spreading democracy, or even about seizing oil fields; it was about defending the dollar, ergo the American Empire. It was about setting an example that anyone who demanded payment in currencies other than U.S. Dollars would be likewise punished.

Many have criticized Bush for staging the war in Iraq in order to seize Iraqi oil fields. However, those critics can't explain why Bush would want to seize those fields-he could simply print dollars for nothing and use them to get all the oil in the world that he needs. He must have had some other reason to invade Iraq.

History teaches that an empire should go to war for one of two reasons: (1) to defend itself or (2) benefit from war; if not, as Paul Kennedy illustrates in his magisterial The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, a military overstretch will drain its economic resources and precipitate its collapse. Economically speaking, in order for an empire to initiate and conduct a war, its benefits must outweigh its military and social costs. Benefits from Iraqi oil fields are hardly worth the long-term, multi-year military cost. Instead, Bush must have gone into Iraq to defend his Empire. Indeed, this is the case: two months after the United States invaded Iraq, the Oil for Food Program was terminated, the Iraqi Euro accounts were switched back to dollars, and oil was sold once again only for U.S. dollars. No longer could the world buy oil from Iraq with Euro. Global dollar supremacy was once again restored. Bush descended victoriously from a fighter jet and declared the mission accomplished-he had successfully defended the U.S. dollar, and thus the American Empire.

II. Iranian Oil Bourse

The Iranian government has finally developed the ultimate "nuclear" weapon that can swiftly destroy the financial system underpinning the American Empire. That weapon is the Iranian Oil Bourse slated to open in March 2006. It will be based on a euro-oil-trading mechanism that naturally implies payment for oil in Euro. In economic terms, this represents a much greater threat to the hegemony of the dollar than Saddam's, because it will allow anyone willing either to buy or to sell oil for Euro to transact on the exchange, thus circumventing the U.S. dollar altogether. If so, then it is likely that almost everyone will eagerly adopt this euro oil system:

The Europeans will not have to buy and hold dollars in order to secure their payment for oil, but would instead pay with their own currencies. The adoption of the euro for oil transactions will provide the European currency with a reserve status that will benefit the European at the expense of the Americans.
The Chinese and the Japanese will be especially eager to adopt the new exchange, because it will allow them to drastically lower their enormous dollar reserves and diversify with Euros, thus protecting themselves against the depreciation of the dollar. One portion of their dollars they will still want to hold onto; a second portion of their dollar holdings they may decide to dump outright; a third portion of their dollars they will decide to use up for future payments without replenishing those dollar holdings, but building up instead their euro reserves.

The Russians have inherent economic interest in adopting the Euro - the bulk of their trade is with European countries, with oil-exporting countries, with China, and with Japan. Adoption of the Euro will immediately take care of the first two blocs, and will over time facilitate trade with China and Japan. Also, the Russians seemingly detest holding depreciating dollars, for they have recently found a new religion with gold. Russians have also revived their nationalism, and if embracing the Euro will stab the Americans, they will gladly do it and smugly watch the Americans bleed.

The Arab oil-exporting countries will eagerly adopt the Euro as a means of diversifying against rising mountains of depreciating dollars. Just like the Russians, their trade is mostly with European countries, and therefore will prefer the European currency both for its stability and for avoiding currency risk, not to mention their jihad against the Infidel Enemy.
Only the British will find themselves between a rock and a hard place. They have had a strategic partnership with the U.S. forever, but have also had their natural pull from Europe. So far, they have had many reasons to stick with the winner. However, when they see their century-old partner falling, will they firmly stand behind him or will they deliver the coup de grace? Still, we should not forget that currently the two leading oil exchanges are the New York's NYMEX and the London's International Petroleum Exchange (IPE), even though both of them are effectively owned by the Americans. It seems more likely that the British will have to go down with the sinking ship, for otherwise they will be shooting themselves in the foot by hurting their own London IPE interests. It is here noteworthy that for all the rhetoric about the reasons for the surviving British Pound, the British most likely did not adopt the Euro namely because the Americans must have pressured them not to: otherwise the London IPE would have had to switch to Euros, thus mortally wounding the dollar and their strategic partner.

At any rate, no matter what the British decide, should the Iranian Oil Bourse accelerate, the interests that matter-those of Europeans, Chinese, Japanese, Russians, and Arabs-will eagerly adopt the Euro, thus sealing the fate of the dollar. Americans cannot allow this to happen, and if necessary, will use a vast array of strategies to halt or hobble the operation's exchange:

Sabotaging the Exchange-this could be a computer virus, network, communications, or server attack, various server security breaches, or a 9-11-type attack on main and backup facilities.

Coup d'état-this is by far the best long-term strategy available to the Americans.

Negotiating Acceptable Terms & Limitations-this is another excellent solution to the Americans. Of course, a government coup is clearly the preferred strategy, for it will ensure that the exchange does not operate at all and does not threaten American interests. However, if an attempted sabotage or coup d'etat fails, then negotiation is clearly the second-best available option.

Joint U.N. War Resolution-this will be, no doubt, hard to secure given the interests of all other member-states of the Security Council. Feverish rhetoric about Iranians developing nuclear weapons undoubtedly serves to prepare this course of action. Unilateral Nuclear Strike-this is a terrible strategic choice for all the reasons associated with the next strategy, the Unilateral Total War. The Americans will likely use Israel to do their dirty nuclear job. Unilateral Total War-this is obviously the worst strategic choice. First, the U.S. military resources have been already depleted with two wars. Secondly, the Americans will further alienate other powerful nations. Third, major dollar-holding countries may decide to quietly retaliate by dumping their own mountains of dollars, thus preventing the U.S. from further financing its militant ambitions. Finally, Iran has strategic alliances with other powerful nations that may trigger their involvement in war; Iran reputedly has such alliance with China, India, and Russia, known as the Shanghai Cooperative Group, a.k.a. Shanghai Coop and a separate pact with Syria.

Whatever the strategic choice, from a purely economic point of view, should the Iranian Oil Bourse gain momentum, it will be eagerly embraced by major economic powers and will precipitate the demise of the dollar. The collapsing dollar will dramatically accelerate U.S. inflation and will pressure upward U.S. long-term interest rates. At this point, the Fed will find itself between Scylla and Charybdis-between deflation and hyperinflation-it will be forced fast either to take its "classical medicine" by deflating, whereby it raises interest rates, thus inducing a major economic depression, a collapse in real estate, and an implosion in bond, stock, and derivative markets, with a total financial collapse, or alternatively, to take the Weimar way out by inflating, whereby it pegs the long-bond yield, raises the Helicopters and drowns the financial system in liquidity, bailing out numerous LTCMs and hyperinflating the economy.

The Austrian theory of money, credit, and business cycles teaches us that there is no in-between Scylla and Charybdis. Sooner or later, the monetary system must swing one way or the other, forcing the Fed to make its choice. No doubt, Commander-in-Chief Ben Bernanke, a renowned scholar of the Great Depression and an adept Black Hawk pilot, will choose inflation. Helicopter Ben, oblivious to Rothbard's America's Great Depression, has nonetheless mastered the lessons of the Great Depression and the annihilating power of deflations. The Maestro has taught him the panacea of every single financial problem-to inflate, come hell or high water. He has even taught the Japanese his own ingenious unconventional ways to battle the deflationary liquidity trap. Like his mentor, he has dreamed of battling a Kondratieff Winter. To avoid deflation, he will resort to the printing presses; he will recall all helicopters from the 800 overseas U.S. military bases; and, if necessary, he will monetize everything in sight. His ultimate accomplishment will be the hyperinflationary destruction of the American currency and from its ashes will rise the next reserve currency of the world-that barbarous relic called gold.

About the Author: Krassimir Petrov (Krassimir_Petrov@hotmail.com) has received his Ph. D. in economics from the Ohio State University and currently teaches Macroeconomics, International Finance, and Econometrics at the American University in Bulgaria. He is looking for a career in Dubai or the U. A. E.

Whoops ...

2006-01-20T16:11:00.000-08:00

By Jennifer Coogan

NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. stocks suffered their biggest loss in nearly three years on Friday, plummeting on disappointing earnings from blue chips Citigroup Inc. and General Electric Co. and a spike in oil caused by geopolitical tensions.

The Dow Jones industrial average and Standard & Poor's 500 stock index posted their biggest point declines since March 24, 2003, soon after the war in Iraq began. The Dow erased its gains for 2006.

Citigroup and GE joined a growing list of companies, including chip maker Intel Corp. and Internet media firm Yahoo Inc., whose quarterly results have disappointed investors.

A surge in oil prices above $68 also battered stocks. Crude climbed on concern about potential supply disruptions stemming from Iran's nuclear plans, the targeting of oil companies by militants in Nigeria and Osama bin Laden's threat of attacks against the United States.

"The market's been watching the earnings reports very closely. We got off on the wrong foot with Citibank and GE," said Evan Olsen, head of equity trading at Stephens Inc. "You've also had oil lifting higher with bin Laden acting up and Iran acting strange which is concerning going into a weekend, so people are taking profits."

The Dow Jones industrial average was down 213.32 points, or 1.96 percent, at 10,667.39. The Standard & Poor's 500 Index was down 23.55 points, or 1.83 percent, at 1,261.49. The Nasdaq Composite Index was down 54.11 points, or 2.35 percent, at 2,247.70.

Friday's decline was the biggest point loss for Nasdaq since September 2003.

The major stock indexes suffered their first weekly loss of the new year. For the week, the Dow shed 2.7 percent, the S&P lost 2.0 percent and Nasdaq ended 3 percent lower.

Before Friday's slide, the Dow was up 1.5 percent for 2006 but the blue-chip average is now down 0.5 percent for the year.

In the bond market, Treasury prices rose slightly but failed to gain major traction from the rout in stocks and soaring oil prices. The benchmark 10-year note eked out a 3/32 gain to yield 4.37 percent, down from 4.38 percent Thursday.

Weighing on the technology-laced Nasdaq were shares of Google Inc. which slid 8.5 percent to $399.46, making it the worst week since the Web search engine made its market debut in August 2004.

Shares of Google were hurt after competitor Yahoo Inc. released disappointing earnings on Tuesday.

"The great names that had been the sweethearts of the market, like Google and Apple, are down. And you can look at oil, rallying from $60 a barrel to $68, so there are concerns of inflation and higher costs for businesses," said Aaron Ford, head of U.S. institutional equity derivative sales at BNP Paribas in New York.

Citigroup shares lost 4.7 percent to $45.69 on the New York Stock Exchange and were the biggest drag on the Dow. Citigroup, the largest U.S. bank, posted quarterly profit and revenue that missed analysts' estimates. Its shares had their biggest one-day percentage drop since a 4 percent decline on March 24, 2003.

Shares of GE fell 3.8 percent to $33.37. The stock was the heaviest drag on the S&P 500. Even though GE's fourth-quarter profit rose, its revenue fell short of expectations.

Motorola Inc., the world's second-largest mobile phone maker, fell 7.6 percent to $22.49 on the NYSE. Late on Thursday, the company issued a first-quarter earnings per share forecast below Wall Street estimates.

U.S. crude oil futures shot up $1.52 to settle at $68.35 as Iran, the world's fourth-largest oil exporter, said it was moving its foreign assets to shield them from possible U.N. sanctions in its nuclear standoff with the West.

Trading was heavy on the NYSE, with about 2.12 billion shares changing hands, while on Nasdaq about 2.37 billion shares traded.

Declining stocks outnumbered advancing ones by a ratio of 5 to 2 on the NYSE and by about 8 to 3 on the Nasdaq.

"Three years ago, there would have been a much more volatile environment on the CME (Chicago Mercantile Exchange) floor, given this type of day," said Harry Michas, stock index futures trader at manmarketmonitor.com, a division of Man Financial.

"But since many of the S&P 500 floor traders either left the business or have moved to electronic platforms, moves like this in the market seem to be much less boisterous."

(Additional reporting by Dan Wilchins, Doris Frankel)

Neoconning The World Bank Bank

2006-01-20T14:41:00.000-08:00

January 20, 2006
Paul Wolfowitz Busy Neo-Conning the World Bank: Staff Rebellion Brewing

Paul Wolfowitz, architect of America's failing foray into Iraq as Rumsfeld's former Deputy at the Pentagon, now heads the World Bank and finally seems like his true self is coming out of the closet.

In recent months, picking up steam in recent weeks, there has been a massive exodus of top talent from the World Bank. According to reports, the senior Ethics Officer at the Bank has departed. Also on the exit roster are the Vice President for East Asia & Pacific, the Chief Legal Counsel, the Bank's top Managing Director, the Director of Institutional Integrity (which monitors internal and external corruption), the Vice President for Environmentally and Socially Sustainable Development, and the head of ISG (Information Solutions Group).

According to one senior insider who feels as if Wolfowitz is gut-punching the most talented teams at the bank and indicated that morale is plummeting, "Wolfowitz just does not talk to his Vice Presidents. He speaks to a few close advisors -- Kevin Kellems, Robin Cleveland, Karl Jackson, some others -- but a lot of very good people are leaving."

What Wolfowitz has done that has started a serious wave of negative sentiment against him among his ranks is that he has appointed Kevin Kellems -- Vice President Cheney's former Communications Director and Spokesman -- as a "director" of the bank, which formally reports to a Vice President of the Bank -- while at the same time making him Senior Advisor to Wolfowitz.

In other words, Wolfowitz is forcing a political appointment at the "director level" of the bank -- which is never done. "Director" positions are fairly low in the World Bank bureaucracy and are filled by a competitive process and the merits of one's work -- not political imposition.

However, Wolfowitz on January 10, 2006 made Kellems Director of Strategy in the External Affairs, Communications and United Nations Affairs Vice Presidency while at the same time Senior Advisor to the President of the Bank.

In addition, the senior Bank staff are bristling at the behavior and antics of Robin Cleveland, a long-time aide to Senator Mitch McConnell who was considered by this writer to be one of the few genuinely monstrous personalities among Congressional staff. She has been shaking World Bank staff and programs on governance and anti-corruption agendas "in her normal, predictable tirade-style" according to one senior World Bank official.

