POLINANCE

Jim Rogers this week

2012-02-16T10:30:00.000-08:00

Judge Napolitano fired from Fox Business after this speech !!

2012-02-13T10:44:00.000-08:00

"Do It! Do The Thing! DO IT!!!" Bill Murray Interview on CNBC

2012-02-10T14:18:00.001-08:00

Schwartz's Sold: René Angélil May Be New Co-Owner Of Montreal Deli; Sale Worth Around $10M

2012-02-10T00:04:00.000-08:00

(Via HP) Schwartz's, the legendary Montreal restaurant famous for its smoked meat, was sold at the beginning of January for around $10 million to a group of investors that may include none other than René Angélil, husband and manager of superstar Céline Dion, according to sources close to the deal. Le Huffington Post Quebec has learned that the transaction took place around Jan. 7, after which the now-former owner, businessman Hy Diamond, filed a request for dissolution of his business with the Registre des entreprises du Québec - the province's business registry. The sale of the uber-popular deli was motivated by a desire simply to move on, sources told HuffPost Quebec. Several investors have shown interest in acquiring Schwartz's, but few were prepared to fork over the hefty sum, according to another source who spoke to HuffPost Quebec. Other sources say the restaurant is now the property of a group of investors, with two prominent names apparently in the mix: Angélil and Paul Sara (Angélil's cousin). The two previously ventured into the restaurant business in the 1990s with the Nickels franchise.

Loyal Employees

Montreal media has been abuzz with rumours of the potential sale, which started earlier this week when English paper The Gazette reported rumours of the sale. Angélil's connection to the sale was revealed early Sunday morning by Le Journal de Montréal. But the deli's employees aren't saying much on the record about the business' change-of-hands, and were advised not to speak about the sale. "We know there has been a sale, but have been asked not to comment on the matter," Schwartz's day manager told HuffPost Quebec, visibly uncomfortable with the question. Other servers seemed indifferent about the names of the future owners. "Our customers are our only priority, much more so than knowing who the owner is," one said with a smile. Schwartz's has enjoyed phenomenal success since it was opened in 1928 by Reuben Schwartz. Locals, tourists and celebrities alike -- Angélil is a well-known fan, and his and Dion's picture is on the deli's wall of fame -- flock daily to the Montreal institution on St. Laurent Boulevard for the famous smoked meats, fries, pickles and more. The long lineups are almost as legendary as the sandwiches at the sole location.

As such, it wouldn't be surprising if the new owners were interested in expanding the Schwartz's brand beyond the Main according to Journal de Montréal's food writer, Thierry Daraize, who said in the report that tourists would love to be able to get their Schwartz's fix elsewhere.

"The brand has huge potential for expansion," he said. "As long as they can preserve their famous recipe."

Schwartz's popularity has thus far spawned a line of merchandise and spices, a book, documentary film, and even a musical. If an expansion is on the horizon, Angélil could likely foot the bill if he is indeed a co-owner; His wife and sole talent protégé Dion had a reported net worth of about $250 million in 2007 and banked $19 million in 2010 - 11 on the strength of her Las Vegas show alone, according to Forbes.

Marc Faber: "Ron Paul Would Be A Very Good President"

2012-02-03T15:36:00.000-08:00

While Marc Faber shares the usual stock of insightful market commentary, together with timing inflection points, and extended thoughts in the attached Bloomberg TV clip, it is the fact that he has officially joined Bill Gross, and so many others, in supporting the candidacy of Ron Paul as president. It is rather sad that only those who see beyond the surface of the current pyramid scheme facade, are bold enough to endorse the only man who is right for the White House. Fast forward to 15 minutes into the video to hear Marc Faber: "Ron Paul would be a very good president."

“The Forgotten Man”, a painting by Jon McNaughton,

2012-02-03T15:15:00.000-08:00

Li Ching-Yuen was a man who claimed he was 256, the Chinese government claimed he was 197, it was also said that he was 7 ft tall.

2012-02-02T00:11:00.000-08:00

(Via Wikipedia) Some claim that Li Ching-Yuen was born in 1677 in Qi Jiang Xian, Szechuan province. By his own account, he was born in 1736. However, in a 1930 New York Times article, Professor Wu Chung-chieh of the University of Chengdu discovered Imperial Chinese government records from 1827, congratulating one Li Ching-Yuen on his 150th birthday, and further documents later congratulating him on his 200th birthday in 1877. In 1928, a New York Times correspondent wrote that many of the old men in Li's neighborhood asserted that their grandfathers knew him when they were boys, and that he at that time was a grown man.
He began gathering herbs in the mountain ranges at the age of ten, and also began learning of longevity methods, surviving on a diet of herbs and rice wine. He lived this way for the first 100 years of his life. In 1749, when he was 71 years old, he moved to Kai Xian to join the Chinese army as a teacher of the martial arts and as a tactical advisor.

One of his disciples, the Taijiquan Master Da Liu told of Master Li's story: at 130 years old Master Li encountered an older hermit, over 500 years old, in the mountains who taught him Baguazhang and a set of Qigong with breathing instructions, movements training coordinated with specific sounds, and dietary recommendations. Da Liu reports that his master said that his longevity "is due to the fact that I performed the exercises every day - regularly, correctly, and with sincerity - for 120 years."

In 1927, Li Ching Yuen was invited by General Yang Sen to visit him in Wan Xian, Szechuan where his famous portrait was photographed. The general was fascinated by his youthfulness, strength and prowess in spite of his advanced age. Returning home, he died a year later, some say of natural causes; others claim that he told friends that "I have done all I have to do in this world. I will now go home." After Li's death, General Yang Sen investigated the truth about his claimed background and age and wrote a report about his findings that was later published.

He worked as an herbalist, promoting the use of wild reishi, goji berry, wild ginseng, he shou wu and gotu kola along with other Chinese herbs. Li had also supposedly produced over 200 descendents during his life span, surviving 23 wives.

The secret of longevity
The article "Tortoise-Pigeon-Dog", from the May 15, 1933 issue of Time reports on his history, since it included Li Ching-Yuen's answer to his secret of a long life:

Tranquil mind
Sit like a tortoise
Walk sprightly like a pigeon
Sleep like a dog

References about Master Li Ching Yuen
Dr. Yang Jwing-Ming, in his book "Muscle/Tendon Changing and Marrow/Brain Washing Qigong", says that Li Ching-Yuen was a Chinese herbalist skilled in Qigong who spent most of his life in the mountains. In 1927, the National Revolutionary Army General Yang Sen (揚森), invited him to his residence in Wann Hsien, Szechuan province, where the picture shown in this article was taken.

Chinese General Yang Sen wrote a report about him, "A Factual Account of the 250 Year-Old Good-Luck Man", where he described Li Ching Yuen's appearance: "He has good eyesight and a brisk stride; Li stands seven feet tall, has very long fingernails, and a ruddy complexion."

Stuart Alve Olson's 2002 book "Qigong Teachings of a Taoist Immortal: The Eight Essential Exercises of Master Li Ching Yuen" teaches the practice of the "Eight Brocade Qigong" learned with the Taijiquan Master T. T. Liang (Liang Tung Tsai), who learned it from the General Yang Sen.

According to legend, Li Ching Yuen was the creator of Jiulong Baguazhang (or Nine Dragons Baguazhang).

The Taoist Master Liu Pai Lin (劉百齡), who lived in São Paulo, Brazil from 1975 until 2000, had in his classroom another photograph of Master Li Ching Yuen unknown to the West. In this photo his face is clearly visible, as are his long and curled fingernails.[10] Master Liu had met him personally in China, and considered him as one of his Masters. He used to say that Master Li answered to him that the fundamental taoist practice is to learn to keep the "Emptiness" (Wuji). Master Liu's son, Master Liu Chih Ming, teaches the 12 Silks Qigong in CEMETRAC, as transmitted by Master Li.

Many cultures around the world, particularly in India, Tibet and China, tell of remarkable longevity achieved by spiritual (yogic and taoist) adepts. Yogananda's "Autobiography of a Yogi" with Immortal sage, Babaji and Peter Kelder's "The Ancient Secret of the Fountain of Youth" being examples

'The Fantastic Flying Books Of Mr. Morris Lessmore,' Oscar-Nominated Animated Short,' Available To Watch Online

2012-01-30T22:06:00.001-08:00

The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore from Moonbot Studios on Vimeo.

Girl can say any word backwards within seconds!

2012-01-30T00:44:00.000-08:00

The slow thought movement: Daniel Kahneman on intuition and our two brains

2012-01-27T04:09:00.000-08:00

(Via National Post) Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman offers this exercise in his new book, Thinking, Fast and Slow: A bat and ball cost $1.10. The bat costs one dollar more than the ball. Using your intuition, how much does the ball cost? If the number that comes to mind is 10 cents, you’re wrong. The correct answer is 5 cents; but more than 50% of Harvard, MIT and Princeton students gave the intuitive, and incorrect, answer. “Many people are overconfident, prone to place too much faith in their intuitions,” the Tel Aviv-born psychologist writes. “They apparently find cognitive effort at least mildly unpleasant and avoid it as much as possible.”As the only non-economist to have won the Nobel Prize in economic sciences for his pioneering work on decision-making, Kahneman has changed the way we think about thinking. The title of his book, his first publication for the public, describes two modes of thinking. Kahneman calls them System 1 and System 2. System 1 thinks fast. It was responsible for the aforementioned “10 cents” answer. It operates automatically with little or no effort. You would use it to, say, detect hostility in your spouse’s voice. System 2, however, thinks slow. It works harder to judge, to choose, to compute. You would use it to solve an equation like 17 x 24, for instance.

As you’ve already discovered, System 1 can be prone to mistakes, and System 2 often just endorses or rationalizes ideas and feelings generated by System 1. For example, you may not realize that you dislike your new boss because he looks vaguely like Emperor Palpatine in Star Wars. But you will find confirming evidence of your loathing and you will believe whatever story you tell yourself.

“When the stakes are high, it’s best to slow down, reflect and criticize yourself,” Kahneman says during a recent interview. “It’s not something you can do all of the time. We simply cannot run on System 2 all of the time. It’s too slow and effortful. We must trust our intuitions for small decisions. But when the decisions are large … you want to ask yourself whether you’re prone to biases.” It may be hard to believe that our intuitions fail us in the face of seemingly magical stories of sixth sense. In his book, Kahneman refers to psychologist Gary Klein’s story of a team of firefighters battling a kitchen fire. The commander suddenly shouted: “Let’s get out of here!” without realizing why. Shortly after, the floor collapsed. It might strikes us as wondrous, but intuition is merely recognition.

“Expert intuition develops from a lot of practice,” Kahneman says. “This is how we become expert drivers. We develop, for example, the sense that the driver in the next lane is dangerous. That is something that we are not even aware of learning. We pick up cues that we’re barely aware of and they guide our behaviour.”Expert intuition requires practice in a regular, stable environment — and our world is irregular. So while pundits make long-term predictions, Kahneman warns that we shouldn’t be quick to believe them.

“If they’re confident, it means they make up good stories. They believe in their stories. But we shouldn’t be taken in by their confidence.”Fund managers, for example, are confident in their stock-picking skills. But Kahneman points to 50 years of research that shows for the majority of fund managers, “the selection of stocks is more like rolling dice than like playing poker.”Kahneman cites a paper titled Trading is Hazardous to Your Wealth, research showed that, on average, the most active traders had the poorest results. In another paper, Boys Will Be Boys, research revealed that men acted on their useless ideas more often than women, and that as a result, women got better investment results.“People are widely over-optimistic about their ability to pick out stocks and they’re even wrong about their memory of how they’ve been successful they have been in the past. They selectively remember their successes and not their failures,” Kahneman says. How we remember things is also key to our happiness. People have two selves: the remembering self and the experiencing self, he explains.

“Somebody in a question and answer period after my talk said they had recently been listening to a symphony disc and that right before the end, there was a screeching sound that was horrible. He added the sentence: ‘It ruined the whole experience,’ ” Kahneman recalls. “I pointed out to him that actually it hadn’t. He had had the experience; he had had 20 minutes of glorious music. What it did ruin was the memory of the experience. But memory is all we get to keep.” Most of us are guided by our remembering self. Think about this, Kahneman suggests: Would you pay for a vacation if afterward all pictures and videos were destroyed and you had to take a potion that wiped your memories of the holiday? Probably not.

In one experiment, subjects were asked to repeat one of two painful trials; they often chose to repeat the one that involved more suffering because it had left a better memory. “The experiencing self who actually does the living tends not to have enough voice in planning your activities,” Kahneman says. “When people make life decisions they do not sufficiently ask: What would I actually experience and how long will I experience it? They tend to neglect duration and they tend not to think of experience, just the memories they will be left with later.”

Get set for a crash, forecaster says

2012-01-27T04:01:00.000-08:00

Global stock markets are poised for a crash by summer as Europe’s debt crisis and slowing spending by aging baby boomers put the brakes on global growth, warns U.S. economic forecaster Harry Dent Jr. “It’s a replay of 2008 and early 2009 – only the recession goes deeper,” suggested the founder of Tampa, Fla.-based economics research firm HS Dent. “The 50- to 70-per-cent decline will happen in the next two to three years, but I think you are going to see the strongest part this year.”Severe market downturns don’t usually happen in a U.S. election year, but the U.S. Federal Reserve Board is “running out of bullets” to spur its economy, said the author and newsletter writer who predicted Japan’s severe downturn and the surging U.S. market in the 1990s.

“We told people to get 100 per cent out of stocks last Friday,” Mr. Dent said. “You might miss the last 2, 3, 4 or 5 per cent, but when it falls, it can fall so rapidly.”

Unless the United States unveils more stimulus like its two previous “quantitative easing” or bond-purchasing programs, the recent market rally can’t last, insisted the author of The Great Crash Ahead. “You may get another bounce in the markets, but you just push the crash lower down the line into 2013 and 2014.”

He sees Europe slipping into recession as it embarks on austerity measures, and dragging the United States with it. Slower growth will hurt the export-oriented Chinese economy as well as resource-based countries, such as Canada and Australia so it is a “worldwide slowdown,” said Mr. Dent, who focuses on demographic trends for much of his economic analysis.

The economies of the developed world will stall also because the boomer bulge is getting ready to retire, said Mr. Dent, who earned his MBA from Harvard Business School as a Baker Scholar in the top 5 per cent of the graduating class. “In the United States, 92 million baby boomers are now shifting on average from spending and borrowing to saving and paying down debt …

“How are you going to stimulate an economy with an increasingly aging population?” he asks. “Look at how well it worked in Japan … Its market is still down close to 80 per cent, 20 years later.”

Like stocks, global real estate is also in a bubble spurred by easy credit, but is bursting in different areas at different times, Mr. Dent said. He has been renting a home in Tampa since 2005 as he waits for the battered Florida market to bottom before buying. “The home I have been renting for six years has fallen at least 40 per cent, and I am expecting another 20- or 30-per-cent decline.”

When an asset bubble bursts, prices often return to where the rapid, price runup began, he said. “Look at what your real estate was worth between 1996 and 2000. That is the range it will fall to … I think housing in Vancouver and Victoria could decline 60 or 70 per cent, while Toronto is more like 50 per cent, and Montreal a little less.”

Not all of Mr. Dent’s predictions have been right. His biggest error was predicting that the Dow Jones industrial average would hit about 35,000 in the last decade, but it only reached over 14,000 in 2007. Investors gun-shy from the swoon in tech stocks shifted from U.S. securities to real estate and hot emerging markets, such as China, he said. “We did not anticipate that.”

He expects the new crash will be similar to the one in 2008-09 when everything fell except for the U.S. dollar. To weather the next downturn, conservative investors should be out of stocks, and invested in U.S. Treasury bills and short-term and long-term U.S. government bonds, he suggested.

Aggressive investors might bet on stocks falling through the ProShares Short S&P 500 exchange-trade fund (SH-N38.440.190.50%), he said, or on a rising U.S. greenback through PowerShares DB U.S. Dollar Index Bullish ETF (UUP-N22.15-0.02-0.09%)

He also expects gold- and silver-bullion prices to decline in the next crash, but he has only given a partial sell signal on these metals to his clients. “Gold and silver often rally a little longer than stocks,” he said. “I think gold [now around $1,630 (U.S.) an ounce] will end up at $740, and maybe even lower … I think silver will end up between $5 and $10 several years from now.” ETF not for everyone

Harry Dent oversees the U.S.-listed Dent Tactical exchange-traded fund (DENT-N18.84-0.001-0.01%) but suggests that most investors avoid this go-anywhere ETF. “People would be better off to be safe in cash, or bet on the markets going down,” said the economic forecaster whose firm has run the ETF since late 2009.

The quantitatively driven ETF uses a momentum strategy, but it doesn't work well in a volatile market environment, he said. The ETF lost 8 per cent last year versus a flat S&P 500, and gained 4 per cent in 2010 versus a nearly 13-per-cent gain for that index.

He says the ETF is mostly intended for advisers who don’t want to put their clients’ investments 100 per cent into cash, or don’t want to use ETFs that short the market. He only promotes the ETF to advisers in his network, not individual investors.

The ETF is not designed to outperform the market, but rather takes a defensive approach and can be largely in cash at different times, he noted

You want people to understand you. Speak in pictures.

2012-01-27T03:56:00.000-08:00

(Via G&M) We live in a world of blah, blah, blah. And presentations specialist Dan Roam says it is killing our ability to think, learn, work and lead. Instead of clarity, we have fog – complexity, misunderstanding and boredom. “Ever left a meeting more confused than when you entered? Ever watched two hours of cable news and knew that you knew less about the world? Ever stifled another yawn during another conference room bullet-point bonanza? You get the picture,” the San Francisco-based author writes in Blah Blah Blah. We need ideas, and thinking. But he argues that our overuse and misuse of words is interfering with our ability to convey ideas and clear thinking. He even offers a “blah-blahmeter” to help us recognize when words aren’t working:

– The conversation, meeting or presentation is a blah when the intent is to illuminate, the topic is complicated and the message ends up boring.
– It’s worse – blah-blah on his scale – when the intent is to obfuscate, the idea is missing and the message is foggy.
– It’s blah-blah-blah when the intent is to divert, the idea is rotten and the message is misleading.

What we want, of course, are situations where the intent is to clarify, the idea is simple and the message is clear. A blah-free zone, in other words. Mr. Roam’s solution, which he calls vivid thinking, involves adding visuals. Words are linear, and have to be strung together in sequence. Visuals can complement those words, allowing us to grasp things all at once. When we think, we use both components of our minds. But too often, in meetings and reports, we now rely solely on words. “Vivid thinking means balanced thinking,” he writes. “The reason for all the blah-blah-blah is that we’ve simply forgotten how to use both our minds. “For 30,000 years, humans have been making marks on walls (then on paper, and more recently on touch screens) to reflect our thoughts. For 25,000 of those years, we drew pictures. Only in the past 5,000 years did we begin the gradual shift to writing words. The problem is that now we have gone too far,” he says. Because we live in a verbal world, too many of us have never properly developed our visual side. So the thought of drawing – which is essential to Mr. Roam’s approach – can be paralyzing. But he stresses that the drawings can – and should – be simple. He offers a visual grammar to assist us in overcoming our fears. For example, to represent the who and what of your ideas, draw a simple portrait – a face, a box, or a sailboat. A simple action can become a stick figure running. When dealing with quantitative matters, use a chart. When trying to present time frames, choose a simple timeline, again probably with arrows, showing what the sequence is. In each case, he is suggesting simply a sketch. Nothing fancy, just a representation of the idea you are developing or have developed. Beyond this, he introduces seven essentials for an idea to be clear, which he has combined into the acronym FOREST:

Form: The idea must be viscerally graspable – concrete rather than abstract. Only the essentials: Vivid ideas fit in a nutshell. You get someone’s attention with the basics, and then add the details.

Recognizable: It helps if the idea is familiar in some fashion. He notes that the late American psychologist Abraham Maslow never mentioned the word pyramid when writing about his “hierarchy of needs,” but that shape has helped us to understand – to literally see – the concept. Evolve: To help people embrace your idea, you must leave it unfinished enough that they can add their own insights. Span ideas: For any idea to be effective, it must compensate for its deficiencies. This means it needs – like the ancient yin-yang symbol – to include its opposite. Targeted: The idea must be contoured and presented in a way that matters to your audience. These are interesting ideas, but unfortunately Blah Blah Blah is flawed where it counts most, in presentation. Mr. Roam has a tendency to blah-blah-blah, wandering and taking far too many words and metaphors to get across his ideas. I often found myself adrift, trying to figure out why I was reading what I was reading and, more basically, struggling with whether this is a book about drawing or about thinking since it flips between those elements. But obviously he is tackling an important issue, as he did in his 2008 book, The Back Of the Napkin, and as consultant David Sibbet does in Visual Meetings. Mr. Roam’s ideas have evolved since his initial work, but I prefer those other books.

POSTSCRIPT

In Up, Down, or Sideways (Tyndale, 170 pages, $16.99) performance consultant and speaker Mark Sanborn looks at the ingredients of success that will help you whatever the economy or the current situation at your workplace. In short chapters he tackles how to keep score, so you know whether you are achieving what’s truly important; the importance of optimism; the value of relationships; the practice of showing gratitude; and the need for discipline. None of this is new, and his ideas aren’t exceptional, so any value will likely come through the reinforcement his passionate book provides.

University of Melbourne: Workers more productive if allowed to use the internet for leisure

2012-01-27T02:45:00.000-08:00

Surfing the net at work for pleasure actually increases our concentration levels and helps make a more productive workforce, according to a new University of Melbourne study. Dr Brent Coker, from the Department of Management and Marketing, says that workers who engage in Workplace Internet Leisure Browsing (WILB) are more productive than those who dont. People who do surf the Internet for fun at work - within a reasonable limit of less than 20% of their total time in the office - are more productive by about 9% than those who dont, he says. Firms spend millions on software to block their employees from watching videos on YouTube, using social networking sites like Facebook or shopping online under the pretense that it costs millions in lost productivity, however thats not always the case. According to the study of 300 workers, 70% of people who use the Internet at work engage in WILB. Among the most popular WILB activities are searching for information about products, reading online news sites. Playing online games was the fifth most popular, while watching YouTube movies was seventh. The attraction of WILB, according to Dr Coker, can be attributed to peoples imperfect concentration. People need to zone out for a bit to get back their concentration. Think back to when you were in class listening to a lecture after about 20 minutes your concentration probably went right down, yet after a break your concentration was restored. Its the same in the work place. Short and unobtrusive breaks, such as a quick surf of the internet, enables the mind to rest itself, leading to a higher total net concentration for a days work, and as a result, increased productivity.
However Dr Coker says that it is important such browsing is done in moderation, as internet addiction can have the reverse effect. Approximately 14% of internet users in Australia show signs of Internet Addiction they dont take breaks at appropriate times, they spend more than a normal amount of time online, and can get irritable if they are interrupted while surfing. WILB is not as helpful for this group of people - those who behave with internet addiction tendencies will have a lower productivity than those without.

