The Moscow Show Trials (Khamovniki District Court) - another attempt.

HOWEVER BELATEDLY.

Open Letter to the Moscow Khamovniki District Court:

There must be some discussion on the outcome of the Yukos chief executives’ trial in Moscow that is soon to be decided, especially since it affects so many of the Khodorkovsky family and friends everywhere, and people like me do not want in the least to override the judicial powers of the Russian state, nor the invisible hand – type commerce that Yukos apparently afforded to its employees and their families, and efforts of that business to change the status quo in the hydrocarbons markets in view of O.P.E.C., and so forth.  What is apparent from reading about these matters, currently being decided in a contest at Khamovnichesky (sp?) / Khamovniki District Court, is that it is clear in a way that the Prosecutor’s office represents one side of the Yeltsin legacy, and the defendant’s apparently another.  People like me know the significance of the Yeltsin years is extremely powerful in its symbolism and subordinates that of the October revolution of 1917 and its aftermath in many ways, though the actual observable truth of this is subject to interpretation, and one is not at present in a place to definitively opine on these items.  With respect to this and the hope and uplifting denouement of the Yeltsin years, I refer you to, for example, the autobiographical portrait of George Shultz; or the co – written tome by Bush and Scowcroft in its portrayal of same, or any similar text on the era.  Yeltsin does deserve great credit, and enshrinement, for his economic reforms and this will become apparent more and more as the years pass.  Also, one can not question, in any way whatsoever the Kremlin’s power to adjudicate, without competitive dramatics, matters such as those being decided in the Yukos executives’ case.

It is possible that if Mikhail Khodorkovsky can be accused of anything, it is for not remembering his upbringing under the Yeltsin regime.  Most Russians can be said to be embittered, or at least not so invigorated by the memory of this time in their history, though there are cogent and complex reasons why Boris Yeltsin as head of state made choices and promoted economic and commercial policies that were intended to benefit everyone; every Russian person.  This should not be forgotten in these court proceedings, neither by the prosecutor, nor by the defendants and their attorney(s.)  People like me who understand a little about business know the Yukos business affairs were conducted by executives, well meaning, and very well – advised, and they performed their duties to stakeholders in excellent fashion, probably even with respect to taxation compliance and other regulatory measures – though that might not be the determination of the courts.  

In my reading about this case, it is important to understand the successes of many businesses are a mystery to most people, and that of Yukos was no exception to this axiom.  The success and overall assurances provided by government regulators and how they facilitate a healthy commercial environment is also something few people understand, either.  With this in mind, and as the judicial opinions are expressed in the outcome of the statutory charges currently being tried, and where the laws are clear and well – defined, and where this adjudication does have application to Russian society as a whole, including the ‘perspective of the world’ to paraphrase the great sociologist Fernand Braudel, the direction Russian commerce will take for the future, and the status of the defendants in this case as prophets (who will be regarded as real or false, depending on who’s whom, and what’s what) and the power of the legacy of previous times in the history of your country and its meaning at present and obvious present legal and other conditioning, and popular acclaim of these juridical matters in your capitol; the responsibilities of the parties to this trial are significant and quite serious.  These and other legal and economic processes and principles will be changed and otherwise affected by this judicial turning point.  It is important that you know outsiders to Russia understand this.  

While Mr. Khodorkovsky can be accused of forgetting his upbringing, the parties represented by the prosecution against him can in parallel be admonished for bringing a halt to a very large and constructive business concern in Russia, as illustrated in press reports and other open sources, that provided and promised a decent living and hope for a bright future for many Yukos employees, their families and considerable value, monetary and organisational, bestowed upon Russian society as the result of the innovations and initiatives of the defendants.  It is entirely possible, and given my own impression of the way in which market economics is interpreted and practiced in Russia, the country’s chief administrators, at the time Yukos activities were suspended or abrogated, did not themselves understand precisely the value of what good Yukos meant to many people, and the mysteries of its successes.  It is perhaps in the remnants of dialectic reasoning that remain in the consciousness of many people in your country that did call for an investigation of the way things happened or were “done,” and then further dicing up of what was found that makes one possible outcome of these proceedings to be so unpalatable.  What has apparently happened is the focus of the trial has not been on the business for lack of understanding of those operations, but on the defendants only.  In my studies at university I have often encountered insoluble problems, of ethics, for example, and could not revert to a solution which muddied the waters further as there are even natural rules and guidelines against this.  The prosecution in this case has apparently chosen to delve into and question matters of private business, the methods of which were in exegesis at the time of Yukos, and that have been rendered incomprehensible to observers and jurists alike with the efforts to dissect them at trial.  Both the jurists and attorneys need to comprehend what the legacy of Boris Yeltsin represents to those outside your country, and what great values and integrity he instituted in his time, in effort and in deed; at least in what concerns his own administrative efforts.  That is what really is being contested here, and this is an interpretation, and it is a political / administrative view.  No one during the time of the 1990’s to today, a great time of business innovation and invention everywhere, and especially so in Russia, can be blamed for being ambitious and, again, inventive as the Yukos executives had been.  Any decision of the courts that finally decides this case should account or compensate for this, and that Russian society has run through a crucible of economic events need not be on the heads of those Yukos people who apparently and sincerely wished for the better of the Russian economy and country.  Good day.