The irony here is that Robin Cleveland was herself deeply involved in the Boeing tanker ethics mess. While soliciting then Secretary of the Air Force James Roche to help her brother get a job at Northrop Grumman, Roche wroter her a reply after receiving his resume:

While the Financial Times reported that Roche was found guilty of breaching defense department ethics rules, the Pentagon inspector general did not have the authority to inveestigate Robin Cleveland.

Senior bank staff see Wolfowitz withdrawing from his team and senior players -- and relying instead on a group of political zealots -- Wolfowitz's "dobermans" one staffer told TWN.

Here are some comments that have been shared with TWN this morning and yesterday:

"Wolfowitz is not talking to his VPs. He is withdrawing -- and instead using Robin Cleveland and the likes of Kevin Kellems to do his bidding, and they are building massive ill will inside the Bank."
"He is appointing political hacks into positions that should be filled by highly qualified personnel through competitive and transparent processes."

"Cleveland and Wolfowitz talk about anti-corruption and good governance, but she herself was in the midst of the Boeing tanker scandal and he is appointing a hack at the director level, circumventing the VP, and making this same hack his Senior Adviser. Cleveland in particular rankles as she is the single most arrogant and abusive person at the senior level of the bank without anything to be arrogant about. She makes John Bolton look sheepish."

"Wolfowitz is Sovietizing the bank by placing his political watch dogs in key positions in the bank -- and is more interested in political symbolism than the substantive work and challenges of the Bank."

What is clear to TWN is that whatever honeymoon Paul Wolfowitz had at the World Bank -- externally and internally -- is over. ANY major bureaucracy will resist change and attempt to thwart some of the more extensive objectives of its leader. So, some of this resentment of Wolfowitz may be similar to the same kind of resistance that James Wolfensohn encountered when he was shifting things around inside the institution.

However, after having recently listened to Karl Jackson at an informal lunch where Jackson recounted his work on Indonesia and interaction with Paul Wolfowitz, with whom Jackson is very close, I have concerns about the quality of interaction between Wolfowitz and other senior level personalities in the Bank's hierarchy. I can't comment on Jackson's precise comments as they were not for attribution -- but I got a "feel" for some of the problems that others have been describing.

Jackson now serves as an advisor to Wolfowitz and is a former colleague at the Johns Hopkins/Nitze School of Advanced International Studies where Wolfowitz served as Dean. But after just mentioning the names Robin Cleveland and Kevin Kellems to a few Bank staff in phone interviews, people gushed with resentment against them and Paul Wolfowitz.

This simmering tension between Wolfowitz and his staff seems to be deeper and more serious than even the drama of staff reorganization can explain.

Wolfowitz may be showing his stripes now -- and may be finally tilting the Bank into a groove where it becomes a harsher instrument of U.S. foreign policy -- rewarding friends and punishing those who don't fall into lockstep behind George W. Bush's vision.

Reflection

2006-01-19T16:49:00.000-08:00

As I was sifting through some contracts whose terms we were modifying in that grand old business tradition of calculated negotiation it really began to irritate me how much I had to go back and forth over the same things again and again at the direction of my boss. It must be understood that he likes to change things up in agreements whenever he feels the tenor of the negotiation is shifting. I don't know what to make of it considering these are not face to face deals; we're shooting emails back and forth through cyberspace in some weird business waltz where he just changes the steps from time to time in an effort to keep the competition/potential vendor "on their toes". Whatever.

The thought dawned on me that the reason this guy has to run this company is because if he were an employee anywhere else he would be fired pretty fast. I don't know how the guy was before he founded our little enterprise but I do know that he was not in the business world proper. He has a more techincal background. I suspect that difficulties with others in that field might not have played a small role in leading him to start his own business to lord over others with.

Economics Dictate Child Rearing?

2006-01-17T15:16:00.000-08:00

Chinese nanny state takes root in US

By Stephanie Irvine
BBC News

Parents want their children speaking Chinese from an early age

China's emergence as an economic superpower has been well-documented.

Western business leaders are said to be gearing up for all the changes to come, but they are not the only ones keen to get a head start.

An increasing number of families in the United States is looking to employ Chinese nannies - not so much for their child-rearing abilities, but more for their language skills.

Parents always want to give their children a good head start in life to prepare them for the future.

It seems that families in the United States with a lot of disposable income believe that helping their children master the intricacies of Mandarin at an early age is one way to do that.

Companies who place nannies or au pairs with families in New York have experienced a rush of requests for native Chinese-speakers.

That is the trend right now, according to JaNiece Rush of Lifestyle Resources.

"Just in the last couple of years, we've received an influx of calls where families are hoping that we can find them Chinese-speaking - especially Mandarin-speaking - nannies and housekeepers, so that their children will pick up Chinese," she says.

Bidding war

This is good news for Chinese-speaking nannies in New York.

You can't ignore the obvious that the Chinese economy is growing

Martha Genieser
parent

JaNiece Rush explains that they are in such high demand they can command a salary of around $20,000 more than the average nanny would earn.

One Chinese woman even managed to secure a salary of $70,000-a-year after two families tried to outbid each other to get her.

It is a lot of expense and effort to go to, but is it worth it?

Martha Genieser is the mother of a three-and-a-half year-old boy, George, who started Mandarin classes about a year ago. She explained why she was looking for a Chinese au pair.

"He really enjoys it, he's having a good time. It's something that is his own - and because he is having such a good time with it, I thought it would be nice to do something outside the classroom,' she says.

George has also learnt Italian with previous nannies and is learning French at nursery school.

Martha Genieser insists she is pushing Mandarin because George enjoys it, although she admits she believes there may be long-term economic benefits.

"I think, you know, you can't ignore the obvious that the Chinese economy is growing at such a great rate, and it would be nice if in the future George had a head start in a language that traditionally I think is very difficult to learn,' says Ms Genieser.

Passing trend?

Language experts say it is easiest to learn a new language, and master new sounds, within the first few years of life.

So it makes sense to introduce Mandarin - a language which foreigners find difficult to learn - at an early age.

But JaNiece Rush doubts whether most families are really committed for the long-term.

"It's almost like when everybody had the Pomeranians [dogs] and the Pocketbooks [computers] a few years ago.

"Maybe it will last but I don't think so. It seems like we go through trends - like the trend a couple of years ago when everyone wanted Spanish speakers, and right now it just seems that Mandarin is the new hot thing to have your children learn," she says.

Things Fall Apart

2006-01-13T09:11:00.000-08:00

Piece by piece.

I was looking at a website today with a lot of pics from my friends and their families on it. It made me sad. I feel so distant from the people I grew up with. I know that part of that is just growing up in general, you move on, but I feel so far away from what I was and who I was with. I feel alienated in that sense. I have friends and all in Vegas, but as they say, "you can't go home again."

I guess I would feel better if I could look at my situation now and feel that I had risen to some place that otherwise would not be attainable if not for sacrifice and hard work, etc. Sure, I've worked and sweat and studied and made it to where I am today, but I just don't know if what I've given up, if the choices I've made, are really "worth it" in the end. I left my home town, I left my home state, I went to school and now I got a job in a different state. I feel homeless and without roots. While some part of this is exhilarating another part is terrifying and cold. I feel like I'm constantly on some precipice.

Reading over this I am appalled at how I sound like I'm going through a mid-life crisis. I always had some contempt for men who experienced this, I don't know why. BTW, I am nowhere near 40 (yet).

All of this crisis mode reflection is exacerbated by the fact that my home life feels like it is falling apart as well. Some days I think I am seriously going to come unglued. I suppose I can empathize to some extent with those folks who just lose it and have nervous breakdowns. Society is rough. All the pieces that we are don't exactly lend themselves to coming together in a seamless whole. Disjointed am I.

Big ups to Chinua Achebe for his awesome book.

What a Day

2006-01-12T15:25:00.000-08:00

ZOMG!! What a boring, yet work-filled, day! I have spent the whole day workig on a project that will not be anywhere near completion by the end of the week. The boss has really screwed me on this one.

Yeserday he came running into my office demanding to know what the status on project "R" was. I told him that we were waiting for the other side to get their act together adn in the mean time we were using our energy to pull together some of the other loose ends. THis was not acceptable to him. He DEMANDED to know what was going on. I looked at him and calmly explained that there's very little I can do to make others (especially people in different states) work with us in a more expeditious manner. I told him I would nag them via email and phone. He seemed to like this response and it got him out of my office.

Now I'm stuck working my tail off to clean up a series of messes he made. His ham fisted approach to negotiations and general business practice leaves me with a lot to deal with on the backs ide. I'm constantly taking heat for not cleaning up his messes fast enough. I guess you get to impose that on people when you're "The Boss".

This Makes Me Sad ...

2005-12-29T11:45:00.000-08:00

Sleepy-Eyed Dunkin' Donuts Actor Vale Dies

Wed Dec 28, 2:21 PM ET

NEW YORK - Michael Vale, the actor best known for portraying sleepy-eyed Fred the Baker in Dunkin' Donuts commercials, has died at age 83.

Vale died Saturday in New York City of complications from diabetes, son-in law Rick Reil said.

Ads featuring Fred, who uttered the trademark line "Time to make the doughnuts," ran for 15 years until Vale retired in 1997.

Canton, Mass.-based Dunkin' Donuts said in a statement that Vale's character "became a beloved American icon that permeated our culture and touched millions with his sense of humor and humble nature."

Vale was born in Brooklyn and studied acting at the Dramatic Workshop in New York City with classmates Tony Curtis, Ben Gazzara and Rod Steiger.

A veteran of the Broadway stage, film and television, Vale appeared in more than 1,300 TV commercials. His movie roles included a jewelry salesman in "Marathon Man." He also appeared in "Guerrilla Girl," a 1953 movie starring Helmut Dantine, and "A Hatful of Rain" (1957), starring Don Murray and Eva Marie Saint.

Housing Prices Dip

2005-12-23T12:16:00.000-08:00

By MARTIN CRUTSINGER
AP Economics Writer
Dec 23 10:08 AM US/Eastern

WASHINGTON - Sales of new homes plunged in November by the largest amount in nearly 12 years, providing the most dramatic evidence yet that the red hot housing market over the last five years is starting to cool down. The Commerce Department reported Friday that new single-family homes were sold at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1.245 million units last month, a drop of 11.3 percent from October, when sales had surged to an all-time high.

Last month's decline was even bigger than the 8.7 percent drop-off that Wall Street analysts had been expecting. While sales of both new and existing homes are still on track to set records for a fifth straight year in 2005, analysts are forecasting sales will decline in 2006 as the housing boom quiets down.

Analysts are looking for home sales to dip by around 6 percent next year under the impact of rising mortgage rates. Analysts believe that house prices, which had been soaring at double digit rates, will moderate as well.

Some of that price moderation was evidenced in the November report, which showed that the median price of a new home sold was $225,200 last month. That was up just 0.3 percent from November 2004, the weakest year-over-year price change in two years. The November median price was down 4.1 percent from the October median sales price of $234,800.

In other economic news, the Commerce Department reported that orders to U.S. factories for big-ticket manufactured goods jumped to a record $223 billion in November. That was a 4.4 percent increase from October, representing the largest percentage advance in six months. Orders for durable goods had risen 3 percent in October.

The gain in demand for durable goods was far above the 1.1 percent increase Wall Street analysts had been expecting. But the strength was concentrated in a surge in demand for commercial aircraft, which shot up 133.8 percent to $25.9 billion from $11.1 billion the previous month.

Outside of this area, manufacturing demand was weak. Excluding transportation, durable goods orders dropped by 0.6 percent, the third straight monthly decline in these categories.

Critique of Management in Other Departments

2005-12-22T12:31:00.000-08:00

Happy Winter Solstice Everybody!

Today (the 22nd) is the Winter Solstice, the shortest day of the year. The is the point where the Earth is nearest the sun but tilted the furthest away, making the hours of sunlight the shortest we will see all year in the Northern Hemisphere. After today the days will get longer and longer. Yay! I'm not really a pagan but I do celebrate this day (and the Summer Solstice on the grounds that they are true observable scientific occasions in the Earth's orbit around the Sun. Same goes for the Equinoxes.

This morning when I came into work I heard the CSR manager talking to (lecturing was more like it) his sole CSR about The Rapture and Christ and the history of the Solstice and all sorts of other crap. (Note to Christian readers: I'm fine with you having your beliefs, just don't preach them to me, thanks.) He was running down the whole Judeo-Christian gauntlet, Leviathan to Rapture, the number of years before the Earth will be destroyed, on and on and on.

I have a little problem with this man proselytizing in the office. Check that. I don't know if he was proselytizing, per se, but he was certainly getting into how people who didn't adhere to his faith were going to burn in hell and the world would end, etc. It was a little much. There's proclaiming your faith to someone and then there's preaching. I don't even know if proclamations of faith are kosher in a business environment (sorry, I had to write it ...). In fact, I don't think that they are. In my opinion the office environment should be as neutral as possible with regards to race, sex, religion, creed, etc. I mean, the whole enterprise is propelling a capitalist business interest, and supposedly capitalism cares little for the specifics of the workers in proportion to their labors, so I think that a business environment should not be endorsing any one faith over another.

No, this does not apply to all businesses. I know that there are businesses which are explicitly religious. There's some Bible/Ministry outfit down the street from us which sells literature or something. I think they're the ones responsible for the occasional parking lot leaflets. That business obviouisly has its orientation, and more power to them. I do not judge them for it. I think that the ethics taught in some religions if applied to business could really make a better atmosphere for dealing.

In this instance, though, I don't think that this manager's actions were on track. The poor woman he was talking to was Jewish (from what I understand) and she didn't seem to have invited the conversation in any way. I think he was jsut on a run.

I'm a Jerk

2005-12-21T15:39:00.000-08:00

I had to have the boss fill out this form today that is required by a certain government agency before we can qualify to do X in X state. After filling out as much of it as I could, I smiled to myself when I realized that there was a section on criminal history and if you have been convicted of a crime which one, explain, etc. I knew he would have to do more than sign off on this form, because as an officer of the corporation he would have to actually delve into his past and put his time in jail on paper, which may possibly jeopardize the agency's approval of his corpoation doing what it wants to do in X state.