Ron Paul calls out Newt Gingrich CNN Florida Republican Debate 1/26/12

2012-01-27T02:43:00.003-08:00

RAP NEWS 11: Australia Day (feat. Ken Oathcarn)

2012-01-25T10:17:00.001-08:00

S&G - SOUND OF SILENCE einsauszwei rework

2012-01-25T02:34:00.001-08:00

Full Text Of Obama's State Of The Union

2012-01-25T01:49:00.000-08:00

OBAMA: Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans: Last month, I went to Andrews Air Force Base and welcomed home some of our last troops to serve in Iraq. Together, we offered a final, proud salute to the colors under which more than a million of our fellow citizens fought - and several thousand gave their lives. We gather tonight knowing that this generation of heroes has made the United States safer and more respected around the world. For the first time in nine years, there are no Americans fighting in Iraq. For the first time in two decades, Osama bin Laden is not a threat to this country. Most of al Qaeda's top lieutenants have been defeated. The Taliban's momentum has been broken, and some troops in Afghanistan have begun to come home. These achievements are a testament to the courage, selflessness, and teamwork of America's Armed Forces. At a time when too many of our institutions have let us down, they exceed all expectations. They're not consumed with personal ambition. They don't obsess over their differences. They focus on the mission at hand. They work together. Imagine what we could accomplish if we followed their example. Think about the America within our reach: A country that leads the world in educating its people. An America that attracts a new generation of high-tech manufacturing and high-paying jobs. A future where we're in control of our own energy, and our security and prosperity aren't so tied to unstable parts of the world. An economy built to last, where hard work pays off, and responsibility is rewarded. We can do this. I know we can, because we've done it before. At the end of World War II, when another generation of heroes returned home from combat, they built the strongest economy and middle class the world has ever known. My grandfather, a veteran of Patton's Army, got the chance to go to college on the GI Bill. My grandmother, who worked on a bomber assembly line, was part of a workforce that turned out the best products on Earth. The two of them shared the optimism of a Nation that had triumphed over a depression and fascism. They understood they were part of something larger; that they were contributing to a story of success that every American had a chance to share - the basic American promise that if you worked hard, you could do well enough to raise a family, own a home, send your kids to college, and put a little away for retirement. The defining issue of our time is how to keep that promise alive. No challenge is more urgent. No debate is more important. We can either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while a growing number of Americans barely get by. Or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules. What's at stake are not Democratic values or Republican values, but American values. We have to reclaim them. Let's remember how we got here. Long before the recession, jobs and manufacturing began leaving our shores. Technology made businesses more efficient, but also made some jobs obsolete. Folks at the top saw their incomes rise like never before, but most hardworking Americans struggled with costs that were growing, paychecks that weren't, and personal debt that kept piling up. In 2008, the house of cards collapsed. We learned that mortgages had been sold to people who couldn't afford or understand them. Banks had made huge bets and bonuses with other people's money. Regulators had looked the other way, or didn't have the authority to stop the bad behavior. It was wrong. It was irresponsible. And it plunged our economy into a crisis that put millions out of work, saddled us with more debt, and left innocent, hard-working Americans holding the bag. In the six months before I took office, we lost nearly four million jobs. And we lost another four million before our policies were in full effect. Those are the facts. But so are these. In the last 22 months, businesses have created more than three million jobs. Last year, they created the most jobs since 2005. American manufacturers are hiring again, creating jobs for the first time since the late 1990s. Together, we've agreed to cut the deficit by more than $2 trillion. And we've put in place new rules to hold Wall Street accountable, so a crisis like that never happens again. The state of our Union is getting stronger. And we've come too far to turn back now. As long as I'm President, I will work with anyone in this chamber to build on this momentum. But I intend to fight obstruction with action, and I will oppose any effort to return to the very same policies that brought on this economic crisis in the first place. No, we will not go back to an economy weakened by outsourcing, bad debt, and phony financial profits. Tonight, I want to speak about how we move forward, and lay out a blueprint for an economy that's built to last - an economy built on American manufacturing, American energy, skills for American workers, and a renewal of American values. This blueprint begins with American manufacturing. On the day I took office, our auto industry was on the verge of collapse. Some even said we should let it die. With a million jobs at stake, I refused to let that happen. In exchange for help, we demanded responsibility. We got workers and automakers to settle their differences. We got the industry to retool and restructure. Today, General Motors is back on top as the world's number one automaker. Chrysler has grown faster in the U.S. than any major car company. Ford is investing billions in U.S. plants and factories. And together, the entire industry added nearly 160,000 jobs. We bet on American workers. We bet on American ingenuity. And tonight, the American auto industry is back. What's happening in Detroit can happen in other industries. It can happen in Cleveland and Pittsburgh and Raleigh. We can't bring back every job that's left our shores. But right now, it's getting more expensive to do business in places like China. Meanwhile, America is more productive. A few weeks ago, the CEO of Master Lock told me that it now makes business sense for him to bring jobs back home. Today, for the first time in fifteen years, Master Lock's unionized plant in Milwaukee is running at full capacity. So we have a huge opportunity, at this moment, to bring manufacturing back. But we have to seize it. Tonight, my message to business leaders is simple: Ask yourselves what you can do to bring jobs back to your country, and your country will do everything we can to help you succeed. We should start with our tax code. Right now, companies get tax breaks for moving jobs and profits overseas. Meanwhile, companies that choose to stay in America get hit with one of the highest tax rates in the world. It makes no sense, and everyone knows it. So let's change it. First, if you're a business that wants to outsource jobs, you shouldn't get a tax deduction for doing it. That money should be used to cover moving expenses for companies like Master Lock that decide to bring jobs home. Second, no American company should be able to avoid paying its fair share of taxes by moving jobs and profits overseas. From now on, every multinational company should have to pay a basic minimum tax. And every penny should go towards lowering taxes for companies that choose to stay here and hire here. Third, if you're an American manufacturer, you should get a bigger tax cut. If you're a high-tech manufacturer, we should double the tax deduction you get for making products here. And if you want to relocate in a community that was hit hard when a factory left town, you should get help financing a new plant, equipment, or training for new workers. My message is simple. It's time to stop rewarding businesses that ship jobs overseas, and start rewarding companies that create jobs right here in America. Send me these tax reforms, and I'll sign them right away. We're also making it easier for American businesses to sell products all over the world. Two years ago, I set a goal of doubling U.S. exports over five years. With the bipartisan trade agreements I signed into law, we are on track to meet that goal - ahead of schedule. Soon, there will be millions of new customers for American goods in Panama, Colombia, and South Korea. Soon, there will be new cars on the streets of Seoul imported from Detroit, and Toledo, and Chicago. I will go anywhere in the world to open new markets for American products. And I will not stand by when our competitors don't play by the rules. We've brought trade cases against China at nearly twice the rate as the last administration - and it's made a difference. Over a thousand Americans are working today because we stopped a surge in Chinese tires. But we need to do more. It's not right when another country lets our movies, music, and software be pirated. It's not fair when foreign manufacturers have a leg up on ours only because they're heavily subsidized. Tonight, I'm announcing the creation of a Trade Enforcement Unit that will be charged with investigating unfair trade practices in countries like China. There will be more inspections to prevent counterfeit or unsafe goods from crossing our borders. And this Congress should make sure that no foreign company has an advantage over American manufacturing when it comes to accessing finance or new markets like Russia. Our workers are the most productive on Earth, and if the playing field is level, I promise you - America will always win. I also hear from many business leaders who want to hire in the United States but can't find workers with the right skills. Growing industries in science and technology have twice as many openings as we have workers who can do the job. Think about that - openings at a time when millions of Americans are looking for work. That's inexcusable. And we know how to fix it. Jackie Bray is a single mom from North Carolina who was laid off from her job as a mechanic. Then Siemens opened a gas turbine factory in Charlotte, and formed a partnership with Central Piedmont Community College. The company helped the college design courses in laser and robotics training. It paid Jackie's tuition, then hired her to help operate their plant. I want every American looking for work to have the same opportunity as Jackie did. Join me in a national commitment to train two million Americans with skills that will lead directly to a job. My Administration has already lined up more companies that want to help. Model partnerships between businesses like Siemens and community colleges in places like Charlotte, Orlando, and Louisville are up and running. Now you need to give more community colleges the resources they need to become community career centers - places that teach people skills that local businesses are looking for right now, from data management to high-tech manufacturing.
And I want to cut through the maze of confusing training programs, so that from now on, people like Jackie have one program, one website, and one place to go for all the information and help they need. It's time to turn our unemployment system into a reemployment system that puts people to work. These reforms will help people get jobs that are open today. But to prepare for the jobs of tomorrow, our commitment to skills and education has to start earlier. For less than one percent of what our Nation spends on education each year, we've convinced nearly every State in the country to raise their standards for teaching and learning - the first time that's happened in a generation. But challenges remain. And we know how to solve them. At a time when other countries are doubling down on education, tight budgets have forced States to lay off thousands of teachers. We know a good teacher can increase the lifetime income of a classroom by over $250,000. A great teacher can offer an escape from poverty to the child who dreams beyond his circumstance. Every person in this chamber can point to a teacher who changed the trajectory of their lives. Most teachers work tirelessly, with modest pay, sometimes digging into their own pocket for school supplies - just to make a difference. Teachers matter. So instead of bashing them, or defending the status quo, let's offer schools a deal. Give them the resources to keep good teachers on the job, and reward the best ones. In return, grant schools flexibility: To teach with creativity and passion; to stop teaching to the test; and to replace teachers who just aren't helping kids learn.
We also know that when students aren't allowed to walk away from their education, more of them walk the stage to get their diploma. So tonight, I call on every State to require that all students stay in high school until they graduate or turn eighteen. When kids do graduate, the most daunting challenge can be the cost of college. At a time when Americans owe more in tuition debt than credit card debt, this Congress needs to stop the interest rates on student loans from doubling in July. Extend the tuition tax credit we started that saves middle-class families thousands of dollars. And give more young people the chance to earn their way through college by doubling the number of work-study jobs in the next five years. Of course, it's not enough for us to increase student aid. We can't just keep subsidizing skyrocketing tuition; we'll run out of money. States also need to do their part, by making higher education a higher priority in their budgets. And colleges and universities have to do their part by working to keep costs down. Recently, I spoke with a group of college presidents who've done just that. Some schools re-design courses to help students finish more quickly. Some use better technology. The point is, it's possible. So let me put colleges and universities on notice: If you can't stop tuition from going up, the funding you get from taxpayers will go down. Higher education can't be a luxury - it's an economic imperative that every family in America should be able to afford. Let's also remember that hundreds of thousands of talented, hardworking students in this country face another challenge: The fact that they aren't yet American citizens. Many were brought here as small children, are American through and through, yet they live every day with the threat of deportation. Others came more recently, to study business and science and engineering, but as soon as they get their degree, we send them home to invent new products and create new jobs somewhere else. That doesn't make sense. I believe as strongly as ever that we should take on illegal immigration. That's why my Administration has put more boots on the border than ever before. That's why there are fewer illegal crossings than when I took office. The opponents of action are out of excuses. We should be working on comprehensive immigration reform right now. But if election-year politics keeps Congress from acting on a comprehensive plan, let's at least agree to stop expelling responsible young people who want to staff our labs, start new businesses, and defend this country. Send me a law that gives them the chance to earn their citizenship. I will sign it right away. You see, an economy built to last is one where we encourage the talent and ingenuity of every person in this country. That means women should earn equal pay for equal work. It means we should support everyone who's willing to work; and every risk-taker and entrepreneur who aspires to become the next Steve Jobs. After all, innovation is what America has always been about. Most new jobs are created in start-ups and small businesses. So let's pass an agenda that helps them succeed. Tear down regulations that prevent aspiring entrepreneurs from getting the financing to grow. Expand tax relief to small businesses that are raising wages and creating good jobs. Both parties agree on these ideas. So put them in a bill, and get it on my desk this year. Innovation also demands basic research. Today, the discoveries taking place in our federally-financed labs and universities could lead to new treatments that kill cancer cells but leave healthy ones untouched. New lightweight vests for cops and soldiers that can stop any bullet. Don't gut these investments in our budget. Don't let other countries win the race for the future. Support the same kind of research and innovation that led to the computer chip and the Internet; to new American jobs and new American industries. Nowhere is the promise of innovation greater than in American- made energy. Over the last three years, we've opened millions of new acres for oil and gas exploration, and tonight, I'm directing my Administration to open more than 75 percent of our potential offshore oil and gas resources. Right now, American oil production is the highest that it's been in eight years. That's right - eight years. Not only that - last year, we relied less on foreign oil than in any of the past sixteen years. But with only 2 percent of the world's oil reserves, oil isn't enough. This country needs an all-out, all-of-the-above strategy that develops every available source of American energy - a strategy that's cleaner, cheaper, and full of new jobs. We have a supply of natural gas that can last America nearly one hundred years, and my Administration will take every possible action to safely develop this energy. Experts believe this will support more than 600,000 jobs by the end of the decade. And I'm requiring all companies that drill for gas on public lands to disclose the chemicals they use. America will develop this resource without putting the health and safety of our citizens at risk. The development of natural gas will create jobs and power trucks and factories that are cleaner and cheaper, proving that we don't have to choose between our environment and our economy. And by the way, it was public research dollars, over the course of thirty years, that helped develop the technologies to extract all this natural gas out of shale rock - reminding us that Government support is critical in helping businesses get new energy ideas off the ground. What's true for natural gas is true for clean energy. In three years, our partnership with the private sector has already positioned America to be the world's leading manufacturer of high-tech batteries. Because of federal investments, renewable energy use has nearly doubled. And thousands of Americans have jobs because of it. When Bryan Ritterby was laid off from his job making furniture, he said he worried that at 55, no one would give him a second chance. But he found work at Energetx, a wind turbine manufacturer in Michigan. Before the recession, the factory only made luxury yachts. Today, it's hiring workers like Bryan, who said, "I'm proud to be working in the industry of the future." Our experience with shale gas shows us that the payoffs on these public investments don't always come right away. Some technologies don't pan out; some companies fail. But I will not walk away from the promise of clean energy. I will not walk away from workers like Bryan. I will not cede the wind or solar or battery industry to China or Germany because we refuse to make the same commitment here. We have subsidized oil companies for a century. That's long enough. It's time to end the taxpayer giveaways to an industry that's rarely been more profitable, and double-down on a clean energy industry that's never been more promising. Pass clean energy tax credits and create these jobs. We can also spur energy innovation with new incentives. The differences in this chamber may be too deep right now to pass a comprehensive plan to fight climate change. But there's no reason why Congress shouldn't at least set a clean energy standard that creates a market for innovation. So far, you haven't acted. Well tonight, I will. I'm directing my Administration to allow the development of clean energy on enough public land to power three million homes. And I'm proud to announce that the Department of Defense, the world's largest consumer of energy, will make one of the largest commitments to clean energy in history - with the Navy purchasing enough capacity to power a quarter of a million homes a year. Of course, the easiest way to save money is to waste less energy. So here's another proposal: Help manufacturers eliminate energy waste in their factories and give businesses incentives to upgrade their buildings. Their energy bills will be $100 billion lower over the next decade, and America will have less pollution, more manufacturing, and more jobs for construction workers who need them. Send me a bill that creates these jobs. Building this new energy future should be just one part of a broader agenda to repair America's infrastructure. So much of America needs to be rebuilt. We've got crumbling roads and bridges. A power grid that wastes too much energy. An incomplete high-speed broadband network that prevents a small business owner in rural America from selling her products all over the world.
During the Great Depression, America built the Hoover Dam and the Golden Gate Bridge. After World War II, we connected our States with a system of highways. Democratic and Republican administrations invested in great projects that benefited everybody, from the workers who built them to the businesses that still use them today. In the next few weeks, I will sign an Executive Order clearing away the red tape that slows down too many construction projects. But you need to fund these projects. Take the money we're no longer spending at war, use half of it to pay down our debt, and use the rest to do some nation-building right here at home. There's never been a better time to build, especially since the construction industry was one of the hardest-hit when the housing bubble burst. Of course, construction workers weren't the only ones hurt. So were millions of innocent Americans who've seen their home values decline. And while Government can't fix the problem on its own, responsible homeowners shouldn't have to sit and wait for the housing market to hit bottom to get some relief. That's why I'm sending this Congress a plan that gives every responsible homeowner the chance to save about $3,000 a year on their mortgage, by refinancing at historically low interest rates. No more red tape. No more runaround from the banks. A small fee on the largest financial institutions will ensure that it won't add to the deficit, and will give banks that were rescued by taxpayers a chance to repay a deficit of trust. Let's never forget: Millions of Americans who work hard and play by the rules every day deserve a Government and a financial system that do the same. It's time to apply the same rules from top to bottom: No bailouts, no handouts, and no copouts. An America built to last insists on responsibility from everybody. We've all paid the price for lenders who sold mortgages to people who couldn't afford them, and buyers who knew they couldn't afford them. That's why we need smart regulations to prevent irresponsible behavior. Rules to prevent financial fraud, or toxic dumping, or faulty medical devices, don't destroy the free market. They make the free market work better. There is no question that some regulations are outdated, unnecessary, or too costly. In fact, I've approved fewer regulations in the first three years of my presidency than my Republican predecessor did in his. I've ordered every federal agency to eliminate rules that don't make sense. We've already announced over 500 reforms, and just a fraction of them will save business and citizens more than $10 billion over the next five years. We got rid of one rule from 40 years ago that could have forced some dairy farmers to spend $10,000 a year proving that they could contain a spill - because milk was somehow classified as an oil. With a rule like that, I guess it was worth crying over spilled milk.
I'm confident a farmer can contain a milk spill without a federal agency looking over his shoulder. But I will not back down from making sure an oil company can contain the kind of oil spill we saw in the Gulf two years ago. I will not back down from protecting our kids from mercury pollution, or making sure that our food is safe and our water is clean. I will not go back to the days when health insurance companies had unchecked power to cancel your policy, deny you coverage, or charge women differently from men. And I will not go back to the days when Wall Street was allowed to play by its own set of rules. The new rules we passed restore what should be any financial system's core purpose: Getting funding to entrepreneurs with the best ideas, and getting loans to responsible families who want to buy a home, start a business, or send a kid to college. So if you're a big bank or financial institution, you are no longer allowed to make risky bets with your customers' deposits. You're required to write out a "living will" that details exactly how you'll pay the bills if you fail - because the rest of us aren't bailing you out ever again. And if you're a mortgage lender or a payday lender or a credit card company, the days of signing people up for products they can't afford with confusing forms and deceptive practices are over. Today, American consumers finally have a watchdog in Richard Cordray with one job: To look out for them. We will also establish a Financial Crimes Unit of highly trained investigators to crack down on large-scale fraud and protect people's investments. Some financial firms violate major anti-fraud laws because there's no real penalty for being a repeat offender. That's bad for consumers, and it's bad for the vast majority of bankers and financial service professionals who do the right thing. So pass legislation that makes the penalties for fraud count. And tonight, I am asking my Attorney General to create a special unit of federal prosecutors and leading state attorneys general to expand our investigations into the abusive lending and packaging of risky mortgages that led to the housing crisis. This new unit will hold accountable those who broke the law, speed assistance to homeowners, and help turn the page on an era of recklessness that hurt so many Americans. A return to the American values of fair play and shared responsibility will help us protect our people and our economy. But it should also guide us as we look to pay down our debt and invest in our future. Right now, our most immediate priority is stopping a tax hike on 160 million working Americans while the recovery is still fragile. People cannot afford losing $40 out of each paycheck this year. There are plenty of ways to get this done. So let's agree right here, right now: No side issues. No drama. Pass the payroll tax cut without delay. When it comes to the deficit, we've already agreed to more than $2 trillion in cuts and savings. But we need to do more, and that means making choices. Right now, we're poised to spend nearly $1 trillion more on what was supposed to be a temporary tax break for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans. Right now, because of loopholes and shelters in the tax code, a quarter of all millionaires pay lower tax rates than millions of middle-class households. Right now, Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. Do we want to keep these tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans? Or do we want to keep our investments in everything else - like education and medical research; a strong military and care for our veterans? Because if we're serious about paying down our debt, we can't do both.
The American people know what the right choice is. So do I. As I told the Speaker this summer, I'm prepared to make more reforms that rein in the long term costs of Medicare and Medicaid, and strengthen Social Security, so long as those programs remain a guarantee of security for seniors. But in return, we need to change our tax code so that people like me, and an awful lot of Members of Congress, pay our fair share of taxes. Tax reform should follow the Buffett rule: If you make more than $1 million a year, you should not pay less than 30 percent in taxes. And my Republican friend Tom Coburn is right: Washington should stop subsidizing millionaires. In fact, if you're earning a million dollars a year, you shouldn't get special tax subsidies or deductions. On the other hand, if you make under $250,000 a year, like 98 percent of American families, your taxes shouldn't go up. You're the ones struggling with rising costs and stagnant wages. You're the ones who need relief. Now, you can call this class warfare all you want. But asking a billionaire to pay at least as much as his secretary in taxes? Most Americans would call that common sense. We don't begrudge financial success in this country. We admire it. When Americans talk about folks like me paying my fair share of taxes, it's not because they envy the rich. It's because they understand that when I get tax breaks I don't need and the country can't afford, it either dds to the deficit, or somebody else has to make up the difference - like a senior on a fixed income; or a student trying to get through school; or a family trying to make ends meet. That's not right. Americans know it's not right. They know that this generation's success is only possible because past generations felt a responsibility to each other, and to their country's future, and they know our way of life will only endure if we feel that same sense of shared responsibility. That's how we'll reduce our deficit. That's an America built to last. I recognize that people watching tonight have differing views about taxes and debt; energy and health care. But no matter what party they belong to, I bet most Americans are thinking the same thing right now: Nothing will get done this year, or next year, or maybe even the year after that, because Washington is broken. Can you blame them for feeling a little cynical? The greatest blow to confidence in our economy last year didn't come from events beyond our control. It came from a debate in Washington over whether the United States would pay its bills or not. Who benefited from that fiasco? I've talked tonight about the deficit of trust between Main Street and Wall Street. But the divide between this city and the rest of the country is at least as bad - and it seems to get worse every year. Some of this has to do with the corrosive influence of money in politics. So together, let's take some steps to fix that. Send me a bill that bans insider trading by Members of Congress, and I will sign it tomorrow. Let's limit any elected official from owning stocks in industries they impact. Let's make sure people who bundle campaign contributions for Congress can't lobby Congress, and vice versa - an idea that has bipartisan support, at least outside of Washington. Some of what's broken has to do with the way Congress does its business these days. A simple majority is no longer enough to get anything - even routine business - passed through the Senate. Neither party has been blameless in these tactics. Now both parties should put an end to it. For starters, I ask the Senate to pass a rule that all judicial and public service nominations receive a simple up or down vote within 90 days. The executive branch also needs to change. Too often, it's inefficient, outdated and remote. That's why I've asked this Congress to grant me the authority to consolidate the federal bureaucracy so that our Government is leaner, quicker, and more responsive to the needs of the American people. Finally, none of these reforms can happen unless we also lower the temperature in this town. We need to end the notion that the two parties must be locked in a perpetual campaign of mutual destruction; that politics is about clinging to rigid ideologies instead of building consensus around common sense ideas. I'm a Democrat. But I believe what Republican Abraham Lincoln believed: That Government should do for people only what they cannot do better by themselves, and no more. That's why my education reform offers more competition, and more control for schools and States. That's why we're getting rid of regulations that don't work. That's why our health care law relies on a reformed private market, not a Government program. On the other hand, even my Republican friends who complain the most about Government spending have supported federally-financed roads, and clean energy projects, and federal offices for the folks back home. The point is, we should all want a smarter, more effective Government. And while we may not be able to bridge our biggest philosophical differences this year, we can make real progress. With or without this Congress, I will keep taking actions that help the economy grow. But I can do a whole lot more with your help. Because when we act together, there is nothing the United States of America can't achieve. That is the lesson we've learned from our actions abroad over the last few years. Ending the Iraq war has allowed us to strike decisive blows against our enemies. From Pakistan to Yemen, the al Qaeda operatives who remain are scrambling, knowing that they can't escape the reach of the United States of America.
From this position of strength, we've begun to wind down the war in Afghanistan. Ten thousand of our troops have come home. Twenty- three thousand more will leave by the end of this summer. This transition to Afghan lead will continue, and we will build an enduring partnership with Afghanistan, so that it is never again a source of attacks against America. As the tide of war recedes, a wave of change has washed across the Middle East and North Africa, from Tunis to Cairo; from Sana'a to Tripoli. A year ago, Qadhafi was one of the world's longest-serving dictators - a murderer with American blood on his hands. Today, he is gone. And in Syria, I have no doubt that the Assad regime will soon discover that the forces of change can't be reversed, and that human dignity can't be denied. How this incredible transformation will end remains uncertain. But we have a huge stake in the outcome. And while it is ultimately up to the people of the region to decide their fate, we will advocate for those values that have served our own country so well. We will stand against violence and intimidation. We will stand for the rights and dignity of all human beings - men and women; Christians, Muslims, and Jews. We will support policies that lead to strong and stable democracies and open markets, because tyranny is no match for liberty. And we will safeguard America's own security against those who threaten our citizens, our friends, and our interests. Look at Iran. Through the power of our diplomacy, a world that was once divided about how to deal with Iran's nuclear program now stands as one. The regime is more isolated than ever before; its leaders are faced with crippling sanctions, and as long as they shirk their responsibilities, this pressure will not relent. Let there be no doubt: America is determined to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and I will take no options off the table to achieve that goal. But a peaceful resolution of this issue is still possible, and far better, and if Iran changes course and meets its obligations, it can rejoin the community of nations. The renewal of American leadership can be felt across the globe. Our oldest alliances in Europe and Asia are stronger than ever. Our ties to the Americas are deeper. Our iron-clad commitment to Israel's security has meant the closest military cooperation between our two countries in history. We've made it clear that America is a Pacific power, and a new beginning in Burma has lit a new hope. From the coalitions we've built to secure nuclear materials, to the missions we've led against hunger and disease; from the blows we've dealt to our enemies; to the enduring power of our moral example, America is back. Anyone who tells you otherwise, anyone who tells you that America is in decline or that our influence has waned, doesn't know what they're talking about. That's not the message we get from leaders around the world, all of whom are eager to work with us. That's not how people feel from Tokyo to Berlin; from Cape Town to Rio; where opinions of America are higher than they've been in years. Yes, the world is changing; no, we can't control every event. But America remains the one indispensable nation in world affairs - and as long as I'm President, I intend to keep it that way. That's why, working with our military leaders, I have proposed a new defense strategy that ensures we maintain the finest military in the world, while saving nearly half a trillion dollars in our budget. To stay one step ahead of our adversaries, I have already sent this Congress legislation that will secure our country from the growing danger of cyber-threats. Above all, our freedom endures because of the men and women in uniform who defend it. As they come home, we must serve them as well as they served us. That includes giving them the care and benefits they have earned - which is why we've increased annual VA spending every year I've been President. And it means enlisting our veterans in the work of rebuilding our Nation. With the bipartisan support of this Congress, we are providing new tax credits to companies that hire vets. Michelle and Jill Biden have worked with American businesses to secure a pledge of 135,000 jobs for veterans and their families. And tonight, I'm proposing a Veterans Job Corps that will help our communities hire veterans as cops and firefighters, so that America is as strong as those who defend her. Which brings me back to where I began. Those of us who've been sent here to serve can learn from the service of our troops. When you put on that uniform, it doesn't matter if you're black or white; Asian or Latino; conservative or liberal; rich or poor; gay or straight. When you're marching into battle, you look out for the person next to you, or the mission fails. When you're in the thick of the fight, you rise or fall as one unit, serving one Nation, leaving no one behind. One of my proudest possessions is the flag that the SEAL Team took with them on the mission to get bin Laden. On it are each of their names. Some may be Democrats. Some may be Republicans. But that doesn't matter. Just like it didn't matter that day in the Situation Room, when I sat next to Bob Gates - a man who was George Bush's defense secretary; and Hillary Clinton, a woman who ran against me for president.

