Sunday, March 30, 2008

Bush Abandons Capitalism So Tax Payers Can Pay For Attempt To Prop Up World Economy

the U.S. government discarded a half-century of rules to save American financial capitalism from collapse.

something big just happened
without an explicit vote by Congress.
billions of dollars of taxpayer money were put at risk
.
administration ... no longer believes the market can sort out the mess.

"The Government of Last Resort is working with the Lender of Last Resort to shore up the housing and credit markets to avoid Great Depression II,"

the Fed lent directly to Wall Street securities firms for the first time.

he clear and present danger that the virus in the housing, mortgage and credit markets is infecting the overall economy is too great to ignore.

Is it enough? Probably not.

next step ... almost sure to require the explicit use of taxpayer money.

a dangerous downward spiral in which falling prices of houses and mortgage-backed securities lead lenders to pull back, hurting the economy and dragging asset prices down further, and so on.

next step ... put a floor under prices
+++


Ten Days That Changed Capitalism

Officials Improvised
To Rescue Markets;
Will It Be Enough?

Wall Stree Journal
March 27, 2008; Page A1
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120657397294066915.html

By DAVID WESSEL

The past 10 days will be remembered as the time the U.S. government discarded a half-century of rules to save American financial capitalism from collapse.

On the Richter scale of government activism, the government's recent actions don't (yet) register at FDR levels. They are shrouded in technicalities and buried in a pile of new acronyms.

But something big just happened. It happened without an explicit vote by Congress. And, though the Treasury hasn't cut any checks for housing or Wall Street rescues, billions of dollars of taxpayer money were put at risk. A Republican administration, not eager to be viewed as the second coming of the Hoover administration, showed it no longer believes the market can sort out the mess.

"The Government of Last Resort is working with the Lender of Last Resort to shore up the housing and credit markets to avoid Great Depression II," economist Ed Yardeni wrote to clients.

First, over St. Patrick's Day weekend, the Fed (aka the Lender of Last Resort) and the Treasury forced the sale of Bear Stearns, the fifth-largest U.S. investment bank, to J.P. Morgan Chase at a price so low that a shareholder rebellion prompted J.P. Morgan to raise the price. To induce J.P. Morgan to do the deal, the Fed agreed to take losses or gains, if any, on up to $29 billion of securities in Bear Stearns's portfolio. The outcome will influence the sum the Fed turns over to the Treasury, so this is taxpayer money; that's why the Fed sought Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's OK.

Then the Fed lent directly to Wall Street securities firms for the first time. Until now, the Fed has lent directly only to Main Street banks, those that take deposits from ordinary folks. That's because banks were viewed as playing a unique economic role and, supposedly, were more closely regulated than other types of lenders. In the first three days of this new era, securities firms borrowed an average of $31.3 billion a day from the Fed. That's not small change, and it's why Mr. Paulson, after the fact, is endorsing changes to give the Fed more access to these firms' books.

Increased Leverage

In the days that followed, the Republican Treasury secretary leaned on two shareholder-owned, though government-chartered, companies -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- to raise capital that their boards didn't want to raise. In exchange, their government regulator allowed them to increase their leverage so they can buy about $200 billion more in mortgage-backed securities.

So Fannie and Freddie will get bigger, a welcome development when mortgage markets are in trouble. Already, they have regained lost market share. They accounted for 76% of new mortgages in the fourth quarter of last year, up from 46% in the second quarter, Mr. Paulson said Wednesday. But everyone knows that if Fannie or Freddie stumble, taxpayers will get stuck with the tab.

And then, the federal regulator of the low-profile Federal Home Loan Banks, which are even less well capitalized than Fannie and Freddie, said they could buy twice as many Fannie and Freddie-blessed mortgage-backed securities as previously permitted -- more than $100 billion worth.

Was this necessary? It's messy, uncomfortable and undoubtedly flawed in many details. Like firefighters rushing to a five-alarm fire, policy makers are making mistakes that will be apparent only in retrospect.

Too Great to Ignore

But, regardless of how we got here, the clear and present danger that the virus in the housing, mortgage and credit markets is infecting the overall economy is too great to ignore. The Great Depression was worsened because the initial government reaction was wrong-headed. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke spent an academic career learning how to avoid repeating those mistakes.

Is it working? It is helping. One key measure is the gap between interest rates on mortgages and safe Treasury securities. A wide gap means high mortgage rates, which hurt an already sickly housing market. A lot of recent activity, including Wednesday's previously planned auction in which the Fed is trading Treasurys for mortgage-backed securities, is aimed at increasing demand for those securities to drive down mortgage rates.

The gap remains enormous by historical standards, but has narrowed. On March 6, according to FTN Financial, 30-year fixed-rate mortgages were trading at 2.92 percentage points above the relevant Treasury rates; Wednesday the gap was down to 2.22. Normal is about 1.5 percentage points. Money markets are still under stress, as banks and others hoard cash and super-safe short-term Treasurys.

Is it enough? Probably not. Although it's hard to know, the downward tug on the overall economy from falling house prices persists. The next step, if one proves necessary, is almost sure to require the explicit use of taxpayer money.

Cushion the Blow

The case for doing more is twofold. One is to cushion the blow to families and communities, even if some are culpable. The other is to disrupt a dangerous downward spiral in which falling prices of houses and mortgage-backed securities lead lenders to pull back, hurting the economy and dragging asset prices down further, and so on.

In ordinary times, a capitalist economy lets prices -- such as those of homes, mortgage-backed securities and stocks -- fall to the point where the big-bucks crowd rushes in, hoping to make a killing. But if the big money remains on the sidelines, unpersuaded that a bottom is near, the wait for bargain hunters to take the plunge could be very long and very painful.