I feel bad for taking delight in this. Its not right. I should not be experienceing schadenfreude, I don't think of myself as "that type of person." Usually I'm quite empathetic, and while I still am in this case, I think that I feel the littlest bit of glee in knowing that he is going to have to own up to his past and take some responsibility. I have a big problem with my employer and his lack of responsibility. I guess that I would respect him more if I knew he had "paid his dues" or had some respectable story. As it stands now I don't respect him much. Its kind of hard to work for someone you don't respect. I am just now beginning to understand this.

In other news we gave him his Christmas present today. It was a nice gift, one which we all were compelled to chip in on for fear of being left off the "donors" list which #2 was tracking. We didn't know what the gift would be when our arms were being twisted for our "donations". God help you if you're left off the donors list. I don't know what he'd do -- take back your company "gift"? Oh wait, he was going to do that anyway if you didn't show up to his party. Jerk.

Great Reading Material For Future/Wannabe Shills

2005-12-21T13:24:00.000-08:00

I'm especially fond of Step #6. That's sneaky ... This from the Wiki How-to

How to Look Busy at Work Without Really Working

Looking busy while actually not working is an art. Trust me - I know.

Steps

First off, you want your work area completely covered with work related material (think organized mess but nothing too bad because that could land you in hot water itself), and it's always good to have multiple windows open on your computer, for "researching" or "networking" or whatever it is that your supposed to be at work doing. An open outlook with several unread "attn: marketing ideas" etc. isn't a bad idea.
Place a pencil or pen behind your ear to give off the impression that you are writing down so much important imformation that if it were possible, your right hand, itself, would be a writing instrument - and remember proper pencil placement - if your boss walks by your desk on the left hand side, place the pencil behind your left ear, or this effect is lost.
Take a lot of bathroom breaks - and sit down when possible. I know, I know, this sounds gross but I live to get paid to spend 40 minutes in the can reading the funnies.
Get up and go talk to one of your friends in a different department, but leave your workspace very "busy" looking. I always tell the person next to me that I am going to "double check something with someone from a different department" but what I'm really doing is providing myself with an excuse if my boss wonders where I was for an hour. "Oh, didn't Gina tell you? I wanted to double check and make sure both of our departments were on the same page about the new add campaign, I know it's an important issue and I would hate to have any mix-ups." Your boss will appreciate your ability to pay attention to details but what your really doing is... well, you know...
If your in sales or "telesales" or any type of job that requires you to make a quota on phone calls per day/week/month, call up dell/gateway/local computer shop and just let them put you on hold for 20 minutes before hanging up. You're eating up your time and on the computer that tracks call time it appears as if your busy pushing clients to buy. I usually browse video game message boards while I'm on hold because when my boss walks by "I'm on hold, I've been on the phone for 20 minutes with this guy and he had to run to the bathroom, I'm close to a sale".
Personally, I fake diabeties - specifically hypoglycemia (http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/dm/pubs/hypoglycemia/). This will allow you to leave work every 1 1/2 to 2 hours and go enjoy a snack downstairs. And whenever you feel like just being a flake, your "blood sugar is really low and you feel very tired and dizzy. You're trying to correct this problem but you have good days and bad." Nobody argues with this; it's golden, trust me. I cannot tell you how much time I've scammed by doing this. make sure you do your research, remember, it's not a lie if you believe it.

Tips

Always, always have a back up.
A lie is not a lie if you can provide specific details about the situation (ex: "Why wern't you at the employee picnic on saturday?" Bad answer: "My stomach hurt, I'm sorry." Good answer: "You know what, I'm sorry about missing that. What happened was I was eating some chicken from that new Chinese place down on [blank - again, do your homework] and I wasn't feeling very hot. I feel very bad about missing the outing, so how about letting me help with the planning for the next event?" (This shows that your a leader, and plus you can pick someplace that dosen't suck - like Vegas.) Besides, your boss will probably forget anyway and if you do get asked, you're "Too busy with the new sales reports."
Bring in a co-worker who is equally as lazy or hates the company as much as you - he/she is your perfect alibi.

Warnings

Don't get drunk at the bar and brag about how you cut corners at work to other people - they may be interviewing at your company soon or know someone there.
Occasionally, do a little bit of work so they keep you on the payroll.
Don't tell anyone you don't trust about your secrets of avoiding work!
Limit the amout of time you call in sick - it detracts from your credibility.

The Gift That Keeps On Giving

2005-12-19T09:30:00.000-08:00

This weekend I picked up something that I was initially a little embarrassed to even admit I needed: a nose hair trimmer.

It wasn't like I had a moustache forming from my nasal orifice, but there were hairs there that would make themselves known to me (and hopefully NOT others). So rather than ask someone else to purchase one for me as a gift (you know, to *hint* at it -- that would've been way weird/awkward) I just went out to TJ Maxx and found one on the cheap. Here's the best part: It works really well!

Again, I didn't have all that much nose fuzz to begin with, just a few hairs that I would notice when I shaved. Prior to my trimmer I would have to pluck these with tweezers and let me tell you, that HURTS. Mr. Nose Hair Trimmer gets the job done pain free, the only sensations are a slight tickle.

Chalk one up for otherwise useless niche gadgets.

Somebody Tell Me I'm Wrong Here ...

2005-12-16T15:50:00.000-08:00

Ok, something has happened in my company, and I'm really bothered by it. Somebody please tell me I am overreacting.

Last nite was the boss' Company dinner/Christmas party. It was held at a casino, in some restaurant. I didn't go. I had my reasons, chief among them that notice was not given to me in time (read: we were notified that this was the Christmas party the day before the actual dinner) to plan accordingly. I had other stuff in the works for that evening, and I don't like to be told on short notice that I'm expected somewhere and that feelings will be hurt if I am not in attendance.

So anyway, I didn't go. I stayed at home with the Yumi Bear and we ordered pizza and watched the Rockets play the Supersonics. She worked and I read while Yao and the boys did their thing. It was a good nite. This morning I come to work and I find out that our Xmas bonuses were given out at the dinner. Well, me having not been there I had the expected to still see my bonus. Later this morning, sure enough, #2 came by and dropped off a $200 check in my hand. On it is written MERRY CHRISTMAS. To that point I was cool. The world seemed OK, good, even.

Then at lunch #2 tells me that The Boss is pissed. I ask why. He says because he handed out those checks this morning and Boss didn't like that. What? It seems that The Boss didn't intend to give anyone that didn't got to his little party a check. I was shocked when I heard this. How could The Boss possibly justify such preferential treatment? Was he paying people to attend his functions now? Wasn't this our bonus? I expressed this to #2 along with the implication that The Boss was lucky the checks did go out, as otherwise he'd have a discrimination lawsuit on his hands (I was kind of talking out of my ass here, but I do think that the possibility of a law could exist). #2 told me the checks were not presents but gifts from The Boss.

Then I started to think about the impression that this gives me of The Boss. A man who will pay you to go to his dinner, but if you don't "no check for you!" It really worried me. Who am I working for? What kind of environment is this? There is a real lack of professionalism in this operation, and I think that this is highlighted by this recent event. I mean, just the fact that The Boss would hold a dinner and then reward those who attended while effectively shunning those who did not worries me. I've long held the impression of my boss that he's a 45 year old teenager, but now I'm really starting to think that's true in more ways than I am comfortable with.

So somebody please tell me I am overreacting and everything is OK. I have the check, but I haven't cashed it yet. I have half a mind to go down to The Boss' office and look him in the eye while I rip up his check and then throw it in his face. I think that this might not be such a good idea, though ...

My Coworkers are Mentally Stunted Individuals

2005-12-14T15:08:00.000-08:00

Some of them are, at least. There's this other manager in another department who always sends me really lame emails asking about this client or that and can I help him out with something. I wouldn't get mad about this except for the fact that all the information he requests of me is readily accessible on the company intranet database and/or the Internet at large. Seriously dude, we work with publicly available information, so you should be able to find out anything.

I used to get mad at these sorts of requests, because of the sheer idiocy behind them, but now I respond to them not with anger but with a certain veiled contempt. You see, I reply to his emails as if I were writing to my 89 year old grandmother who can't even turn on her computer most of the time. Mind you, the recipient is a grown man in his 40s/early 50s with a supposed Master's in Business (I doubt his claim on this, but it sounds believable only because he admits that it is from San Francisco State University, which is not known in the MBA world for its intellectual rigors).

An example of a recent email exchange:

Can you tell me what is going on with this entity

From: James R Woolston [mailto:XXXXXXXX@XXXXXXXX]
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 1:22 AM
To: XXXXXXXXXX
Subject: RE: Authorization Form

Hi XXXXXXXXXX.

Well, it's been (6) months since we first started communications regarding my using XXXXXXXX as register agent. And after (6) months there is no resolve with the former agent (NRAI), whom I have had numerous correspondence with, since!!! I have attached copies of my latest correspondence with NRAI.

Each time you and I correspond you tell not to worry about it! Like it's going to go away. Well it doesn't. I'm asking one more time that you please finish what ever is necessary.

Thank you and Merry Christmas

XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX

-----Original Message-----
From: XXXXXXXXXXXX L. XXXXXXX [mailto:XXXXXXXX@XXXXXXXX]
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 3:02 PM
To: XXXXXXXXXX
Subject: RE: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX. - Authorization Form

Ok. I have your fax, I have given it to our Multi-State Processor and they will issue another check for $30.00 and resubmit your paperwork. This should take care of it.

Karmen

From: James R Woolston [mailto:XXXXXXXXX@XXXXXXXXX]
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 11:49 AM
To: Karmen L. Flavin
Subject: RE: XXXXXXXXX. - Authorization Form

Hi Karmen

Once again.

-I did not file any documents with NYS.

-$30 fee was remitted to Incorp Services!

Can we please "put this to bed".

I have included clean (microfilmable) copies of the certificate. I started over with the form.

I am faxing these documents as well.

James R Woolston

XXXXXXXXXXXXXX

PO Box 703

Greene, NY 13778

607-760-6582

This was what he sent me, with his little note on the top. Its obviosu by reading this that the client is upset because shit has not been done quickly and he wants to know something. After I gathered all the publicly available information I wrote this back to the other manager:

XXXXXXX,

http://XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Above is a link to the NY SOS website page with data for this entity. XXX is listed as the Registered Agent, but NRAI is listed for Process. Weird. I would advise you to call the NY SOS and ask them where the discrepancy lies, and why.

In the future you might try saving us both time by looking in the notes. Everything related to any entity is documented there, and scanned as well. You could have also looked in the NY SOS website. To do this simply point your web browser (that's Internet Explorer) to their home page at: NY Department of State and go the section marked "Search For Corporations or Business Entities" From there you plug in a name and all the data is displayed. In case you need help, just click on the underlined sections of this email, they are "hyperlinks" that will take you to places on the Internet. I know, so many funny terms, huh?

I hope this information was helpful. If you ever need any help with anything else don't hesitate to ask me and I can show you. I know that there's a lot of information out there and sometimes you might get confused or forget something. It happens to everyone.

Thanks, XXXXXX, and have a wonderful day!

XXX XXXXX
Foreign Jurisdiction Compliance Manager

XXXXXXXXXXXXX.
XXXXXXXXXXXXX
Las Vegas, NV

The only thing I "worry" about is that he'll catch on to the fact that I'm being rude and confront me. Actually, maybe that's what I want.

One man’s trash is another’s ticket to Vegas

2005-12-12T15:06:00.000-08:00

Hat tip to Yumi for finding this article. I'm glad you didn't have to look in the dumpster for it.

A fast-food chain's air travel promotion has would-be travelers scavenging and opportunists working the Internet.

By The Christian Science Monitor

Danielle is no stranger to diving into Dumpsters. "You'd be amazed what they throw away at Trader Joe's, it's like whole meals over there," says the young nanny from the Philadelphia area. But when she heard that the garbage outside Wendy's restaurants had free airline travel in it, "it just seemed too good to be true."

Yet, on a recent icy December evening, Danielle and a friend spent nearly two hours digging through dozens of grease- and ketchup-smeared garbage bags outside two Manhattan Wendy's restaurants searching for soft drink cups with AirTran frequent-flier coupons printed on the side.

In all, the pair collected about 330 cups, more than enough for two round-trip flights for each of them. "It's pretty disgusting work, especially when you grab a handful of chewed meat," says Danielle, who asked that her full name be withheld to ensure that AirTran would honor her claim. "But it's about the only way I can afford to see my family (in San Luis Obispo, Calif.)."

Indeed, for a new generation of opportunists, other people's fast-food trash is their treasure.

64 drinks, one flight
Under the promotion, Wendy's and discount airline AirTran are offering free frequent-flier rewards when customers purchase 20- or 32-oz. soft-drinks. Coupons from the side of the cups can be redeemed toward airfare on the Orlando, Fla., airline; 64 coupons are worth a round-trip flight anywhere AirTran flies. Eighty-four million of the cups will be distributed.

Since the promotion was launched in early November, the coupons have become hot-ticket items on auction and clearinghouse websites like eBay and Craigslist. And because AirTran flies from Los Angeles to Boston, even the Bahamas, the promotion has attracted unusually broad interest.

With online sellers generally demanding between $150 to $200 for 128 coupons (two round-trip flights' worth), the coupons represent a considerable savings over buying the plane tickets outright: Two coach class round-trip AirTran tickets from San Francisco to Miami sold recently for $720, for example.

Some sellers even boast of their foul efforts to obtain the coupons: One eBay seller from Nashville, Tenn., who sold 65 coupons for $75, prominently featured a photo of the Dumpster out of which he'd fished them.

On Craigslist, buyers are soliciting coupons for upwards of $1.50 each, more than the retail value of a Wendy's soft drink. "I will pay you to dumpster-dive at Wendy's," writes a buyer in Indianapolis. "Looking for about 1,000-1,500 of these, maybe a few more."