All that mattered that day was the mission. No one thought about politics. No one thought about themselves. One of the young men involved in the raid later told me that he didn't deserve credit for the mission. It only succeeded, he said, because every single member of that unit did their job - the pilot who landed the helicopter that spun out of control; the translator who kept others from entering the compound; the troops who separated the women and children from the fight; the SEALs who charged up the stairs. More than that, the mission only succeeded because every member of that unit trusted each other - because you can't charge up those stairs, into darkness and danger, unless you know that there's someone behind you, watching your back.
So it is with America. Each time I look at that flag, I'm reminded that our destiny is stitched together like those fifty stars and those thirteen stripes. No one built this country on their own. This Nation is great because we built it together. This Nation is great because we worked as a team. This Nation is great because we get each other's backs. And if we hold fast to that truth, in this moment of trial, there is no challenge too great; no mission too hard. As long as we're joined in common purpose, as long as we maintain our common resolve, our journey moves forward, our future is hopeful, and the state of our Union will always be strong. Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.

Julian Assange to host own TV show

2012-01-24T21:25:00.000-08:00

The WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, has announced that he is to host his own TV series, interviewing "key political players, thinkers and revolutionaries" from around the world. In a media release published on the WikiLeaks website on Monday, Assange said the 10-part series would be based on "the world tomorrow" and would feature interviews with "iconoclasts, visionaries and power insiders". "Through this series I will explore the possibilities for our future in conversations with those who are shaping it," Assange said. "Are we heading towards utopia, or dystopia and how we can set our paths? This is an exciting opportunity to discuss the vision of my guests in a new style of show that examines their philosophies and struggles in a deeper and clearer way than has been done before." Assange has been detained under a European arrest warrant (EAW) by Swedish prosecutors over allegations that he sexually assaulted two women during a visit to Sweden in August 2010. The WikiLeaks founder, who denies the claims, is awaiting a hearing at the supreme court for his appeal against extradition to Sweden.

WikiLeaks said the new TV series would air in mid-March, but did not reveal details of where the series would be broadcast or on which networks. The statement describes initial licensing commitments as covering more than "600m viewers across cable, satellite and terrestrial broadcast networks". It asks those interested in licensing the series to contact Quick Roll Productions, which describes itself as a production firm specialising in "broadcast and new media audiences". "WikiLeaks, as the world's boldest publisher, has been at the front line of this global movement for understanding and change," the statement said. "Its founder, Julian Assange, as the subject of an ongoing grand jury investigation in the United States for over 500 days now, is one of the world's most recognisable revolutionary figures. Both a pioneer for a more just world and a victim of political repression, he is uniquely placed to catalyse a global discussion on how to go forward." The statement added that "in recognition of this, Assange will draw together controversial voices from across the political spectrum", but did not say who any of the guests might be

PowerLifting Documentary: Power Unlimited

2012-01-24T01:25:00.001-08:00

Marc Faber - This Week in Money

2012-01-21T14:36:00.001-08:00

SC Republican Presidential Debate FIERY NEWT: GINGRICH UNLOADS AT DEBATE

2012-01-20T04:46:00.000-08:00

Newt Gingrich, seeking to maintain his momentum, tapped back into the deep reservoir of resentment in American conservatism Thursday night by lecturing a debate moderator for the second time this week.

It was another explosive moment to cap the most eventful day of the Republican primary season. Iowa's Republican party kicked off the day announcing that former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa) had won the Jan. 3 caucuses, instead of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. Texas Gov. Rick Perry withdrew from the race and endorsed Gingrich. And then it emerged that Gingrich's former wife, Marianne Gingrich, was accusing the former House speaker of asking her to take part in an "open marriage" to allow him to keep a mistress.

CNN's John King, Thursday's debate moderator, chose to ask Gingrich about his ex-wife with his very first question of the night, setting off a volcanic reaction from the Georgia Republican. Gingrich fixed King with a vicious glare and chastised him like a boarding school headmaster reproving a wayward student.

"I think the destructive, vicious, negative nature of much of the news media makes it harder to govern this country, harder to attract decent people to run for public office," Gingrich said. "And I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate on a topic like that."

Just as happened in Monday's debate in Myrtle Beach, when Gingrich went after welfare recipients and big government, the crowd in the debate hall rose and gave Gingrich a standing ovation. But Gingrich was not finished speaking, fully aware that he had been given an opportunity to increase the momentum that his explosive comments on Monday bestowed on his candidacy.

"Every person in here knows personal pain. Every person in here has had someone close to them go through painful things," Gingrich said. "To take an ex-wife and make it two days before the primary, a significant question in a presidential campaign, is as close to despicable as anything I can imagine.

"I am, frankly, astounded that CNN would take trash like that and use it to open a presidential debate," he said. King was on his heels, and protested weakly that CNN had not been the first to report the story. That just opened the door wider for Gingrich.

"John, it was repeated by your network," replied Gingrich, visibly upset. "You chose to start the debate with it. Don't try to blame somebody else. You and your staff chose to start the debate with it."

Mid-lecture, Gingrich did actually address the accusation itself: "The story is false. Every personal friend I have who knew us in that period says the story was false," he said.

But then Gingrich went back to hitting the media, saying that ABC News didn't quote his friends because "they would like to attack any Republican."

"I'm tired of the elite media protecting Barack Obama by attacking Republicans," Gingrich concluded, drawing more enthusiastic cheers inside the hall.

One of Gingrich's top backers in the state, Katon Dawson, derided Gingrich's ex-wife afterwards: "Marianne's been out there doing this for years," Dawson said.

Earlier in the day, Gingrich refused to even engage the issue, telling reporters he would not answer questions about it.

"I'm not going to say anything about Marianne ... I'm not getting involved," he said, adding that his daughters were willing to talk to the press about the issue.

Gingrich's two daughters, Kathy Lubbers and Jackie Cushman, told ABC News that their father had assured them that Marianne's accusations were false.

"We spoke with him about that, Brian, and he said it's simply not true," Lubbers told ABC. "The truth is our father and Marianne had a difficult marriage. They had a difficult divorce. ... The American people have moved on. Our father has moved on.

In the debate, it was CNN's decision to go with the "open marriage" question off the bat that gave Gingrich an easy out to hit them for having misplaced priorities and an outsized focus on the sensational.

Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) agreed with Gingrich's critique. Paul campaign chairman Jesse Benton said that "opening the CNN debate tonight with questions about the former speaker's personal life is highly inappropriate given the many serious issues this country faces."

But Benton, in a statement, said that Paul takes issue with "Gingrich's attacks on capitalism, the money he took from Freddie Mac and his support for TARP and the individual healthcare mandate."

"Our problem with Newt Gingrich is not that he lied to his wife, but that he lied to the American people," Benton said.

ABC was set to air the full interview with Marianne Gingrich late on Thursday after the debate concluded. As a result, Gingrich's messy personal past will continue to be a focus the day before the primary and into the weekend.

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said that while Christian voters believe in forgiveness and redemption, the revelations about Gingrich's second divorce were of concern.

"As more of this comes out it's troubling," Perkins said.

But Randy Brinson, an evangelical organizer and founder of Redeem the Vote, said that his group has a list of 1.4 million South Carolina voters and was seeing a big move toward Gingrich among that constituency.

The Marianne Gingrich story "may backfire," Brinson said.

Romney's top aides were mum in the spin room after the debate. "I'm not going to touch it," adviser Stuart Stevens said when asked about the "open marriage" question and Gingrich's response.

"I'm not going to make any comment," said former Sen. Jim Talent (R-Mo.), who spent 20 minutes on a conference call this week bashing Gingrich's leadership in the House.

Privately, Romney aides were confident that while Gingrich got another standing ovation, his lashing out at King would hurt him.

One Romney adviser told The Huffington Post during the debate that Gingrich's comments were "good inside the hall, but will not work on Main Street, and main line churches."

And Austin Barbour, one of Romney's national finance chairmen, said that "a candidate's personal background should and is considered by voters."

"Personal principles matter to voters. Don't attack the moderator for trying to let the voters hear your response on issues that matter to voters," Barbour told HuffPost.

Another veteran Republican consultant in Washington called Gingrich's rebuke of King "very strong," but still predicted that "he comes up short in [South Carolina] and finishes number two."

Polls have shown Gingrich rapidly erasing Romney's double-digit lead over the past few days, and the race here looks like it will indeed come down to the wire. A CNN poll released late Thursday, however, showed Romney maintaining a 10-point lead, with 33 percent, compared with Gingrich's 23 percent.

Romney performed well in the debate, as he usually does, but again took some hits over his income tax returns. Gingrich's campaign released their candidate's returns at the beginning of the debate, guaranteeing that it would come up. And Romney said he will release his in April, the first time he has definitively said so.

"I'll release my returns in April, and probably for others years as well," Romney said.

King pressed Romney on why he wouldn't release past returns before the Saturday primary. When Romney equivocated, there were scattered boos in the audience.

Gingrich did not go unscathed. Santorum made the same argument against Gingrich that the Romney campaign has been making the past two days -- that Gingrich is too volatile and too undisciplined to be president.

"Grandiosity has never been a problem with Newt Gingrich, he handles it very, very well," Santorum said. "And that's really one of the issues here, folks. A month ago he was saying, 'It's inevitable that I'm going to win the election, I'm destined to do it.' I don't want a nominee that I have to worry about going out and getting the picture the next day and I have to worry about what he's going to say next. That's what I think we're seeing here.

"Newt's a friend, I love him, but at times you've just got, you know, sort of that worrisome moment that something's going to pop. We can't afford that in a nominee," Santorum said.

Gingrich responded by embracing Santorum's critique.

"You're right. I think grandiose thoughts," Gingrich said. "This is a grandiose country of big people doing big things. And we need leadership prepared to take on big projects."

The Romney campaign immediately sent out a research document titled, "I think grandiose thoughts." It chronicled Gingrich's past comparisons of himself to historical figures, including Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, Abraham Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson, Henry Clay, Charles de Gaulle, William Wallace, Pericles, the Duke of Wellington, Thomas Edison, Vince Lombardi, the Wright Brothers, and Moses.

Ricky Gervais' Opening Monologue Golden globes 2012

2012-01-15T20:50:00.001-08:00

2012 Campaign Contributors

2012-01-14T23:56:00.000-08:00

Friday 13th 2012: Jim Rogers & Marc Faber

2012-01-14T04:15:00.000-08:00

S&P Cuts Credit Ratings for Nine Euro Zone Nations

2012-01-14T03:47:00.000-08:00

Standard & Poor's downgraded the credit ratings of nine euro zone countries, stripping France and Austria of their coveted triple-A status but not EU paymaster Germany, in a Black Friday 13th for the troubled single currency area. "Today's rating actions are primarily driven by our assessment that the policy initiatives that have been taken by European policy makers in recent weeks may be insufficient to fully address ongoing systemic stresses in the euro zone," S&P said in a press release announcing the downgrade. In a potentially more ominous setback, talks broke down between Greece and its creditors over a debt swap seen as crucial to avert a Greek default, although officials said more talks are likely next week.

If Greece cannot persuade banks and insurers to accept voluntary losses on their bond holdings, a second international rescue package for the euro zone's most heavily indebted state will unravel, raising the prospect of bankruptcy in late March, when it has to redeem 14.4 billion euros in maturing debt.

S&P lowered its long-term rating on Cyprus, Italy, Portugal and Spain by two notches, and cut its rating on Austria, France, Malta, Slovakia and Slovenia by one notch. The move puts highly indebted Italy on the same BBB+ level as Kazakhstan and pushes Portugal into junk status. The credit-rating agency affirmed the current long-term ratings for Belgium, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg and the Netherlands.

U.S. stocks slumped earlier amid buzz about the possible downgrades, though finished well off their lows. The euro fell by more than a cent to $1.2650 on the news. European shares closed lower. Safe-haven German 10-year bond futures rose to a new record high while the risk premium investors charge on French, Spanish, Italian and Belgian debt widened.

The credit-rating agency put all 14 euro-zone nations — Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, and Spain — on "negative" outlook for a possible further downgrade.

Germany was the only country to emerge totally unscathed with its triple-A rating and a stable outlook. A negative outlook indicates that S&P believes there is at least a one-in-three chance that a country's rating will be lowered in 2012 or 2013.

French Finance Minister Francois Baroin, speaking after an emergency meeting with President Nicolas Sarkozy, played down the impact of Europe's second biggest economy being downgraded to AA+ for the first time since 1975. "This is not a catastrophe. It's an excellent rating. But it's not good news," Baroin told France 2 television, saying the government would not respond with further austerity measures. In December, S&P placed the ratings of 15 euro zone countries on credit watch negative — including those of top-rated Germany and France, the region's two biggest economies — and said "systemic stresses" were building up as credit conditions tighten in the 17-nation bloc.

Since then, the European Central Bank has flooded the banking system with cheap three-year money to avert a credit crunch. At the time, the U.S.-based ratings agency said it could also downgrade the euro zone's current bailout fund, the European Financial Stability Facility Euro zone finance ministers responded jointly by saying in a statement they had taken "far-reaching measures" in response to the sovereign debt crisis and were accelerating reforms towards stronger economic union.

Greek negotiators who have repeatedly voiced confidence in a deal in which private creditors would accept writedowns of 50 percent of the face value of their bond holdings said they were now less hopeful, warning of "catastrophic consequences" for Greece and Europe if they failed. "Yesterday we were cautious and confident. Today we are less optimistic," a source close to the Greek task force in charge of the negotiations said. The Institute for International Finance, negotiating on behalf of banks, said: "Under the circumstances, discussions with Greece and the official sector are paused for reflection on the benefits of a voluntary approach."

The two sides are divided principally over the interest rate Greece will end up paying, which determines how much of a hit banks take. While both appear to be engaged in brinkmanship, there are also doubts about the take-up rate of any voluntary deal, since some hedge funds have bought up Greek debt and want to be paid out in full or trigger default insurance. The double blow of the S&P news and the stalling of the Greek debt talks came after a brighter start to the year with Spain and Italy beginning their marathon debt rollover at lower borrowing costs this week.

The European Central Bank's move last month to flood banks with cheap three-year liquidity helped ease a worsening credit crunch and provided funds which governments hope some will use to buy sovereign bonds.

Rescue Fund Weakened

S&P said the euro zone faced stresses including tightening credit conditions, rising risk premiums for a growing number of sovereigns, simultaneous deleveraging by governments and households and weakening economic growth prospects.

It also cited political obstacles to a solution to the crisis due to "an open and prolonged dispute among European policy makers over the proper approach to address challenges."

Austerity and budget discipline alone were not sufficient to fight the debt crisis and risked becoming self-defeating, the ratings agency said.

German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble played down the news, saying: "In the past months, we've come to agree that the ratings agencies' judgments should not be overvalued."

France and Austria were at risk because of their banks' exposure to the debt of peripheral euro zone countries and Hungary respectively, as well as the weakening economic outlook for Europe. Italy and Spain face historically high borrowing costs.

The cut in France's rating is a serious setback for the center-right Sarkozy's chances of re-election in May and could weaken the euro zone's rescue fund, reducing its ability to help countries in difficulty.

France is the second largest guarantor of the EFSF, which has a triple-A rating. Preserving that status would require members to increase their guarantees, which could prove politically unpopular.

In their statement, the euro zone finance ministers said they would do all they could to ensure the rescue fund keeps its top rating.

After vowing for months to do everything to preserve Paris' top-notch standing, Sarkozy appeared to prepare voters last month for the loss of the prized status before the election.

His political opponents pounced on the S&P decision as a verdict on the failure of his policies.

"This is in reality a double downgrade. It is a downgrade of our sovereign rating that will affect the country's reputation, with heavy consequences, and it is also a downgrade compared to our main neighbor, Germany, with which we had equal status up to now," centrist candidate Francois Bayrou said.

Socialist party leader Martine Aubry said: "Mr. Sarkozy will be remembered as the president who downgraded France."

It is not clear how far the downgrade will increase France's borrowing costs, since markets have already anticipated the prospect by raising the French risk premium over German Bunds.

"One notch is priced in but not more. The Franco-German spread can widen. It is about 130 basis points for the 10-year bond. The maximum level reached was 180 to 190 basis points and it can go back to this level," said Alessandro Giansanti, senior rates strategist at ING in Amsterdam.

'Triple-A Is a Dying Species'

The consequence of the downgrade is that the EFSF can't keep its triple-A rating, said Commerzbank chief economist Joerg Kraemer.

"That may irritate markets in the short term but wouldn't be a big problem in a world where the U.S. and Japan also don't have a triple-A rating anymore. Triple-A is a dying species," he said.

John Wraith, Fixed Income Strategist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch told CNBC the mass downgrade is another serious step in the crisis and would lead to a serious worsening of sentiment.

"To a large degree, it’s widely anticipated," Wraith said. "However, we think the reality of it is going to have a knock-on, ongoing impact on these markets."

“It clearly deteriorates still further the credit worthiness of a lot of the European banks and just keeps that negative feedback loop between struggling banks and the sovereigns that may have to support them if things go from bad to worse in full force,” Wraith added.

The downgrade could automatically require some investment funds to sell bonds of affected states, making those countries' borrowing costs rise still further.

"It's been priced in for several weeks, but the market had been lulled into complacency over the holidays, and the new year began with a bounce in risk appetite, thanks partly to a good Spanish auction," said Samarjit Shankar, Director Of Global Fx Strategy at BNY Mellon in Boston.

"But the Italian auction brought us back to earth," he said.

Italy's three-year debt costs fell below 5 percent on Friday, but its first bond sale of the year failed to match the success of a Spanish auction the previous day, reflecting the heavy refinancing load Rome faces over the next three months.

"Young Voters Know Ron Paul Isn't Gonna Send Them To War To Make Some Contractor Rich!"

2012-01-11T00:30:00.000-08:00

Ron Paul "Maybe The Military Industrial Complex Donated To Obama So He'll Keep Building

2012-01-10T09:11:00.000-08:00

2012 Republican Presidential Debate In New Hampshire

2012-01-10T09:09:00.001-08:00

CES 2012 Pre-Day One: Highlights

2012-01-10T09:03:00.001-08:00

Cajun Pawn Stars - Season 1, Episode 1: Donkeys and Dollars

2012-01-10T02:45:00.000-08:00

Bacteria in the gut of autistic children different from non-autistic children

2012-01-09T22:16:00.000-08:00

The underlying reason autism is often associated with gastrointestinal problems is an unknown, but new results to be published in the online journal mBio on January 10 reveal that the guts of autistic children differ from other children in at least one important way: many children with autism harbor a type of bacteria in their guts that non-autistic children do not. The study was conducted by Brent Williams and colleagues at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University. Earlier work has revealed that autistic individuals with gastrointestinal symptoms often exhibit inflammation and other abnormalities in their upper and lower intestinal tracts. However, scientists do not know what causes the inflammation or how the condition relates to the developmental disorders that characterize autism. The research results appearing in mBio indicate the communities of microorganisms that reside in the gut of autistic children with gastrointestinal problems are different than the communities of non-autistic children. Whether or not these differences are a cause or effect of autism remains to be seen.
"The relationship between different microorganisms and the host and the outcomes for disease and development is an exciting issue," says Christine A. Biron, the Brintzenhoff Professor of Medical Science at Brown University and editor of the study. "This paper is important because it starts to advance the question of how the resident microbes interact with a disorder that is poorly understood."
Bacteria belonging to the group Sutterella represented a relatively large proportion of the microorganisms found in 12 of 23 tissue samples from the guts of autistic children, but these organisms were not detected in any samples from non-autistic children. Why this organism is present only in autistic kids with gastrointestinal problems and not in unaffected kids is unclear.
"Sutterella has been associated with gastrointestinal diseases below the diaphragm, and whether it's a pathogen or not is still not clear," explains Jorge Benach, Chairman of the Department of Microbiology at Stony Brook University and a reviewer of the report. "It is not a very well-known bacterium."
In children with autism, digestive problems can be quite serious and can contribute to behavioral problems, making it difficult for doctors and therapists to help their patients. Autism, itself, is poorly understood, but the frequent linkage between this set of developmental disorders and problems in the gut is even less so.
Benach says the study was uniquely powerful because they used tissue samples from the guts of patients. "Most work that has been done linking the gut microbiome with autism has been done with stool samples," says Benach, but the microorganisms shed in stool don't necessarily represent the microbes that line the intestinal wall. "What may show up in a stool sample may be different from what is directly attached to the tissue," he says.
Tissue biopsy samples require surgery to acquire and represent a difficult process for the patient, facts that underscore the seriousness of the gastrointestinal problems many autistic children and their families must cope with.
Benach emphasizes that the study is statistically powerful, but future work is needed to determine what role Sutterella plays, if any, in the problems in the gut. "It is an observation that needs to be followed through," says Benach.
More information: http://mbio.asm.org/

Provided by American Society for Microbiology

My Big Breasts and Me

2012-01-07T03:07:00.000-08:00

Celente: Economic Martial law is coming, it will turn to Chaos, thats why they passed NCAA that allows the Military to take over Police duties !