So the next step, no matter how it is dressed up, is likely to involve the government's moving in ways that put a floor under prices, hoping that will limit the downside risks enough so more Americans are willing to buy homes and deeper-pocketed investors are willing, in effect, to lend them the money to do so.

Write to David Wessel at capital@wsj.com



Labels:
--

Subscribe to emails from :
- Better World News: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/bwn_at7l.us
- Learning News - children learning, how mind works: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/learn_at7l.us
-
Health News - better ways of healthy living: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/health_at7l.us
- Good Morning World - Robert & Barbara Muller's daily idea-dream for a better world: http://www.goodmorningworld.org/emaillist/#subscribe
or send a request a subscription to any of the three lists here.

View these blogs:
- Better World News
- Learning News
- Health News
- Good Morning World


Saturday, March 29, 2008

Meltdown of Global Financial System Continues

CREDIT CRUNCH FALLOUT

Germans Fear Meltdown of Financial System

By SPIEGEL Staff

Germany and other industrialized nations are desperately trying to brace themselves against the threat of a collapse of the global financial system. The crisis has now taken its toll on the German economy, where the weak dollar is putting jobs in jeopardy and the credit crunch is paralyzing many businesses.

A trader reacts in front of the DAX board at the Frankfurt stock exchange.
REUTERS

A trader reacts in front of the DAX board at the Frankfurt stock exchange.

The Bundesbank, Germany's central bank, doesn't like to see its employees working too late, and it expects even senior staff members to be headed home by 8 p.m. On weekends, employees seeking to escape the confines of their own homes are required to sign in at the front desk and are accompanied to their own desks by a security guard. Sensitive documents are kept in safes in many offices, and a portion of Germany's gold reserves is stored behind meter-thick, reinforced concrete walls in the basement of a nearby building. In this environment, working overtime is considered a security risk.

But the ordinary working day has been in disarray in recent weeks at the Bundesbank headquarters building, a gray, concrete box in Frankfurt's Ginnheim neighborhood, where the crisis on international financial markets has many employees working late, even on weekends.

Last Sunday, most of the atypical activity was taking place on the 12th floor, which houses the senior management offices. Bundesbank President Axel Weber was repeatedly in touch -- both by telephone and via videoconferencing -- with his US counterpart, Federal Reserve ("Fed") Chairman Ben Bernanke, as well as with the heads of the central banks of other key industrialized nations. And, of course, with German Finance Minister Peer Steinbrück.

Bernanke told Weber about his organization's failed attempt that Sunday to orchestrate a last-minute bailout for the battered investment bank Bear Stearns. The venerable New York-based company, Bernanke argued, was simply too big to be allowed to go under, and the consequences of such a failure would be incalculable.

Customers wait in a queue outside a branch of Northern Rock, the British mortage lender, in London in September.
AP

Customers wait in a queue outside a branch of Northern Rock, the British mortage lender, in London in September.

None of these crisis managers had forgotten the images of last September's debacle in England, when customers were lined up in front of the branches of Northern Rock -- a bank that had been pushed to the brink of failure by the American subprime mortgage crisis -- to withdraw their savings. As it turned out, the British had taken far too long to guarantee customer deposits.

Political Dynamite

For some time, there has been a tacit agreement among central bankers and the financial ministers of key economies not to allow any bank large enough to jeopardize the system to go under -- no matter what the cost. But, on Sunday, the question arose whether this agreement should be formalized and made public. The central bankers decided against the idea, reasoning that it would practically be an invitation to speculators and large hedge funds to take advantage of this government guarantee.

Everyone involved knows how explosive the agreement is. It essentially means that while the profits of banks are privatized, society bears the cost of their losses. In a world in which the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer, that is political dynamite.

Nevertheless, central bankers are running out of options. They are anxious to avert the nightmare scenario of a financial crisis like the one that rocked Germany in 1931, when the failure of a major Berlin bank prompted a massive run on other banks by a nervous public, which plunged those banks into insolvency. For decades, a repetition of that disaster had seemed unthinkable. But ever since former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan dubbed the current financial crisis the worst since the end of World War II, old certainties have no longer applied.

A Fair Price to Pay?

Graphic: ECB cash injections since 2000
DER SPIEGEL

Graphic: ECB cash injections since 2000

So, what does apply? Should the state use taxpayer money to help greedy bankers repair the damage caused by their unscrupulous speculation? Should it invest billions to save ailing financial institutions, thereby engendering new risks and side effects? And should the government, to use the words of a Frankfurt investment banker, "treat a drug addict with cocaine"?

How does one explain to honest taxpayers that they should pony up their hard-earned money for a bank like Bear Stearns, whose long-standing CEO forked out $28 million (€18 million) for a 600-square-meter (6,500 square-foot) duplex apartment on New York's Central Park shortly before the collapse of his company? Or that UBS, the crisis-ridden, major Swiss bank, fired three of its senior executives for poor performance only to turn around and pay them roughly 60 million Swiss francs (€38 million/$59.2 million) in golden parachutes?

The central banks and governments of the major industrialized nations are still dodging the answers to these questions. They see themselves in the role of an emergency room doctor, whose job is to provide acute treatment. Like a dangerous virus, the crisis in the US real estate market has infected large parts of the worldwide financial system. After being burned by scores of bad loans, the banks have become deeply distrustful of each other. They have gambled away their most important asset: trust.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.
AFP

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.

As the weeks progress, the disaster scenarios painted by prophets of doom, such as the American economist Nouriel Roubini, are becoming more and more likely. For months, Roubini, a professor of economics at New York University, has warned of the risks of a "core meltdown" of global financial systems and has summarized his thoughts in an analysis entitled "The Twelve Steps to Financial Disaster." According to an assessment by the International Monetary Fund, the crisis could lead to global losses exceeding $800 billion (€520 billion).