85,000 coupons and counting
Brooke Szczepanski, a financial planner from Hayes, Va., admits her obsession with Wendy's cup collecting. She bought herself and her husband two headlamps and a long grabbing tool to pluck the cups in the dead of night from Wendy's trash containers. To date, she has collected 2,600 cups and sells them on Craigslist, 64 coupons at a time, for $100.

"A free product makes money at whatever price it sells," says Szczepanski.

The AirTran promotion has already become the stuff of urban legend, calling to mind the California man who, in 1999, redeemed 12,000 pudding cups for 1.2 million frequent-flier miles. David Phillips, who paid $3,100 in all for the Healthy Choice pudding, became an instant cult hero and was the basis for a character in the 2002 movie "Punch-Drunk Love." He estimated he had earned himself more than 30 round-trip flights to Europe.

"That's why we put a limit on the number of flights you can earn," says Tad Hutcheson, AirTran's vice president of marketing.

The company, which has already redeemed an estimated 85,000 coupons, is limiting individuals to two round-trip flights, he notes.

In addition, the airline anticipated a black market for the promotional cups, Hutcheson says, but "when we looked at the pros and cons of it, the cost of getting exposure for AirTran outweighed the bad."

Wendy's: Buy the drink
Wendy's executives also anticipated coupons would be sold online, but none expected it to reach the levels it has, says Bob Bertini, a company spokesman.

"Anytime you have a promotion of this magnitude, you're going to have some challenges along the way," says Bertini, adding that AirTran is responsible for handling the redemption process.

Indeed, Hutcheson warns that AirTran will not honor flight requests for those found to have purchased the coupons online or through any other means than plopping down at least $1.29 for each soft drink. But, he adds, "It's not easy to prove; it's not like we're going to fingerprint every coupon and see if they match."

The airline, however, has tried to quell the sale of the coupons through other means. Employees at Wendy's and its cup manufacturer, Oldemark, are not eligible. AirTran cross-references the names of coupon-redeemers with the employee databases of those companies. The airline has also purchased some coupons on eBay to take them out of circulation, says Hutcheson.

-- Greg Bensinger

Its All About the Currency, Stupid

2005-12-11T17:47:00.000-08:00

The Meridian Report
A Global Perspective on Energy

www.themarkettraders.com

December 10th, 2005

If one stops for a moment to reflect on the use of weaponry over the course of history, we see that as a civilization we have indeed made tremendous strides. From hand to hand combat with sticks and stones we moved into bows and arrows. The invention of gunpowder then heralded yet another new age. Since black powder muskets in the Civil War timeframe, we have now engineered and refined our way to high velocity precision rifles. Along the way, advances in aeronautics gave us the ability to shoot at our foes from high above the ground. Advances in science then gave us the ability to exploit the power inherent in the atom. Once combined with aeronautics, we were able to drop atomic bombs from an overhead aircraft not onto an individual below but onto an entire city below. Advances in computer controlled guidance systems now see us launching so called “smart” bombs from great distances using stealth type flying crafts. But, the best is yet to come. We are about to see a radical new type of weapon unveiled on the global stage. This weapon will not rely on explosive technology or flying aircraft. This weapon will not kill enemy troops. This weapon will not see one army invading the territory of another. No, instead this weapon will simply rely on supply and demand, the basic concepts that underpin Economics 101. This new weapon will be a financial weapon. In fact this weapon will be so powerful it will be able to inflict serious harm on the financial stability of an entire adversarial nation. This weapon is the BOURSE. That’s right – the BOURSE. The dictionary defines BOURSE as follows:

BOURSE: a word of French origin meaning a stock exchange for securities trading.

If I have totally confused you, don’t run away. Keep reading and follow my argument

If you think the invasion of Iraq was about 9-11 and Al-Qaida then I urge you to think again. Cast aside all that the major television networks have programmed into your daily thinking, take a deep breath and slowly exhale. Now, think…real hard. Were any WMD’s (Weapons of Mass Destruction) ever found in Iraq? Has any connection between 9-11 and Saddam Hussein been solidly proven? The answer to both queries is a resounding NO. So why then would the US, the world’s largest economic entity, undertake an invasion of Iraq to capture and remove leader Saddam Hussein? The answer is all about economics. More specifically, Currency. That’s right, Currency. You see, Saddam Hussein had developed a very serious, very viable plan to sell Oil from his country in exchange for Euros. Had he succeeded in putting this plan into action, the damage to the stature of the US Dollar as the global reserve currency would have been un-fixable. Oil importing nations would have reduced their holdings of US Dollars and added Euros to their vaults. The damage to the US economy which is entirely predicated on US Dollar supremacy could have been quite serious indeed. So, in the immediate aftermath of 9-11, the US launched a major offensive under the rather attractive name Operation Iraqi Freedom to trounce any Oil for Euros plans once and for all. But CNN told you a different story. Over and over, night after night you were reminded that Saddam Hussein was a monster. He was sitting on a massive cache of destructive weapons that threatened your safety. He was intimately linked to Al Qaida and global terror. Carefully crafted stories by embedded reporters and film footage of US and British troops moving triumphantly towards Baghdad made the while thing seem larger than life.

Now, fast forward to December 2005. As I write this edition of the Meridian Report, there is a growing sense of deja-vu. This time, it is Iran that is causing problems. But, CNN will have you believe that Iran is causing nuclear problems by refusing to scale back its nuclear program. The real story is that by March 2006 Iran is threatening to have in place an entity called the Iranian Oil Bourse. Trading of Oil on this exchange will be denominated in – yes you guessed it – Euros. A well choreographed play from Saddam’s little black book of game day strategies. The Iranian Oil Bourse will go toe to toe and compete for global prominence with NYMEX in New York and the International Petroleum Exchange in London. Oil trading on these exchanges is done in US Dollar terms. That is why when we hear a quote given for Oil it is always basis the US Dollar. Oil is the lifeblood of the global economy, the US Dollar is the global reserve currency and Oil is quoted in US Dollar terms. A simple 1-2-3 argument.

But this simple 1-2-3 argument may be about to come under attack. A successful start-up of trading operations on this Bourse could lead to an erosion of the US Dollar. Hence this Bourse is a de facto weapon. A weapon so ferocious, that has the ability to undermine the entire US economy, and topple the US Dollar from its lofty perch. After all, why would Oil importing nations need to keep as many US Dollars in reserve if they can purchase Oil in Euros? The ramifications of a weakened US Dollar are serious. Global purchasers of US debt instruments may begin to shy away from a weaker currency in favor of Euro denominated debt instruments. This would place upward pressure on US interest rates and the serious imbalance of the US economy would be laid bare for all to see (as if we don’t already see it). After all, the US has no choice but to keep foreign investors interested in buying US debt. Management of the trade deficit and budget deficit depends on it. The housing market would surely collapse under the weight of higher interest rates. With mortgage rates now above 6% we are already seeing the signs of weakness of the housing market. Now imagine mortgage rates at 8% or even 9%. Given this scenario, it should come as little surprise that China recently moved all of a sudden to re-position its Renminbi currency away from the US Dollar and instead to a basket of global currencies. The Chinese are definitely not stupid. They have excellent relations with Iran and are well aware of the threat this new Bourse poses. Notice how the Chinese still have not told us the exact makeup of this basket? However, you can bet the Euro figures very prominently in the weighting of this basket.

With Operation Iraqi Freedom seemingly stuck in the mud and going nowhere what is the US to do? Sadly, the answer may be that there is little the US can do. The most powerful military force on the planet may be paralyzed. A simple Bourse – an exchange where Oil is bought and sold – may prove to be the ultimate weapon.

There are rumors floating about that a repeat of a 9-11 type attack is in the offing in the US. This would pave the way for the US to unilaterally launch an all out attack on Iran in the interests of protecting the world from terrorists. One of the consequences of this type of action would surely be a rapid deterioration of relations with other industrialized nations and a move by central bankers to quickly reduce US Dollar holdings. Such a move would also add more fuel to the already raging inferno of Muslim / US relations. So, not a likely strategy.

The US could try to garner support on the world stage for a group of Allies to stage an invasion of Iran to thwart further development of the Iranian nuclear program. However, given the problems with the Iraqi situation and with UK Prime Minister Tony Blair still smarting from his involvement in the Iraqi debacle, it is highly unlikely that this approach would work.

The US could simply decide to go it alone and launch a “shock and awe” attack on Iran to restore democracy and rid the world of one of the pivot points of the oft touted “axis of evil”. This no doubt would quickly degrade into mass chaos in the Middle East and global terrorism would quickly ratchet itself to new heights. While such a move would surely delight the Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz neo-conservative crowd, in all practicality an all out offensive would not be a good move.

This leaves us with the only other possibility and that is careful negotiation. But, the Iranians and for that matter all the European importing nations are in the drivers seat and really have no motivation to even come to the negotiating table. Who says Oil has to be priced in US Dollars? Who says the world needs a single reserve currency? Maybe the world needs two reserve currencies. Maybe the days of US Dollar supremacy are over. Maybe it is time for the US to change its ways. Trim the debt, scale back operations in Iraq.

The US could well be boxed in to a corner. A simple Oil Bourse in a Muslim country half-way around the world could be the straw that breaks the proverbial camel’s back. The day of financial reckoning could be at hand. We may be about to witness the next chapter in the story of the Rise and Fall of the American Empire. The Euro could be about to assume its spot as the #2 global reserve currency. As the US Dollar begins to falter under the weight of Oil being sold in Euros on the Iranian Bourse we will surely see a rise in the value of Oil Futures on Nymex. In fact we could see a rise in the value of all commodity futures that trade on the Chicago Board of Trade and the Chicago Mercantile and the New York Board of Trade. Not because these commodities are in scarce supply, but simply because it will take more units of a weakened US Dollar to buy a contract of Live Cattle or a bushel of Oats or a barrel of Oil. This will leave newly minted Fed Governor Ben Bernanke with a few inflationary conundrums of his own. Let’s hope Mr. Bernanke knows what he is doing and is up to the challenge left for him by his mentor, Easy Al.

In a recent edition of the Meridian Report I presented the case for a 4 year cycle pattern in the financial markets and noted that 2006 should produce a cyclical low and cause potentially serious harm to all those unsuspecting long term buy and hold type of investors out there. I suggested that there were a number of catalysts that could spark a market sell-off to lead us into this cycle low. I think it is fair to say we can now add the introduction of the Iranian Oil Bourse to this list of catalysts.

But here is the good news. Despite what the critics are saying, there is a lot of high octane excitement left in these energy markets. As we get closer to March 2006 and the opening of the Iranian Oil Bourse, the volatility in Oil prices and in energy stocks is sure to amplify and as we all know, volatile markets are the best for short term trading strategies. So, take your pick - energy service companies, oil and gas income trusts that trade on the Canadian markets, smaller cap up and coming producers, CBM players or the big name energy producers. These stocks will continue to provide lucrative trading opportunities in 2006. And I will do my level best to keep you all informed. Stay tuned….

American Ingenuity

2005-12-09T09:22:00.000-08:00

The really unfortunate thing is to think how much money has been lining the pockets of the oil companies because people were unaware of this technology.

I'm waiting for someone to hold this article up as proof that we're losing our "American way of life" by not burning oil based products to sustain ourselves. That is such a cheap gimmick: The American Way of Life. A good read, and I do see an emerging market for this type of technology and innovation in the future. Life will change, sure, but it will not be for the worst. Human beings are remarkably adaptable, and (to beat my Nationalist drum) as Americans we are certainly so.

Americans burning corn to cut heating costs
Dec 09 9:25 AM US/Eastern

As US heating costs spiral to all-time highs, American homeowners are turning to burning corn in special stoves to reduce their energy bills. Sales of corn-burning stoves have tripled this year and distributors across the country have been sold out for weeks.

"We are actually taking deposits for products for next fall - it's all you can do," said Ed Hiscox, owner of furnace retailer Hiscox Sales and Service in Valparaiso, Indiana, in the middle of the US corn belt.

"We have customers from very high-end homes to people who are not really in any financial condition at all. It doesn't seem to make a difference - everyone has problems with gas prices."

Once relegated to farmhouses and cabins, corn-burning and more common wood-burning stoves began growing in popularity four years ago among environmentally-minded consumers interested in cheaper and renewable energy sources.

But the real run began this fall when natural gas prices doubled and hurricanes slashed refinery production in the Gulf Coast, causing prices of heating oil to jump.

With natural gas prices shooting to a record high Thursday and oil prices back above 60 dollars a barrel, corn -- the price of which steadily dropped this year -- has become downright cheap as a heating fuel.

That has meant a boom for sellers of efficient corn-burning stoves, with demand far outstripping supply, according to the largest US producer of the stoves.

"We've been sold out for almost six months," said Mike Haefner, president of Minnesota-based American Energy Systems. "We're going to be building eight times as much next year just to try to keep up, but we already have 50 percent of that sold."

Haefner said there were about 65,000 corn stoves sold in the US last year. He expects about 150,000 will be sold this year and at least 350,000 next year.

Even with a retail price of 1,600 to 3,000 dollars, the stoves often pay for themselves within a year or two.

"The savings are phenomenal," said Haefner.

Corn-generated heat costs less than a fifth of the current rate for propane and about a third of electrical heat, according to Haefner. Homeowners report savings of anywhere from 600 to 1,500 dollars a year, he said.

Because of the space needed to store the dried corn kernels burned in the stoves, they are more popular in rural communities and suburbs than in big cities.

But distribution systems are evolving and Haefner is confident the market will continue to expand.

"About five years ago we proved corn could be anywhere - we put a corn silo up in Takoma Park, Maryland and you can see our nation's capital from it," Haefner said. "These things are popping up all over the country."

Turkey farmer Rick Undesser doesn't have to go far to get corn for his stove.

"We grow our own corn so it's kind of handy to have," Undesser told AFP in a recent interview at his Bristol, Illinois farm. "It starts real easy and it keeps us real warm."

Undesser bought the corn stove about three years ago to help cut down on his propane bills for his sprawling 3,500 square foot home.