Sincerely,

THS

Another, belated review of "America and the World," by ...

…  Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent Scowcroft:

This political book, written with David Ignatius examines current affairs and gives a new detailed synopsis of the role of the U.S. in the world, primarily from the time of the Marshall Plan through the Cold War and related nuclear threats, up to the fall of the former soviet union and then through 9 / 11 and beyond.  The text presents the idea that modern life, especially that in western society is in a new form of complexity not even seen since the fully bureaucratic days of Byzantium, for example.  The book begins with its proposals about historical events and their significance to us at this point (now 2008,) and then moves on to examine various questions, such as the Israelis and Palestinians and their state of affairs vis – a – vis the prosecution of the Iraq war.  With respect to Israel, there are great influences calling for a resolution of the conflict with the Palestinians, even at great sacrifice to the Jews, and this is in part what here is interpreted more and more as a ‘status quo’ to begin resolving this and other Middle East issues.  In fact, to abandon the ideals of an Israeli homeland at this point in time would be to equally abandon important U.S. state policies and roles in associations like the G – 20, N.A.T.O., our positions on nuclear non – proliferation and Eastern Europe, in favour of the polity of states like Iran who essentially exploit anti – Israeli groups like Hezbollah and Hamas.  Some of the text is dedicated to illustrating the last part of the Bush Administration and efforts to resolve the conflicts of Hamas, Beirut, and the role of Syria against the Jews, though this effort was shown as, and in fact was not overridingly successful.

The Taliban are perceived in the theme of this examination of historical events through Brzezinski and Scowcroft as a significant threat to U.S. national security, and as the memorable opponents of the soviets in Afghanistan as well.  One is also reminded the Pakistanis and the Taliban were trained by western military people, again against the soviets and the situation as it is today with the Taliban is extremely rancorous with respect to western governments.  

With respect to economics, though mostly politics in the Far East, the authors illustrate principally the rising power, economic and political, financial and so on, of the P.R.C. in terms of the enlightened self – interest not only of its Asian neighbors, but of western officialdom as well.  The rivalry between the P.R.C. and its Asian contemporaries with the west is nonetheless portrayed as ruthless in economic terms.  The issues of Tibet and T’ai wan, and South Korea are easily interpreted as very tense situations with P.R.C., a communist – party based government still dealing with the legacy of T’ian An Men and Deng Xiao Ping; and the recognitions of the legitimacy of smaller Asian associations such as A.S.E.A.N.  Special mention is made of North Korea and the need for its own adherence to nuclear anti – proliferation rules and other regional security issues including the naval incidents of late.  

Special mention is also made in large part of Russia and its current leadership after the very significant Gorbachev and Yeltsin years:  Apart from the conundrum surrounding the mutual political and administrative status of Dmitri Medvedev and Vladimir Putin, there seem to be four major issues with Russia, and all are unsolvable:  Nuclear non – proliferation, N.A.T.O. and the former soviet and COMECON (and Warsaw Pact) states, the vagaries of the petrol business, and relations with P.R.C.  With respect to Eastern Europe, still, Western Europe is illustrated as at times a fitful ally and then again as a close political and administrative partner that is attempting on the state level to rise above issues of nationalism in its institutions.  It is here where the authors bring in their partitioned time – lines on American politics and the world, dating back to the age of John Quincy Adams, then forward to the Wilson presidency, and then post – 9 / 11 events.  Brzezinski notes at this point the older European community was much more cohesive on a regional level given the two devastating world wars and the Cold War during the 20^th century, and needs at present better political coordination.  With respect to World Wars I and II, N.A.T.O. is still an issue unto itself that affects the sovereignty of most Europeans, regardless of nationality or where they reside in the region.

To begin the conclusion of the text, the authors enter into a discussion about the importance of human dignity and human rights, and its influence on their ideas about doctrinaire enlightened or “guileful” realism in affairs.  There is also some discussion of a new world order in which cultural identities have primacy, hearkening to the world of 20^th century Wilsonian political ideas.  The new administration in Washington, D.C., while it promised a number of important things, especially about changes in government, is seen currently as bogged down in its own efforts, and with respect to foreign policy there has been progress and reform in the integration of departments and agencies as far as communications and functioning are concerned.  

From the 1987 New York Times ...

Also from The Cato Institute.

Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty - Litvinenko intrigues...

http://www.rferl.org/

New evidence about the Litvinenko [sic] intrigues in the U.K. have to do with state sanctioning of his apparent poisoning.  The state official who gave an evidential response to questions about Mr. Litvinenko's fate indicated the documentary evidence tracing the material that poisoned him was a fabrication.  That any such evidence has appeared in public is a provocation to anyone who is a party to this set of events, including the general public that must make up its mind as to the authenticity of representations and counter - allegations.  Mr. Litvinenko needs to have lived a long time, and he and people like him pre - deceased their lifespan due to nefarious and unthinkable events.  This is the true provocation and crime in this matter, regardless of the origin of circumstances and events leading to his death.  The security services' reputation in Russia is being called to task by journalists and other public personalities, and needs to become more forceful and proactive in its participation in related investigative affairs.

FW: Yahoo! News Story - Tim Kawakami: Troy Smith has earned QB role with 49ers - Yahoo! News

Tim Kawakami: Troy Smith has earned QB role with 49ers - Yahoo! News
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_localsfo/20101115/ts_yblog_localsfo/49ers-game
-changer-troy-smith-does-what-alex-smith-never-did
============================================================
Yahoo! News
http://news.yahoo.com/

Either, or.

Tyranny and “anti –“ tyranny.

In the story of the Michael Khodorkovsky trial, and that of Platon Lebedev, it is important given Mr. Khodorkovsky’s talk at Khamovnichesky Court, Moscow; on November 2, 2010, that ‘in Russia’ the goals of the new generation of business people who have built up the country again are not necessarily congruent with those of the centrist and now dominant officials in the realm.  The business people who ran Yukos and its related businesses, and they made a tidy sum at it, worked privately to promote economic activities and the development of that society, especially in the Far East.  The disagreement between the judiciary and Mr. Khodorkovsky with Mr. Lebedev is the state considered much of what Mr. Khodorkovsky was doing to be its business, including the spending of petro – currency it intended to use in the treasury, but that was going to build up one or another region in the country.  

Mr. Khodorkovsky is apparently accused of manipulating people, money and the system, all of which were in flux in Russia during the time of Yukos, and developing his own economic and political fiefdom.  That some good came of the economic and oil booms in Russia is inarguable, and one cannot argue as to the benefits of the ends.  Mr. Khodorkovsky is dealing singly with issues that befall developing sectors in developing economies everywhere:  Growth can be unmanageable, and while Mr. Khodorkovsky was an excellent boss in view of this, the Russian government is arguing he clearly was not.  The trial itself has been, from what I have followed, instance after instance of finger – pointing and name calling, and no one has been able to speak freely about what the operations of the business in this ‘anti – trust’ case were really like, or other pertinent issues.  The court sessions become a profile and precedent of poor interpretation of facts on the one hand and legalistic and oppressive regulation on the other, both parties suffering this and other difficulties in a problem circumstance for everyone. 

In his speech in this court case on November 2, the defendant used the past imperfect tense many times.  It is important to understand this as an appeal to the court to apply the same standard of justice to the operations of the state in this process, in its inventories, checklists, and internal debates, etc., that it has applied to statutes applied against Mr. Khodorkovsky and Mr. Lebedev in penalty or penalties against them and any other accused.  The Russian system of justice, probably with its tendency to “nod” to the prosecuting attorney and the judge in fierce enforcement of many statutes, might entirely not have heard this plaintive appeal.  That this is the tradition is highly unfortunate, and one this case challenges the system to begin to reverse.  This is perhaps why the defendants have attempted to highlight the historical context of the trial.  It is unfortunate this tradition dates to the Okrana (sp?) and the courts of pre – revolutionary times, up through Beria and so forth, and why many Russians in this case themselves have cause, especially in view of a prosecutorial decision in this case, to again view their patrimony as unfortunate, and a gain for the state at the expense of, again, common people or those who represented them or stood in their shoes to help their cause.  

In Retrospect, by Robert S. McNamara - a belated review.

By proxy:  Occasionally, books get another surge or popularity apart from the first printing and go to a second edition.  This is a book that easily deserves a second printing, if indeed it has not had one yet:  The reasons are clear, and one obvious one is the U.S. government, when McNamara was secretary of defense leading up to the escalated military expeditions to southeast Asia, did rely on a kind of war of words and of numbers against the Viet Cong and what remained of the Viet Minh from colonial times.  The world of computerized strategy had been introduced from business into the way government worked and the wars we fought.  Everyone, including the French, probably, was using some sort of computer to study and determine everything from interpersonal to regional and global conflicts.  That is not a mystery today.

 

What does remain a mystery for most Americans concerned by developments in South and southeast Asia during the 1950’s through the end of the Viet conflict in the early 1970’s is how could we have devastated the communist and socialist enemy so thoroughly and then been declared “losers,” and resoundingly.  Some of this in one way or another has to do with the fact that many and much of the fighting in the Viet war was South of a demilitarized zone (17^th parallel above Hue City) where Viet Cong incursions made more and more headway as time went on.  Bombing Hanoi might have been effective, but it was ignored by an American public focusing on the pitched armed struggle in the South that was portrayed in everyone’s living room at night.  There were also the American press, various popular socialist revolutionaries and their student followers everywhere, who gave in psychologically to flourishing, but probably fairly isolated, if not very misinterpreted and overstated, aspects of the Viet conflict.  The flip side of giving into the image of the Viet Cong and its chief general Vo Nguyen Giap (which is what the well – known flower power movement did and the press appears to have done) as a superior fighting force was the belief that southeast Asia was in a series of “domino” states that would cascade into communism should Saigon City fall to the North.  There is also the serious criticism of the U.S. that Westmoreland, Taylor, and McNamara were at cross – purposes; a hint of this might also have made for poor morale in the field and thus the war unwinnable.  