2012-01-06T23:40:00.000-08:00

Diamond prices set to outpace gold as luxury spending in Asia rises

2012-01-06T23:00:00.000-08:00

The time between Christmas and New Year’s may be the time to reflect on the past year. But it’s also the time to make predictions for the year or years to come. And there are many. First diamonds are apparently going to be the new gold, according to Bloomberg. Increased spending on luxury goods in China, India and the Middle East will outpace supply pushing up prices for rough, uncut diamonds nine per cent to $145 US in 2012. That rise is expected to continue through 2016, according to Edward Sterck, an analyst at BMO Capital Markets, quoted in the story. Meanwhile the price of gold is expected to fall starting in 2013 after a 19 per-cent gain in 2012, according to the median of seven analysts’ estimates compiled by Bloomberg.

A reflection of luxury demand from China can be found at high-end stores in Britain, such as Harrods and Selfridges. Those stores now accept UnionPay, China’s most popular bank card, the Guardian reports.

“The taste among mainland Chinese consumers for luxury brands is nothing new,” Peter Walker of the Guardian writes. “Louis Vuitton first set up shop in Beijing in 1992, and now has almost 40 outlets inside the country; within a few years Burberry will have 100. More notable is the current effort being expended by UK stores to target high-spending Chinese tourists who will – they hope – plug the gap left by austerity-conscious Britons.” The Asian Pacific Post predicts that China and Asia will have a “yo-yo” year. Economic growth will slow “but Asia, built on resilience, will bounce back.” “The catch-phrase for 2012 is the Asia yo-yo,” Rob Subbaraman, chief Asia economist at Nomura in Hong Kong is quoted as saying in the article. “The harder Asia’s economies are hit, the stronger the tailwinds for a bounce back.” And in a prediction that is closer to home, the New York Times writes that failing artificial hips are going to cost taxpayers, insurers and employers billions of dollars in the coming years.

Viral Video: Huge plate-throwing fight in a famous New Dynasty Chinese Restaurant in Montreal

2012-01-05T03:26:00.001-08:00

Video of a chair-tossing, plate-throwing brawl at a restaurant in Montreal's Chinatown is going viral, but police say no charges are likely to arise from the shocking event. A chair-throwing, plate-tossing fight at a Montreal restaurant early on Jan. 1 caused as much as $20,000 in damage. The brawl was caught on video and it is being widely circulated online.

“We have between $10,000 and $20,000 in damage,” an employee with New Dynasty restaurant on Clark St. told The Gazette on Wednesday. “We are OK but we have a lot of damage,” the man, who spoke on condition that he not be named, said.

The fight took place between 3:30 a.m. and 4 a.m. when a group of people was eating at the restaurant, which serves Asian cuisine. It started when two men who were not restaurant patrons walked by and said hello to a friend who was eating there, the man said.

Another patron then stood up on a table and pointed to the passersby and all hell broke loose, the employee said.

“I don’t think they knew each other before. Everyone just started throwing things. One man was cut and fell to the ground. There was a lot of blood on the carpet.” So much blood, in fact, that the restaurant now needs to replace the carpet. The walls and ceilings were damaged and the lighting, too. Many dishes were thrown and broken, he said.

Montreal police Lt. Ian Lafrenière said police arrived shortly before 4 a.m. and two minutes, 45 seconds after being called about the brawl. “When we got there it was over,” he said. The video is of little use to police because neither the restaurant owner or those who were injured want to press charges, Lafrenière said. “It’s private property and nobody wants to take it further” by pressing charges.

One person was hospitalized and another injured person refused treatment, he said.

The restaurant is still open, however. Repairs are being done as quickly as possible.

Why Canadians can't get great eggs, chicken or milk

2012-01-04T21:31:00.000-08:00

(Via Theglobeandmail.com) Two chicken inspectors showed up at a farm in Southern Ontario not long ago. They flashed badges and inspected the premises and, sure enough, they found what they were looking for: chickens. About 100 of them, wandering across open pastures, pecking at bugs, worms and blades of grass. The inspectors quickly put a stop to all that. They told the farmer to get rid of his chickens or face the consequences. Then they visited other nearby farms, issuing threats of fines (up to $10,000 a day), and leaving more than one Amish farm wife in tears. These were not police, RCMP or public-health officials. They were employees of the Chicken Farmers of Ontario, the body that represents Ontario’s roughly 1,000 chicken farmers, and they have the legal right to “inspect the books, records, documents, lands and premises and any chickens of persons engaged in producing or marketing chickens.” In other words, they can carry out chicken busts. And on this particular bust, their suspicions were confirmed: Delicious pastured chickens were being sold without quota. Quota is a legal requirement for marketing chickens, turkey, eggs or cow milk in Canada. Without it, the simple bucolic act of selling a block of farmstead cheese or several dozen eggs at a farmers’ market is against the law. It’s been this way for almost half a century. If you want access to the market, you have to pay for it. And access isn’t cheap. This kind of arrangement is better known as a cartel. Cartels fix prices. Usually, they’re illegal, but not in Canada. In fact, when it comes to poultry, dairy and eggs, not being part of a cartel is illegal – as many an Amish farm wife can tell you. The Canadian food cartel goes by its own special name: “supply management.” Critics have charged that supply management makes food disproportionately expensive (especially for the poor), cripples our agricultural sector and is holding us back from entering lucrative trade deals with Asia. But here’s what hasn’t been said about supply management: It is the enemy of deliciousness. If you have ever wondered why you can buy heritage chickens such as the famed poulet de Bresse in France but not in Canada, or pastured butter the colour of an autumn sunset in Ireland but not in Canada, or why it’s so hard to find pastured eggs here, the reason is supply management.

Great ingredients, as any good cook will tell you, come from small producers who lovingly tend their flocks and the land that sustains them. These artisan producers – the very people attempting to make food local and sustainable – are stifled under supply management because it requires the one thing these starry-eyed pastoralists almost always don’t have: money. A single cow’s worth of dairy quota, for example, costs about $27,000 (up to $40,000 in B.C.). Quota for one egg-laying hen can cost upward of $200. Now do the math. A tiny egg farm of 500 hens (a typical Canadian farm has 20,0000 or more) can cost more than $100,000. (Exact prices and rules vary across provinces.) Ontario’s minimum allotment of chicken quota – 14,000 units (or about 90,000 birds a year) costs $1.5-million. And a tiny herd of 10 dairy cows costs more than $250,000. How many small farmers have that kind of scratch? The resulting lack of agricultural diversity is a story told on store shelves across Canada. At my local butcher shop, the choice of chicken is limited to standard factory birds and “natural” factory birds. South of the border, by comparison, delectable breeds such as Plymouth Barred Rocks, New Hampshires and Jersey Giants can be found at farmers’ markets, butcher shops and on the Internet. At the Washington, D.C., fine food store P&C Market, shoppers can buy superbly flavoured pastured eggs produced by Joel Salatin, the activist farmer who was profiled in the documentary Food Inc. At my independently owned local supermarket – which sells some of Ontario’s best local produce – all the eggs come out of industrial barns. No wonder. Quota for Mr. Salatin’s hens would cost more than $500,000. If he had the misfortune of being Canadian, as he put it himself, “I would not have entered the egg business.”

Pastured eggs, poultry and milk are the rage of the food world right now, and for a single reason: flavour. A heritage chicken takes three times as long to get to roaster size as its factory equivalent. What it lacks in speed, it makes up for in taste. It’s the same story with pastured eggs and dairy. They are all textbook examples of slow food. Slow costs money. Heritage chicken varieties cost more than fast-growing factory birds. Frank Reese – a fourth-generation Kansas farmer who raises legendary Silverlace Wynadottes, Jersey Giants and Plymouth Barred Rocks – charges $4.99 a pound at local stores. Mr. Reese and his partners raised 30,000 heritage chickens last year, which in my province, Ontario, would cost about $600,000 in quota. “There’s no way we could afford that,” Mr. Reese told me by phone. “We’d have to charge $25 per bird, and at that price, who would buy them?”

In other words, the quota system works for low-margin, high-volume factory operations. But it puts the price of artisanal products in the domain of the 1 per cent.

There is one bright spot in Canada’s food landscape: cheese. Thanks to a policy loophole, cheese makers can get around paying for quota as long as they can prove their cheese doesn’t taste like any other Canadian cheese (otherwise it would take away market share and upset the price fixing scheme). To qualify, cheese makers send applications and samples to Ottawa, where a team of bureaucrats sits in judgment. If the cheese is deemed “innovative,” permission to produce the cheese granted.

It has nothing to do with quality. Numerous superb cheeses have failed because they tasted similar to cheeses that already have quota. Thanks to supply management, none of those cheeses will ever make it to your cheeseboard.

But there at last may be hope. The rumour in Ottawa is that Stephen Harper – perhaps the world’s most unlikely champion of slow food – is considering scrapping supply management so that Canada can be part of a Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal. It’s nothing more than backroom talk, at this point. But if it happens, this country’s reputation for blandness – at least when it comes to poultry, eggs and dairy – may finally start to change.

Chris Hedges Cspan 2h Interview

2012-01-03T06:14:00.000-08:00

"Obama's election was one more triumph of illusion over substance. A skillful manipulation and betrayal of the public by a corporate power elite. We mistook style and ethnicity - an advertising tactic pioneered by CK and Bebetton - for progressive politics and genuine change."

Michael Ruppert & Joe Rogan talk Ron Paul, CIA Dealing Drugs & The Awakening of Mankind

2011-12-31T11:36:00.000-08:00

Michael Ruppert is the author of Crossing The Rubicon: The decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil. Published in September 2004 and is one of the three best-selling books globally and in the US about the attacks of 9/11. Rubicon is the only book to show that Vice President Richard Cheney, the US government and Wall Street had a well-developed awareness of Peak Oil before the 9/11 attacks and that US policy since then has been consistent with Peak Oil imperatives. In May, 2006Crossing the Rubicon was added to the Harvard School of Business library and released in a French version with distribution throughout all major book stores in France.

Mike is also the publisher/editor of From The Wilderness, a newsletter read in more than 50 countries around the world. Its subscribers include 60-plus members of the US congress, professors at more than 40 universities around the world, and major business and economic leaders. Since 9/11 Mike has been in demand as a university lecturer and has spoken on Peak Oil and 9/11 in nine countries. Recently, at the request of Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, he served as an official questioner during a Congressional briefing looking into unanswered questions and the unaddressed flaws of the Keane Commission report. Having concluded that the US government and markets will be useless in preparing American citizens for the coming crisis, Mike’s current focus is on individual and community preparedness for the coming challenges and the development of a reliable news service to quickly identify and track breaking developments around the world.

Mike is a former LAPD narcotics investigator, whistleblower and a 1973 Honors Graduate of UCLA in Political Science. After attempting to expose this he was forced out of LAPD in 1978 while earning the highest rating reports possible and having no pending disciplinary actions. In 1996, after 18 years of struggle, he finally achieved one of his deepest wishes in a face to face public encounter with then CIA Director John Deutch on national television. Washington sources later told Mike that Deutch’s mishandling of the encounter cost him a guaranteed appointment as Secretary of Defense.
On November 28, 2001 Mike gave his first post 9-11 lecture at Portland State University, which was attended by more than 1,000 and resulted in a standing ovation. FTW’svideo, The Truth and Lies About 9-11, has sold more than 15,000 copies. It includes special exclusive interviews with Representatives Ron Paul (R-TX), Cynthia McKinney (D-GA), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Professor Peter Dale Scott, (UC, Berkeley), Professor John Metzger (Michigan State) and Catherine Austin Fitts (former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Managing Director, Dillon Read).

FTW’s stories, including economic and military analysis, detailed exposés of the CIA and the American political and economic system, have been reprinted all over the world. A popular lecturer who has spoken in eight countries, Mike is beginning a new direction forFTW in 2005 focusing on breaking news in a world that is moving steadily toward global warfare, the draft and economic collapse. Mike’s future plans include relocating to semi-rural areas of the Pacific Northwest to begin a detailed study of post-petroleum living strategies with a view towards saving as many lives as possible after 2007.

Fedor Emelianenko vs Satoshi Ishii Fight Video

2011-12-31T11:04:00.001-08:00

Jim Rogers on CNBC 28.12.2011

2011-12-31T06:49:00.000-08:00

The Four Companies That Control the 147 Companies That Own Everything: McGraw-Hill Northwestern Mutual CME Group Barclay's

2011-12-29T01:33:00.000-08:00

(Via Forbes) There may be 147 companies in the world that own everything, as colleague Bruce Upbin points out and they are dominated by investment companies as Eric Savitz rightly points out. But it’s not you and I who really control those companies, even though much of our money is in them. Given the nature of how money is invested, there are four companies in the shadows that really control those companies that own everything.

Before I reveal them, some light math:

According to the 2011 annual factbook from the Investment Company Institute, there is $24.7 trillion in all the mutual funds in the world (a little less than half from the US). Based on data from the ICI, $1.24 trillion of this is directly invested in index funds, plus another $992 billion in assets beyond that $24.7 trillion in Exchange Traded Funds, which aren’t mutual funds but are index funds. That means the bulk of that money is in “active” managed funds or fund of funds.

But then consider this: the chief of hedge funds at a very large asset manager told me last week (alas, I cannot identify either) that an internal study his firm recently performed found that the vast majority of mutual funds defined as actively managed see 95% of the assets they hold determined by an index.That means just 5% of actively managed funds really are driven by the active manager’s judgment.

This less-than-active management is for two reasons: one is to maintain the fund in a style box (i.e. large value stock, medium value stocks) and comply with the reality all mutual funds are required to have a benchmark index they compare their relative performance to. The other reason is to adhere to risk metrics to which most of the fund industry is beholden. This second point is partly due to Modern Portfolio Theory (a complex topic we won’t debate here) and to the human nature that active managers tend to build portfolios close to the indexes they benchmark against to avoid really awful downward relative performance years that ends up costing them their jobs.

So of the $25.69 trillion in worldwide assets we’ve identified, $2.23 trillion are directly in indexes (ETFs and index mutual funds) with another $22.3 trillion indirectly beholden to indexes (that 95% of actively managed fund holdings said to be determined by an index).

You can see where I’m headed here. That means the real power to control the world lies with four companies: McGraw-Hill, which owns Standard & Poor’s, Northwestern Mutual, which owns Russell Investments, the index arm of which runs the benchmark Russell 1,000 and Russell 3,000, CME Group which owns 90% of Dow Jones Indexes, and Barclay’s, which took over Lehman Brothers and its Lehman Aggregate Bond Index, the dominant world bond fund index. Together, these four firms dominate the world of indexing. And in turn, that means they hold real sway over the world’s money.

While that may seem benign – they are indexers after all you may say – a financial index isn’t cut and dried like the index of a book. It’s a misperception indexers merely do some simple math like identifying the 500 largest US companies and voila! you have the S&P 500. Every indexer has a fudge factor that allows them to say one company is more “economically significant” for the index at hand than another company. To again take the S&P 500 as an example, the 502-largest company by market cap could get the nod over number 500 by size if S&P decides it wants to.

The power is even more obvious in bonds. The now-Barclays Aggregate Bond Index attempts to mirror volume of bond issuance in a region or the world, but it can’t include even a sizable percentage of all the bonds issued. Essentially, there’s a big judgment call in there in what bonds it adds to its index. A judgment that influences bond fund flows worldwide.

What does all this mean? Researchers at a desk in midtown Manhattan are the butterflies that cause the hurricanes in the markets. For instance, 37% of all index funds in stocks are in a S&P 500 index fund. That’s $370 billion directly buying and selling stocks based on when the S&P analysts decide to drop ITT from the S&P500 and replace it with just one of three ITT spin-off, Xylem, as announced on Monday. Then add on top of that all of the so-called active mutual funds aiming to beat the S&P 500 (but still reflect 95% of the S&P in their funds) who react to the change and then all of the hedge funds who trade ahead of time trying to guess what S&P may drop or add.

I don’t have a grudge against any indexer (and full disclosure, I’ve done work for some of them). And the folks at McGraw-HIll don’t seem to spook people the way George Soros manages to. But when you discuss power in the world markets, the answer isn’t what you think it is.

The Layover S01E06 Montreal

2011-12-28T20:14:00.001-08:00

Book Claims Hitler 'Died In Argentina'

2011-12-25T23:22:00.000-08:00

Nazi leader Adolf Hitler did not kill himself in Berlin in 1945 but ended his days in Argentina, a new book has claimed. British journalist Gerrard Williams has told Sky News he and co-author Simon Dunstan found an "overwhelming amount of evidence" to suggest Hitler died an old man in South America. Many historians say the Nazi leader died in his Berlin bunker in 1945 - but Williams claims their research, looking at newly de-classified documents and forensic tests, challenges this. "We didn't want to re-write history, but the evidence we've discovered about the escape of Adolf Hitler is just too overwhelming to ignore," he said. "There is no forensic evidence for his, or Eva Braun's deaths, and the stories from the eyewitnesses to their continued survival in Argentina are compelling." Grey Wolf: The Escape Of Adolf Hitler claims the Fuhrer and his mistress Eva Braun were secretly flown out of Germany in April 1945 and taken to fascist-controlled Argentina. It is alleged Hitler lived in the country for 17 years, initially raising his two daughters, until his death in 1962. The book also accuses US intelligence of being complicit in the scam in return for access to Nazi war technology. "Stalin, Eisenhower and Hoover of the FBI all knew there was no proof of him dying in the bunker," Williams told Sky News.
"It's difficult to understand why so much of the already published material we present in the book has been ignored over the years." He added that the book's new findings prove the "Hitler" skull fragments held by the Russians are actually that of a young woman.
Williams said he and Dunstan conducted intensive field research in Argentina, including interviews with many eyewitnesses to Hitler's presence there.
"It's only now that Argentina is once more a thriving democracy that the real stories are beginning to come out," he said.
"Even so, two of our eyewitnesses received death threats from persons unknown while working with us on this book."
The film Grey Wolf is currently in production and is expected to be released in January

http://www.amazon.com/Grey-Wolf-Escape-Adolf-Hitler/dp/1402781393/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1324884430&sr=8-1

Cenk Uygur Cuts Off Peter Schiff's Mic Then Kicks Him Off The Show! & Schiff's responce

2011-12-25T05:47:00.001-08:00

Jim Rogers - NDTV Interview - 22 Dec 2011

2011-12-25T01:04:00.001-08:00

RAP NEWS X - #Occupy2012

2011-12-22T06:47:00.001-08:00

First trailer for the Hobbit.

2011-12-21T03:13:00.001-08:00

Chomsky to Occupy: move to the next stage

2011-12-21T03:09:00.001-08:00

Noam Chomsky has advice for the Occupy movement, whose encampments all over the country are being swept away by police. The occupations were a "brilliant" idea, he says, but now it's time to "move on to the next stage" in tactics. He suggests political organizing in the neighborhoods. The Occupy camps have shown people how "to break out of this conception that we're isolated." But "just occupying" has "lived its life," says the man who is the most revered radical critic of American politics and capitalist economics. Chomsky gave his counsel answering questions in a small group after a speech Monday evening, December 12, in the 1000-seat Westbrook Middle School auditorium (a/k/a Westbrook Performing Arts Center), which was filled to capacity. The speech was sponsored by the University of New England's Center for Global Humanities. The Occupy movement's repression, which Chomsky decried, has a saving grace, he said: the opportunity for it to expand more into "the 99 percent" by engaging people "face to face."
"Don't be obsessed with tactics but with purpose," he suggested. "Tactics have a half life."
Much is at stake. An angry and frustrated population, as exists now in this country, provides "a combustible mix," he said, adding: "Look at Weimar Germany" — the economically and politically turbulent time in Germany in the early 20th century that led to the rule of Adolf Hitler and the Nazis.
Chomsky's speech was entitled "Arab Spring, American Winter." In it, he presented the Occupy movement as the first popular reaction to a "vicious class war" waged against working people for over 30 years in the United States, just as the Arab Spring uprisings this year in the Middle East and North Africa were reactions to decades or centuries of repression by wealthy elites supported by the United States and other Western powers.
Greeted with a standing ovation, on top of his game at 83, he stood, in jeans and sweater, talking and answering questions for two hours in his always-even voice.
Riffing from one topic to another, Chomsky — who, an emeritus professor at MIT, also is known as the father of modern linguistics — demonstrated an encyclopedic knowledge of American foreign policy and history, citing stunningly revealing official documents chronicling our country's economic and military predations abroad.
He compared the rule of international elites over Middle Eastern, African, Latin American, and Asian countries to the rule of the rich 1 percent — it is often the rule of one-tenth of one percent, he suggested — in the United States.
Quoting Adam Smith, the 18th-century father of capitalist theory, Chomsky delved into the roots of the neoliberal soak-the-poor philosophy dominant worldwide. "We're essentially living in a nightmare" that the classical economists predicted, he said.
This nightmare's concentration of wealth "accelerates" political-campaign-money competition, he said, driving politicians into the arms of wealthy interests. One result: "The Democrats are now what used to be called moderate Republicans."
(Recently this reporter asked a prominent Augusta figure if he thought the Occupy movement would make Maine Democrats less like Republicans. He replied that the occupiers "don't finance the campaigns.") Palma Ryan, 59, who is staying at the Occupy camp in Portland's Lincoln Park, said about 40 occupiers were at the speech. Her reaction to hearing Chomsky: "He is so validating. You leave saying 'yes, yes, yes!' Despite what counts in the Portland area as an enormous crowd, the daily press barely covered the event — commonly the case for Chomsky.

Assad losing control as 10,000 soldiers desert Syrian military

2011-12-21T03:05:00.000-08:00

More than 10,000 soldiers have deserted the Syrian army, sources say, with as many as half the conscripts not reporting in the last three call-ups. According to Western intelligence agencies, even though the top brass is still loyal to President Bashar Assad, lower-level officers are deserting in large numbers, and in some cases, whole units have deserted en masse. The army is considered the main factor safeguarding Assad's regime, after mass protests began in the south in March and spread throughout the country, inspired by the demonstrations elsewhere in the Arab world.

On Tuesday, at least 73 people were killed in Syria in clashes between the army and opposition, most of them in Homs in the west and Idlib in the northwest. The 73 dead added to the 100 who were killed on Monday, among them 14 soldiers ambushed by opposition forces, human rights groups said. The groups added that Assad's forces were transferring wounded opposition activists from hospitals to army bases to prevent them from testifying to Arab League observers expected to arrive under a deal struck on Monday. The observers would ensure that the army and opposition adhere to a cease-fire and end the violence.

A new law imposes the death penalty on anyone "smuggling arms to be used in terrorist activity." Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak predicted this month that the Syrian regime would collapse within weeks. Barak said it was impossible to know who would rule Syria in the future, but in any case it would be a blow to the alliance between Iran and Lebanese Shi'ite group Hezbollah. Another sign of the Syrian regime's frailty is Hamas' decision to move its headquarters from Damascus, as the Palestinian group that runs the Gaza Strip prepares for a possible post-Assad era.