The fact that it looks great next to his handcrafted furniture and hunting trophies is just a bonus.

It's A Wonderful Life

2005-12-08T13:51:00.000-08:00

Although this topic has probably been done to death all over the 'net, I have to speak on it, since I saw It's A Wonderful Life last nite. For anyone who hsan't seen the film, I would reccomend it. It is overly senitmental and sappy, but beneath that there's a lot of good theme work going on in the film, and although it is overt it is done well by a very talented cast. James Stuart is magnificent, really. A fantastic actor.

Does anyone else feel that this movie is seriously flawed in that Mr. Potter gets away with stealing $8k from the Baileys? He wheels away at the end of the film $8k richer; what's up with that? Uncle Bailey, what the hell were you thinking? I think that this was a big plot hole that screams to be resolved. But it isn't. Leaves an unsettled feeling in your stomach.

I was thinking about how if this film had been remade recently what changes we might see:

Women would be featured in more prominent roles other than old maid, mother and possible prostitute.

This was one of my biggest hang-ups with the film. Women are so supporting cast here. Violet is a tart, but not an empowered one. She has to get George Bailey's loan to go to New York (?). In the alternative reality she was a dancer being arrested, so go figure. Arguably the black maid is the strongest female character, which is a whole discussion waiting to happen.

Minorities would be featured as something other than maids, piano players, etc.

The only black people I saw were the maid and a piano player in the alternate reality when Martini's becomes Nick's. Martini is an Italian immigrant and today I don't know if a remake would be able to shy away from something mob-related for him, since that topic is hot, hot, hot ever since the Sopranos aired. I think it would probably feature an Asian or two as well, which would be nice. Perhaps a Latino?

Sex would probably play a larger role in the film.

Hollywood is all kiss, kiss, bang, bang today. There'd definitely be more sex. George would be tempted by Violet, or we'd have more graphic portrayal of lewdness in the alternate reality Bedford Falls. Maybe they'd link Violet to Mr. Potter in some sort of twisted power for sex plot. Hmmm ...

Mr. Potter would be an even bigger asshole.

Not to say he wasn't already in this film, but we'd be given a look into his despicable nature. He'd probably hit some kid with his car or kill a puppy or something. Maybe he'd be involved with shady political financing. Something. We would definitely be given the old "power/money = bad news" schtick.

Things I Don't Understand

2005-12-07T16:29:00.000-08:00

I don't understand why the CSRs give me checks that the clients have mailed to us which already have the proper state agency's name and address on them. On top of that, most of the time these checks are accompanied by the properly filled out paperwork, or at least filled out paper work that i am not going to alter.

I don't know why they give the checks to me with these docs. It makes no sense. I just drop the things in an envelope with a window so the address shows up properly and make a note in our database that it was sent. That's it. I kind of start to think that some of the people I work with are a little dense because they do this. The CSRs, at least. I mean, surely they can put together that nothing more needs be done once all authoritative parties are addressed, ie, when the state is paid and we are paid what more do you expect me to do?

I suppose that if I were uber-employee I would call a little mini-meeting and discuss work-flow and how this step is unnecessary and we would all benefit if we streamlined things a bit and yadda yadda yadda. But I'm not gonna do that because the second I told someone that I didn't think they should give me X to do they would raise hell that I was shirking my responsibility or "not being a team player." Seriously. I was almost disciplined for "not being a team player". It was the stupidest g*ddamn thing I've ever had to sit through. I'm lucky I didn't quit right then and there for lack of reality on the part of upper management.

In other, similarly related news I was given a task by one of the other managers in a co-department and when I asked what it was exactly she wanted me to do she got mad and yelled at me to "read it!" It referring to a piece of paper which was obviously vague since I had to ask her what it was she wanted me to do. I told her I was going to throw the bundle away, as I still didn't know what it was she wanted me to do. She fumed and walked away. I took the little stack of papers back to my office and read through them for another half hour trying to make sense of her cryptographic symbols and lack of sentence structure before I finally just tossed the whole thing.

I was mad because she had yelled at me and I hadn't done anything (in my eyes) to deserve such treatment. I was tempted to shout back at her as much, but then I thought better of it (especially considering the time lapse :P) and I realized that I had not let her control me or the situation with her anger. I've learned that people do this a lot, use anger to try and control your reaction, whether or not they are aware of it. In the end after tossing the docs in my garbage bin I took a walk and felt better since I had reacted calmly. Its so difficult to swallow your anger when someone is treating you curtly. It makes me think how I might have been that way with numerous people over the years and what they must have felt. Sorry, anonymous people over the past 25 years!

The Dress Code

2005-12-06T14:33:00.000-08:00

I've blogged here before about the hang ups my company has with dress codes. Mind you, I don't resist dress codes at all. I think they're a good idea and can really inspire a professionalism in people. I'm for them, you could say.

But lately my company has been really slacking on enforcing this code. For the last few months one of the other managers in my office has been rocking into work any day of the week wearing sweat pants and white tennis shoes. I would otherwise consider this acceptable on a Casual Friday sort of basis, but this guy will do it any day he seems to want to. Of course, people see him doing it and they follow suit (no pun intended). So what happened? People wear jeans to work now. Is it such a big deal? I don't think so, since a great majority of our work is "back office" type stuff. Meaning, there is very little contact with clients directly unless you're in Sales and you have them come down to our home office. Most of the contact is email and phone based, so they don't see us very often.

Well, considering this I've to date still been pretty strict on myself with the dress code. Shirt and tie with dress shoes and slacks every day but Friday. On Fridays I would wear the same outfit sans tie, but I eventually dropped the slacks for jeans. The past two days, however, I have ridden my new bike to work. I wear my jeans and yesterday I packed my slacks, dress shoes and tie in a backpack and changed when I got to work. No big deal. Today I did the same thing but when I got to work I saw that this other manager was wearing a flannel shirt with white tennis shoes and I decided to skip the whole changing thing. If he can flaunt the rules and not be called on it, then I'm gonna be comfortable.

I'm still wearing a button down shirt but I've got jeans and sneakers on. I never see clients and I'm not in Sales, I don't see what the big deal is. Our COO popped her head into my office this afternoon and asked me if my head was cold. I realized I was wearing my flat cap and took it off sheepishly. She then said something to the effect of "we have to try and retain a little professional look around here." To which I had to shoot back "yeah, especially when people are allowed to wear white sneakers and sweats to the office."

That old bag. I can't believe her. She won't push down the other manager because he kisses her wrinkled old butt and I'm gonna call her on it. If she tries to enforce anything on me that isn't consistent across the board I'll throw discrimination in her face so fast it'll make her hip shatter. Seriously, I know she has a lot of experience in whatever capacity but she's got a thing or two to learn yet. Or maybe she learned it and forgot it, I don't know. But either way she's not gonna get over on me just because I'm a nice guy. They don't pay me enough here to sacrifice for my own sense of professionalism and being nice.

Virtual Realities = Real Economies

2005-12-06T10:43:00.000-08:00

Farming the monsters for digital gold

DECEMBER 06, 2005

KASI Nafus's clothing store has bucolic surroundings: a maple tree in autumn colours across a stream outside and a little further away a zebra munches on a bush.

Second job: Second Life's 60,000 users trade $2.72 million monthly

If customers arrive on foot, they must wade through the stream, but they don't mind because the water is not real, nor is Nafus's clothing store.

They exist only as three-dimensional representations in a virtual world called Second Life.

The clothes Nafus sells aren't physical either, merely a covering for the virtual bodies people make for themselves in Second Life. That doesn't mean the store, called Pixel Dolls, is not a real business. This is Nafus's full-time job.

"It's not something I'll get fabulously wealthy from, but it's a living," says Nafus, 27, of Seattle.

About 20 million people around the world are spending time in so-called massively multiplayer online role-playing games.

These online spaces are not only adding users, but are growing economies that interact with the real world.

Second Life, for instance, has its own currency, convertible to US dollars at a fluctuating exchange rate, and users can buy the virtual currency with credit cards or sell it for real dollars by cheque or PayPal transfers.

Its 60,000 users trade $US2 million ($2.72 million) monthly, making its economy about the same size as that of South Pacific island nation Tuvalu.

It's small, but large enough to supports about 100 virtual jobs, according to Philip Rosedale, chief executive of Linden Research, which created Second Life. Some design virtual buildings, others create schemes of movement that make virtual bodies dance or perform other complex actions.

Indiana University economist Edward Castronova estimates that real-money trading in virtual worlds is at least $US100 million this year.

Surveying players of the online game Everquest four years ago, Castronova found that 39 per cent would like to quit their jobs and earn a living in the virtual world.

Multiply that by 20 million gamers, and virtual jobs begin to look like one of the more popular professions.

Nafus says part of the reason she began making a business of Second Life was that she was practically spending a full work week on the game anyway.

Designing the clothes is time-consuming and she spends a lot of time creating the "fabric" for the clothes in an image editor before uploading it to Second Life, where she shapes it into three-dimensional forms.

She sells her regular inventory (for instance, linen tie suit, black), for about $US1 each, and limited editions for about $US5.

Selling digital clothes is quite different from selling real clothes. For instance, Nafus doesn't actually have to make each item and the store runs itself, customers just click on clothes images and have copies transferred to their accounts.

Even so, some aspects of a virtual business are similar to the real world. Once, the Second Life computers didn't actually transfer goods to the buyers for three days and to Nafus it was as if the post office had lost all her shipments.

Most virtual jobs are, however, quite different from hers. Second Life is an unusual virtual place in that the residents have great freedom to shape it and make objects in it, creating openings for skilled professionals.

The most popular virtual worlds focus on fighting and have limited scope for creativity. There are plenty of jobs there, but some of these moved overseas pretty almost as soon as they were created, in what is perhaps the fastest example ever of a new job category being outsourced internationally.

"I kill monsters and things to get their items," says Ilin Aurel, 19,of Caracal in Romania.

He makes $US200 monthly, and is employed by Gamersloot.net, based in California, to play online games such as World of Warcraft and Guild Wars.

The Romanian office is staffed around the clock in three shifts with gamers (known as "gold farmers") who collect gold and other virtual riches, which are then sold on the Gamersloot website to people who don't mind spending real money to enrich their in-game characters.

"There's a future in this job," says Aurel.

The presence of gold farmers in a game is not necessarily popular among people who are playing for fun, and game publishers try to limit it, with little success.

"It's almost impossible to design a game that does not generate real-money trade, a secondary market," says freelance journalist Julian Dibbell, who supported himself trading virtual gold, weapons and "real" estate for a year and has written a book about the phenomenon, to be published next year.

"I don't think it could ever become a dominant sector of the economy," Dibbell says. "But look at the real economy itself - the overwhelming proportion of economic transfers that take place in the world today are pure information transfers."

The Australian

I feel bad for IT

2005-12-02T08:46:00.000-08:00

The IT guys at our company, I feel bad for them. I mean, they are the crucial link in our work flow, and everything depends upon them. When something goes wrong with the computers the first thing we do (of course) is turn to IT. They get nothing but flack. Do we ever commend them for keeping the system on track? No. Of course, they're paid ridiculous sums of money to sit in a windowless office and blast techno, but that's their perogative, I suppose.

IT = Thankless job.

Most Annoying CSR ... EVER

2005-11-30T16:59:00.000-08:00

Recently we hired a new CSR to fill the position of the one who just up and flew the coop to Florida (I think that's where she went). I try to be fair with people and not judge them, you know, give 'em a fair chance. Well, suffice it to say that this woman has been given a chance and she has shown that she has to be one of the most annoying people in my office, followed closely by her manager (the two may be tied, we'll know as time goes on).

To start with she's form New York and has a hideous nasal accent which just begins to grate on my nerves after awhile. The accent I could live with if I didn't have to hear it all the time. Which I do. Because she speaks at level 11 volume all the time. I can be in my office with the radio on and I can hear her nasal whine start up about something she doesn't understand. It just drifts into my office and sits in my ear drums. Damned annoying, it is.

To top it off, her manager is an effeminate man who also speaks at level 11 volumes way more than is necessary when you are indoors and not performing a KISS tribute. I used to think that her manager was a homosexual with one of the other CSRs (who was from Jersey/Philly and previously held the title of Most Annoying in my office) but then he said something about his dead wife and I scolded myself for jumping to a conclusion based solely on the tone of his voice. Not that it really matters, I would find the guy annoying if I knew that he was straight as an arrow. Come to think of it, I cut him some sort of slack because I think he might be gay. I don't know what kind of slack I cut him ... I guess I just figure that he's not the type of guy you could settle things over a drink or fist fight with. He's so goddamn catty. Catty = Effeminate in my book.

But yeah, new CSR please avoid my office at all costs. And please stop talking so loudly. I realize that you are in Customer Service and thus are forced to speak throughout the day, but you don't need to shout. Especially to someone who is two feet from you. Also, if you could just try and absorb some of the stuff you are being trained to do that would be great. I bring this up now because I can just see you coming into my office two weeks from now with some botched abomination of an order having no clue as to what to do. Then I will be forced to hear your voice for as long as it takes you to understand the relatively simple directions I will give to rectify the situation. I will also hate your manager more since this will be a shining display of his inadequacy at management/training. No me gusta incompetence.

I need a dutch door to my office.

Forests paying the price for biofuels

2005-11-22T14:08:00.000-08:00

The irony of this article is incredible.

22 November 2005
NewScientist.com news service
Fred Pearce

THE drive for "green energy" in the developed world is having the perverse effect of encouraging the destruction of tropical rainforests. From the orang-utan reserves of Borneo to the Brazilian Amazon, virgin forest is being razed to grow palm oil and soybeans to fuel cars and power stations in Europe and North America. And surging prices are likely to accelerate the destruction

The rush to make energy from vegetable oils is being driven in part by European Union laws requiring conventional fuels to be blended with biofuels, and by subsidies equivalent to 20 pence a litre. Last week, the British government announced a target for biofuels to make up 5 per cent of transport fuels by 2010. The aim is to help meet Kyoto protocol targets for reducing greenhouse-gas emissions.