 

Not only has the “domino” theory been disputed and disproven but the flower power movement has also been declared to have been counterproductive, and even disavowed by some or declared just to have been a mistake of hubris and plain ignorance.  It was morally wrong to try to persuade people that things like the scent of flowers would draw the enemy to a more peaceful demeanor (trees might have been better, but trees take longer to grow and require more husbandry than flowers.)  That the domino effect would draw the world into a communist abyss has been equally disparaged in later years.  The domino effect was the domestic solution to the flower children and its cautionary advocates have survived the Viet and Cold War and other conflicts whereas most ‘flower children’ everywhere are at most tepid on either front.  With respect to the current military conflicts and the overall effects of the conflicts in southeast Asia, one can draw actually glean very few similarities in how they are / were resolved:  The Viet conflict, and its ancillary actions were resolved in a political environment designed to disparage a popularly elected president, and were resolved in reaction to an official call for drafting more people into the military when an elite and volunteer armed forces were on the immediate administrative horizon.  None of those circumstances prevails today, for the most part, and history itself will really judge for better or worse the U.S. reaction to global terrorist threats, as recognised first by the war on terror under Clinton and then under Bush and Obama.

 

 

Another "personality" to learn about and follow (at your own risk.)

 Yesterday, I heard a very interesting interview that originally took place in 2009 in a theatre in New York with John Stewart (The Daily Show:)  This person, who espouses every liberal view and who sees the humour in that, has an excellent television show that is worth watching if you are the same type of person he is – Mr. Stewart is probably a really nice guy to have a beer with, and it shows in his humour, in his style of speech, and everyone should try to catch his show more often before tuning into Leno or Letterman.  He has from what I can see very funny and interesting guests, and his “reporting” television style with Colbert and the other members of the team is nice to watch.  Steven Colbert is actually serious about what he does, and this is what makes the show so off the wall sometimes.  That’s the way it seems, any way.  The entire crew on this show is a bunch of nice guys from New York, and probably in several other cities at one time or another, and they’re nice to watch.  This is not a review as I have not watched televsion consistently since I was a child, and do not even know media trends, and do know in any event that if you enjoy slapstick for young people, this is what it is.  Everyone knows you take your chances with comedy shows, and for some people John Stewart’s and Steven Colbert’s might be a good match for you.  Happy television – watching, and don’t forget the radio, too.

How to agree with 'liberal' economy and its proponents.

Robert Reich this week (Work of Nations, et seq.) and just within the last couple of days has mentioned a thing or two in response to an effort to increase the retirement age in France and the suggestion by some the same thing needs to happen in the U.S.  In a classic example of an economist who thinks of everything, he recommended the income ceiling on the FICA and OASDI should be raised.  Instead of the cynical view that government coffers are never full and always need more revenues to support an increasingly aging population, especially that taking advantage of social security benefits, and thereby calling for the hike in the official Social Security retirement age; Mr. Reich proposes another revenue raiser that would further stratify income by, again, taxing the rich – just make the system more progressive and continue taxing the income and wealth made through wages, for example.

Raising the Social Security tax ceiling is a nice idea, but in fact will raise so little revenue due to the greater and greater minority of highly – compensated (HCI) wage earners having less and less contribution to the tax base and thereby, again, to the overall revenues to the Treasury.  A better analysis and recommendation might be, and people like me do not have all the details, to do what policymakers did for a while in Ireland:  lower the overall business tax baseline and by this stratify the tax revenues of the country.  In Ireland, at least for a while, this resulted in greater tax revenue collections and state and industry and commerce remained happy with the results.  The situation in France is difficult because the electorate is very opinionated against the bureaucracy and subject to ownership of its position as victim thereof:  People like me understand the increase in the retirement age in France as a sign the economy is getting better, at least somewhat lately, and that fortunately people are living longer.  This given even the long and lazy work days sometimes the French have, not to mention the partying and wine – drinking that souses everyone when there’s a good harvest or good holidays, of which there are quite a few.

More Taliban Influences. "Just what could it be this time?"

Country of Afghanistan (2010)  L.A. Times article.

... another friend of the Kennedys.

Former Prime Minister (Great Britain) - September 2010

RESPONSE TO FORMER PRIME MINISTER BLAIR'S LAST COLUMN IN THE WALL STREET JOURNAL (INFORMALLY.)