More than 5,000 people have been killed in the unrest in Syria, most of them anti-Assad activists; in recent days dozens have been killed every day, on average. Still, the army has suffered many losses, mainly from ambushes by opposition forces and ex-soldiers. In some remote districts the opposition groups are getting stronger and the army is having problems operating. The opposition is still weak in the two large cities, Damascus in the south and Aleppo in the north. The Syrian Republican Guard, concentrated mostly in Damascus, is well armed and considered loyal to Assad, making it more difficult to organize demonstrations in the capital.

Still, even in Damascus, rockets have been launched at army vehicles.

One of the main worries in the West is the fate of the army's rocket and missiles caches, as well as its chemical weapons. According to several media reports, Hezbollah has transferred several long-range missiles from Syria to Lebanon.

In the 2006 Second Lebanon War, Hezbollah fired more than 4,000 rockets into Israel. At this stage there is no proof that Hezbollah has transferred chemical weapons. Chemical weapons are not easy to maintain and handle, and as far as is known, Hezbollah does not have such expertise. Israeli Military Intelligence recently presented the government with a report stating that unrest in Arab states will continue into next year. Military Intelligence says the unrest might topple the regimes in Syria and Yemen; in Yemen, outgoing President Ali Abdullah Saleh still has not relinquished all his powers despite the uprising in that Arabian Peninsula country.

The Lullaby - 2011 - By Joe Fenton

2011-12-19T03:06:00.001-08:00

The Lullaby - 2011 - By Joe Fenton from Joe Fenton on Vimeo.

Ron Paul & Joe Rogan on the Tonight Show w/ Jay Leno

2011-12-17T16:13:00.001-08:00

The more attractive a woman is to a man, the more likely he is to overestimate her interest. And women tend to underestimate men's desire.

2011-12-14T07:55:00.000-08:00

Does she or doesn't she...? Sexual cues are ambiguous, and confounding. We—especially men—often read them wrong. A new study hypothesizes that the men who get it wrong might be the ones that evolution has favored. "There are tons of studies showing that men think women are interested when they're not," says Williams College psychologist Carin Perilloux, who conducted the research with Judith A. Easton and David M. Buss of University of Texas at Austin. "Ours is the first to systematically examine individual differences." The findings will appear in an upcoming issue of Psychological Science, a journal published by the Association for Psychological Science.

The research involved 96 male 103 female undergraduates, who were put through a "speed-meeting" exercise—talking for three minutes to each of five potential opposite-sex mates. Before the conversations, the participants rated themselves on their own attractiveness and were assessed for the level of their desire for a short-term sexual encounter. After each "meeting," they rated the partner on a number of measures, including physical attractiveness and sexual interest in the participant. The model had the advantage of testing the participants in multiple interactions.

The results: Men looking for a quick hookup were more likely to overestimate the women's desire for them. Men who thought they were hot also thought the women were hot for them—but men who were actually attractive, by the women's ratings, did not make this mistake. The more attractive the woman was to the man, the more likely he was to overestimate her interest. And women tended to underestimate men's desire.

A hopeless mess? Evolutionarily speaking, maybe not, say the psychologists. Over millennia, these errors may in fact have enhanced men's reproductive success.

"There are two ways you can make an error as a man," says Perilloux. "Either you think, 'Oh, wow, that woman's really interested in me'—and it turns out she's not. There's some cost to that," such as embarrassment or a blow to your reputation. The other error: "She's interested, and he totally misses out. He misses out on a mating opportunity. That's a huge cost in terms of reproductive success." The researchers theorize that the kind of guy who went for it, even at the risk of being rebuffed, scored more often—and passed on his overperceiving tendency to his genetic heirs. The casual sex seekers "face slightly different adaptive problems," says Perilloux. "They are limited mainly by the number of consenting sex partners—so overestimation is even more important." Only the actually attractive men probably had no need for misperception.

The research contains some messages for daters of both sexes, says Perilloux: Women should know the risks and "be as communicative and clear as possible." Men: "Know that the more attracted you are, the more likely you are to be wrong about her interest." Again, that may not be as bad as it sounds, she says—"if warning them will prevent heartache later on."

Provided by Association for Psychological Science

Joe Beef owners Frédéric Morin et David McMillan Tout le monde en parle

2011-12-12T02:08:00.001-08:00

Bill Clinton on TheView

2011-12-10T03:01:00.001-08:00

US war on Opium had no impact on opium production. In Colombia it is a cover for Counter-insurgency in US it's a technique for reintroducing slavery.

2011-12-10T01:28:00.000-08:00

2012=1968? In 2008, Barack Obama lit a fire among young activists. Next year, Occupy Wall Street could consume him.

2011-12-09T14:55:00.000-08:00

(Via New-York Magazine) The post-Zuccotti era of Occupy Wall Street began for Max Berger just after 1 a.m. on November 15, when he learned via text message that a forcible eviction of the park was close at hand. At 26, Berger is a redheaded Reed College alum and professional activist; his employers have included the Progressive Change Campaign Committee and Van Jones’s outfit, Rebuild the Dream. By hard-core standards, he had come late to the OWS action, not visiting the park until a week after the protest got going on September 17. But Berger found himself sucked in and became one of its central players. Now, with Zuccotti under siege, he raced to the park and fired off a series of frantic tweets—before being put in handcuffs. “People singing Marley!” “Press not being let in. This is gonna be some Tiananmen shit.” “They can take this park, but they can’t stop this movement. This will backfire. We will win.”

FULL ARTICLE

Obama's Kansas Class War Populist Speech calls for renewal of New Nationalism Dec 6th

2011-12-09T05:13:00.000-08:00

Tim Seymour & FM Panel Laugh Out Loud @Peter Schiff's Idiotic Eurozone Solutions

2011-12-09T05:01:00.001-08:00

Ori Hofmekler Discusses Coffee

2011-12-08T03:08:00.001-08:00

Marc Faber: "I Have A Very Special Stock Tip For You. The Symbol Is G-O-L-D"

2011-12-08T02:59:00.001-08:00

The Guardian: War drums are beating for Iran. But who's playing them? We're having our money siphoned off to pay for a a greedy military machine !

2011-12-06T23:04:00.000-08:00

(Via The Guardian) In the 14th century there were two pandemics. One was the Black Death, the other was the commercialisation of warfare. Mercenaries had always existed, but under Edward III they became the mainstay of the English army for the first 20 years of what became the Hundred Years war. Then, when Edward signed the treaty of Brétigny in 1360 and told his soldiers to stop fighting and go home, many of them didn't have any homes to go to. They were used to fighting, and that's how they made their money. So they simply formed themselves into freelance armies, aptly called "free companies", that proceeded around France pillaging, killing and raping.
One of these armies was called the Great Company. It totalled, according to one estimate, 16,000 soldiers, larger than any existing national army. Eventually it descended on the pope, in Avignon, and held him to ransom. The pope made the mistake of paying off the mercenaries with huge amounts of cash, which only encouraged them to carry on marauding. He also suggested that they move on into Italy, where his arch-enemies, the Visconti, ran Milan. This they did, under the banner of the Marquis of Monferrato, again subsidised by the pope.
The nightmare had begun. Huge armies of brigands rampaging through Europe was a disaster second only to the plague. It seemed as if the genie had been let out of the bottle and there was no way of putting him back in. Warfare had suddenly turned into a profitable business; the Italian city states became impoverished as taxpayers' money was used to buy off the free companies. And since those who made money out of the business of war naturally wished to go on making money out of it, warfare had no foreseeable end.
Wind forward 650 years or so. The US, under George W Bush, decided to privatise the invasion of Iraq by employing private "contractors" like the Blackwater company, now renamed Xe Services. In 2003 Blackwater won a $27m no-bid contract for guarding Paul Bremer, then head of the Coalition Provisional Authority. For protecting officials in conflict zones since 2004, the company has received more than $320m. And this year the Obama government contracted to pay Xe Services a quarter of a billion dollars for security work in Afghanistan. This is just one of many companies making its profits out of warfare.
In 2000 the Project for the New American Century published a report, Rebuilding America's Defenses, whose declared aim was to up the spending on defence from 3% to 3.5% or 3.8% of American gross domestic product. In fact it is now running at 4.7% of GDP. In the UK we spend about $57bn a year on defence, or 2.5% of GDP.
Just like the taxpayers of medieval Italian city-states, we are having our money siphoned off into the business of war. Any responsible company needs to make profits for its shareholders. In the 14th century the shareholders in the free companies were the soldiers themselves. If the company wasn't being employed by someone to make war on someone else, the shareholders had to forgo their dividends. So they looked around to create markets for themselves.
Sir John Hawkwood's White Company would offer its services to the pope or to the city of Florence. If either turned his offer down, Hawkwood would simply make an offer to their enemies. As Francis Stonor Saunders writes in her wonderful book, Hawkwood – Diabolical Englishman: "The value of the companies was the purely negative one of maintaining the balance of military power between the cities." Just like the cold war.
Two decades ago I picked up an in-house magazine for the arms industry. Its editorial was headed "Thank God For Saddam". It explained that, since the collapse of communism and end of the cold war, the order books of the arms industry had been empty. But now there was a new enemy, the industry could look forward to a bonanza. The invasion of Iraq was built around a lie: Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction, but the defence industry needed an enemy, and the politicians duly supplied one.
And now the same war drums, encouraged by the storming of the British embassy last week, are beating for an attack on Iran. Seymour Hersh writes in the New Yorker: "All of the low enriched uranium now known to be produced inside Iran is accounted for." The recent IAEA report which provoked such outcry against Iran's nuclear ambitions, he continues, contains nothing that proves that Iran is developing nuclear weapons.
In the 14th century it was the church that lived in symbiosis with the military. Nowadays it is the politicians. The US government spent a staggering $687bn on "defence" in 2010. Think what could be done with that money if it were put into hospitals, schools or to pay off foreclosed mortgages.
The retiring US president, Dwight D Eisenhower, famously took the opportunity of his farewell to the nation address in 1961 to warn his fellow countrymen of the danger in allowing too close a relationship between politicians and the defence industry.
"This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience," he said. "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist." It exists. The genie is out of the bottle again.

Ratio of Pay: CEO v Average Worker

2011-12-06T23:02:00.001-08:00

Jim Rickards on Financial WarFare as Doctrine

2011-12-04T20:40:00.001-08:00

Jim Rogers this week

2011-12-01T09:17:00.000-08:00

Preparing for the Worst: The High Price of Abandoning the Euro

2011-11-29T14:53:00.000-08:00

(Via Der Spiegel) The warning signs are mounting, and fresh news is adding to the gloom every day. Britain's financial watchdog has instructed banks to brace for a possible break-up of the euro zone. British currency trader CLS Bank is reportedly conducting stress tests to prepare for this worst-case scenario. Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski made a dramatic appeal to Germany on Monday to prevent a collapse of the currency union, saying: "We are standing on the edge of a precipice." German investors are jettisoning derivatives on a large scale because they have lost confidence in the instruments. For the first time, it appears, people across Europe regard the downfall of the euro as a real possibility. Is it really for the first time, though? In fact, scenarios for the euro's breakup are older than the currency itself. At the end of 1998, Harvard Law School Professor Hal Scott published a paper called "When the Euro Falls Apart." He put the chances of the euro failing at around 10 percent. Today, that's a real prospect. According to Mark Cliffe, the chief economist of ING Bank, "even the most ardent euro admirer must concede that the probability of countries leaving or the breakup of the euro zone is no longer zero." The economist Nouriel Roubini, known as "Dr. Doom" because he predicted the 2008 financial crisis, recently put the likelihood of the euro zone collapsing at 45 percent. But such expert forecasts sound abstract to most people. What would be the concrete consequences and costs of a euro apocalypse -- for Europe and for Germany? Here's an assessment:

The disintegration of the euro zone is basically possible. Back in 1998, Harvard Law School Professor Scott cited a number of factors that would theoretically permit euro countries to return to their national currencies.

So could Germany simply return to the deutsche mark? Could Greece simply reintroduce the drachma?

That wouldn't be as easy as euroskeptics are arguing. The European treaties don't envisage nations leaving the euro zone -- a country can only quit the European Union as a whole. Such a departure would take a long time, and investors could use that time to withdraw their capital, warns economist Karsten Junius in a research note for DekaBank. So the country in question would suffer economic damage on its path back into a national currency.

It is also unclear what would happen to a country's sovereign debt if it left the euro zone. When the single currency was set up, national debt was converted into euros. In many cases, that conversion was enshrined in bond contracts as a one-way street, meaning that a return to national currencies wasn't provided for.

The decisive factor would be whether the country in question had borrowed money under national or international law -- and that varies from member state to member state. According to DekaBank, Germany has issued only 0.2 percent of its debt under international law, while the figure for the Netherlands is just under 40 percent. For Portugal, it stands at 60 percent.

The bonds would become the subject of legal disputes which would cause lasting damage to investor confidence in the countries that issued them. Investors are already worried by these factors. Japanese bank Nomura is reported to have advised its customers to check the government bonds in their portfolios to see whether they can be converted into a national currency.

When a currency is abolished, there are always victims, including many citizens whose savings are suddenly worth less or nothing. History shows that the collapse of currency unions is often accompanied by unrest or even civil war. UBS chief economist Stephane Deo believes that it is "virtually impossible to imagine a break-up without severe social consequences."

Violent protests in Europe? It is a nightmare scenario.

At the same time, the EU would suffer an immediate loss of influence in the world if it lost the euro. Efforts to forge a common foreign and security policy would be rendered pointless. Without the euro, the voice even of large countries like Germany would amount to no more than "a whisper on the world stage" writes Deo.

US economist Barry Eichengreen says the disastrous political consequences of a collapse of the euro zone will deter countries from allowing the currency to fail. "The high value that member states attach to their involvement in the larger European process would prevent them from abandoning the euro," he writes, adding: "except under the most extreme circumstances."

Have these extreme circumstances been reached now? Are the costs of saving the euro -- ever-increasing debt and interest payments on that debt -- so high that they exceed its benefits?

In no other country is skepticism of the euro as great as it is in Germany. On the one hand, that is understandable given that Germany is responsible for the largest share of the aid packages for the crisis-stricken countries. But it also comes across as a bit absurd considering the high degree to which the country has profited from the introduction of the euro.

Germany is a proud exporting nation, and around 40 percent of its exports go to other euro-zone nations. On Tuesday, the news broke that German exports will exceed the €1 trillion level for the first time. But the very companies enjoying this current success are accustomed to being able to export their goods at the lowest and most stable prices. The euro made both possible. The common currency eliminated exchange rate fluctuations in the euro zone, the euro appreciated less strongly than the deutsche mark. In other words, it kept prices competitive.

The result was a boom in exports. Between 1999 and 1993, German exports rose by around 3 percent. But between 1999 and 2003, exports increased by 6.5 percent. Between 2003 and 2007, two years after the introduction of euro notes and coins, German exports rose a staggering 9 percent. The federal government-owned investment bank KfW researched the benefits of this boom and determined that membership in the currency union has created profits in Germany in the last two years alone of €50 billion to €60 billion.

If Germany were to exit the euro zone, this advantage would vanish quite suddenly. A reintroduced deutsche mark would quickly appreciate against the euro -- UBS chief economist Deo regards a rise by 40 percent to be realistic. The result would be that exports would become more expensive. If a strong country were to leave the euro zone, Deo writes, "it would ultimately have to write off its export industry." For the German economy, this would be a disastrous scenario.

Would Would Happen If Athens Left the Euro Zone?

And what would happen to the crisis-plagued countries like Greece and Portugal? Some economists -- like Hans-Werner Sinn, the president of the Institute for Economic Research (Ifo), a leading German think tank in Munich -- believe Greece could actually regain competitiveness by leaving the euro zone by devaluating the drachma. That may sound good at first, but there's a catch: Athens would still have to pay back a large share of its debt, even after exiting from the common currency, in euros. But that repayment would be made far more difficult as a result of the drachma's devaluation. An Athens exit from the euro zone would also hit German and French banks, which have a high degree of exposure to Greek debt.

A decisive question is that of the total cost Germany would face if it left the euro zone. Economist Dirk Meyer has developed a scenario in which the total costs would fall somewhere between €250 and €340 billion. That would represent 10 to 14 percent of German gross domestic product, a considerable amount.

UBS chief economist Deo, has even gone so far as to estimate that 20 to 25 percent of GDP might be realistic in the first year after a German exit alone. That would translate to a per capita cost of between €6,000 and €8,000, with costs of between €3,500 and €4,500 in subsequent years. By comparison, if, after Greece, Portugal and Ireland each had to be given a debt haircut of 50 percent, Deo estimates it would only cost around €1,000 per German citizen -- and it would be a one-time cost.

The calculations undertaken by ING chief economist Cliffe are similarly pessimistic. In his scenario, he assumes that the breakup of the euro zone would create many additional problems: falling stock prices, the need to bail out further banks to the tune of billions and a sharp drop in the euro exchange rate. "Compared to the presumed long-term benefits, the scope of the economic damage in the first two years would weigh heavily," he concludes. "Decision-makers," he warns, "perhaps ought to think of that before they gleefully describe the exit from the currency union as an option."

This sounds like a clear message to Europe's politicians. But it isn't just the real economy that would be affected massively by the end of the euro zone. The financial sector would also face new perils.

The impressions left by the last financial crisis in 2008 and 2009 remain fresh, the worries of new problems among banks still great. In this situation the exit of a single country from the euro zone could be fatal.

Should a weak country like Greece pull out, a panicked reaction by its citizens is to be expected. In expectation of currency devaluation, hundreds of thousands of people would likely clean out their bank accounts, creating a run on banks. People would subsequently try to put their money in foreign banks. A capital flight like this would finish off banks that are already in distress.

Were the entire euro zone to dissolve, even a strong country like Germany would suffer. In this case each former member country would have to establish a new exchange rate for their new currency. Europeans would then have an incentive to swap their remaining euros against a strong national currency -- like the deutsche mark, for example. Thus Germany would attract piles of capital, in turn increasing inflation pressure.

According to economist Junius, countries have two possibilities for avoiding these problems: On the one hand they can act so quickly that the financial markets would be surprised by their exit from the euro zone. In this case, however, the move couldn't be communicated politically and legitimized -- making it practically unthinkable.

On the other hand, countries that pull out could, through the implementation of capital controls, among other things, take precautions for monitoring the amount of money that comes in and out. Harvard economist Scott has already thought extensively about how Italy could introduce a new Lira with temporary border closures and stamping.

But Junius sees such a step as unrealistic for Europe. "In light of the geographical proximity and intensive trade relationships it would be a very impractical solution that would offer a few days of relief at best," he said. Furthermore, the capital controls would contradict the principle of the common market, putting the concept of the European Union itself in question.

New Cool Trend: Third Wave Coffee: direct trade, high-quality beans, single-origin, lighter roasts and latte art.

2011-11-27T12:58:00.001-08:00

The Third Wave of Coffee refers to a current movement to produce high-quality coffee, and consider coffee as an artisanal foodstuff, like wine, rather than a commodity, like wheat. This involves improvements at all stages of production, from improving coffee bean growing, harvesting, and processing, to stronger relationships between coffee growers and coffee traders and roasters, to higher quality and fresh roasting, at times called microroasting (by analogy with microbrew beer), to skilled brewing.

Third Wave Coffee aspires to the highest form of culinary appreciation of coffee, so that one may appreciate subtleties of flavor, bean varietal, and growing region – similar to other complex culinary products such as wine, tea, and chocolate. Distinctive features of Third Wave Coffee include direct trade coffee, high-quality beans (see specialty coffee for scale), single-origin coffee (as opposed to blends), lighter roasts of the beans, and latte art. It also sometimes includes naked portafilters, and revivals of alternative methods of coffee preparation, such as vacuum coffee (sometimes called "siphon") and individual drip brew.

The term "Third Wave" was coined in 2002, and refers narrowly to an American phenomenon, particularly from the 1990s and continuing today, but with some roots in the 1980s, 1970s, and 1960s. Similar movements exist in the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, and Scandinavia. More broadly, Third Wave Coffee can be seen as part of the specialty coffee movement.

History of term

Trish Rothgeb (formerly Skeie) of Wrecking Ball Coffee Roasters first wrote about the Third Wave of Coffee in a November 2002 article of The Flamekeeper, a newsletter of the Roaster's Guild, a trade guild of the Specialty Coffee Association of America. More recently, the third wave of coffee has been chronicled by publications such as The New York Times, LA Weekly, Los Angeles Times, La Opinión and The Guardian.

In March 2008, Pulitzer Prize winning food critic Jonathan Gold of the LA Weekly defined the third wave of coffee by saying:

The first wave of American coffee culture was probably the 19th-century surge that put Folgers on every table, and the second was the proliferation, starting in the 1960s at Peet's and moving smartly through the Starbucks grande decaf latte, of espresso drinks and regionally labeled coffee. We are now in the third wave of coffee connoisseurship, where beans are sourced from farms instead of countries, roasting is about bringing out rather than incinerating the unique characteristics of each bean, and the flavor is clean and hard and pure.

The earlier term "specialty coffee" was coined in 1974, and refers narrowly to high-quality beans scoring 80 points or more on a 100-point scale.

By region

United States

In the US, the market is very diverse. Most Third Wave Coffee is served in independently owned and operated coffee shops, with few chains, none large. There are a large number of roasters, often available via mail order, and some stand-alone coffee shops or small chains roast their own coffee; compare brewpub. There are a few larger businesses, more prominent in roasting than in operating – the "Big Three of Third Wave Coffee" are commonly held to be Intelligentsia Coffee & Tea of Chicago, Illinois; Stumptown Coffee Roasters of Portland, Oregon; and Counter Culture Coffee of North Carolina, all of which engage in direct trade sourcing. Intelligentsia has 6 bars – 3 in Chicago, 3 in Los Angeles, together with 1 "lab" in New York, while Stumptown has 8 bars – 5 bars in Portland, 2 in Seattle, and 1 in New York. By comparison, Starbucks has well over 10,000 locations.

Earlier history

Important earlier influences are Peet's Coffee & Tea of Berkeley, California, which in the late 1960s began artisanal sourcing, roasting, and blending, and the Seattle coffee scene of the 1970s, 80s, and 90s, which saw the birth of artisanal American espresso bars, and led to nationwide chains, notably Starbucks, which are retrospectively titled "Second Wave". (Peet's primarily retails beans for home brewing, features dark roasts, and did not serve espresso until 1984.) These in turn were predated by Italian American espresso bars, primarily serving immigrant communities, and 19th century "First Wave" coffee importers.

Another important event was the 1982 foundation of the Specialty Coffee Association of America. Other early importers include Dallis Coffee (founded 1980s) and The Coffee Connection of Boston (founded 1974, following influence by Peet's).

List of 3rd wave coffe shops in Montreal:

Entre le café et la plume 123, av. du Mont-Royal O, 514 903-2618

Caffè in Gamba 5263 Avenue du Parc (514) 656-6852

Café Névé 151 Rue Rachel Est (514) 903-9294

Caffè Art Java 837 Avenue Du Mont-Royal E. (514) 527-9990

Café Pikolo 3418B, avenue du Parc

Pourquoi Pas Espresso Bar 1447 rue Amherst

La Montée de Lait 9 avenue Fairmount Est

Cafe Myriade 1432 Rue Mackay
Pikolo Espresso Bar 3418 Avenue du Parc

Café Rico‎ 969 Rue Rachel Est

Cluny ArtBar 257 Prince Street

Saint Henri 3624 Rue Notre-Dame Ouest

Camellia Sinensis 351, rue Emery

Samsung Galaxy S2 making fun of apple iPhone users

2011-11-25T14:58:00.000-08:00

L'humain toujours plus fort que la machine

2011-11-24T09:15:00.000-08:00

(Via Le Devoir) Le scénario-catastrophe est alimenté depuis des lunes par l'univers de la science-fiction: un jour, les machines vont prendre le contrôle des humains, les asservir et surtout présider à leur destinée, pour le pire, bien entendu. La perspective d'avenir n'est pas très joyeuse. Elle serait aussi de plus en plus facile à entrevoir avec la prolifération des modules de communication portables auxquels s'accrochent les humains, parfois dans les secondes suivant la levée du lit et souvent au mépris des autres humains autour d'eux.