The American economy is presumably already in a recession, which affects the rest of the world. Experts also predict noticeably less growth and fewer new jobs for Germany. If the economic situation worsens, the state could face tax losses in the billions. This could force Berlin's ruling grand coalition of Social Democrats and Christian Democrats to shelve its plan to consolidate public budgets.

Calling Bluffs

In this situation, even the most zealous disciples of the free market are calling for more government intervention. "I no longer have faith in the ability of the markets to heal themselves," Deutsche Bank CEO Josef Ackermann confessed in a speech delivered last Monday in Frankfurt. Ackermann said that the American example shows that governments and central banks must now play a stronger role.

Even his counterpart at Commerzbank, Klaus-Peter Müller, agreed, saying that the current situation has the potential to develop into "the biggest financial crisis in postwar history" as long as "the markets are allowed to continue operating unchecked." According to Müller, "It would make sense to permit the banks -- retroactively to Jan. 1 -- to account for securities differently by eliminating the daily revaluation requirement." He argues that this would stop the downward spiral on the banks' financial statements.

Deutsche Bank CEO Josef Ackermann and German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
DPA

Deutsche Bank CEO Josef Ackermann and German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

The German Finance Ministry promptly rejected such calls, saying: "We see no need to become active at the national level." But this assertion is far from the truth. The ministry has become a place of nonstop crisis meetings, the chancellery is kept constantly apprised of the latest developments, and the Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (BaFin) has already set up a task force to address the issue. No one in the government has the slightest doubt that it will intervene the minute another bank begins to falter.

Germany's state-owned banks, which have been especially careless in recent years about investing in American securities backed by subprime loans, are considered greatly at risk. One of them, Bayerische Landesbank, is currently considering writing off €1 billion ($1.54 billion) -- or possibly even more -- in bad debt. In the first two months of 2008 alone, the Bavarian bank's troubled securities portfolio has lost €1 billion in value, and it has fallen even further since. "There could be another billion in losses on top of that," says one banker.

At another state-owned bank, Dusseldorf-based WestLB, €5 billion ($7.7 billions) in government bailout funds are apparently not enough. The bank is already losing its next billion.

"The numbers are completely irrelevant," says a senior executive at one state-owned bank, "but it is clear that before a bank goes under, the central bank will push a red button and provide as much money as is needed."

This blatant display of nonchalance irritates Commerzbank CEO Müller, who is also the president of the Association of German Banks. "We must achieve greater transparency," says Müller. "It doesn't help when some banks hide behind outdated accounting regulations. All facts must be on the table and current."

Hitting Big Business Where It Hurts

State-owned bank WestLB has already used €5 billion in government bailout funds.
DDP

State-owned bank WestLB has already used €5 billion in government bailout funds.

The state-owned banks are not alone. The German economy is also suffering from the effects of the financial crisis. "Germany cannot uncouple itself from the world economy," says Walther Otremba, state secretary in the German Ministry of Economics.

Otremba has kept careful track of what bankers, business owners and the officials of major trade groups have been telling him. German exporting companies are showing the first signs of the coming slump. Orders once considered dependable are being cancelled, costs are on the rise and loans can only be had with markups, even for low-risk projects.

It's like the beginning stage of the flu, when the patient still appears healthy and strong. But the virus is already replicating in the body, and the patient is beginning to feel the effects of joint pain and crippling fatigue.

For years, the German economy benefited from the fact that German sports cars and high-end kitchens were seen as hip in the United States. But now the chain reaction set in motion by declining real estate prices, increasingly scarce credit and recession fears is depressing US demand for such products.

Even worse, because the US Federal Reserve, fearing a nationwide bank crash, is flooding the markets with cheap money, the dollar has plunged to a new record low, with bitter consequences for German producers. Since the beginning of the year, the products sold by their American competitors have become almost 7 percent cheaper, and profits from US sales are melting away as the dollar weakens even further.

The plunge of the US currency has already shaken the core of German industry: machine building, aviation and automobile manufacturing. Together these industries employ more than a million people and play a key role in preserving Germany's status as the world's largest exporter of goods. The weak dollar threatens thousands of jobs. Companies are forced to outsource some of their production to the dollar zone, and they are urging their suppliers to follow them on their trek westward.

The falling dollar is pushing German car manufacturers like BMW to ship production overseas.
DDP

The falling dollar is pushing German car manufacturers like BMW to ship production overseas.

BMW serves as an example of the consequences of the weak dollar. According to an analysis requested by CEO Norbert Reithofer, his company loses €80 million ($123 million) for each cent the dollar falls. This led to losses of more than €500 million ($770 million) last year. Now BMW plans to cut 8,100 jobs, most of them in Germany, while at the same time investing $750 million (€487 million) to expand its plant in Spartanburg, South Carolina, where it will add 500 new positions. Reithofer hopes that these steps will enable BMW to reduce its dependency on the dollar exchange rate.

The VW Group has also lost money in North America in recent years because of the weak dollar -- to the tune of about €3.5 billion ($5.4 billion). In an attempt to rectify the situation, Volkswagen CEO Martin Winterkorn plans to build a new assembly plant in the United States with annual production capacity of about 200,000 vehicles.

Aircraft manufacturer Airbus is suffering the most from the dollar's weakness. Aircraft sales worldwide are transacted in dollars, but Airbus incurs a large share of its costs in euros. To respond to the problem, the company plans to drastically reduce costs with its "Power 8" restructuring program. The plan will mean the loss of 10,000 jobs and the sale of seven factories.

Graphic: Changes in key interest rates in the Eurozone and US since 2000
DER SPIEGEL

Graphic: Changes in key interest rates in the Eurozone and US since 2000

But now another side effect of the financial crisis is jeopardizing Airbus's restructuring plan. Because of the weak credit markets, Airbus may not even be able to sell its plants. "Some of the potential buyers are having trouble raising the money for the acquisition," says Louis Gallois, CEO of Airbus parent company EADS. The banks are turning off the money supply. According to a survey by the Bundesbank, "standards for commercial loans are being tightened across the board for all types of companies and loan terms."