That the latest financial crisis has called for people like the former British Prime Minister to comment that the mortgage - backed and other asset - backed products that were being sold were too complex and too difficult to track through the financial system we have does not speak to the merits of the invention and market in financial and other products that promise to improve the quality of life, and that people, investors, want in the first place. The problem the products were too complex, as proposed by Mr. Blair, indicates the investing public, otherwise rule - abiding and sophisticated, is ignorant, and that he has called for additional regulation on such matters re - enforces the idea that many leaders, of great amplitude themselves, do not understand Wall Street. It is perhaps one fault of our lawmakers they themselves did not make attempts to understand the mortgage crisis and have fallen back on rule - making: The derivatives market in the financial centers can be difficult to understand for some people, especially those having to deal with somewhat illiquid assets like housing, and other factors such as interest rates.



Blair also devotes considerable currency in his latest column to the subject of Iraq and Afghanistan, and gives an interesting post - soviet analysis of the Middle East with respect to these two countries. He gives no analysis nor does he clearly state how much in conflict certain factional areas of the Middle East are at cultural and other loggerheads with western countries at this point in time. There is valid discussion of Mr. Blair's long - standing point that terrorism is a provocation and can drive armed conflict as it has in the above two countries, and any victory in the war on terror has its price, it is above all evident, though Mr. Blair does avoid discussion of the expenses of the military deployments, etc., in Iraq and Afghanistan to date. There is, however, in the article a very cogent discussion of the merits of western values that is valid for every one of us, either in learning about them as a foreign person, or upholding them as a citizen of one western country or another. It is a danger that the imams are pursuing greater Islamic orthodoxy, sometimes in the face of public opinion in their own countries, and the hazards of this are discussed with respect to modernity and the current climate of world society, not just western culture. That Mr. Blair has either had governments, or had influence, in the administrations of three U.S. presidents indicates the obvious power of the labour party in England at one time, much as perhaps was at one time the influence of the British conservatives in the America during the late 1950's and early 1960's.



Islamic orthodoxy needs be discouraged, as needs be the voracious and insatiable appetite of some Middle East nations on the nuclear weapons and proliferation issues: The imams have Israel, other European and Middle Eastern countries and the Americas, not to mention other countries in the southern hemisphere as openly sworn or uncommitted opposition to theocracy of any kind, and the admonishment against theocracy in his article is followed by some words on "soft power." Mr. Blair does propose that western democracy is a little complacent with respect to international conflict at this point, and this is probably true with regard to the nine grueling years of war some peoples have had to deal with.

AS CORRECTED: An Inauspicious Anniversary (New York Times - 11 September.)

South Bay prostitution ring shut down, police say - San Jose Mercury News

South Bay prostitution ring shut down, police say - San Jose Mercury News

Why is prostitution wrong? ... Morally and legally wrong? Some people do believe this sort of behaviour is alright and needs to be legal, just like the "fun" of taking drugs should be legal. The basic principle of such arguments is a kind of relativism where most people just have their own moralistic ideas that are self - referential, and are free to create catastrophes and disasters out of others who are essentially vulnerable and without resources, and whom society considers unfit to work or contribute otherwise.

The overall difficulty of such behaviour is there is a demand for it as far as "helping" keep a family or relationship together or "using" such persons to keep a life intact, under the guise of illegal and / or immoral behaviour, however justified. Society's institutions, despite the myth to the contrary, have never been held together, nor really helped by this sort of perfidity and illegality. Such behaviour is counter productive and is also disastrous for the women and children who are compelled to enter into these activities that are destructive to everyone, including the social fabric of society in our country. Basic writings on psychology, such as Civilisation And Its Discontents (S. Freud,) speak to the overall uselessness and wastefulness of these behaviours, especially in the tally of lives cast into a social abyss, and despite the common belief among some that they are constructive and useful, and that they have their place: Everything gets "messed up" when you begin believing drugs and prostitution need to be legal and considered an ordinary and moral woof and wissom in the workings of our modern world.

Japanese Motorcyclist Killed at Race in Italy - CBS News

Japanese Motorcyclist Killed at Race in Italy - CBS News: "after"

Letters: Iraq Represents a U.S. Achievement | Hoover Institution

Letters: Iraq Represents a U.S. Achievement Hoover Institution

August in Belgium?

Louvain is where many books were burned by an advancing army some almost hundred years ago.  Books of the day then are / were like the computers of today in a way:  single storehouses of literature, lists and informations of any kind in compact form, and many were extremely carefully published, even pamphlets of the day.  Destruction of spirit in the old days meant at least in part the destruction of literature, prose, poetry, current events news, criticism and analysis, whatever.  At least look at these pictures of Leuven which are very simple, but confirm that the town would not recover as intended from the destruction of the Great War, from virually any perspective, in those August days.  Leuven is in Belgium, and it is a small town today, insignificant in the scheme of high - technology information processing and the great scale of today as well as the other activities of the world, and let its story be a lesson to us all who harbor thoughts of harm and destruction in view of prejudices, an appetite for conflict, even brutality.  Voyons.