La preuve, selon quelques technophobes et angoissés de la modernité, que la prophétie des oiseaux de mauvais augure est finalement en train de s'écrire. Doucement. La machine commence-t-elle à prendre le dessus sur son créateur? Des membres de la Dell Communauty ont soumis ce sombre demain à l'épreuve des faits, pour le plaisir de la chose. Comment? En comparant les compétences de la machine humaine avec celle de la machine binaire, selon plusieurs points, dont la vision, l'audition, la mémoire et la capacité de composer avec des virus. Le résultat, s'il est encore et toujours à l'avantage de l'animal pensant, ne fait pas pour autant mal paraître les assemblages de plastique, de circuits imprimés de processeurs.

La vision. C'est l'humain qui gagne avec des yeux qui lui permettent de percevoir, en terme de définition, pas moins de 576 mégapixels, soit 300 fois plus que la caméra de la plupart des ordinateurs portables qui ne comprennent le monde autour d'eux qu'à une résolution de 2.0 mégapixels. Les appareils photo de calibre professionnel sont aujourd'hui à 24 mégapixels. Bien sûr, l'an dernier, un appareil photo expérimental a fait monter la sauce en prenant un cliché de... 26 gigapixels, note Dell. Mais il a fallu trois heures pour générer la photo.

L'audition. L'oreille humaine est impossible à battre avec sa capacité à capter des fréquences sur un spectre qui va de 20 à 20 000 hertz. La plupart des microphones d'ordinateurs, eux, vont de 100 à 16 000 hertz. Et, donc, pour cacher une conversation à Hal, l'ordinateur malade de 2001, l'odyssée de l'espace, la recette aurait été très simple.

L'odorat. Victoire facile. L'organisme humain dispose de milliers de capteurs sensoriels qui lui permettent de distinguer plus de 10 000 odeurs différentes. Les bonnes comme les mauvaises. Les ordinateurs, eux, ne sentent tout simplement pas. Au mieux, ils peuvent identifier des molécules liées à une odeur ou une saveur, mais jamais comprendre ce qu'est vraiment le parfum de l'amour. Tant pis pour eux.

La lecture. Quelques humains prétendent pouvoir lire 10 000 mots à la minute, même si, dans les faits, la plupart d'entre nous atteignent en lecture une vitesse de croisière de 1000 à 2000 mots par minute. C'est autant que la plupart des numériseurs... pour le moment du moins, puisque dans les laboratoires, des machines capables de lire 200 pages à la minute sont déjà en opération.

La mémoire. Ça se corse. La Dell Communauty souligne qu'à ce jour, un certain Daniel Tammet a fait briller l'humain en mémorisant le chiffre Pi (3,1416) et surtout ses 22 500 décimales. Un disque dur de 500 gigabytes peut contenir des chiffres 24 millions de fois plus gros. Et aujourd'hui, l'humain travaille à la construction d'un disque dur de 120 petabytes capable de contenir 120 millions de gigabytes de données numérisées. C'est la capacité de 7,5 millions de iPhone de base en une seule machine. Et ça donne forcément une longueur d'avance à cette dernière.

Le jeu. Le combat est déjà terminé. Le champion du monde des échecs et même celui du jeu télévisé Jeopardy, c'est un ordinateur. Et l'avance dans ce domaine est probablement impossible à surmonter.

La consommation d'énergie. Un ordinateur consomme en moyenne entre 20 et 90 watts, soit bien moins que la machine humaine qui, si elle suit les recommandations des nutritionnistes en ingérant 2000 à 2500 calories par jour, induit une consommation d'énergie variant entre 96 et 120 watts. Reste que c'est encore mieux que les performances du plus puissant des superordinateurs qui, pour arriver à un niveau de calcul approchant de 80 % celui du cerveau humain, a besoin de 9,9 mégawatts d'énergie pour le faire. Pas 96 watts.

Le stockage énergétique. Allez, plastronnons: un ordinateur portable peut vivre de trois à dix heures sur sa pile. L'humain moyen peut survivre de quatre à six semaines sans nourriture et de deux à dix jours sans eau. Que dire de plus?

La température. La machine humaine est fragile, souligne la Dell Communauty en rappelant que, pour bien fonctionner, le corps humain doit avoir une température variant entre 36,1 et 37,2 °C. L'ordinateur, lui, peut faire la même chose entre 10 et 35 °C.

Les infections. Il y a des millions de virus dans l'environnement, mais près de 5000 sont très bien connus de la communauté scientifique en raison de leur risque potentiel sur la santé humaine. Aujourd'hui, les ordinateurs évoluent dans un écosystème où 2,5 millions de virus informatiques les menacent. C'est pire.

Au terme de la comparaison, l'humain arrive facilement à tirer son épingle du jeu, croient les instigateurs de ce projet comparatif aussi inutile que divertissant. Oui, l'humain a encore le dessus sur la machine et finalement, la science-fiction n'a jamais vraiment cessé de le démontrer puisqu'il faut encore et toujours passer par son cerveau génial pour être capable, pour le moment, d'imaginer une situation inverse.

CNN Republican National Security Debate 11/22/2011 (1 of 9)

2011-11-23T00:05:00.001-08:00

Dean Clifford: Best explanation of Freeman on the Land so far !

2011-11-22T01:53:00.001-08:00

The Guardian and French newspaper LeMonde reports 'freemason-style Goldman Sachs network across European countries'

2011-11-21T22:56:00.000-08:00

The Guardian: Goldman Sachs conquers Europe

Zero Hedge: The Final Phase Of Goldman's World Domination Plan

Marc Roche, auteur de "La Banque - comment Goldman Sachs dirige le monde" (2010) et "Le capitalisme hors-la-loi" (2011) a publié le 16 novembre dans Le Monde un article sur le putsch européen de Goldman Sachs, symbole du banksterisme et de la voyoucratie de l'hyperfinance. En effet, le nouveau président de la Banque centrale européenne Mario Draghi, le président désigné du conseil italien Mario Monti et le nouveau Premier ministre grec Loucas Papademos sont les figures totémiques de ce maillage serré. Sans compter, Otmar Issing, ex-membre du directoire de la Bundesbank et ancien économiste en chef de la BCE ; et l'Irlandais Peter Sutherland, un administrateur de Goldman Sachs International, qui a participé en coulisses au sauvetage de l'Irlande.

Extraits :

Ils sont sérieux et compétents, pesant le pour et le contre, étudiant les dossiers à fond avant de se prononcer. L'économie est leur péché mignon. Ils ne se découvrent que très rarement, ces fils de la Lumière entrés dans le Temple après un long et tatillon processus de recrutement. C'est à la fois un groupe de pression, une amicale de collecte d'informations, un réseau d'aide mutuelle. Ce sont les compagnons, maîtres et grands maîtres amenés à "répandre dans l'univers la vérité acquise en loge".

Ses détracteurs accusent le réseau d'influence européen tissé par la banque américaine Goldman Sachs (GS) de fonctionner comme une franc-maçonnerie. A des degrés divers, le nouveau président de la Banque centrale européenne Mario Draghi, le président désigné du conseil italien Mario Monti et le nouveau premier ministre grec Lucas Papademos sont les figures totémiques de ce maillage serré.

Ex-commissaires et responsables de banques centrales
Le premier fut vice-président de Goldman Sachs International pour l'Europe entre 2002 et 2005. Il était "associé" en charge des "entreprises et pays souverains", le département qui avait, peu avant son arrivée, aidé la Grèce à maquiller ses comptes grâce au produit financier " swap " sur de la dette souveraine.

Le deuxième a été conseiller international de Goldman Sachs de 2005 à sa nomination à la tête du gouvernement italien. Selon la banque, sa mission a consisté à la conseiller" sur les affaires européennes et les grands dossiers de politiques publiques mondiaux". Mario Monti a été un "ouvreur de portes" dont la tâche consistait à pénétrer au coeur du pouvoir européen pour défendre les intérêts de GS.

Le troisième, Lucas Papademos, fut gouverneur de la Banque centrale hellène entre 1994 et 2002. A ce titre, il a joué un rôle non élucidé dans l'opération de maquillage des comptes publics perpétré avec l'aide de Goldman Sachs. Le gestionnaire de la dette grecque est au demeurant Petros Christodoulos, ex-trader de la banque américaine à Londres.

Deux autres poids lourds du réseau Goldman en Europe ont également été à l'affiche dans la crise de l'euro : Otmar Issing, ex-membre du directoire de la Bundesbank et ancien économiste en chef de la Banque centrale européenne ; l'Irlandais Peter Sutherland, un administrateur de Goldman Sachs International, qui a participé en coulisses au sauvetage de l'Irlande.

Recueillir des infos en toute légalité
Comment le réseau de fidèles et d'entremetteurs a-t-il été constitué ? Aux Etats-Unis, ce cercle magique est constitué d'anciens responsables de l'institution passés avec armes et bagages au plus haut niveau de la fonction publique. En Europe, en revanche, Goldman Sachs s'est fait l'apôtre du capitalisme de relations.

Mais à l'inverse de ses concurrents, la banque ne s'intéresse ni aux diplomates à la retraite, ni aux hauts fonctionnaires nationaux comme internationaux et encore moins aux anciens premiers ministres ou ministres des finances. Goldman vise en priorité les responsables de banques centrales ou les ex-commissaires européens.

Leur tâche prioritaire consiste à recueillir des informations en toute légalité sur les opérations à venir ou sur la politique de taux d'intérêt des banques centrales. La banque aime placer ses hommes sans jamais laisser tomber le masque. C'est pourquoi ses hommes liges cachent cette filiation quand ils donnent une interview ou mènent une mission officielle.

Bien introduits, ces "ex" bavardent de choses et d'autres avec leurs interlocuteurs. Les langues se délient devant des personnages d'une telle trempe. Ils "sentent le vent" comme on dit familièrement. Les informations exclusives circulent ensuite dans les salles de marché de la banque.

Un ancien associé de Goldman Sachs à la BCE, un ex-entremetteur à la tête du gouvernement italien, un proche au pouvoir en Grèce : pour ses contempteurs, la banque dispose aujourd'hui d'un fantastique relais à Francfort, Rome et Athènes qui pourrait s'avérer utile en ces temps tourmentés.

La banque a mangé son pain blanc
Reste que, au-delà des apparences, le gouvernement Goldman en Europe, au faîte de sa puissance avant ou pendant la tourmente financière de 2008, a peut-être mangé son pain blanc.

En effet, les complicités anciennes entretenues par les ex-banquiers centraux chevronnés mobilisés pour tirer les ficelles, se révèlent moins utiles de nos jours face à des politiciens sensibles à l'impopularité des professionnels de la finance tenus pour responsables de la crise. Là où Goldman Sachs pouvait facilement exercer ses talents, une série d'affaires lui ont mis à dos la puissance publique. Le carnet d'adresses ne suffit plus sur une planète financière complexe et technique, face à une nouvelle génération d'industriels moins pétris de respect pour l'establishment.

Les patrons européens partis à la conquête du monde se sont émancipés des croisés de la haute finance style GS. La quête de valorisation de l'actionnaire, les exigences de transparence et l'activisme des contre-pouvoirs (médias, ONG, investisseurs institutionnels) ont tendance à émousser l’"effet réseau".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fE_nXrbpXis&feature=feedlik

The EU has destroyed National Democracy!

2011-11-20T20:46:00.001-08:00

G.I.A.B.O (Global Insurrection Against Banker Occupation)

2011-11-20T06:01:00.000-08:00

GIABO is a movement and soon to be PAC that advocates for the people against the large banks that have come to occupy every level of government and influence around the globe.
-End Too Big To Fail
-End Revolving Door Governance
-End Commodity Market Manipulation
-End Sale of State Assets to Banks
-End Bubble Economic Management
-End Tax Evasion By Top Income Earners
-End Golden Parachute Compensation for Failed Executives
-End Corporate Tax Evasion And Lower Corporate Tax Rate To A Flat 10%

-Promote A Transparent and Democratic Federal Reserve
-Promote Entrepreneurship
-Promote Competition Between Banks
-Promote Conservative (Risk Averse) Finance
-Promote New Regulatory Authority
-Promote High Frequency Trading Oversight
-Promote Derivatives Oversight
-Promote New Financial Product Approval Process

-Make Excessive Risk Taking With Other's Money A Criminal Offense
-Make Ratings Agencies Public/Private Partnerships
-Make Carried Interest Regular Income
-Make Firms That Borrowed At Subsidized Rates From The Federal Reserve Repay The Difference Between Subsidized And Market Rates Once Healthy

-Create Millionaire Tax Brackets. Additional 1% Tax On Every $250,000 after $2,000,000 Capped at 70%.

-Expose Politicians That Take Money From Failed Banks And Act Against The Interest Of Their Constituents
-Expose Hill Staffers, Lobbyists And Political Appointees Who Have Conflicts Of Interest Or Other Relationships That Make The Impartial Execution Of Their Job Unlikely
-Expose Banks And Their Lobbying Efforts

Capital Account: Max Keiser on Financial Apartheid, Germany 4.0, and Gold vs. SDR

2011-11-19T16:01:00.000-08:00

As the eurozone crisis continues, could the options on the table include a German takeover? A leaked document from Germany's foreign ministry reportedly reveals the country may be preparing for a new European fund that will be able to take over the economies of struggling eurozone countries. Meanwhile, we know regulators have been trying to figure out what happened to the $600 million dollars missing from customers of MF global. And they now suspect at least some of that cash may not be missing, it may be gone. Regulators suspect it may have been used to cover trading losses at the firm that has, of course, now declared bankruptcy. The question remains as to whether more customers will react like Gerald Celente who we talked to this week and created a new interpretation of what MF really stands for. And from working on Wall Street to Occupying Wall Street, we'll talk to Max Keiser on his evolution from broker to leader of the so-called global insurrection against banker occupation. And with 75,000 layoffs expected on Wall Street, will we see more bankers join the fight?

David Letterman with Herman Cain

2011-11-19T15:12:00.000-08:00

Ireland: "Germany Is Our New Master"

2011-11-18T12:45:00.000-08:00

(Reuters) - The Irish government has complained to European partners after confidential budget information shared with its EU-IMF lenders was leaked by German lawmakers, sparking a political storm at home. The media and opposition reacted furiously at the fact that the details of the December budget were presented to German lawmakers before their Irish counterparts, heightening fears that its EU-IMF bailout has undermined Irish sovereignty.

"Germany is our new master," ran a banner front-page headline in the Irish Daily Mirror. Opposition leaders in parliament described the leaks as "incredible" and "unprecedented" and demanded the government explain.

New German laws give its parliament the right to be fully informed about bailout countries' progress before new trenches of funds are paid out and Ireland's main opposition party led cries Germany was now calling the shots in Europe. Germany is pushing aggressively for EU treaty change to create tighter fiscal discipline across the bloc and a spokesman for its finance ministry said there was a clear procedure allowing parliament to see confidential documents belonging to countries in EU/IMF programmes.

Irish Finance Minister Michael Noonan told state broadcaster RTE he had provided "indications of what we might do in the budget" to the European Union and International Monetary Fund as part of Ireland's bailout programme. The Commission passed the document to Germany, which in turn gave the document to its budget committee, which is entitled to a quarterly update on the progress of countries bailed out by the European Financial Stability Facility bailout fund."We understand that the Irish authorities are upset, any leak of confidential information is regrettable," European Commission spokesman Amadeu Altafaj said in Brussels. The commission added in a statement that it had a mandate to share all relevant information with other member states before the disbursement of fresh funds is agreed to. The documents, first obtained by Reuters on Thursday, show Ireland will increase its top rate of sales tax by 2 percentage points in next month's budget and make up the rest of the 1 billion euros (856.7 million pounds) it is targeting in new revenue measures through indirect taxes. Noonan confirmed he would proposed a 2 percent VAT hike to government, but denied that a final decision had been made. The government has "raised this as an issue of concern at EU level," a spokesman for Noonan said. The leader of Ireland's largest opposition party said voters were entitled to an explanation of why the information was given to European partners before Irish lawmakers.

"I think it will be damaging in the sense that it plays to a narrative that Germany is calling shots all over Europe," Fianna Fail leader Michael Martin told Reuters. "It will damage sentient towards Europe and that is a problem."

What price the new democracy? Goldman Sachs conquers Europe

2011-11-18T04:34:00.000-08:00

The ascension of Mario Monti to the Italian prime ministership is remarkable for more reasons than it is possible to count. By replacing the scandal-surfing Silvio Berlusconi, Italy has dislodged the undislodgeable. By imposing rule by unelected technocrats, it has suspended the normal rules of democracy, and maybe democracy itself. And by putting a senior adviser at Goldman Sachs in charge of a Western nation, it has taken to new heights the political power of an investment bank that you might have thought was prohibitively politically toxic.

This is the most remarkable thing of all: a giant leap forward for, or perhaps even the successful culmination of, the Goldman Sachs Project.

It is not just Mr Monti. The European Central Bank, another crucial player in the sovereign debt drama, is under ex-Goldman management, and the investment bank's alumni hold sway in the corridors of power in almost every European nation, as they have done in the US throughout the financial crisis. Until Wednesday, the International Monetary Fund's European division was also run by a Goldman man, Antonio Borges, who just resigned for personal reasons.

Even before the upheaval in Italy, there was no sign of Goldman Sachs living down its nickname as "the Vampire Squid", and now that its tentacles reach to the top of the eurozone, sceptical voices are raising questions over its influence. The political decisions taken in the coming weeks will determine if the eurozone can and will pay its debts – and Goldman's interests are intricately tied up with the answer to that question.

Simon Johnson, the former International Monetary Fund economist, in his book 13 Bankers, argued that Goldman Sachs and the other large banks had become so close to government in the run-up to the financial crisis that the US was effectively an oligarchy. At least European politicians aren't "bought and paid for" by corporations, as in the US, he says. "Instead what you have in Europe is a shared world-view among the policy elite and the bankers, a shared set of goals and mutual reinforcement of illusions."

This is The Goldman Sachs Project. Put simply, it is to hug governments close. Every business wants to advance its interests with the regulators that can stymie them and the politicians who can give them a tax break, but this is no mere lobbying effort. Goldman is there to provide advice for governments and to provide financing, to send its people into public service and to dangle lucrative jobs in front of people coming out of government. The Project is to create such a deep exchange of people and ideas and money that it is impossible to tell the difference between the public interest and the Goldman Sachs interest.

Mr Monti is one of Italy's most eminent economists, and he spent most of his career in academia and thinktankery, but it was when Mr Berlusconi appointed him to the European Commission in 1995 that Goldman Sachs started to get interested in him. First as commissioner for the internal market, and then especially as commissioner for competition, he has made decisions that could make or break the takeover and merger deals that Goldman's bankers were working on or providing the funding for. Mr Monti also later chaired the Italian Treasury's committee on the banking and financial system, which set the country's financial policies.

With these connections, it was natural for Goldman to invite him to join its board of international advisers. The bank's two dozen-strong international advisers act as informal lobbyists for its interests with the politicians that regulate its work. Other advisers include Otmar Issing who, as a board member of the German Bundesbank and then the European Central Bank, was one of the architects of the euro.

Perhaps the most prominent ex-politician inside the bank is Peter Sutherland, Attorney General of Ireland in the 1980s and another former EU Competition Commissioner. He is now non-executive chairman of Goldman's UK-based broker-dealer arm, Goldman Sachs International, and until its collapse and nationalisation he was also a non-executive director of Royal Bank of Scotland. He has been a prominent voice within Ireland on its bailout by the EU, arguing that the terms of emergency loans should be eased, so as not to exacerbate the country's financial woes. The EU agreed to cut Ireland's interest rate this summer.

Picking up well-connected policymakers on their way out of government is only one half of the Project, sending Goldman alumni into government is the other half. Like Mr Monti, Mario Draghi, who took over as President of the ECB on 1 November, has been in and out of government and in and out of Goldman. He was a member of the World Bank and managing director of the Italian Treasury before spending three years as managing director of Goldman Sachs International between 2002 and 2005 – only to return to government as president of the Italian central bank.

Mr Draghi has been dogged by controversy over the accounting tricks conducted by Italy and other nations on the eurozone periphery as they tried to squeeze into the single currency a decade ago. By using complex derivatives, Italy and Greece were able to slim down the apparent size of their government debt, which euro rules mandated shouldn't be above 60 per cent of the size of the economy. And the brains behind several of those derivatives were the men and women of Goldman Sachs.

The bank's traders created a number of financial deals that allowed Greece to raise money to cut its budget deficit immediately, in return for repayments over time. In one deal, Goldman channelled $1bn of funding to the Greek government in 2002 in a transaction called a cross-currency swap. On the other side of the deal, working in the National Bank of Greece, was Petros Christodoulou, who had begun his career at Goldman, and who has been promoted now to head the office managing government Greek debt. Lucas Papademos, now installed as Prime Minister in Greece's unity government, was a technocrat running the Central Bank of Greece at the time.

Goldman says that the debt reduction achieved by the swaps was negligible in relation to euro rules, but it expressed some regrets over the deals. Gerald Corrigan, a Goldman partner who came to the bank after running the New York branch of the US Federal Reserve, told a UK parliamentary hearing last year: "It is clear with hindsight that the standards of transparency could have been and probably should have been higher."

When the issue was raised at confirmation hearings in the European Parliament for his job at the ECB, Mr Draghi says he wasn't involved in the swaps deals either at the Treasury or at Goldman.

It has proved impossible to hold the line on Greece, which under the latest EU proposals is effectively going to default on its debt by asking creditors to take a "voluntary" haircut of 50 per cent on its bonds, but the current consensus in the eurozone is that the creditors of bigger nations like Italy and Spain must be paid in full. These creditors, of course, are the continent's big banks, and it is their health that is the primary concern of policymakers. The combination of austerity measures imposed by the new technocratic governments in Athens and Rome and the leaders of other eurozone countries, such as Ireland, and rescue funds from the IMF and the largely German-backed European Financial Stability Facility, can all be traced to this consensus.

"My former colleagues at the IMF are running around trying to justify bailouts of €1.5trn-€4trn, but what does that mean?" says Simon Johnson. "It means bailing out the creditors 100 per cent. It is another bank bailout, like in 2008: The mechanism is different, in that this is happening at the sovereign level not the bank level, but the rationale is the same."

So certain is the financial elite that the banks will be bailed out, that some are placing bet-the-company wagers on just such an outcome. Jon Corzine, a former chief executive of Goldman Sachs, returned to Wall Street last year after almost a decade in politics and took control of a historic firm called MF Global. He placed a $6bn bet with the firm's money that Italian government bonds will not default.

When the bet was revealed last month, clients and trading partners decided it was too risky to do business with MF Global and the firm collapsed within days. It was one of the ten biggest bankruptcies in US history.

The grave danger is that, if Italy stops paying its debts, creditor banks could be made insolvent. Goldman Sachs, which has written over $2trn of insurance, including an undisclosed amount on eurozone countries' debt, would not escape unharmed, especially if some of the $2trn of insurance it has purchased on that insurance turns out to be with a bank that has gone under. No bank – and especially not the Vampire Squid – can easily untangle its tentacles from the tentacles of its peers. This is the rationale for the bailouts and the austerity, the reason we are getting more Goldman, not less. The alternative is a second financial crisis, a second economic collapse.