The financial managers of construction material giant Heidelberg Cement are already feeling the new ice age. Last year Heidelberg acquired British competitor Hanson, financing a portion of the takeover with two publicly traded bonds. Within four months, rising credit market interest rates led to an additional cost of €7.5 million ($4.9 million). "Market conditions are totally absurd," says one Heidelberg manager.

Hitting Them While They're Down

Even worse off are companies that fell into the hands of corporate raiders like Blackstone, Permira, Carlyle and Fortress during the takeover frenzies of recent years. From frozen fish stick maker Iglu to model train builder Märklin to the media group Kabel Deutschland, well over 600 German companies -- altogether employing about a million people -- are now controlled by the international private equity industry. Hungry for profits, the banks financed their corporate takeovers at exorbitant prices because, until recently, they could quickly sell the carelessly approved loans to greedy investors.

But no one is buying anymore. The market for billions in takeover loans is dead, as are many of the deals that had attracted corporate raiders. In the slump, the investment companies are trying to squeeze what they can out of their new acquisitions.

Another bad day on the DAX.
DDP

Another bad day on the DAX.

Last Wednesday, for example, Fortress demonstrated how to milk a German company. The US financial investor owns 80 percent of real estate management giant Gagfah, which was originally owned by the German retirement insurance system. Now that the company has selectively raised rents, laid off personnel and reappraised its inventory of 170,000 apartments, the owners want to see their money and have ordered Gagfah to significantly increase its profit distributions.

Permia and KKR, two other private equity firms, are taking a similarly brazen approach to plundering their television empire, the ProSiebenSat.1 media conglomerate. They are having the company pay out dividends that are three times as high as its 2007 profits. This has resulted in the company's debt growing by more than €3 billion ($4.6 billion), putting it in a position in which any crisis could jeopardize its existence.

And the crises will come, especially now that German economic growth is declining. "It cannot be ruled out that the weak phase in the United States will last the entire current year," says economic guru Bert Rürup, "which means that the climate for the German economy will likely become more difficult next year."

The Coming Paradigm Shift

If the economists are right, there will soon be a fundamental shift in the political agenda. The government and the opposition are still discussing how to distribute the fruits of Germany's economic recovery more broadly among social classes. But soon the focus could shift to keeping growth alive within domestic industry.

For some time German Economics Minister Michael Glos, a member of the conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU), has had a plan on the back burner with which he hopes to stimulate the economy with additional tax reductions.

The government is also prepared for a continuation of the bank crisis. If other banks run into trouble, Finance Minister Peer Steinbrück plans to come to their aid with fiscal tools, even if it gets expensive for the government. "Preventing a bank crash," say officials at the finance ministry, "takes precedence over budget consolidation."

In the wake of the financial crisis, a new debate has begun over the role of the state. For years, the prevailing dogma was that the international capital markets ought to be left largely to free market forces. But now even financial investors and top bankers are calling for more government control.

This also revives a government initiative that was a dismal failure last year. In the face of US resistance, Berlin failed in its attempt to introduce tighter regulations for hedge funds. "But now," says an advisor to Chancellor Angela Merkel, "even the Americans see the issue in a new light."

Beat Balzli, Konstantin von Hammerstein, Dietmar Hawranek, Wolfgang Reuter, Michael Sauga

Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan



Labels:
--

Subscribe to emails from :
- Better World News: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/bwn_at7l.us
- Learning News - children learning, how mind works: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/learn_at7l.us
-
Health News - better ways of healthy living: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/health_at7l.us
- Good Morning World - Robert & Barbara Muller's daily idea-dream for a better world: http://www.goodmorningworld.org/emaillist/#subscribe
or send a request a subscription to any of the three lists here.

View these blogs:
- Better World News
- Learning News
- Health News
- Good Morning World


Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Support The Great social Movement That Supports The Obama Campaign

We did not foresee the exciting social movement that is the Obama campaign.

Many of us supported other candidates, or waited skeptically as weeks and months passed. But the closeness of the race makes it imperative that everyone on the sidelines, everyone in doubt, everyone vacillating, everyone fearing betrayals and the blasting of hope, everyone quarreling over political correctness, must join this fight to the finish.

Not since Robert Kennedy’s 1968 campaign has there been a passion to imagine the world anew like the passion and unprecedented numbers of people mobilized in this campaign.

+++


PROGRESSIVES FOR OBAMA
March 24th, 2008
http://blog.pdamerica.org/?p=1815

by Tom Hayden, Bill Fletcher, Barbara Ehrenreich, and Danny Glover

All American progressives should unite for Barack Obama. We descend from the proud tradition of independent social movements that have made America a more just and democratic country. We believe that the movement today supporting Barack Obama continues this great tradition of grass-roots participation drawing millions of people out of apathy and into participation in the decisions that affect all our lives. We believe that Barack Obama’s very biography reflects the positive potential of the globalization process that also contains such grave threats to our democracy when shaped only by the narrow interests of private corporations in an unregulated global marketplace. We should instead be globalizing the values of equality, a living wage and environmental sustainability in the new world order, not hoping our deepest concerns will be protected by trickle down economics or charitable billionaires. By its very existence, the Obama campaign will stimulate a vision of globalization from below.

As progressives we believe this sudden and unexpected new movement is just what America needs. The future has arrived. The alternative would mean a return to the dismal status quo party politics that have failed so far to deliver peace, health care, full employment and effective answers to crises like global warming.

During past progressive peaks in our political history—the late Thirties, the early Sixties—social movements have provided the relentless pressure and innovative ideas that allowed centrist leaders to embrace visionary solutions. We find ourselves in just such a situation today.