... And the Premier League

Tottenham's Stadium Pitch (courtesy desso.com)

Deutsche fussball

You Can Find This in "The Wall Street Journal" (Fedor, ...)

An economic policy that seems to be working, at least with regard to expectations the U.S. economy will recover sooner rather than later, was spelled out in the Federal Reserve Chairman's testimony before Congress about three weeks ago.  Regardless of all the statistics and formulas, theorising and prognostications, the 2010 financial reform bill will asssure some things in the future:  That the abuses of private bankers do not end up being paid for by the state, and through other rules that they not be allowed to string their financial wagons together (another abuse as shown by the 2008 crisis.)  Other provsions of the new rules call for federal oversight and approval of some aspects of daily banking operations, but these items should not take away from the ordinarily streamlined running of the financial system, given its reliance on powerful information systems.

There are indications as well in the overall economy, apart from the financial sector, including expectations for continued price stability and indicators as provided from analysis of treasury rates that the Federal Reserve Chairman deserves credit for, insofar as these measures are prominent in recovery conditions.  Not the least to mention is consumers will not any longer, at least not for the foreseeable future, be able to pay off the mortgage with gains, and policies will principally discourage the type of highly - leveraged mortgage underwriting characterised by the last housing and related real estate finance boom.  Economic values as they are preached now might entirely have gone back to the virtues of saving and socking away cash apart from fancy investment vehicles as promoted through the local money store. 

Perhaps The Most Important Thing to Remember about This ...

...  is Hiroshima was the first.

Hiroshima - August 6, 2010 - morning.

... and yet, today in South Africa

F.W. de Klerk & Nelson Mandela  - May 1990 (courtesy U.K. Guardian)

Not only is the country of South Africa important in the scheme of the human rights issues in mind with everyone today, but turning the recent history of that country over and over brings to mind some certainly unresolved items of which the following:  a.  The South African transition to majority rule has gone quite smoothly compared, for example, to what is happening in Zimbabwe or even Mozambique; b.  In what ways does the new regime there continue to defeat the argument of the Afrikaans assuming for so long the "white man's burden," and then relinquishing it to the blacks.  Due to these two items and more, and their international political and cultural influences, is South Africa a safe place today where one might travel and even stay for a while or emigrate?  People like me have a hard time posing this question as the only ideas we have about Africa are from literary dogma and the press.

It is also interesting to note that the Afrikaans continue to have a role in South African society, even though many of the native peoples just wanted them out.  There are and have been things wrong with colonialism for a long time, and this is why it is not any longer practised by anyone.  Some western powers still have control of island nations and so forth, but the actual colonial period entered into its sunset when water transport became motorized and when some other things happened (like WWI.)  One might note here the Afrikaans, again, were not colonial really in that they believed in the eventuality of the blacks ruling their own territories without the kind of oriental chaos they had experienced when settling that land.  It becomes clear upon any study of Africa the blacks knew of other lands, not mystical to them, but as those of subjugators; and they only really had an interest in maintaining the status quo of a very organic society that dated back many years.  The institutional introduction of Occidental institutions and polity at the time of the colonial empires was a huge shock to the native South African population and they staged a long - standing revolt.  That westerners were the first to really settle in Africa engendered future contemptibility and when the communists began propagandizing the native peoples there during the period after WWII, the political climate was rife with vulnerabilities that were exacerbated and exist to this day.  Part of the credence of the ANC and its merits was the future promise to make the country productive and to preserve its institutions that were not overwhelmingly racist.  This led to the beginning of better prospects for African nations as far as foreign aid and international legitimacy were concerned among other things.  All this due to the relationships between personalities like F. W. de Klerk and Nelson Mandela; see your Cambridge history.

Keynsians, Hearken!

The above link is to an article that speaks about the effectiveness of the U.S. president's 2009 spending package that by some recent reports has added over two million new jobs (is that net or just a regular number?)  The content of the article examines, in theory pretty much only, the validity of the recent spending package, and there is some ground to be contested for the Keynsians, i.e., Romer, Summers, et. al, insofar as theorists vary on how effective government stimulus spending is at any one time, and this goes back to the Okun period in the 1960's when economic indicators started to become more true to life and "accurate" with respect to economic phenomenon and the information derived thereby using telecommunications and computing power.  Keep in mind that Keynsians do believe economics is full of numbers and you need some sort of quantitative analysis to make economic decisions (Keynes read statistics in the paper pretty much always, or obtained them over the telephone in working his economic and portfolio majic at Cambridge when he was alive.)  The fact is statistics do work, but they can be flawed, such as in the 2008 presidential stimulus package whence there was additional government spending, but investment was going abroad in one way or another, and the spending had little effect - there was a recession anyway.