Rising demand for green energy has led to a surge in the international price of palm oil, with potentially damaging consequences. "The expansion of palm oil production is one of the leading causes of rainforest destruction in south-east Asia. It is one of the most environmentally damaging commodities on the planet," says Simon Counsell, director of the UK-based Rainforest Foundation. "Once again it appears we are trying to solve our environmental problems by dumping them in developing countries, where they have devastating effects on local people."

The main alternative to palm oil is soybean oil. But soya is the largest single cause of rainforest destruction in the Brazilian Amazon. Supporters of biofuels argue that they can be "carbon neutral" because the CO₂ released from burning them is taken up again by the next crop. Interest is greatest for diesel engines, which can run unmodified on vegetable oil, and in Germany bio-diesel production has doubled since 2003. There are also plans for burning palm oil in power stations.

"Once again we are trying to solve our environmental problems by dumping them on developing countries"

Until recently, Europe's small market in biofuels was dominated by home-grown rapeseed (canola) oil. But surging demand from the food market has raised the price of rapeseed oil too. This has led fuel manufacturers to opt for palm and soya oil instead. Palm oil prices jumped 10 per cent in September alone, and are predicted to rise 20 per cent next year, while global demand for biofuels is now rising at 25 per cent a year.

Roger Higman, of Friends of the Earth UK, which backs biofuels, says: "We need to ensure that the crops used to make the fuel have been grown in a sustainable way or we will have rainforests cleared for palm oil plantations to make bio-diesel."

From issue 2526 of New Scientist magazine, 22 November 2005, page 19

About Last Nite ...

2005-11-21T10:39:00.000-08:00

For all those seeking love in the digital age, be forewarned:

Online daters sue matchmaking Web sites for fraud

Friday 18 November 2005, 11:56am EST

By Martha Graybow

NEW YORK, Nov 18 (Reuters) - It's not easy finding love in cyberspace, and now some frustrated online daters say they were victims of fraud by two top Internet matchmaking services and have taken their complaints to court.

Match.com, a unit of IAC/Interactive Corp. (IACI.O: Quote, Profile, Research), is accused in a federal lawsuit of goading members into renewing their subscriptions through bogus romantic e-mails sent out by company employees. In some instances, the suit contends, people on the Match payroll even went on sham dates with subscribers as a marketing ploy.

"This is a grossly fraudulent practice that Match.com is engaged in," said H. Scott Leviant, a lawyer at Los Angeles law firm Arias, Ozzello & Gignac LLP, which brought the suit.

Match "promotes the policies of integrity to protect members, and yet they themselves, we allege, are misleading their entire customer base," he said.

The company said it does not comment on pending litigation. But Match spokeswoman Kristin Kelly said the company "absolutely does not" employ people to go on dates with subscribers or to send members misleading e-mails professing romantic interest. The company has about 15 million members worldwide and 250 employees, she said.

In a separate suit, Yahoo Inc.'s (YHOO.O: Quote, Profile, Research) personals service is accused of posting profiles of fictitious potential dating partners on its Web site to make it look as though many more singles subscribe to the service than actually do.

Yahoo did respond to requests for comment.

The suits, which both seek class-action status, came as growth in the online dating industry has slowed, although Web matchmaking still remains a big business.

U.S. consumers spent $245.2 million on online personals and dating services in the first half of 2005, up 7.6 percent from a year earlier, according to the Online Publishers Association. That's a slower growth rate compared with several years ago.

At the same time, competition among online dating services is fierce, with some sites offering newfangled features such as extensive compatibility surveys to match up people with similar temperaments and outlooks.

ALLEGATIONS OF 'DATE BAIT'

The Match lawsuit was filed earlier this month in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles by plaintiff Matthew Evans, who contends he went out with a woman he met through the site who turned out to be nothing more than "date bait" working for the company.

The relationship went nowhere, according to his suit. Evans says Match set up the date for him because it wanted to keep him from pulling the plug on his subscription and was hoping he'd tell other potential members about the attractive woman he met through the service, according to Leviant.

His lawyers said Evans, of Orange County, California, was not available to comment, but described him as a working professional in his 30s.

Leviant said his client found out about the alleged scam after the woman he dated confessed she was employed by Match. The lawsuit also claims the company violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act, a law best known for being used in prosecuting organized crime.

The Yahoo suit was filed last month by Robert Anthony, of Broward County, Florida. The suit, brought in U.S. District Court in San Jose, California, accuses the company of breach of contract, fraud and unfair trade practices.

Anthony's lawyer, Peter McNulty of the McNulty Law Firm in Bel Air, California, did not respond to requests for comment.

Economists expect sharp recession after real-estate bubble bursts

2005-11-14T16:11:00.000-08:00

By Ellen Simon
The Associated Press
Posted November 12 2005

NEW YORK · Much of the nation has had a lovely real estate boom for the past five years, but the house party is almost over and the cleanup won't be pretty.

That's the word from economists and investors who have watched housing prices march ever higher.

"The collapse of the housing bubble will throw the economy into a recession, and quite likely a severe recession," warned a July report by the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

In recent weeks, many major investment firms have concurred. Said a Lehman Brothers report, "[A] turn in the housing market is central to our economic forecast. "

"The demographic story behind the housing market boom, as we always thought, was a giant hoax," wrote Merrill Lynch & Co.'s North American economist, David Rosenberg, in a recent report.

If housing prices decline sharply, the effects could be broad. Lehman estimates one-third of the past year's U.S. economic growth was a consequence of the housing boom. Housing construction is equal to 5 percent of the national economy.

A downturn in housing could mean more than 1.3 million lost jobs, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. predicts, bumping up the national unemployment rate by 1 percent and the unemployment rate in house-mad California by 2 percent. Those numbers don't include likely job cuts in housing-dependent businesses, such as banking, furniture and building materials.

The Center for Economic and Policy Research predicts worse, saying a bubble burst would mean the loss of 5 million to 6.3 million jobs.

The housing run-up has financed consumer spending, creating more than $5 trillion in bubble wealth, the center estimates. Consumers have used "cash-out" mortgages to pay for everything from new kitchens to college tuition.

A final nightmare scenario: A federal bailout of the mortgage market is likely if housing crashes, the center predicts. So, if corporate pension funds continue to falter and this dire prediction does come true, the Feds could conceivably be holding your mortgage and your pension.

While there's disagreement on what a downturn will mean, it's widely held that a number of factors could bring prices down. A decline in prices will track interest rates: If rates go up sharply, prices will plummet, said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Economy.com, an independent provider of financial research. If rates rise slowly, housing prices may ease gradually.

Others point to simple supply and demand. Bubbles have their own psychology -- a neighbor tells you at a party that her house has tripled in value and you feel like an idiot for renting -- but supply and demand operates on logic, which has to kick in at some point.

The supply and demand picture for housing looks out of whack. For six straight months, ending in September, builders started work on more than 2 million new homes. This has only happened three other times in the postwar period, according to Merrill Lynch: 1971 to 1973, 1977 to 1978 and early 1984.

Those periods were fundamentally different from today in at least one respect: More people were forming households. Household formation is the growth rate in the number of households and it's boosted by new immigration and twenty-somethings leaving their parents' homes. It is currently half what it was for most of those peak periods.

"At no time in the past three decades has the gap between household formation and housing starts been as wide as it has been over the past 12 to 24 months," Rosenberg wrote. "We've become accustomed to hearing about how housing is in a new paradigm, that the fundamentals are sound, so on and so forth. But please, just don't tell me that the sector has managed to divorce itself from supply and demand realities."

Another indicator, unsold homes on the market, also points down. The ratio of inventories to sales has been rising rapidly in recent months and stands at its highest level since 1996, according to Wachovia Corp.

Rents provide more evidence of an imbalance between supply and demand. Since World War II ended, sale prices for homes have generally kept pace with the overall rate of inflation, and rents moved at the same pace. That hasn't been the case for the last eight years, according to the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

People Should Read This

2005-11-11T08:31:00.000-08:00

I really try to avoid anythign political here, and in that spirit, this article is posted solely for the scientific content. I think that it is important and more people should pay attention to this sort of thing:

The physics of 9/11 — including how fast and symmetrically one of the World Trade Center buildings fell — prove that official explanations of the collapses are wrong, says a Brigham Young University physics professor.
In fact, it's likely that there were "pre-positioned explosives" in all three buildings at ground zero, says Steven E. Jones.
In a paper posted online Tuesday and accepted for peer-reviewed publication next year, Jones adds his voice to those of previous skeptics, including the authors of the Web site www.wtc7.net, whose research Jones quotes. Jones' article can be found at www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html.

Stuart Johnson, Deseret Morning News

"It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in all three (WTC) buildings," BYU physics professor Steven E. Jones says.

Jones, who conducts research in fusion and solar energy at BYU, is calling for an independent, international scientific investigation "guided not by politicized notions and constraints but rather by observations and calculations.
"It is quite plausible that explosives were pre-planted in all three buildings and set off after the two plane crashes — which were actually a diversion tactic," he writes. "Muslims are (probably) not to blame for bringing down the WTC buildings after all," Jones writes.
As for speculation about who might have planted the explosives, Jones said, "I don't usually go there. There's no point in doing that until we do the scientific investigation."
Previous investigations, including those of FEMA, the 9/11 Commission and NIST (the National Institutes of Standards and Technology), ignore the physics and chemistry of what happened on Sept. 11, 2001, to the Twin Towers and the 47-story building known as WTC 7, he says. The official explanation — that fires caused structural damage that caused the buildings to collapse — can't be backed up by either testing or history, he says.
Jones acknowledges that there have been "junk science" conspiracy theories about what happened on 9/11, but "the explosive demolition hypothesis better satisfies tests of repeatability and parsimony and therefore is not 'junk science.' "

Adblock

In a 9,000-word article that Jones says will be published in the book "The Hidden History of 9/11," by Elsevier, Jones offers these arguments:

• The three buildings collapsed nearly symmetrically, falling down into their footprints, a phenomenon associated with "controlled demolition" — and even then it's very difficult, he says. "Why would terrorists undertake straight-down collapses of WTC-7 and the Towers when 'toppling over' falls would require much less work and would do much more damage in downtown Manhattan?" Jones asks. "And where would they obtain the necessary skills and access to the buildings for a symmetrical implosion anyway? The 'symmetry data' emphasized here, along with other data, provide strong evidence for an 'inside' job."

• No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel columns, he says.

• WTC 7, which was not hit by hijacked planes, collapsed in 6.6 seconds, just .6 of a second longer than it would take an object dropped from the roof to hit the ground. "Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum, one of the foundational laws of physics?" he asks. "That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors — and intact steel support columns — the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass. . . . How do the upper floors fall so quickly, then, and still conserve momentum in the collapsing buildings?" The paradox, he says, "is easily resolved by the explosive demolition hypothesis, whereby explosives quickly removed lower-floor material, including steel support columns, and allow near free-fall-speed collapses." These observations were not analyzed by FEMA, NIST nor the 9/11 Commission, he says.

• With non-explosive-caused collapse there would typically be a piling up of shattering concrete. But most of the material in the towers was converted to flour-like powder while the buildings were falling, he says. "How can we understand this strange behavior, without explosives? Remarkable, amazing — and demanding scrutiny since the U.S. government-funded reports failed to analyze this phenomenon."

• Horizontal puffs of smoke, known as squibs, were observed proceeding up the side the building, a phenomenon common when pre-positioned explosives are used to demolish buildings, he says.

• Steel supports were "partly evaporated," but it would require temperatures near 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit to evaporate steel — and neither office materials nor diesel fuel can generate temperatures that hot. Fires caused by jet fuel from the hijacked planes lasted at most a few minutes, and office material fires would burn out within about 20 minutes in any given location, he says.

• Molten metal found in the debris of the World Trade Center may have been the result of a high-temperature reaction of a commonly used explosive such as thermite, he says. Buildings not felled by explosives "have insufficient directed energy to result in melting of large quantities of metal," Jones says.

• Multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence were reported by numerous observers in and near the towers, and these explosions occurred far below the region where the planes struck, he says.

Jones says he became interested in the physics of the WTC collapse after attending a talk last spring given by a woman who had had a near-death experience. The woman mentioned in passing that "if you think the World Trade Center buildings came down just due to fire, you have a lot of surprises ahead of you," Jones remembers, at which point "everyone around me started applauding."
Following several months of study, he presented his findings at a talk at BYU in September.
Jones says he would like the government to release 6,899 photographs and 6,977 segments of video footage for "independent scrutiny." He would also like to analyze a small sample of the molten metal found at Ground Zero.

Another Two Bite The Dust

2005-11-08T14:24:00.000-08:00

Man, we are seriously losing staff at a ridiculous rate. Two days into this week and we're down two people already!

The first was a girl doing collections. She was a nice girl and had been a CSR prior to working collections. It was rumoured that she and the boss had a thing going on at one point, but of course no one had any proof of this. That's not the reason she left though, ostensibly. I guess what happened was that she did the New York show, committed to doing the Chicago show and then backed out at the last minute, citing her (soon-to-be) mother-in-law's upcoming surgery. Of course the company had incurred travel costs on her behalf at that point and the boss was understandably upset to hear that all the expenses were for naught. I guess he called her at home and her boyfriend answered the phone. Boss told boyfriend that he was sorry to hear about the surgery and boyfriend replied something along the lines that it was no big deal. This made Boss fuming mad as now she had not only backed out of a trip and made the company lose money but she had also lied to him personally. He placed her on a two week suspension and I guess that didn't sit well with her so she just walked out today. Just like that.

Number two to go out the door today was a CSR that had been here for awhile, maybe a few months. She was nice enough, and I liked her. I think she had a lot of personal problems at home. All I know is that she missed work yesterday and came into today saying that she was done and moving to Florida. Just like that. Her situation I wonder about more than the other girl. With #1 it all seems kind of cut-and-dry. There were personal feelings involved, drama, lies, etc. With this one it seems like there was certainly drama but it was more personal to her and not spread to other people in the company. Well, I guess I'll never know.