We intend to join and engage with our brothers and sisters in the vast rainbow of social movements to come together in support of Obama’s unprecedented campaign and candidacy. Even though it is candidate-centered, there is no doubt that the campaign is a social movement, one greater than the candidate himself ever imagined.

Progressives can make a difference in close primary races like Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Oregon, Puerto Rico, and in the November general election. We can contribute our dollars. We have the proven online capacity to reach millions of swing voters in the primary and general election. We can and will defend Obama against negative attacks from any quarter. We will seek Green support against the claim of some that there are no real differences between Obama and McCain. We will criticize any efforts by Democratic super-delegates to suppress the winner of the popular and delegate votes, or to legitimize the flawed elections in Michigan and Florida. We will make our agenda known at the Democratic national convention and fight for a platform emphasizing progressive priorities as the path to victory.

Obama’s March 17 speech on racism was as great a speech as ever given by a presidential candidate, revealing a philosophical depth, personal authenticity, and political intelligence that should convince any but the hardest of ideologues that he carries unmatched leadership potentials for overcoming the divide-and-conquer tactics which have sundered Americans since the first slaves arrived here in chains.

Only words? What words they were.

However, the fact that Barack Obama openly defines himself as a centrist invites the formation of this progressive force within his coalition. Anything less could allow his eventual drift towards the right as the general election approaches. It was the industrial strikes and radical organizers in the 1930s who pushed Roosevelt to support the New Deal. It was the civil rights and student movements that brought about voting rights legislation under Lyndon Johnson and propelled Eugene McCarthy and Bobby Kennedy’s anti-war campaigns. It was the original Earth Day that led Richard Nixon to sign environmental laws. And it will be the Obama movement that makes it necessary and possible to end the war in Iraq, renew our economy with a populist emphasis, and confront the challenge of global warming.

We should not only keep the pressure on, but we also should connect the issues that Barack Obama has made central to his campaign into an overarching progressive vision.

- The Iraq War must end as rapidly as possible, not in five years. All our troops must be withdrawn. Diplomacy and trade must replace further military occupation or military escalation into Iran and Pakistan. We should not stop urging Barack Obama to avoid leaving American advisers behind in Iraq in a counterinsurgency quagmire like Afghanistan today or Central America in the 1970s and 1980s. Nor should he simply transfer American combat troops from the quagmire in Iraq to the quagmire in Afghanistan.
- Iraq cannot be separated from our economic crisis. Iraq is costing trillions of dollars that should be invested in jobs, universal health care, education, housing and public works here at home. Our own Gulf Coast requires the attention and funds now spent on Gulf oil.
- Iraq cannot be separated from our energy crisis. We are spending an unheard-of $100/barrel for oil. We are officially committed to wars over oil supplies far into the future. We instead need a war against global warming and for energy independence from Middle Eastern police states and multinational corporations.

Progressives should support Obama’s 16-month combat troop withdrawal plan in comparison to Clinton’s open-ended one, and demand that both candidates avoid a slide into four more years of low-visibility counterinsurgency.

The Democratic candidates should listen more to the blunt advice of the voters instead of the timid talk of their national security advisers. Two-thirds of American voters, and a much higher percentage of Democrats, oppose this war and favor withdrawal in less than two years, nearly half of them in less than one year. The same percentage believe the war has had a negative effect on life in the United States, while only 15 percent believe the war has been positive. Without this solid peace sentiment, neither Obama nor Clinton would be taking the stands they do today.

Further, the battered and abused people of Iraq favor an American withdrawal by a 70 percent margin.

The American government’s arrogant defiance of these strong popular majorities in both America and Iraq should be ended this November by a powerful peace mandate.

The profound transition from the policies of the past will not be easy, and fortunately the Obama campaign is lifted by the fresh wind of change. We seek not only to change the faces in high places, however, but to save our country from slow death by greed, status quo politics, and loss of vision. The status quo cannot stand much longer, neither that of politics-as-usual nor that of our security, energy and economic policies. We are stealing from the next generation’s future, and living on borrowed time.

The Bush Administration has replaced the Cold War with the War on Terrorism led by the same military-industrial complex that President Eisenhower warned against. The reality and public fear of terrorism today is no less real than fear of communism and nuclear annihilation a generation ago. But we simply cannot continue multiple military interventions in many Muslim countries without increasing the vast number of violent jihadists against us, bleeding our military and our economy, becoming more dependent on Middle East oil, creating unsavory alliances with police states, shrinking our own civil liberties and putting ourselves at permanent risk of another 9/11 attack.

We need a brave turn towards peace and conflict resolution in the Middle East and the Muslim world. Getting out of Iraq, sponsoring a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians, ending alliances with police states in the Arab world, unilaterally initiating real energy independence and moving the world away from the global warming crises are the steps that must be taken.

Nor can we impose NAFTA-style trade agreements on so many nations that seek only to control their own national resources and economic destinies. We cannot globalize corporate and financial power over democratic values and institutions. Since the Clinton Administration pushed through NAFTA against the Democratic majority in Congress, one Latin American nation after another has elected progressive governments that reject US trade deals and hegemony. We are isolated in Latin America by our Cold War and drug war crusades, by the $500 million counter-insurgency in Columbia, support for the 2002 coup attempt in Venezuela, and the ineffectual blockade of Cuba. We need to return to the Good Neighbor policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt in the 1930s, which rejected Yankee military intervention and accepted Mexico’s right to nationalize its oil in the face of industry opposition. The pursuit of NAFTA-style trade policies inflames our immigration crisis as well, by uprooting countless campesinos who inevitably seek low-wage jobs north of the border in order to survive. We need balanced and democratically-approved trade agreements that focus on the needs of workers, consumers and the environment. The Banana Republic is a retail chain, not an American colony protected by the Monroe Doctrine.