The article does accurately propose that deficit reduction and cutting taxes, and cutting interest rates, and some other things would do well to get the U.S. economy booming again like a big band.  The problem has been for years that the twin deficits are structural, and this is in time of war so the federal government needs to pay for the conflicts somehow and we are all deeply in debt which means we are taking away from tomorrow (sui generis) when interest rates will be adversely affected by the increase in debt today.  The problem with interest rates and the dollar continue and if the president does what others have done before him, raising taxes, all this will mean is the commensurate spending that will result will only really cancel some of the deleterious economic effects remaining from the 2009 recession.  Policy makers talk about now "cutting" the deficits, and that would be first a positive thing for our consumer economy and then might attract some capital back into the country.  How this is to be done remains a huge question as Keynsians want to project an image the economy is doing better and then capital will follow; the monetarists' quip in this case might be that spending and tax reductions are not the 200% solution, but are better than projecting our economic troubles everywhere through taxing and spending behaviours.  The monetarists are in a bind as they have no real voice in the federal administration right now despite some prospective redemption in thier policy ideas.

Neither tax and spend, nor manipulating monetary economic items is the answer here as both these principles work most adequately under different regimes in relative peace time.  There are wars going on and our country (and its armed forces) is / are the champion(s) of liberty, honour, patriotic and civic duty in those conflicts; things we all believe in as U.S. citizens and citizens to - be.  Warrring parties often have their own ways of resolving payments and items due in the conflicts:  Before modern finance was discovered, moneys to pay for soldiery and armaments came mostly from the countries' treasuries, which is less so in modern times.  States have given to taking out loans from the citizenry to pay for conflicts, especially the current conflicts in the Middle East.  People like me do not believe government policies are the reasons for either our current economic difficulties or their solutions.  Without getting into what one might think of James Earl Carter's "Conspicuous Consumption" speech during the latter part of his presidency means for us today; everyone knows some belt - tightening is in order for everyone within our shores.  You also might do well to try to buy a few treasuries through the local mutual fund broker.  This will in the individual case do virtually, if not absolutely, nothing, but you will thereby be in step with the problems the president has:  a.  Simple people have believed for years that belligerents become wealthy and this is the reason for countries going to war (war is actually extremely expensive in any age, and quickly drains the treasury of any region,) b.  There is an ever - burgeoning debt mound in the federal government due just to deficit operations and spending; c.  The effect of any, even extremely powerful monetary / fiscal policy decision will be marginal / has been marginal at best; d.  Our region currently suffers from now historically very high unemployment on average; e.  The twin deficits must be reduced - something past administrations have demonstrated as "possible" but not probable; f.  To the extent deficits are cut, there are more poor tradeoffs between taxes and interest rates, for example, and other factors; g.  Any efforts at federal austerity will principally choke the national and regional economies that are used to federal funding; h. and on and on...  There is an entire body of work that goes into every economic policy decision, and the president, whoever he is, makes very few mistakes despite finger - pointing and partisanship, etc., especially with people like Paul Volcker in his corner.  The unfortunate thing here is that the Volcker people themselves, whatever their views are, have never been the purveyors of good tidings, really, and fall more or less within the Keynsian framework that calls for a kind of modern liberalistic approach to things. 

Nonetheless, pay attention to what the economic bills the president is signing, and they could pull off some austerity measure while raising taxes, or something.  Maybe a new labour bill could do it, though the business climate in the States now is as if we have had a labour regime for twenty years and the 1990's and early 00's have been cancelled out.  My solution would be to do what has been done in countries like Japan - hold down interest rates and muddle through, and call elections when things really do not work out.  All this, though we do not want our model to be Japan (and it isn't at this point,) do we, as that region has been long suffering economically for years.  People like me do believe in austerity measures and at the same time, and despite the increased expense of the wars, do not believe in rationing or quotas.  The idea is to stay away from that type of business climate where everyone is trying to get their hands on gold, silk, booze and chocolate, for example.

Some comments are that "It Could Be Worse." - 2009 New York Times Magazine

Also - Click President Signing Unemployement Act - 2010 as well for more ...

The above link is a 2009 interview site where the U.S. president sat down with a magazine editor and went over some items not only affecting our country, but other administrations as well that look to the O'Bama administration as an example, especially those in the western hemisphere.  This is the first I had heard that the president's mom had a cancer attack, then she apparently had stroke and upon that fell and broke her hip.  This would be a sorrowful thing for anyone, and this happened during the presidential campaign which must have been doubly disconcerting for the to - be president - elect and it shows his leadership skills to be able to speak about this openly, and to talk about it within the overall framework of medical care in the U.S.

It seems to me that with respect to this article that someone make a determination as I have that public finance began the financial crisis and (through Fannie and Freddie, and maybe even other entities of the same nature) with their collapse led to further problems that eventually touched upon the private sector and snowballed further.  The president in his interview appears not to know this and despite the conversation, the interviewer appears lost on it as well, even despite some discussion of the now passing financial rules in Congress and the Volcker - influenced regulations relating to macroeconomic financial safety and soundness.  Here also seems to be some cloudiness on the subject of the role of the U.S. Treasury now that the scandals have been remedied and how the moneys that funded the failures are to be repaid.  There is, however, some discussion of the technology and other crucial sectors driving paper profits and these parts of commerce, at least in the future, according to the interview, will not have the same primary role as revenue and income drivers in the economy as they did before. 