All this is great news for the receptionist, though, as now she gets to move to the back of the office and be a CSR. I suppose she'll get a pay raise to go along with that new position. When I asked her about this she didn't seem happy and her reasoning was "no one else seems to want to work here, why should I?" I couldn't argue with that.

American Foreign Policy Butts Into American Buiness Interests

2005-11-07T12:35:00.000-08:00

An unsafe world for US companies
By Mark Engler

The Bush administration has a reputation for creating an unusually business-friendly White House. Put Vice President Dick Cheney's secretive Energy Task Force and massive tax cuts together with corporate lobbyists writing regulations for their own industries, and you've made an argument that seems pretty persuasive.

There are reasons, however, to consider a contrary notion: Maybe President George W Bush and Cheney aren't very good capitalists at all.

Bush's history as a failed businessman is well known. Cheney, portrayed by conservatives as a brilliant ex-chief executive officer and by progressives as a Halliburton shill, also has a suspect past. While he certainly increased Halliburton's profile in four-and-a-half years as its chief, his foremost accomplishment was the US$7.7 billion acquisition in 1998 of Dresser Industries, a rival that turned out to be plagued with staggering asbestos-related liabilities.

In the wake of Cheney's reign, multiple Halliburton divisions sought bankruptcy protection and the company's stock price plunged. Rolling Stone magazine reported in August 2004, "Even with the bounce Halliburton stock has received from the war, an investor who put $100,000 into the company just before Cheney became vice president would have less than $60,000 today."

Many analysts hold the vice president accountable for the downturn, arguing that Dresser's asbestos problems, which cost Halliburton billions, were predictable. Less harsh critics nonetheless question his success as a business leader. For instance, Jason E Putman, an energy analyst at Victory Capital Management, argues that, as Halliburton chief, "Overall, Cheney did maybe at best an average job." Newsweek's Wall Street editor, Allan Sloan, is less complimentary, suggesting Cheney was a "CEO who messed up big-time".

When it comes to Iraq, we hear a lot about the government largesse flowing toward Halliburton, Bechtel and a handful of other favored firms. Less often do we consider the possibility that the administration's "war on terrorism" has been a major business blunder. If you start, though, with the lackluster corporate records of Bush and Cheney, the administration's foreign policy comes into quite a different focus. Even if you believe that the White House is designing its overseas crusade to benefit US corporations, there's no reason to assume that it has been doing so successfully.

Increasingly, the business media is suggesting that corporate leaders, who once hoped the current administration would push the corporate globalization of the Bill Clinton years to new heights, now fear another fate from the international order Bush has created. Tax cuts and deregulation on the domestic front have been obvious bonuses, but otherwise many US multinationals face a troubling scene. The White House's failed CEOs have pursued a global agenda that, at best, benefits a narrow slice of the American business community and leaves the rest exposed to a world of popular resentment and economic uncertainty.

When it comes to the interventions of Bush, Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and the neo-conservatives in the global economy, "at best an average job" might be a charitable judgment, and "messed up big-time" could be closer to reality. Those business people who have yet to join the majority that opposes the president's handling of his war in Iraq - or the increasing chorus of conservative critics who have begun questioning the administration's foreign policy - may soon have a long list of reasons to get on the bandwagon, starting with the bottom line.

Not KFC's war
In recent years, KFC has had some trying moments in the Muslim world. In early September, a bomb exploded inside one of the company's fried-chicken outlets in Karachi, Pakistan. It was not the first time the chain had been targeted. In May, a Shi'ite mob, angered by US backing for President General Pervez Musharraf and by reported abuses at Guantanamo Bay, set fire to another KFC outlet - one decked out with large images of Colonel Sanders set atop fields of stars and stripes. Two other branches were destroyed shortly after the US attack on Afghanistan in 2001.

The woes affecting KFC go well beyond one fast-food chain - McDonald's, too, has been attacked in Pakistan and Indonesia - and the torching of fast-food outlets is only the most dramatic sign of the new business climate being fostered by a changing American foreign policy. If Clinton's diplomatic affairs could be described as a sustained effort to make the world safe for Mickey Mouse, Microsoft and popcorn chicken, the Bush/Cheney agenda represents something altogether more dangerous for business.

The Clinton administration served as a steady advocate for building a cooperative, "rules-based" international economy - a multilateral order known to critics as "corporate globalization". The Bush administration, while purporting to be interested in issues such as "free trade", has offered up a very different set of policies.

Aggressive and unilateralist, it has fashioned a new model of "imperial globalization", which has even put multilateral institutions such as the World Trade Organization, decried by globalization activists, in jeopardy. Rather than working through such bodies, the current administration has regularly shown intransigence in international negotiations around trade and development; it has focused on tying its aid for other countries directly to its militarist prerogatives; and it has tried to deny war-weary "Old Europe" its traditional role as a junior partner in the globalization endeavor. In the process, it has begun dismantling an international order that served multinational corporations very well in the booming 1990s, and facilitated their rise over the past 30 years.

In short: if Bush is an oil president, he's not a Disney president, nor a Coca-Cola one. If Cheney is working diligently to help Halliburton rebound, the war he helped lead hasn't worked out nearly so well for Starbucks.

A bungled-brand America
Whether the administration's bold gamble for US global dominance will prove profitable either in the near future or in the long run, the business costs of this approach are already becoming evident. For starters, the new wave of anti-Americanism sweeping the planet goes far beyond KFC bombings in South Asia or widespread hostility in the Middle East.

In Asia, the South China Morning Post has noted that a "strong, growing hostility" toward the United States has complicated Disney's expansion plans in the area. The Bush imperial foreign policy, moreover, is inspiring consumer backlash even among traditional allies.

In December 2004, Jim Lobe of Inter Press Service reported on a survey of 8,000 international consumers released by the Seattle-based Global Market Insite (GMI) Inc. The survey noted:
One-third of all consumers in Canada, China, France, Germany, Japan, Russia and the United Kingdom said that US foreign policy, particularly the "war on terror" and the occupation of Iraq, constituted their strongest impression of the United States ... "Unfortunately, current American foreign policy is viewed by international consumers as a significant negative, when it used to be a positive," comments Dr Mitchell Eggers, GMI's chief operating officer and chief pollster. Brands the survey identified as particularly at risk at the time included Marlboro cigarettes, America Online (AOL), McDonald's, American Airlines, ExxonMobil, Chevron Texaco, United Airlines, Budweiser, Chrysler, Barbie Doll, Starbucks and General Motors.

More recent assessments have verified these trends. Indeed, in past months, a litany of stories in the financial media featured unnerving questions for business. Typical were the British Financial Times in August (World Turning Its Back on Brand America) and Forbes in September (Is Brand America In Trouble?).

A US Banker magazine article from August relaying the results of an Edelman Trust Barometer survey of global elites found that "41% of Canadian elites were less likely to purchase American products because of Bush administration policies, compared to 56% in the UK, 61% in France, 49% in Germany and 42% in Brazil".

It's not just snooty foreigners who are negative, either. American business leaders themselves have been starting to link economic woes to imperial policy. The previously mentioned US Banker article warned, "The majority of American CEOs, whose firms employ eight million overseas, are now acknowledging that anti-American sentiment is a problem."

And a 2004 Boston Herald story, headlined "Mass. Execs: Iraqi War Hurting; US competitiveness becoming a casualty", pointed to the "sixty-two percent of executives surveyed by Opinion Dynamics Corp [who] said the war is hurting America's global competitiveness".

Regularly featured in stories about America's image problems is a group of corporate executives who have come together as Business for Diplomatic Action (BDA).While avoiding an explicit stance on the Iraq war, the BDA argues:
The costs associated with rising anti-American sentiment are exponential. From security and economic costs to an erosion in our ability to engender trust around the world and recruit the best and brightest, the US stands to lose its competitive edge if steps are not made toward reversing the negativity associated with America.Compared to the adverse impacts of Bush's imperial globalization, the administration's efforts at (Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs) Karen Hughes-style brand rehabilitation are laughable - and the BDA knows it. Taking diplomatic matters into their own hands, BDA spokespeople flatly state, "Right now the US government is not a credible messenger."

A quagmire for corporations
Is the problem just one of perception, or have the wages of war cut into business profits? In June 2004, USA Today reporter James Cox wrote about how financially ailing companies are pointing to the war as the culprit:
Hundreds of companies blame the Iraq war for poor financial results in 2003, many warning that continued US military involvement there could harm this year's performance. In ecent regulatory filings at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), airlines, home builders, broadcasters, mortgage providers, mutual funds and others directly blame the war for lower revenues and profits last year.Among those complaining, Hewlett-Packard claimed that the occupation of Iraq has created uncertainty and hurt its stock price; meanwhile, media companies Hearst-Argyle Television, Sinclair Broadcast Group and Journal Communications bemoaned the number of TV and radio ads preempted by war news.

While fingering the war might be just a convenient excuse for some underperforming executives, the level of grumbling is noteworthy, as are the comments of outspoken fund managers profiled by Cox: "The war in Iraq created a quagmire for corporations." - David J Galvan, a portfolio manager for Wayne Hummer Income Fund in his letter to shareholders.

Vintage Mutual Funds concludes that "the price of these commitments [in Iraq and Afghanistan] may be more than the American public had expected or is willing to tolerate".

"In an SEC filing, Domenic Colasacco, manager of the Boston Balanced Fund, calls the ongoing US occupation 'sad and increasingly risky'."Of course, we know that reconstruction companies are posting profits. Sales of gas masks and armored Humvees are also up. But such war-supported companies are a small minority. On the other hand, the diverse businesses in the tourism industry have taken a huge blow. Delta Air Lines, JetBlue, Orbitz, Priceline.com, Morton's steakhouses, Fairmont Hotels & Resorts and Host Marriott, to name just a few, have blamed disappointing returns on the war. Travel industry leaders have warned: The US is losing billions of dollars as international tourists are deterred from visiting the US because of a tarnished image overseas and more bureaucratic visa policies ... "It's an economic imperative to address these problems," said Roger Dow, chief executive of the Travel Industry Association of America, tourism's main trade body ... Mr Dow stressed that tourism contributed to a positive perception of the US ... "If we don't address these issues in tourism, the long-term impact for American brands Coca-Cola, General Motors, McDonald's could be very damaging."

Economic nightmares foretold
Every year, the global business elite gathers at a resort in Davos, Switzerland for the World Economic Forum. In the high-flying Clinton years, a feeling of exuberance pervaded the globalists' gathering - protests outside their meetings notwithstanding. By January 2003, however, the mood in Davos had already darkened perceptibly. Economic optimism was waning. The coming war in Iraq, in particular, was causing concern. Corporate leaders showed little more enthusiasm than the protestors outside for the impending unilateralist invasion. Analysts fed their misgivings, citing "the threat of war as the biggest question mark hanging over global growth prospects".

Around the same time, progressive economists Dean Baker and Mark Weisbrot detailed a possible worst-case scenario in a policy report entitled "The Economic Costs of a War in Iraq. Beyond the costs of anti-Americanism abroad", they focused on three additional areas of concern: A war-related oil shock that might cost the American economy hundreds of thousands of jobs over a seven-year period; a heightened risk of terrorist attacks in the US, which might result in increased security costs, slowing the growth of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP); and a likelihood that increased oil prices would drag the developing world into a deep recession.

I asked Baker how relevant the report's concerns have proven. Though he emphasizes that the worst did not come to pass, he notes worrying signs. Oil prices have indeed skyrocketed, owing largely to increased demand from China and India, but exacerbated by Iraq's absent oil. Moreover, as each new intelligence estimate predicts that we are less, not more, secure because of the Iraqi occupation, the risk of an economy-crippling attack grows. Already, Baker points out, the hours we spend waiting in security lines at the airport or delayed in city subways represent costly economic losses.

Then, of course, there is the as yet unrealized possibility that spreading guerilla warfare and terrorism will include escalating sabotage against vast and largely indefensible stretches of oil pipeline in the Middle East. It is this scenario among others that caused professor of Middle Eastern history and Informed Comment blogger Juan Cole to liken Bush's Iraq debacle to "throwing grenades around in the cockpit of the world economy".

Such costs, foretold before the invasion, suggest that the pre-war pessimism in Davos was well justified. And such a modest list hardly exhausts the possible economic "downsides" to Bush administration policies in Iraq and beyond.

The debate about Congressional spending, for one, deserves at least passing mention. Whether fiscal conservatives are right that Iraq and tax-cut-bloated deficits are necessarily bad for business, or whether Military Keynesianism has actually been helping to soften a periodic economic downturn, the idea of war without sacrifice should sound fishy to any account-minded executive.

Take direct war costs running in the hundreds of billions, add in medical bills for disabled veterans, then throw in the costs of National Guard reservists being pulled from small businesses, and pretty soon you're talking real money. At some point the overvalued dollar, which our creditors in the central banks of China and Japan have decided to let ride for the time being, will have to come down and is likely to bring the economy with it. When that happens, Colonel Sanders won't be the only one to feel the pain.

Will business turn?
In the August of the 2004 election cycle, the Kerry campaign distributed a list of 204 business executives who supported the candidate's policies. It was a nice try, but, as Bloomberg News reported, the Democrat trailed Bush badly in corporate support. Fifty-two chief executives from major companies had by then donated to Kerry; 280 to the president's reelection campaign. (Business being business, "at least three executives on Kerry's list also gave the maximum $2,000 to Bush's reelection campaign.")

A year has passed since the elections. Approval ratings for the victorious president continue to sink to all-time lows, and "staying the course" remains official Washington policy for Iraq. In this context, it's not surprising that Republican "realists" such as Brent Scowcroft (who warned in a Wall Street Journal op-ed before the war that "it undoubtedly would be very expensive - with serious consequences for the US and global economy") are making noise again.

And it would make perfect sense if an increasing number of those Bush CEOs were by now pining for a return to Clinton-style multilateral globalization of a sort still held out by the defeated senator from Massachusetts and many other Democrats.