Shared illusions, perhaps? Who would dare test it?

Arrests at Occupy Wall Street

2011-11-18T02:27:00.000-08:00

Watch Nigel Farage Dance On The Euro's Grave

2011-11-17T19:15:00.001-08:00

After 16 hours on air at Wall Street protests, a Ustream star is born

2011-11-16T09:09:00.000-08:00

The revolution will be Ustreamed. When police ran Occupy Wall Street protestors out of Zuccotti Park in the middle of the night on Tuesday, there was really only one way to watch it live: On Tim Pool's "TheOther99" video stream. Pool, armed only with a cellphone and donated backup batteries, filmed the event through the night. He hosted the coverage news anchor style, the way Brian Williams would, talking almost continuously, stopping occasionally to conduct interviews. It might have looked a bit like grainy home video, but Pool had a sizable international audience. His Ustream.TV "channel" had, at various times, more than 20,000 simultaneous viewers, an audience some cable channels might envy. The audience exploded when word went out across Twitter that Pool’s stream was the best way to watch the protests online. When I met Tim Tuesday afternoon, he'd been "on the air" continually for nearly 16 hours. And while plenty of video streams have come and gone during the protests, Pool’s broadcast earned him a lot of credibility with protesters, and he was still going strong into the evening. "Other than my hand cramping up from holding up the phone, I feel pretty good," he said. He hadn't gone dark, or gone to the bathroom, that entire time. "I do really need a piece of fruit, though," he added.

Pool, from Chicago, has been at the Occupy Wall Street protest from the start. He said had no experience hosting a TV show or live stream, but honed his ability to fill air time with talk during the past two months while documenting the protest. Anyone -- including police officers and foul-mouthed protesters -- who walked near Pool risked being broadcast instantly to the world. Pool spent most of the time Tuesday morning running after crowds of evicted protesters as they tried to reorganize, or showing live video of sanitation workers gathering tents and other personal items in the park for disposal. He rarely turned the camera on himself. "I'm here to document what's going on," he said. "I've been doing this since the beginning." What Pool’s doing is vaguely similar to what’s called “lifecasting,” where individuals chronicle their lives online through a continual video stream or similar real-time techniques. The difference is this: Pool’s all-night broadcast on Tuesday morning was riveting.

The quality of his video stream -- both in content and technology -- is surprisingly good. And the simplicity of his gear can't be beat. He's using a Samsung Galaxy S2 on Sprint's 4G network to stream video, using the onboard camera and microphone to record, and connecting the phone to a small but powerful backup battery. If you want to know, it’s an "Energi to Go" 18,000 battery produced by Energizer which provides 18,000 milliamp hours (roughly 10 cell phone charging cycles). When his backup battery drained dangerously low, he put out a plea for help on his stream and received two more donated batteries. "That's why I've been able to keep doing this long," he said.

Perhaps the most complicated part of his video gear was the umbrella he had to raise to protect his gear Tuesday night when rain began falling in lower Manhattan. But by that time, police had allowed protesters back into Zuccotti Park, and Pool wasn't about to let a little rain get in the way of his broadcast.

JIm Rogers on Alex Jones !!

2011-11-16T01:36:00.001-08:00

Bill Maher "I Misjudged Republicans! They Will Vote For A Black Man As Long As He's An Idiot"

2011-11-15T22:53:00.001-08:00

Damien Walters Stuntman Shows Off Crazy Moves

2011-11-15T04:04:00.000-08:00

Emily Levine: A trickster's theory of everything

2011-11-14T10:29:00.001-08:00

How to start a business by Tim Ferriss

2011-11-14T10:27:00.001-08:00

Mike Gravel's plan for real democracy, on the Kaiser Report

2011-11-13T02:30:00.000-08:00

Junior dos Santos vs Cain Velasquez fight

2011-11-12T21:24:00.001-08:00

Mr. McRaney’s new book, You Are Not So Smart is aimed at pointing out the self-delusions most of us harbour but aren’t humble enough to notice.

2011-11-12T06:24:00.000-08:00

(Via The G&M) Author David McRaney has some bad news for those of us who think we’re pretty together, cognitively speaking: We probably spend a lot of time confirming our own biases by reading copacetic newspapers and websites. We think we’re skeptical, but we’re prone to believe horoscope-style niceties about ourselves. And even though we think we’re good, moral beings, we’re just as likely to do bad things as the next guy. Mr. McRaney’s new book, You Are Not So Smart is a romp through some of the major findings in the field of psychology aimed at pointing out the self-delusions most of us harbour but aren’t humble enough to notice.

The journalist and social media director, who has been blogging for two years on the topic, writes that even when we think we’re engaging in deep introspection, we “miss many influences, accumulating on your persona, like barnacles on the side of a ship.”

He talked about some of those pernicious barnacles from his home in South Mississippi.

What’s the granddaddy of self-delusions?

Confirmation bias holds everything together. Thinking your opinions are the result of objective analysis, when they’re not. It flavours our unbreakable belief that our behaviour follows from attitude, when actually our attitudes follow from our behaviours. We like to make up stories. But we’re unreliable narrators.

How’s that related to what you call “consistency bias”?

We don’t like to feel like we are inconsistent. We tend to think we’ve always had the same attitudes and beliefs about the world. People tend to say they’ve always felt X, X being what they feel in that moment.

When you go back and look there always seems to be some discrepancy. Researchers have done this with relationships. They ask people in the middle of a break-up, ‘How do you feel about each other?’ Then a year later they ask them again and if they’ve reconciled, they’ve always loved each other. If they’ve now decided to part ways and they don’t like each other any more, they say, ‘Yeah, I could really tell back then that she wasn’t for me or he wasn’t for me.’

Like when someone says they know on their wedding day that they shouldn’t have married the person.

We redact and edit our past so we can be consistent.

Why?

The why is where it gets messy and complicated but there’s probably something to do with cognitive dissonance and perception and the need to keep a high, beautiful self-esteem going.

A number of the delusions you explore explain people as consumers. You say brand loyalty, for example, is more about reinforcing a choice you’ve already made than actually loving the product. We love to bemoan evil corporations, but we’re complicit.

That’s really where the rubber meets the road in a lot of this stuff. Whenever you think about psychology, you have to remember that it’s a really young science. But that doesn’t mean people haven’t been doing this kind of research for a long time when it comes to selling things. For instance, the fewer items you put out on display, the less chance the consumer is going to feel buyer’s remorse. And Apple is the greatest genius at this because they offer good, better, best and that’s it. The reason is you sit there thinking, did I just spend all that money on a computer? You think, I only had three options and I picked the best one. Instead of looking for a camera and you go on Amazon and there are 10,000 choices. You might think, I don’t know if I got the right one.

Then there’s the “anchoring effect.” What’s that?

One way it’s used everyday is in restaurants, especially high-end restaurants: You look over the menu and everything’s about the same price, then there’s this one meal that’s $45 or $55 and you’re like, ‘That’s crazy, I’m not spending that.’ The only reason that’s on the menu is as a decoy to make you see the other prices as reasonable. Because they’ve set the anchor price. Even telling you this or me writing about it doesn’t mean that I have any power against it.

So do you play spot-the-anchor at restaurants with friends or tells dinner party debaters how they’re deluded?

It’s like natural selection. I’ve learned things that will give me social capital and the things that will make people say... shut up. I do it all the time. But it’s on social media where I have to keep myself in check because people will say, ‘This is the first time in 600 years it’s 11/11/11’ and I’m like ‘...based on an arbitrary...’ wait, why am I doing this? I’m just going to make somebody hate me.

So, events like that aren’t as special as we think? We love one-in-a-million coincidences.

My favourite way to look at it is something called the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy – honestly, because it has an awesome name. It comes from the idea of a cowboy shooting at the side of a barn, over and over again. It fills up with bullets. Then, he walks over to the barn and paints a bull’s-eye over where the bullet holes clustered. So he can look like he’s a crack shot.

Now, that’s a great metaphor and one of my favourite mental stumbling blocks because it’s so easy to describe. You can say this is also why people say things like deaths always come in threes. Which is crazy because there have been billions of deaths up until now and someone’s dying every couple of seconds, so obviously death is a continuous process but we tend to draw a bull’s eye around a meaningful number and three tends to be a meaningful number in our culture.

We’re desperate for patterns?

The brain is a pattern-recognition machine. That’s how we escaped nature and built civilization. We recognize signal and separate it from noise. When you’re in the middle of a party and everyone’s talking you can listen to one voice. We sort chaos into order at all times and we’re keen on trying to find order in any pattern. You can’t just look at a cloud and say, ‘What an interesting lump of air molecules’ you have to say, that looks a lot like a bear. Or, especially a face. We have face-recognition software built in.

We’re built to recognize when things line up and it’s difficult for us just to say it’s coincidence because since we also love to create narratives about things, we like to apply stories to when coincidences line up.

In the Second World War when the Germans were bombing England, there were places – it was random – that the bombs didn’t hit. If you took out a map and put push pins where the bombs landed, they naturally clustered in some areas and not in others. People began to think, ‘Maybe we have spies living among us and they obviously live in the places where the bombs aren’t falling.’ Something that’s good for us and has helped us for millennia can make us turn around and see patterns where there aren’t any.

Not that this is a self-help book, but what would be the most useful place to start to shift their thinking?

Procrastination: I don’t think I’ve written anything with more hits and sharing because we all experience it. Steve Jobs was a procrastinator. Albert Einstein. You cannot stop wanting to procrastinate.

What I outline in the book is that it’s not laziness that’s doing this, it’s “present bias.” You believe that the person you are now is going to be the person you are later. You think that the person who makes all the plans and sees things clearly and knows what to do now is the person who is going to face these decisions when you get to that point. In study after study, if you ask someone which is better, the cupcake or the salad, they say the salad. And then you ask them, in an hour, if I give you that choice which one are you going to pick? You say the salad. Then, when you sit them down, people are more likely to pick the cupcake.

You write that people can look at their Netflix queue for an example of this.

I put my own list of saved movies on my blog: Those are great movies and documentaries that I should watch and that will make me a better person. And then in the moment I’m going to watch, yeah, I’m going to watch Family Guy.

The person picking the movies is not the person facing the choice of what to watch.

They did a study with a bank of movies, many of them labelled lowbrow (which I wouldn’t do because I love so much lowbrow stuff) like The Mask or Speed. It also had things like The Piano and Schindler’s List (movies that were current at the time). They gave people the option to pick three movies to watch over the course of a few days. Most people did pick Schindler’s List, but they chose to watch it third. When they were told they had to watch them back-to-back, people didn’t pick Schindler’s List at all. They’d just pick three fun movies.

You have to fight the desire for instant gratification. You’re always going to do it even if you know you do it. I wrote about Walter Mischel’s famous marshmallow test, which asked kids to hold off eating a marshmallow placed in front of them. Children who were able to delay gratification ended up being the people who were more successful in life, in the way we consider people successful. They had better marriages, higher-paying jobs and more education. The correlation suggests that being good at delaying gratification means that you’re good at thinking about thinking.

The kids who succeeded weren’t the ones with the most willpower. They were the ones who didn’t even look at the marshmallow. Kids who failed the test were the ones who thought they were more in control then they really were. They’d stare at it. Smell it. They’d say, ok, I’ll just lick it and put it down. The kids who succeeded would bang their head on the table, slap their face, turn around and around in their chair. They knew they couldn’t’ trust themselves so they came up with strategies to outwit themselves. That’s how you get around procrastination. You cannot face it head on, it’s impossible. You can’t stare at the marshmallow. You have to outsmart the future you.

So, have you figured out a way not to stare at the marshmallow?

I actually wrote about procrastination as a response to having to write the book. That’s what was going on in my life. We were in the early process of getting a book deal and I knew I had a lot of work ahead of me, keeping interesting blog posts going up and sitting down every night making sure I had a book coming out. While I’m keeping a job.

I know I can work for about two hours before I want to punch the screen and run through the fields. They make computer programs to do this for you but I’ve been able to get away with some self control – I make sure I don’t do any social media for two hours. And I don’t do any non-on-topic browsing for those two hours. Then I sit down and write in two-hour bursts.And there’s an old trick given to me by my first psychology professor, the Premack principle – you always reward yourself after doing something you didn’t want to do. I get to play video games or go on social media for 30 minutes. Then I start over again. It’s an ongoing struggle. It will never stop. You’ll be 85 and saying ‘I don’t wanna take the pills...’

There are also a few life-and-death brain delusions that people might want to know. You write about something called the normalcy bias, which can make people not rush to save their own lives – you mention cases of 9/11 World Trade Center workers who shut down their computers, put on their coats and slowly made their way to the exit instead of running.

You hear about people who just stand around and die when a ship sinks or a building is on fire. There’s a window to survive and a lot of people don’t; they just sit there.

When if comes to something scary, or dangerous, or life-threatening, the first thing we want to believe is that things are not dangerous or scary. We really try to convince ourselves that everything is okay. We go through a predicable series of reactions. You hear an explosion in your building – you don’t immediately jump up and go, ‘Get the hell out of here!’ No one does that unless they’ve been trained, which is why it’s important to take the drill seriously. They teach you to get past your normalcy bias.

Otherwise, you just look around and try to gather information from the people around you. If you’re still alarmed, then you’ll try to contact friends and family. Evolutionarily speaking that makes sense, you’re going to try and make sure the people you love and share genes with are ok. And see if they know anything.

Eventually, maybe, if enough things alert you to how bad the situation is, you act. The problem is in some situations, like an air disaster or floods, you don’t have enough time for that.

You write that those 9/11 victims were “begging for the world to return to normal be engaging in acts of normalcy.”

I know that’s true. The eye of Hurricane Katrina passed over us. I had my whole family in my house. Some had come up from the Mississippi Gulf coast, some down from up north – I’m sure they wish they hadn’t. So the eye passed over us. We were without power for 10 days. When the power went out I was making a grilled cheese sandwich. We watched a movie the night before. We were doing normal stuff because we wanted normal stuff to be possible.

Then, there’s the bystander effect, which we may have seen in the recent case of the Chinese toddler who died after being hit by vehicles and ignored by passersby.

It’s a natural tendency. There’s a lab experiment in which a student is writing a test and someone yells “Help!” in the next room. If the student is surrounded by actors told not to respond, the student doesn’t, for minutes. If he’s alone, it only takes 5 or 6 seconds.

You end the book with a doozy, something called the “fundamental attribution error.” We keep making the mistake of thinking people who do bad things are crazy or evil without looking at their environment.

There’s the superstar 1971 study by Philip Zimbardo (in which students were put into a prison setting as guard and prisoners and turned on each other). Forty years later you have Abu Ghraib. If you give people power and don’t watch them, they do bad things with it.

This interview has been condensed and edited.

Intellectual Roots of Wall St. Protest Lie in Academe ! Movement's principles arise from scholarship on anarchy

2011-11-12T06:22:00.000-08:00

Academics have become frequent visitors to Zuccotti Park, the 33,000-square-foot pedestrian plaza in the heart of New York City's financial district that is now the site of a nearly monthlong protest, Occupy Wall Street.

Famous scholars like Cornel West, Slavoj Zizek, and Frances Fox Piven have spoken to the crowd, with their remarks dispersed, word-for-word, from one cluster of people to the next through a "human megaphone." Many others, such as Lawrence Lessig, have lent their support from farther away, as the demonstrations have spread to cities and college campuses nationwide.

The movement has repeatedly been described as too diffuse and decentralized to accomplish real change, and some observers have seen the appearances by academic luminaries as an attempt to lend the protest intellectual heft and direction. Certainly, its intellectual underpinnings and signature method of operating are easier to identify than its goals.

Economists whose recent works have decried income inequality have informed the movement's critiques of capitalism. Critical theorists like Michael Hardt, professor of literature at Duke University, and Antonio Negri, former professor of political science at the University of Padua, have anticipated some of the central issues raised by the protests. Most recently, they linked the actions in New York and other American cities to previous demonstrations in Spain, Cairo's Tahrir Square, and in Athens, among other places. But Occupy Wall Street's most defining characteristics—its decentralized nature and its intensive process of participatory, consensus-based decision-making—are rooted in other precincts of academe and activism: in the scholarship of anarchism and, specifically, in an ethnography of central Madagascar. It was on this island nation off the coast of Africa that David Graeber, one of the movement's early organizers, who has been called one of its main intellectual sources, spent 20 months between 1989 and 1991. He studied the people of Betafo, a community of descendants of nobles and of slaves, for his 2007 book, Lost People. Betafo was "a place where the state picked up stakes and left," says Mr. Graeber, an ethnographer, anarchist, and reader in anthropology at the University of London's Goldsmiths campus. In Betafo he observed what he called "consensus decision-making," where residents made choices in a direct, decentralized way, not through the apparatus of the state. "Basically, people were managing their own affairs autonomously," he says. The process is what scholars of anarchism call "direct action." For example, instead of petitioning the government to build a well, members of a community might simply build it themselves. It is an example of anarchism's philosophy, or what Mr. Graeber describes as "democracy without a government." He transplanted the lessons he learned in Madagascar to the globalism protests in the late 1990s in which he participated, and which some scholars say are the clearest antecedent, in spirit, to Occupy Wall Street.

Soon after the magazine Adbusters published an appeal to set up a "peaceful barricade" on Wall Street, Mr. Graeber spent six weeks in New York helping to plan the demonstrations before an initial march by protesters on September 17, which culminated in the occupation.

It is far from clear, of course, how attuned the protesters are to the scholarship of Mr. Graeber, other critical theorists, or academics who study anarchism. A growing collection of fiction and nonfiction books, however, has a post-office box to which supporters are invited to send books. "The People's Library" in New York City, which has been copied at other Occupy protest sites, houses nearly 1,200 books in cardboard boxes that are protected against the elements by clear plastic sheeting.

"I really am amazed for the respect they have for the word," Eric Seligson, the librarian at the protest site on Wall Street, told Esquire. "There's a real reverence for what has been written that has surprised me, since they eschew whatever came before, all the thought that came before."

The defining aspect of Occupy Wall Street, its emphasis on direct action and leaderless, consensus-based decision-making, is most clearly embodied by its General Assembly, in which participants in the protest make group decisions both large and small, like adopting principles of solidarity and deciding how best to stay warm at night. This intensive and egalitarian process is important both procedurally and substantively, Mr. Graeber says. "One of the things that revolutionaries have learned over the course of the 20th century is that the idea of the ends justifying the means is deeply problematic," he says. "You can't create a just society through violence, or freedom through a tight revolutionary cadre. You can't establish a big state and hope it will go away. The means and ends have to be the same." When 2,000 people make a decision jointly, it is an example of direct action, or direct democracy, Mr. Graeber says. "It makes you feel different to go to a meeting where your opinions are really respected." Or, as an editorial in the protest's house publication, Occupied Wall Street Journal, put it, "This occupation is first about participation."

Three days after the protests began, Mr. Graeber left. Since then, he has kept a low profile because he wants to avoid what he calls an "intellectual vanguard model" of leadership. "We don't want to create a leadership structure," he says. "The fact I was being promoted as a celebrity is a danger. It's the kids who made this happen."
Animated by Anger

Those kids include college students, who have been animated by anger over mounting student-loan debt and declining job prospects, and have become visible participants in the protests. Several Occupy Colleges demonstrations took place last week. The concerns of the protesters are primarily economic, and scholars of that discipline have had much to say about economic fairness that has resonated with the demonstrations. In a Vanity Fair article in May, Joseph E. Stiglitz, the Nobel laureate and professor at Columbia University framed income inequality as a matter of a wealthy 1 percent versus the remaining 99 percent—a trope that the movement has championed. Critics of the movement, including David Brooks, have faulted this line of thinking because "almost no problem can be productively conceived in this way." Mr. Stiglitz visited the protests this month, where he said the financial markets, which are supposed to allocate capital and manage risks, have instead misallocated capital and created risk. "We are bearing the cost of their misdeeds," he told the demonstrators. Jeffrey D. Sachs, director of the Earth Institute at Columbia, also visited the demonstrations and spoke to them this month. He says his primary goal in attending was to show his support for the demonstrators' efforts. He also wanted to share ideas, many of which he stakes out in a recent book, The Price of Civilization, which one commentator has urged the protesters to read, though it is not yet in the collection of the People's Library. As a macroeconomist and fiscal expert, Mr. Sachs says he sees the nation's priorities most clearly expressed in the budget of the federal government, and he has come to believe that the market and government must both play a large role in assuring fairness, productivity, and environmental sustainability. "I was trying to explain that we arrived at a fiscal crisis in the country," he says of his remarks to the demonstrators. "Either our government is going to become completely shrunken and dysfunctional, or we're going to start paying for civilization again."
Other scholars have embraced the movement, either in person or from afar. The American Association of University Professors issued a position statement this month, and more than 200 faculty members at Columbia signed a petition pledging support. The presumption that academics favor the aims of the occupation has become so widespread that Paul Krugman recently felt compelled to explain that the ethical guidelines of The New York Times forbade him from visiting Zuccotti Park. But visits like these are little more than a celebrity academic "walk by," says Todd Gitlin, professor of journalism and sociology at Columbia University, who has written about the protests for The Chronicle. And other observers have pointed out that the student-loan burden imparted by universities makes these institutions an ambiguous force, at best, in the demonstrations. Of greater influence than any particular thinker or group of thinkers are the recent demonstrations in other countries, and the knowledge that protesters have been gaining there, says Evan Calder Williams, a doctoral candidate in literature at the University of California at Santa Cruz and a Fulbright fellow at the University of Naples-L'Orientale. Protesters in Egypt, Greece, and Spain, among other sites, have been creating a growing record of their experiences, through blogs and social media, which other protesters are reading and commenting upon.

"This isn't anti-intellectualism: It is simply to say that the relevant theory is that which will be developed from struggling to grasp the obscure shape of the past few years," Mr. Williams said in an e-mail. "It's safe to say that Syntagma Square, the many-month occupation of a Chilean girls' school by its students, and Occupy the Hood are—and deserve to be—of far greater intellectual import than any contemporary theorist will be."

The idea that intellectual ferment is coming from the streets rather than academe is evidence that anarchism is witnessing something of a resurgence of interest among both activists and academics, says Nathan J. Jun, assistant professor of philosophy at Midwestern State University, in Texas, and author of the forthcoming Anarchism and Political Modernity.

While some students in the movement might be passingly familiar with anarchist studies, Mr. Jun says, they have probably not read much of the scholarship. It is much more likely that anarchism itself has had the greater influence on Occupy Wall Street because, he says, many activists there "regard anarchy as an ideal to be realized."

♦ ♦ ♦
Scholars Visit Occupy Wall Street

David Graeber, of the U. of London's Goldsmiths campus: "You can't create a just society through violence, or freedom through a tight revolutionary cadre. You can't establish a big state and hope it will go away. The means and ends have to be the same."

Michael Hardt, of Duke U. (writing with Antonio Negri): "Indignation against corporate greed and economic inequality is real and deep. But at least equally important is the protest against the lack, or failure, of political representation."

Jeffrey D. Sachs, of Columbia U.: "Either our government is going to become completely shrunken and dysfunctional, or we're going to start paying for civilization again."

Slavoj Zizek, of the European Graduate School: "Don't fall in love with yourselves, with the nice time we are having here. Carnivals come cheap—the true test of their worth is what remains the day after, how our normal daily life will be changed."

Cornel West, of Princeton U.: "It's impossible to translate the issue of the greed of Wall Street into one demand or two demands. We're talking about a democratic awakening."