The interview includes a discussion of the president's overall views on the economy and his perceptions about workers and their choices and goals, for example, of the workforce toward greater vocational fulfilment, greater employment, and better lives for workers.  There is a surprising omission of any discussion of the basic relationships between the means of production and labor in the talk illustrated in this article, and in fact it appears that the president has decided, maybe accurately, the economy of the U.S. must at this point, and for very healthy reasons, become at least in part a labor economy among others.  By this he must believe in anti - inflationary measures and the general provisions of labor economics with the all encompassing statistics they have and so forth.  There was a significant discussion on the subject of health care and this article notes that ninety percent of health care costs are attributed to chronically ill patients in clinics and hospitals - and with this in mind, what one can do with health care costs - with the emphasis on the cost structure of delivering health care when the fixed costs are so high.  One back - of - the - envelope solution has been to "socialize" health care, but given the structure of insurance and other vehicles that cover health care in the U.S. and they way they have been for years, it does appear, for further discussion yet, that health care is already socialized.  This lawyer - president appears to want to depend upon quantitative methods for his executive powers and their implementation, and it is in any event very interesting to have read through this year - old magazine piece from May 2009 to find many of the same issues as looked -at still up - to - date.

Egypt, again taking another administrative turn.

Hosni Mubarak and Anwar Sadat

FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL:  This editorial by Fouad Ajami (The Foreigner's Gift, 2007) clearly and distinctly explains the place of Egypt in the modern world and its veteran leadership as they enter the arena of political maturity and face the dangers of anarchy in the 'near abroad' - the world of islamic influence, and the 'far abroad' - the western world as led by the United States.  Mr. Ajami writes here in appropriately incriminating prose on the subject of Ayman al - Zawahiri of Al - Q'aeda who was an Egyptian terrorist and then was involved in the assassination of Anwar Sadat during a 1981 parade ceremony.  Under Sadat, Israel had completed talks with Egypt to allow international recognition of Israel.  To see how important this was, take a look at the Hamas charter.  Zawahiri had other colleagues who were involved in the 1993 New York World Trade Center terrorist blast including another Egyptian, Omar Rahman.

It is noticeable by the editorial that the Egyptian regime is the origin of at least some violence on our Homeland and in conspiratorial ways.  On the other hand, Hosni Mubarak, the current Egyptian head of state, has effectively done away at home with the types of terrorist shenanigans that dominate the headlines in other international regions.  This bitter truth, that many arab terrorists come from different backgrounds in western - friendly countries such as Egypt is something in need of a remedy that will last like the current regime has.

Terezin

From "Radio Free Europe:"  'A recent Prague Spring concert honored musicians and artists in the Terezin concentration camp who died in the Holocaust. Terezin Music Foundation founder Mark Ludwig pays special homage to composer Gideon Klein, who died aged 26...'  It is captivating to try to find out or in some way have an image of what went on in the work camps of WWII Central Europe.  Terezin itself was apparently a type of dressed - up or hotel version of said camps and was visited and approved of by officials from Geneva several times during the German occupation of Czechoslovakia.  Any material you find on it is worth reading as the Terezin camp was run in fashion always to be ready with a new coat of paint here and there and even new bunks for the Hebrew and other inmates upon the impending visitation of Geneva and other officials to confirm that there were no exterminations there.  It was a small and well - run prison camp where a higher percentage of the Holocaust inmates survived.

July 14 - An anniversary of sorts - Ten Days Ago...

... Have read and heard about the news of the latest celebration of French "independence" from the feudal or royal age, and have heard of the grand parades and so forth: "A bas Louis XVI," etc., but you and I both know that cake was possible in that time as the harvests of that time were good, and there were some bad ones, too; but the granaries were full in most places. The crown of France had spent its capital and other funds on the grandeur of the Regency two or three generations before and the state could no longer support itself. In the history of ideas, Robespierre and Danton nor are nor were at the time propitious ideologues, even given the critiques of modern day iconoclasts, though they did have great influence and this probably due to moneyed revolutionary interests emanating from abroad. The royals were mostly informed of the impending revolts, and this has been a subject in the literature for a long time, as they even in many cases welcomed and profited from the revolutionary ideas and regarded them as refreshing because they were taxed so heavily by the state. Some of the details are apocryphal and therefore must be treated 'avec un grain de sel,' and the actions of many revolutionaries in the Tuileries against the king's guards were horrendous and extremely cruel (they had an army and the guards could not surrender under orders, and so forth.) The celebrants of the 14 July festival are therefore again taken to be rapacious and jaded against what was a benevolent monarchy under which there were many freedoms for the time, just not financial freedoms which infuriated everyone in the end and the city of Paris became a powder keg for insurrection against bloodlines first, and then the crown.