Neither of these alternative camps will seem particularly appealing to progressives, but they pose a genuine threat to the imperial globalists who seem incapable of extracting themselves from Iraq. Indeed, intra-party rivalry among the Republicans - which is likely to increase as we enter an election year - could play a vital role in turning White House hawks into dead ducks. All the better if this avian transformation is sped by dissatisfaction from corporate leaders reevaluating the costs of Bush foreign policy and deciding that empire just doesn't pay.

Immigrant workers stiffed for Katrina work

2005-11-07T11:40:00.000-08:00

When I stumbled across the below article I can't say I was surprised, but I was certainly disheartened. It is sad to see businesses essentially making slaves out of people. Enlightened capitalism is not the American model. I suppose that's the thing about capitalism and competition: sometimes people cheat to get ahead. In this instance when people cheat they are not paying for work and these poor folks who risked their lives to get here for the opportunity to play a part in the game are left with nothing. That is despicable.

GULFPORT, Mississippi (AP) -- A pattern is emerging as the cleanup of Mississippi's Gulf Coast morphs into its multibillion-dollar reconstruction: Come payday, untold numbers of Hispanic immigrant laborers are being stiffed.

Sometimes, the boss simply vanishes. Other workers wait on promises that soon, someone in a complex hierarchy of contractors will provide the funds to pay them.

Nonpayment of wages is a violation of federal labor law, but these workers -- thousands of them, channeled into teams that corral debris, swaddle punctured roofs in blue tarps and gut rain-ravaged homes -- are especially vulnerable because many are here illegally.

After Katrina hit, Armando Ojeda paid $1,200 to be smuggled across the desert border from Mexico, a walk that took several nights. Talk of $10 an hour -- more in a day than he made each week at a computer factory back home -- led him to pay another $1,200 to be crammed in van with a dozen other immigrants and driven 1,600 miles, from a safe house in Arizona to Mississippi.

The passengers were not fed -- Ojeda recalls his mouth watering when he smelled tacos the driver ate -- and were discharged near the Naval Construction Battalion Center in Gulfport, where Ojeda sleepwalked though his first day clearing hurricane-strewn junk.

The job was supposed to pay $7 an hour. But six weeks later, Ojeda still hasn't been paid the $600-plus he said he is owed for eight days of dawn-to-dusk labor.

Karen Tovar, the subcontractor on the job, acknowledged she hasn't been able to pay dozens of workers a total of about $130,000. She insisted she was not at fault, blaming the way payments can be stalled along a long chain of subcontractors often led by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

At one point, Tovar had 83 workers cleaning the Navy base under a broader, $12 million contract held by KBR, a firm owned by Vice President Dick Cheney's former company, Halliburton.

After several weeks without pay, many workers grew frustrated and left.

"I've told them, 'When I get paid, you will receive your funds.' And they say, 'When?"' she said. "I'm very sure it's going to be shortly."

An Army Corps spokesman said he wasn't aware of any problems with payments. A KBR spokeswoman wouldn't provide details about the base cleanup, referring inquiries to the Navy, which referred questions about subcontractors back to KBR.

Tovar said she knew of other subcontractors who disappeared with their payrolls, and wondered whether her former workers expect she will abscond to her home in North Carolina.

"I don't know if they're thinking that I've left and took the money or that I'm trying to hide the funds, because I wouldn't do that," said Tovar, 47. "In my type of work, you're working on trust."

Armando Ojeda is not trusting. He doesn't think he'll be paid, though he remains among the platoons of workers bivouacked along the coast. His goal: to wire his parents in the poor southern state of Chiapas enough money to offset the cost of his trip, which he has come to see as a folly he had to indulge before age or commitments bound him home.

"I am stupid for coming," he said, with a smile and shake of the head. "It was a foolish thing, nothing more."

Nonpayment of immigrant workers is not a new phenomenon -- and it doesn't appear to be as much of an issue in New Orleans. With so much work to do and not enough laborers to do it, the market there appears to favor workers, said immigration lawyer David Ware.

What's remarkable in Mississippi is the apparent scope of the problem, though it is impossible to quantify.

In this beleaguered state, which doesn't have a labor department, the issue isn't even on the radar.

Nonpayment is not specified as a crime under Mississippi law and the state Department of Employment Security defers wage claims to the federal Department of Labor. Workers who claim back wages have two formal options: Filing a civil suit in state court or a federal complaint. Mississippi prosecutors haven't received any complaints, according to special assistant attorney general Peter Cleveland.

A spokeswoman for the federal Labor Department said she could not determine whether there have been any post-Katrina claims in the Gulf region. But there are some in the pipeline: On Friday, a representative of the Mississippi Immigrants Rights Alliance said the advocacy group had prepared complaints on behalf of more than 150 workers who are owed more than $100,000 by five contractors, including Tovar's KTS Services.

Out in the cleanup-zone, dozens of Hispanic immigrant workers interviewed by the AP shared a common refrain: "I worked without being paid."

In Gulfport, several dozen men living in makeshift bunks in a hangar-like building said they were owed tens of thousands of dollars.

Like other workers, Alfredo Roblero saw opportunity in the wreckage, and was recruited from Ft. Pierce, Florida, with promises of steady work for good wages, expenses paid.

"They bring you to nothing," said Roblero, 26, who figured he was due about $500 for five days spent demolishing what was left of the coastal Casino Magic Biloxi. "They owe you, and you wait for them."

Many of the workers wore the shirts of Dallas-based Restoration Group. In a subsequent telephone interview, company president James Rea said the workers were the responsibility of a subcontractor. He insisted all have been paid and blamed insurance companies for any delay.

"We're all standing in line and we take our piece of each dollar off as we hand it down," he said, "and eventually it gets down to the end of the line."

In a slovenly trailer park, men named Francisco and Oscar said they were owed thousands of dollars for weeks of work. Not long before, according to local immigrant advocates, more than a dozen workers were bunking in their trailer, each paying $10 per night for lodging to a subcontractor who they said then shorted them thousands of dollars.

Before that, the men had worked for -- and had quit -- Karen Tovar's crew.

Tovar said that the men didn't understand American pay schedules, specifically the practice of working two weeks before getting paid for the first.

"I've been to Mexico and, basically, these people live from week to week and when they come over here they have a misconception when the week is held back," said Tovar.

Tovar said that she has worked other hurricane cleanups, but never had trouble being paid by other subcontractors. While she is now receiving a steady flow of payments, she said it's not enough to pay off the $130,000 she owes 83 workers for helping clear the Navy base.

Elizabeth Martinez is another subcontractor who has been embroiled in wage disputes. She has been living among workers in a small tent city in Ocean Springs.

On Oct. 12, eight men who had been patching roofs asked a Texas-based immigrant worker advocate who was visiting the camp to help negotiate their pay.

As is often the case, the situation remains in dispute.

Advocate Anita Grabowski said the men, who came to Mississippi from Arkansas and have since scattered, worked two weeks and were due their money.

Bosses at the Alabama-based subcontractor that hired Martinez, Hughes Construction Services LLC, said the workers didn't understand that they weren't yet scheduled to be paid.

Martinez herself said she didn't hire the workers to lay roof tarps and that they were trying to extort money they hadn't earned _ an increasingly common scam, she said.

Martinez said she didn't want to pay until she checked her records. But the owners of family-run Hughes decided to front Martinez more than $15,000 to pay the men -- $10 an hour, $15 for overtime.

"We just wanted it to be over with," said Jody Hughes, one of three Hughes sons working the cleanup. The men were paid and agreed to find work elsewhere.

"Hughes was being intimidated," Martinez said. "To me, it's like paying off damn terrorists."

On a chill late-October evening, Martinez stood near her tent, engrossed in discussions with three more men who had driven two hours from New Orleans to complain that she hadn't paid them.

Martinez told their chief negotiator, Antonio Hernandez, that she had paid the fourth member of their roof-tarp crew, a man named Ruben who now was in Texas.

Soon summoned by cell phone, Ruben denied receiving any money. But one of Hernandez's companions acknowledged that he had seen Martinez pay Ruben something, and Martinez produced handwritten records that persuaded the men she had advanced Ruben $700 cash, which the men hadn't seen.

The men piled back into their beat-up brown van for the return ride to New Orleans with boxes of food and $150 in cash Martinez gave them "not because I owe you ... as a gift."

Just as they pulled out, Martinez flagged down four Guatemalan workers who walked into the encampment. She said a true scam artist had ripped off these unfortunates.

One by one, they explained that they had cleaned a school for 144 hours at a promised $8 an hour. Then one of their bosses dropped them on the side of the road, without food. Eventually, a church bus picked them up.

Any idea, they asked, of how to get paid?

Mid Week Post

2005-11-02T12:08:00.000-08:00

Well, a little flu bug has been going around and today it has sidelined half our sales force. That's just super. No money coming in is a bad thing. But actually for me it means fewer orders to process so there's a reduction in work load and that's a good thing. Weird. Anyway, the girl that has infected everyone is here today, she was sick yesterday but decided to "rough it out" and come to work anyways. While I applaud this work ethic it is a terrible idea in that she has passed around what was previously contained solely to her. One person missing a few days is much better than them insisting on coming to work only to take down more members of the office subsequently. I am not sick as of this posting, but who is to say? If I get sick I will be very mad at this girl. On a side note she says that she is feeling better today and thinks that it was only a 24-hour thing. We'll see.

Still out of the office is the renaissance man of fixing everything: our Director of Special Projects. I love that title. It might as well read: Director of Miscellany. Anyway, this guy is still out of town and he's been gone since before the NY show. He was the one who had to drive the van there (Special Project? Sounds like it ...). With him gone it means that the printers don't get fixed when they foul up and one of the scanners is down too. What is it with this place? The whole thing feels like it is going to ruins sometimes.

There's also an "Unavailable" number that keeps calling me. Who are you, mysterious Unavailable? I made this policy a long while back of not answering "Unavailable" or "Restricted" IDs on my private line. If its so important they'll leave a message. If its a call I am expecting I'll pick up. Still, my curiosity does grab me, as this Unavailable has been calling all week. But why won't they leave me a message? That's shady and I'm not having anything to do with shadiness.

Its The Little Things That Kill

2005-10-28T15:55:00.000-07:00

Payroll doesn't get around to cutting our checks until Friday afternoon at like 4:30. What is up with this? Can they possibly pull it together for Thursday so that I don't have to sit in line at a friggin' casino for a half hour on Friday nite? That line is something else. At first I was a little upset about it, but come to tell you, now I kind of enjoy the experience. There's such a cross section of Vegas society that utilizes the casinos to cash their paychecks. You see the construction guys, the casino workers, the goofy government types all standing there together shuffling slowly along to get money that they will then more likely than not pour right back into the casino. That's a little sad to think about.

Still, for as much fun (in a cultural exploration/visceral experience kind of way) as it is to stand in line to cash my paycheck I would much rather that check be directly deposited into the bank. I tried to sign up for DD and my bank rejected it because the company didn't do that. Weak.

Another thing: what's up with shoddy Internet connections? I'm four hours from LA, possibly one of the most wired locations in all the United States, and we get dropped all the time? I suppose I could redirect some of this ire towards my IT department in the form of: why do we pay you guys so much to have shite breakdown all the time? I mean seriously, things go haywire more than I would deem acceptable. I would seriously be wondering about the competence of these individuals if I were in a position to do something (which I am not). They might be able to code up a storm but I don't think network architecture/maintenance is their forte.

Rebel Without A Suit

2005-10-28T09:34:00.000-07:00

I'm being rebellious today and I'm not wearing slacks, chinos, etc. I've opted to go casual and today I'm sporting jeans. I feel like such a rebel. I think I should trade in my blazer for a leather jacket.

But seriously, this was kind of a hard decision for me to make given my propensity for donning traditional office wear the whole week. The breaking point came when I saw some of my colleagues (one in particular) totally abandoning any semblance of a suit on Fridays. We're talking sweat suits, people. Up to that point I had been only so bold as to go without a tie on Fridays, but after I saw another manager get away with wearing a tan two piece Karl Kani number I decided casual meant casual. So today I am wearing jeans with a blazer and a button down shirt (without a tie) and it is quite comfortable. I feel like I could take on the world! If by "the world" you mean a mound of invoices that need to be paid.

To Be Young, Single & Stupid

2005-10-26T14:24:00.000-07:00

Last week some people from our company attended a Trade Show in New York City. I was unable to attend, and my boss was pretty upset by this. He sent me an angry/hurt email and I had to reply in a very diplomatic manner and explain things to him. Poor guy has little in the way of perspective to really understand why I would decline the "privilege" of travelling to New York on business.

There are various reasons I did not go. I will not cite them all here, but I have picked one very poignant example of company treatment to illustrate my aversion. At present in New York City it is 50 degrees and cloudy. From what I understand of the Weather Channel there is a Nor' Easter blowing through and the conditions are not fun. One of my colleagues has been in New York since Thursday last week with no umbrella and they put him up in a hostel. That's right, a friggin' hostel. Granted, they gave him a suite during the weekend but now he's sharing accommodations with backpackers from all over the globe. Not my idea of a business trip, but to each his own. This poor guy had to drive a van from Vegas to New York loaded with equipment for the show and now he is waiting to drive to Chicago for another Trade Show. Talking to the IT guy about the situation he commented "Oh to be young, single and stupid."

I second that sentiment. I suppose, to be fair, that the guy isn't in all that bad a straight. He is salaried so he's kind of on a little vacation out there for the time being. But being forced to drive a van across the country? I don't know if 12 hour days on the highway would be worth the salary he receives (I'm speculating here because i don't know what he makes, exactly). There are little lines we draw every day with people. In a business environment where capitalism is the name of the game those lines are being erased or impinged upon daily as the volume of business and the pressures of the market make the workload swell and drain. Things have to be done and who will be available to take up the slack?

In theory this is where the real "guts" of capitalism kicks in and the "everyone has a price" cliche pops up. What's your time worth to you? The IT guy was right; my colleague is 24, single, and has a situation where he doesn't have to pay rent to anyone. The guy has little in the way of responsibility beyond a car payment. I don't think he's stupid, I think he can just afford (that is to say he's willing to pay via time) to do some things which I consider a little too inconvenient in terms of cost to my life for work. The ol' private life versus work balancing act.