We are pleased that Hillary Clinton has been responsive to the tide of voter opinion this year, and we applaud the possibility of at last electing an American woman president. But progressives should be disturbed at her duplicitous positions on Iraq and NAFTA. She still denies that her 2002 vote for legislation which was called the war authorization bill was a vote for war authorization. She now promises to “end the war” but will not set a timeline for combat troop withdrawal, and remains committed to leaving tens of thousands of counter-terrorism troops and trainers in Iraq amidst a sectarian conflict. While Obama needs to clarify his own position on counterinsurgency, Clinton’s “end the war” rhetoric conceals an open commitment to keep American troops in Iraq until all our ill-defined enemies are defeated—a treadmill which guarantees only the spawning of more enemies. On NAFTA, she claims to have opposed the trade deal behind closed doors when she was First Lady. But the public record, and documents recently disclosed in response to litigation, proves that she was a cheerleader for NAFTA against the strong opposition of rank-and-file Democrats. The Clintons ushered in the Wall Street Democrats whose deregulation ethos has widened inequality while leaving millions of Americans without their rightful protections against market shocks.

Clinton’s most bizarre claim is that Obama is unqualified to be commander-in-chief. Clinton herself never served in the military, and has no experience in the armed services apart from the Senate armed services committee. Her husband had no military experience before becoming president. In fact he was a draft opponent during Vietnam, a stance we respected. She was the first lady, and he the governor, of one of our smallest states. They brought no more experience, and arguably less, to the White House than Obama would in 2009.

We take very seriously the argument that Americans should elect a first woman president, and we abhor the surfacing of sexism in this supposedly post-feminist era. But none of us would vote for Condoleeza Rice as either the first woman or first African-American president. We regret that the choice divides so many progressive friends and allies, but believe that a Clinton presidency would be a Clinton presidency all over again, not a triumph of feminism but a restoration of the aging, power-driven Wall Street Democratic Hawks at a moment when so much more fresh imagination is possible and needed. A Clinton victory could only be achieved by the dashing of hope among millions of young people on whom a better future depends. The style of the Clintons’ attacks on Obama, which are likely to escalate as her chances of winning decline, already risks losing too many Democratic and independent voters in November. We believe that the Hillary Clinton of 1968 would be an Obama volunteer today, just as she once marched in the snows of New Hampshire for Eugene McCarthy against the Democratic establishment.

We did not foresee the exciting social movement that is the Obama campaign. Many of us supported other candidates, or waited skeptically as weeks and months passed. But the closeness of the race makes it imperative that everyone on the sidelines, everyone in doubt, everyone vacillating, everyone fearing betrayals and the blasting of hope, everyone quarreling over political correctness, must join this fight to the finish. Not since Robert Kennedy’s 1968 campaign has there been a passion to imagine the world anew like the passion and unprecedented numbers of people mobilized in this campaign.

TOM HAYDEN is author of Ending the War in Iraq, a five-time Democratic convention delegate, former state senator, and board member of the Progressive Democrats of America. BILL FLETCHER, JR., who originated the call for founding “Progressives for Obama,” is the executive editor of Black Commentator, and founder of the Center for Labor Renewal; BARBARA EHRENREICH is the author of Dancing in the Streets[2007] and other popular works and, with Hayden, a member of The Nation’s editorial board. DANNY GLOVER is the respected actor, activist, and chairman of the board of TransAfrica.

more info: http://progressivesforobama.blogspot.com/



Labels:
--

Subscribe to emails from :
- Better World News: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/bwn_at7l.us
- Learning News - children learning, how mind works: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/learn_at7l.us
-
Health News - better ways of healthy living: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/health_at7l.us
- Good Morning World - Robert & Barbara Muller's daily idea-dream for a better world: http://www.goodmorningworld.org/emaillist/#subscribe
or send a request a subscription to any of the three lists here.

View these blogs:
- Better World News
- Learning News
- Health News
- Good Morning World


Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Creating Real Community It's What Nurtures Us More Fully Human

build real community -- with mass transit and local food

conserve energy.
You don't need a dryer -- that's the sun's job.

generate the power we use cleanly.

take the bus or ride a bike to the farmers' market
Farmers' markets are the fastest growing part of the American food economy
life satisfaction and happiness
manage it on half the energy use per capita.

Building a Movement

a political swell larger than the civil rights movement
passionate and ... willing to sacrifice.

a whole new level of commitment -- to nonviolent protest, to electioneering, to endless lobbying.
 every nation pitching in

forget the endless expansion

Another Way to be Human

we need our neighbors

build real community, of the kind that lets us embrace mass transit and local food and co-housing and you name it,

we were built for community. Everything we know about human beings, from the state of our immune systems to the state of our psyches, testifies to our desire for real connection

community because it's what makes us fully human.
+++

If We Want to Survive the Climate Crisis We Must ChangeIf We Want to Survive the Climate Crisis We Must Change

By Bill McKibben, YES! Magazine. Posted March 15, 2008.
http://www.alternet.org/environment/78498/?page=entire


Either we build real community -- with mass transit and local food -- or we will go down clinging to the wreckage of our privatized society.

More stories by Bill McKibben

At any given moment we face as a society an enormous number of problems: there's the mortgage crisis, the health care crisis, the endless war in Iraq, and on and on. Maybe we'll solve some of them, and doubtless new ones will spring up to take their places. But there's only one thing we're doing that will be easily visible from the moon. That something is global warming. Quite literally it's the biggest problem humans have ever faced, and while there are ways to at least start to deal with it, all of them rest on acknowledging just how large the challenge really is.