Joseph E. Stiglitz, of Columbia U.: "We are bearing the cost of their misdeeds. There's a system where we've socialized losses and privatized gains. That's not capitalism; that's not a market economy. That's a distorted economy."

Lawrence Lessig, of Harvard U.: "The arrest of hundreds of tired and unwashed kids, denied the freedom of a bullhorn and the right to protest on public streets, may well be the first real green-shoots of this, the American spring. And if nurtured right, it could well begin real change."

Jobbook has a lofty aim - to be the world's top job-searching website

2011-11-12T06:17:00.000-08:00

(Via The Gazette) Jobbook is a different kind of tech startup. Just a month into its first beta launch and with no revenue to speak of, the 15 employees of the year-old startup that matches job seekers and employers are sitting pretty in a sprawling 4,000-squarefoot office on Sherbrooke St. W., near the corner of Fort St. In the middle of the office is a half court for basketball that employees use to blow off steam, "but only after 5 p.m.," co-founder Antoine de Brabant, 25, said. The office also has a workout room with a stationary bicycle and a weight bench. How did they score such swanky digs? One of the building's owners is a shareholder and a company mentor. That arrangement explains Jobbook's business model perfectly. The company aims to grow by providing financial incentives to those that help promote it. Jobbook has a network of ambassadors at universities that act to promote the site and build an online community of job seekers. The ambassadors could be given financial incentives, such as shares in the company, if they reach certain milestones. The results are impressive. With only a small number of jobs listed on the site, there are already 5,500 member job seekers from among 58 universities in Canada and the U.S. in the first month of the site's existence. The company is aiming for 20,000 members by the end of the year. Jobbook's model is different than that of other job search sites, like Monster.ca, and the similarly named Jobboom. Instead of charging employers to list their ads, or to see the resumés of candidates, Jobbook only charges employers once someone is hired at a standard rate of five per cent of the annual salary. The company says this ensures a higher success rate, and often saves employers money. "The goal of the algorithm is to put the ultimate match at the top of the list," explained Noah Chaimowicz, 30, the cofounder in charge of development. "So for employers, it's easy because it goes by which criteria they specify, but for job seekers, they can click thumbs up and thumbs down on each posting, and that way the program will learn more about the user's preferences." While the company relies on the honour system for employers to report they hired a candidate from their site, those hired also have an incentive to report because the site rewards every 100th person hired with a free vacation. Jobbook was the brainchild of de Brabant's father, Jean de Brabant, a serial entrepreneur who was the developer of the Tropiques Nord condo development located next to the famed Habitat complex. He came up with the idea, and the method to grow the business, by engaging a network of university ambassadors. He just didn't have the technical know-how. Enter Antoine and Chaimowicz, who had both recently left tech startups of their own and were looking to start a new venture.

"It worked out well because he needed us and we needed him," Antoine de Brabant said. Zach Newburgh, who handles university relations, is another co-founder. The four partners own 85 per cent of the company. The rest of the equity is spread around investors, ambassadors and employees. Although all employees are paid, eight of the 15 are shareholders. The others get stock options after a trial period. De Brabant says the shares are incentives for employees to ensure the company's success. Also key to the company's success has been to attract individual investors, such as former Fonorola chairman Michael Boyd, who have also been given shares in the company. In total, the company has 20 shareholders. Although the site is still in beta, or test mode, an official version will be up within a month, and then the company will be actively recruiting prospective employers.Jobbook's goal is to break even by early next year, which would mean 500 people hired through the site.The founders, however, have a much loftier goal: to make Jobbook the world's top job-searching site."We've created everything so that we can scale it all to hundreds of millions of people," Chaimowicz said.

Republican Presidential Debate Oakland University

2011-11-10T00:08:00.001-08:00

Tom Waits - "Satisfied"

2011-11-09T17:38:00.001-08:00

Investors should stay away from risky asset classes in fixed income and stick to Treasuries, money markets, and CDs, says Bill Bernstein.

2011-11-07T07:53:00.000-08:00

William J. Bernstein is an American financial theorist. He is known for his research in the field of modern portfolio theory and for his finance books for individual investors who wish to manage their own equity portfolios. Bernstein is a proponent of the equity or index allocation school of thought, believing that all equity selection strategies should be focused on allocating between asset classes, rather than selecting individual stocks and bonds, or from the timing of their sales. Bernstein's first book, The Intelligent Asset Allocator, makes this case in detail; his second book, The Four Pillars of Investing: Lessons for Building a Winning Portfolio (McGraw-Hill, 2002; ISBN 0071385290), is aimed for those less comfortable with statistical thought. It also puts asset-class returns into long-term historical perspective.

Bernstein is a proponent of modern portfolio theory, which stands in stark contrast to the view that skilled managers can succeed in picking particular investments that will outperform the market, whether through market timing, momentum investing, or finding assets whose future value have been underestimated by the market. He argues that the financial research literature shows that most return is determined by the asset allocation of the portfolio rather than by asset selection.

Bernstein's third book, The Birth of Plenty, is a history of the world's standard of living; it proposes four conditions that have historically been necessary for it to rise. His fourth book, A Splendid Exchange: How Trade Shaped the World, published in April 2008 by Grove Atlantic, is a history of trade. In 2009 his fifth book was published "The Investor's Manifesto: Preparing for Prosperity, Armageddon, and Everything in Between" which continues the theme of asset allocation in a more accessible way.

Bernstein holds a PhD in chemistry and an MD; he practiced neurology until retiring from the field.

Modern portfolio theory (MPT) is a theory of investment which attempts to maximize portfolio expected return for a given amount of portfolio risk, or equivalently minimize risk for a given level of expected return, by carefully choosing the proportions of various assets. Although MPT is widely used in practice in the financial industry and several of its creators won a Nobel memorial prize for the theory, in recent years the basic assumptions of MPT have been widely challenged by fields such as behavioral economics.

MPT is a mathematical formulation of the concept of diversification in investing, with the aim of selecting a collection of investment assets that has collectively lower risk than any individual asset. That this is possible can be seen intuitively because different types of assets often change in value in opposite ways. For example, to the extent prices in the stock market move differently from prices in the bond market, a collection of both types of assets can in theory face lower overall risk than either individually. But diversification lowers risk even if assets' returns are not negatively correlated—indeed, even if they are positively correlated.

More technically, MPT models an asset's return as a normally distributed function (or more generally as an elliptically distributed random variable), defines risk as the standard deviation of return, and models a portfolio as a weighted combination of assets, so that the return of a portfolio is the weighted combination of the assets' returns. By combining different assets whose returns are not perfectly positively correlated, MPT seeks to reduce the total variance of the portfolio return. MPT also assumes that investors are rational and markets are efficient.

MPT was developed in the 1950s through the early 1970s and was considered an important advance in the mathematical modeling of finance. Since then, many theoretical and practical criticisms have been leveled against it. These include the fact that financial returns do not follow a Gaussian distribution or indeed any symmetric distribution, and that correlations between asset classes are not fixed but can vary depending on external events (especially in crises). Further, there is growing evidence that investors are not rational and markets are not efficient

Full Hour with Gerald Celente - Alex Jones Show 03 Nov 2011

2011-11-07T02:25:00.000-08:00

Gerald Celente proposes to reinstall:

-Robinson–Patman Act
-Sherman Antitrust Act
-Glass Steagall Act
-Direct Democracy

Where Government Bonds Pay 6%

2011-11-07T01:35:00.000-08:00

(Via Smartmoney.com) Emerging-market bonds might be that rare investment that holds appeal for both the aggressive and the timid. The aggressive investor will like the 6.5% yield on the JP Morgan Emerging Market Bond index. That's triple what investors get from 10-year bonds issued by the United States, Germany or the United Kingdom and a couple of percentage points more than high-quality U.S. corporate bonds pay.

The timid will take comfort in the rapidly improving creditworthiness of emerging markets at a time when developed countries are struggling to control their finances.

Not all emerging markets are flush, of course, but as a group they have debt equal to around one-third of their gross domestic product, half that of the U.S., according to Joyce Chang, head of global credit research at JP Morgan. The average emerging market is running a budget deficit of around 2% of GDP this year, versus more than 11% for the U.S. Countries like Brazil, Mexico, Taiwan and Malaysia are are owed more by foreign governments than they owe to them. Of the world's $10.1 trillion in foreign exchange reserves, $8 trillion is held by emerging-market governments, according to Ms. Chang.

Credit downgrades for the the U.S., Japan, Spain and Ireland have grabbed headlines in recent years. But less noticed this year were upgrades in countries like the Philippines, Panama and Bulgaria. Standard & Poor's now rates Estonia and the Czech Republic at the same level as Japan. The investment grade portion of the JP Morgan Emerging Markets Bond index has jumped from 2% in 1993 to 58% today.

Seasoned investors might recall a string of late-1990s currency collapses in emerging markets like Thailand, Russia and Brazil. Those crises forced policy makers to abandon fixed interest rates, fight inflation, increase savings and dramatically reduce debt, says Ms. Chang. Rapid growth has helped, too. Emerging-market GDP, already close to half of world GDP, is growing at 5% a year, versus less than 1% for developed market GDP.

It's premature to call emerging-market bonds a safe haven, says Sam Finkelstein, a portfolio manager with Goldman Sachs Asset Management. Many have weaker institutions than the U.S. and greater currency volatility, but the fundamentals are good and the trend is improving.

The universe of bonds is also expanding. Emerging-market corporations have issued more bonds than governments for six years running, he says. Some of these companies carry unique risks, like excessive government control, but the expanding menu is allowing bond-fund managers to shop for higher corporate yields while diversifying currency exposure.

"It's not an either-or choice between developed-market bonds and emerging-market ones," says Matthew Ryan, who oversees three bond funds for MFS Investment Management. "Most investors should have exposure to both."

During the 2008 financial crisis, emerging-market bonds were "last in, first out," says Mr. Ryan. "They were the last to be affected and the first to recover," he says. "I think that shows strength."

Most investors looking to buy emerging-market bonds will want to use mutual funds in order to get proper diversification. There are two main choices to be made. The first is whether to use a low-cost passive fund that tracks an index or a higher-cost active fund with a manager who picks bonds.

The second is which types of bonds to favor. In addition to the choice between sovereign and corporate bonds, there are dollar-denominated bonds and local-currency bonds. The latter are subject to currency swings, which is a minus for investors who are bullish on the dollar but a plus for those who believe emerging-market currencies will appreciate versus the dollar.

The iShares JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond Fund (EMB: 110.89, 0.10, 0.09%), which tracks an index of dollar-denominated bonds, costs $60 per $10,000 invested and yields 4.8%. Brazil, Russia and Mexico each make up about 8% of the portfolio. (What about China and India? They're not big bond issuers.) The Wisdom Tree Emerging Markets Local Debt Fund (ELD: 50.64, -0.04, -0.08%), which brings currency exposure, has 10% weightings in Brazil, Indonesia, Malaysia and Mexico and costs $55 per $10,000 invested. It yields 4.9%.

Some actively managed funds might be worth their extra cost, because bond indexes tend to weight issuers according to the amount of debt outstanding rather than the investment merits of countries or companies.

The TCW Emerging Markets Income fund has much larger corporate bond exposure than peers. That has helped it return 12.6% a year on average over the past decade, beating the JP Morgan index by more than two percentage points a year. But it also caused the fund to lag behind the index by more than nine percentage points during the tumultuous third quarter as investors fled for the relative safety of government bonds. The fund costs $92 a year per $10,000 invested.

The MFS Emerging Markets Debt fund, which Mr. Ryan manages, has a 14% weighting in corporate bonds. Its "class A" shares are pricey, with a maximum up-front sales charge of 4.75% and yearly expenses of $119 per $10,000 invested. But over the 10 years through September they beat the JP Morgan index by 1.4 percentage points a year after expenses.

Finally, the Pimco Emerging Markets Bond fund is a good fit for Brazil fans, with its 39% exposure to that country. Its A shares cost a maximum of 3.75% up front plus $125 a year per $10,000 invested. Over the 10 years through September, they beat the JP Morgan index by nearly a percentage point per year after expenses.

Going forward, investors shouldn't expect these funds to produce the double-digit yearly total returns of the past decade. But although assets linked to emerging-market-bond indexes have doubled in four years, investor exposure to these bonds is still small, says Lupin Rahman, a portfolio manager for Pimco. "As investors become more savvy about emerging markets, there's substantial opportunity left for these bonds to gain value relative to developed world bonds."

Monkeys with larger friend networks have more gray matter

2011-11-05T03:06:00.000-07:00

New research in the UK on rhesus macaque monkeys has found for the first time that if they live in larger groups they develop more gray matter in parts of the brain involved in processing information on social interactions. The researchers, led by Jerome Sallet of Oxford University, said the results of the new study bear some similarities to research by other groups working with humans, that related brain size to the extent of social interactions. These studies include recent work that suggested a link between the volume of some regions of the brain and the number of online friends people have in social networking sites such as Facebook.

The new study observed 23 macaques in a number of groups of different sizes. The monkeys were kept in their groups for an average of over a year, and a minimum of two months. One monkey was alone in its cage, but in all the other groups, which had from two to seven individuals, a heirarchy developed in which an individual's rank depended on the monkey's ability to form successful social interactions, such as friendships and partnerships.

The study used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to compare the brains of the monkeys, and the results showed that in the temporal areas of the brain associated with social interaction skills, around a five percent increase in the volume of gray matter was found for each additional group member. The regions of the brain that increased in volume included the temporal pole, temporal cortex, and the inferior and rostral temporal gyri.

The researchers also compared the brains of male monkeys at various levels in the dominance-based heirarchy and found a number of brain areas, particularly the prefrontal cortex and inferior temporal sulcus, were enlarged in males of higher rank.

The research demonstrated that the social networks caused the changes in the brain (rather than enlarged brain areas influencing position in the social network, or the size of the network) because the scientists manipulated the size and makeup of the groups over a period of several months, and observed the changes in the brains of the monkeys.

Earlier research has shown that the brain shows plasticity, which means it can change in volume in different regions in response to environmental changes or acquisition of new skills or knowledge. Research had not previously shown brain plasticity in relation to social networking skills.

The paper was published in the journal Science on 4th November.

Straw wine: Amarone & Recioto della Valpolicella

2011-11-04T08:39:00.001-07:00

Straw wine, or raisin wine, is a wine made from grapes that have been dried to concentrate their juice. The result is similar to that of the ice wine process, but suitable for warmer climates. The classic method dries clusters of grapes on mats of straw in the sun, but some regions dry them under cover, some hang up the grapes, and the straw may be replaced by modern racks. The technique dates back to pre-Roman times, and most production of these wines has been in Northern Italy and the French Alps. However producers in other areas are now starting to experiment with the method.

Straw wines are typically sweet to very sweet white wines, similar in density and sweetness to Sauternes and capable of long life. The low yields and labour-intensive production method means that they are quite expensive. Around Verona red grapes are dried, and are fermented in two different ways to make a dry red wine (Amarone) and a sweet red wine (Recioto della Valpolicella).

History

There are references to golden sweet wines in the Mediterranean during Phoenician times. A dried grape wine known as the Cypriot Manna was described in 800 BC by the Greek poet Hesiod. The first description of the production of a raisin wine comes from Columella in the first century AD, writing about the Passum wine made in ancient Carthage. The modern Italian name for these wines, passito, echoes this ancient word. Perhaps the closest thing to passum is Moscato Passito di Pantelleria from Zibibbo, a variety of the ancient muscat grape, produced on Pantelleria, an island in the Strait of Sicily (50 miles from Tunisia) opposite to where Carthage used to be

Amarone della Valpolicella, usually known as Amarone, is a typically rich Italian dry red wine made from the partially dried grapes of the Corvina (40.0% – 70.0%), Rondinella (20.0% – 40.0%) and Molinara (5.0% – 25.0%) varieties. The wine was awarded Denominazione di Origine Controllata (DOC) status in December 1990. On 4 December 2009, Amarone and Recioto della Valpolicella were promoted to the status of Denominazione di Origine Controllata e Garantita (DOCG). Total production for sale (including recioto) in 2008 was 8.57 million bottles

Why Ryan Gosling is the man of the future

2011-11-03T23:57:00.001-07:00

(Via G&M) Film heroes can get into your head. Last month, after watching Ryan Gosling in Drive, I found my stride steadier, my movements more graceful. I felt confident and unafraid. I was Ryan Gosling as Driver while I washed my hands in the theatre restroom and I was Driver as I strolled purposefully through the mall on my way home.The appeal of the Mr. Gosling’s character – a mash-up of the strong, silent, 20th-century man and today’s sensitive New Dad – was summed up by a female friend: “I’ve never seen anything hotter than Ryan Gosling in Drive. It was too much. I wish I hadn’t seen it.”

But there’s something more to the actor, something that makes him not just the thinking woman’s hottie of the minute, but also the heroic man of the future. In both Drive and Crazy, Stupid, Love, he portends a new kind of masculinity, one suited to an age where the perfect man can no longer be trusted.

In a Wikileaks world, it’s not possible or even desirable to appear to be the Teflon-smooth politician or perfect gentleman. Everyone knows there’s a crack somewhere – a deep-seated insecurity, a messy addiction – and it’s better to out it yourself, from the outset. In Drive, Mr. Gosling doesn’t just crack, he explodes. When he beats a man to save the woman he’s in love with, and then continues to gratuitously stomp the man’s head into pieces while he’s at it, it’s the first moment we see the rage beneath his steady, robotic masculinity.

It’s also the moment that Driver becomes more human and lovable.

That may seem contradictory, but bear with me. In an interview, Mr. Gosling explained to horrified filmgoers that “movie violence can be poetic.” I think the psychotic break depicted is a metaphor for disclosure, a sharing of one’s “primary wound” – as Freud might say – to a lover. It’s a metaphor for exposing one’s less-than-ideal nature.

Who knows what fears the powerful men of yore repressed in order to stomp the economy into pieces, or betray their women, but men in the age of transparency will have to reveal them. Admitting limitations has never been part of the American Dream, but then again, that dream – of infinite profits, of having it all and then some – has turned into a nightmare.

It would be preposterous in real life for a woman to go knocking on Driver’s door again after witnessing his psychosis, but in the language of that thriller, it makes sense. For the audience, Carey Mulligan’s character is like the pet who instinctively senses whether our date is a good man or a bad man.

In the rom-com Crazy, Stupid, Love, Mr. Gosling does away with metaphor and depicts a male sociopathy we can recognize more easily.

His character starts out with the kind of emotional opaqueness advocated by guy pickup manuals like The Game. But when Emma Stone’s character makes fun of his version of that game – “So what’s your big move?” she teases – he doesn’t reject her, but instead cracks open and reveals the messy bits behind the perfect six-pack abs. His father was “too soft, too sensitive,” he confesses, a perceived weakness that led him to become a “wildly unhappy” and overcompensating womanizer.

I’ll admit that The Ides of March doesn’t fit so neatly into my thesis – Mr. Gosling isn't a hero exposing his flaws in this one, but a political campaign manager who learns he has to lie in order to survive. As a project, however, the film does aptly criticize the hypocrisy of image creation and protection among men in politics. An intern bears the brunt of the lies, naturally.

Sure, in the Wikileaks future, politicians are still going to try to be Teflon, but it’ll be harder and harder to keep up the façade. Voters are getting better at telling the real story from the good story.

It might sound like a ridiculous idea that the Tiger Woodses and Eliot Spitzers would willfully out themselves as sex addicts or polyamorists, but behaviours that our culture shames into the shadows are already being exposed and integrated. Charlie Sheen, as messed up as he clearly is, has been admired for saying how he really feels. Even Tom Cruise – previously the epitome of the perfect film hero – became more human the moment he began jumping on Oprah’s couch.

In a recent Esquire cover story, Mr. Gosling says he now has a split personality: public and private. “Even my own name sounds like just someone I know,” he said. But there was a moment in an MTV interview that caught my attention. After being captured on a passerby’s iPhone breaking up a fight in a New York street, Mr. Gosling said he was embarrassed by his behaviour.

“I had just come from the gymnasium, and I was all stretched out and feeling warmed up,” he said, acknowledging he really didn’t know what was going on and might have made things worse. In admitting the possible error even in the whole idea of being a hero, Mr. Gosling puts his ego up for public sacrifice.

Not only is it admirable, but an irony that I doubt the men of the 20th century would have understood.

Signs of ageing halted in the lab,The onset of wrinkles, muscle wasting and cataracts has been delayed and even eliminated in mice.

2011-11-03T20:23:00.001-07:00

It was done by "flushing out" retired cells that had stopped dividing. They accumulate naturally with age. The scientists believe their findings could eventually "really have an impact" in the care of the elderly. Experts said the results were "fascinating", but should be taken with a bit of caution.

The study, published in Nature, focused on what are known as "senescent cells". They stop dividing into new cells and have an important role in preventing tumours from progressing. These cells are cleared out by the immune system, but their numbers build up with time. The researchers estimated that around 10% of cells are senescent in very old people.

Scientists at the Mayo Clinic, in the US, devised a way to kill all senescent cells in genetically engineered mice. The animals would age far more quickly than normal, and when they were given a drug, the senescent cells would die. The researchers looked at three symptoms of old age: formation of cataracts in the eye; the wasting away of muscle tissue; and the loss of fat deposits under the skin, which keep it smooth.

Researchers said the onset of these symptoms was "dramatically delayed" when the animals were treated with the drug. When it was given after the mice had been allowed to age, there was an improvement in muscle function.

One of the researchers, Dr James Kirkland, said: "I've never seen anything quite like it." His colleague Dr Jan van Deursen told the BBC: "We were very surprised by the very profound effect. I really think this is very significant."The treatment had no effect on lifespan, but that may be due to the type of genetically engineered mouse used.

Eternal youth?

The study raises the tantalising prospect of slowing the signs of ageing in humans. However, senescent cells cannot be just flushed out of human beings. Dr Deursen said: "I'm very optimistic that this could really have an impact. Nobody wants to live longer if the quality of life is poor."

He argued that young people were already clearing out their senescent cells."If you can prime the immune system, boost it a little bit, to make sure senescent cells are removed, that might be all it needs.

"Or develop a drug that targets senescent cells because of the unique proteins the cells make." Dr Jesus Gil, from the Medical Research Council's Clinical Sciences Centre, said the findings needed to be "taken with a bit of caution. It is a preliminary study".

However, he said it was a fascinating study which "suggests if you get rid of senescent cells you can improve phenotypes [physical traits] associated with ageing and improve quality of life in aged humans".

Jim Rogers RBS Conference 22.09.2011, Austria

2011-11-01T00:55:00.001-07:00

Investing legend Jim Rogers said that although the latest Eurozone deal for Greece is more generous than he expected, it's not enough to solve Europe's problems. "Politicians have delayed addressing the problem yet again," Rogers told Investment Week. "It will come back in a few weeks or a few months and the world will still have the same problem, but this time only worse because the European Central Bank and other countries will be deeper in debt." The deal European leaders hammered out on Thursday includes boosting the region's rescue fund to $1.4 trillion (1 trillion euros) and asking bondholders to take a voluntary 50% haircut on Greek debt. Rogers said while the deal isn't enough to fix the issues, the haircut was more than he expected. The writedown on Greek holdings means $3.7 billion in debt-insurance contracts won't be triggered. "Never in a million years did I expect them to impose a haircut of 50 percent; this shows at least somebody is starting to accept reality," said Rogers. Rogers said haircuts are a necessary step in fixing Europe's plaguing debt crisis, and more should be implemented. "Greece is bankrupt, but others are too, and these haircuts will have to come back and be wider," said Rogers. But until more stringent and widespread action is taken to alleviate not just Europe's debt but that in the United States, the crisis will continue. "Most European countries are increasing their debt rather than decreasing their debt," Rogers said. "Until that changes, the problems are going to continue, just as they will in the U.S."