What exactly do I mean by large? Last fall the scientists who study sea ice in the Arctic reported that it was melting even faster than they'd predicted. We blew by the old record for ice loss in mid-August, and by the time the long polar night finally descended, the fabled Northwest Passage was open for navigation for the first time in recorded history. That is to say, from outer space the Earth already looks very different: less white, more blue.

What do I mean by large? On the glaciers of Greenland, 10 percent more ice melted last summer than any year for which we have records. This is bad news because, unlike sea ice, Greenland's vast frozen mass sits above rock, and when it melts, the oceans rise -- potentially a lot. James Hansen, America's foremost climatologist, testified in court last year that we might see sea level increase as much as six meters -- nearly 20 feet -- in the course of this century. With that, the view from space looks very different indeed (not to mention the view from the office buildings of any coastal city on earth).

What do I mean by large? Already higher heat is causing drought in arid areas the world over. In Australia things have gotten so bad that agricultural output is falling fast in the continent's biggest river basin, and the nation's prime minister is urging his people to pray for rain. Aussie native Rupert Murdoch is so rattled he's announced plans to make his NewsCorp empire (think Fox News) carbon neutral. Australian voters ousted their old government last fall, largely because of concerns over climate.

What do I mean by large? If we'd tried we couldn't have figured out a more thorough way to make life miserable for the world's poor, who now must deal with the loss of the one thing they could always take for granted -- the planet's basic physical stability. We've never figured out as efficient a method for obliterating other species. We've never figured out another way to so fully degrade the future for everyone who comes after us. Or rather, we have figured out one other change that rises to this scale. That change is called all-out thermo-nuclear war, and so far, at least, we've decided not to have one.

But we haven't called off global warming. Just the opposite: in the 20 years that we've known about this problem, we've steadily burned more coal and gas and oil, and hence steadily poured more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Instead of a few huge explosions, we've got billions of little ones every minute, as pistons fire inside engines and boilers burn coal. Having put off real change, we've made our job steadily harder. But there are signs that we're finally ready to get to work. Congress is for the first time seriously considering legislation that would actually limit U.S. emissions. The bills won't be signed by President Bush, and they don't do everything that needs doing -- but they're a start.

And the international community meeting in Bali in December overcame U.S. resistance and began the steps toward an international treaty that will be ready in 2009. The talks are going slowly, largely because of American intransigence, but George Bush won't be president forever, so there's at least a chance we'll re-engage with the rest of the world. If we do, there are steps we can take. Because the problem is so big, and coming at us so fast, those steps will need to be large. And even so, they won't be enough to stop global warming -- at best they will slow it down and give us some margin. But here's the deal:

We need to conserve energy. That's the cheapest way to reduce carbon. Screw in the energy-saving lightbulbs, but that's just the start. You have to blow in the new insulation -- blow it in so thick that you can heat your home with a birthday candle. You have to plug in the new appliances -- not the flat-screen TV, which uses way more power than the old set, but the new water-saving front-loading washer. And once you've got it plugged in, turn the dial so that you're using cold water. The dryer? You don't need a dryer -- that's the sun's job.

We need to generate the power we use cleanly. Wind is the fastest growing source of electricity generation around the world -- but it needs to grow much faster still. Solar panels are increasingly common -- especially in Japan and Germany, which are richer in political will than they are in sunshine. Much of the technology is now available; we need innovation in financing and subsidizing more than we do in generating technology.We need to change our habits -- really, we need to change our sense of what we want from the world.

Do we want enormous homes and enormous cars, all to ourselves? If we do, then we can't deal with global warming. Do we want to keep eating food that travels 1,500 miles to reach our lips? Or can we take the bus or ride a bike to the farmers' market? Does that sound romantic to you? Farmers' markets are the fastest growing part of the American food economy; their heaviest users may be urban-dwelling immigrants, recently enough arrived from the rest of the world that they can remember what actual food tastes like. Which leads to the next necessity:

We need to stop insisting that we've figured out the best way on Earth to live. For one thing, if it's wrecking the Earth then it's probably not all that great. But even by measures of life satisfaction and happiness, the Europeans have us beat -- and they manage it on half the energy use per capita. We need to be pointing the Indians and the Chinese hard in the direction of London, not Los Angeles; Barcelona, not Boston.

Building a Movement

Most of all, we need a movement. We need a political swell larger than the civil rights movement -- as passionate and as willing to sacrifice. Without it, we're not going to best the fossil fuel companies and the auto-makers and the rest of the vested interests that are keeping us from change. Some of us have spent the last couple of years trying to build that movement, and we've had some success. With no money and no organization, seven of us launched StepItUp in January 2007. Before the year was out, we'd helped organize 2,000 demonstrations in all 50 states -- and helped take our once-radical demand for an 80 percent reduction in U.S. carbon emissions by mid-century into the halls of power.

We haven't won yet -- but we're way beyond what we could have expected when we began. Last November, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stood at a podium in front of 7,000 college students gathered from around the country at the University of Maryland and led them in a chant: "80 percent by 2050." I'm as cynical as the next guy, but it feels like our democracy is starting to work.

It will need to work much better, though. We'll need to see a whole new level of commitment -- to nonviolent protest, to electioneering, to endless lobbying. We'll have to be committed to an environmentalism much broader and more diverse than we've known -- younger, browner, and insistent that the people left out of the last economy won't be left out of the new one. And we'll need to see it not just here but around the world. Because they don't call it global warming for nothing. If we're going to have a fighting chance, we'll need every nation pitching in -- which means, in turn, that we'll have to understand where we all stand right now.

What about China and India?

Here's the political reality check, just as sobering as the data about sea ice and drought: China last year passed the United States as the biggest emitter of carbon on Earth. Now, that doesn't mean the Chinese are as much to blame as we are -- per capita, we pour four times more CO2 into the atmosphere. And we've been doing it for a hundred years, which means it will be decades before they match us as a source of the problem.

But they -- and the Indians, and the rest of the developing world behind them -- are growing so fast that there's no way to head off this crisis without their participation. And yet they don't want to participate, because they're using all that cheap coal not to pimp out an already lavish lifestyle, but to pull people straight out of deep poverty. Which means that if we want them not to burn their coal, we're going to need to help them -- we're going to need to supply the windmills, efficient boilers, and so on that let them build decent lives without building coal-fired power plants.

Which means, in turn, we're going to need to be generous, on a scale that passes even the Marshall Plan that helped rebuild post-World War II Europe. And it's not clear if we're capable of that any more -- so far our politicians have preferred to scapegoat China, not come to its aid. I said at the start that this was not just another problem on a list of problems. It's a whole new lens through which we look at the world. When we peer through it, foreign policy looks entirely different: the threats to our security can be met only by shipping China technology, not by shipping missiles to China's enemies.

When we peer through the climate lens, our economic life looks completely changed: we need to forget the endless expansion now adding to the cloud of carbon and concentrate on the kind of durability that will let us last out the troubles headed our way.

Another Way to be Human

Our individual lives look very different through these glasses too. Less individual, for one thing. The kind of extreme independence that derived from cheap fossil fuel -- the fact that we need our neighbors for nothing at all -- can't last.

Either we build real community, of the kind that lets us embrace mass transit and local food and co-housing and you name it, or we will go down clinging to the wreckage of our privatized society. Which leaves us with the one piece of undeniably good news: we were built for community. Everything we know about human beings, from the state of our immune systems to the state of our psyches, testifies to our desire for real connection of just the kind that an advanced consumer society makes so difficult.

We need that kind of community to slow down the environmental changes coming at us, and we need that kind of community to survive the changes we can't prevent. And we need that kind of community because it's what makes us fully human.This is our final exam, and so far we're failing. But we don't have to put our pencils down quite yet. We'll see.

See more stories tagged with: bill mckibben, step it up, climate change, global warming

Bill McKibben wrote this article as part of Stop Global Warming Cold, the Spring 2008 issue of YES! Magazine. Bill McKibben is the author of The End of Nature, Wandering Home, and Deep Economy, and a founder of StepItUp, which has recently joined forces with 1sky.


Labels:
--

Subscribe to emails from :
- Better World News: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/bwn_at7l.us
- Learning News - children learning, how mind works: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/learn_at7l.us
-
Health News - better ways of healthy living: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/health_at7l.us
- Good Morning World - Robert & Barbara Muller's daily idea-dream for a better world: http://www.goodmorningworld.org/emaillist/#subscribe
or send a request a subscription to any of the three lists here.

View these blogs:
- Better World News
- Learning News
- Health News
- Good Morning World

Friday, March 14, 2008

USA Financial Panic Escalates, Recession Deep & Long, One Of History's Great Financial Crises

Fed's attempt to avert a recession has almost certainly failed.
the recession will be both deep and long.

Fed announced this week that it would put $400 billion - almost half its available funds - into other stuff, including bonds backed by, yes, home mortgages.
The hope is that this will stabilize markets and end the panic.

no advanced-country's central bank has ever exposed itself to this much market risk -
the Fed still won't manage to get a grip on the economy.

things have by no means returned to normal.
rescuing the whole financial system

one of history's great financial crises.

The next steps will be up to the politicians.
explain what it's doing to an angry public.
+++




    Betting the Bank
    By Paul Krugman
    The New York Times

    Friday 14 March 2008
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/031408T.shtml

 Go to Original

    Four years ago, an academic economist named Ben Bernanke co-authored a technical paper that could have been titled "Things the Federal Reserve Might Try if It's Desperate" - although that may not have been obvious from its actual title, "Monetary Policy Alternatives at the Zero Bound: An Empirical Investigation."

    Today, the Fed is indeed desperate, and Mr. Bernanke, as its chairman, is putting some of the paper's suggestions into effect. Unfortunately, however, the Bernanke Fed's actions - even though they're unprecedented in their scope - probably won't be enough to halt the economy's downward spiral.

    And if I'm right about that, there's another implication: the ugly economics of the financial crisis will soon create some ugly politics, too.

    To understand what's going on, you have to know a bit about how monetary policy usually operates.

    The Fed's economic power rests on the fact that it's the only institution with the right to add to the "monetary base": pieces of green paper bearing portraits of dead presidents, plus deposits that private banks hold at the Fed and can convert into green paper at will.

    When the Fed is worried about the state of the economy, it basically responds by printing more of that green paper, and using it to buy bonds from banks. The banks then use the green paper to make more loans, which causes businesses and households to spend more, and the economy expands.

    This process can be almost magical in its effects: a committee in Washington gives some technical instructions to a trading desk in New York, and just like that, the economy creates millions of jobs.

    But sometimes the magic doesn't work. And this is one of those times.

    These days, it's rare to get through a week without hearing about another financial disaster. Some of this is unavoidable: there's nothing Mr. Bernanke can or should do to prevent people who bet on ever-rising house prices from losing money. But the Fed is trying to contain the damage from the collapse of the housing bubble, keeping it from causing a deep recession or wrecking financial markets that had nothing to do with housing.

    So Mr. Bernanke and his colleagues have been doing the usual thing: printing up green paper and using it to buy bonds. Unfortunately, the policy isn't having much effect on the things that matter. Interest rates on government bonds are down - but financial chaos has made banks unwilling to take risks, and it's getting harder, not easier, for businesses to borrow money.

    As a result, the Fed's attempt to avert a recession has almost certainly failed. And each new piece of economic data - like the news that retail sales fell last month - adds to fears that the recession will be both deep and long.

    So now the Fed is following one of the options suggested in that 2004 paper, which was about things to do when conventional monetary policy isn't getting any traction. Instead of following its usual practice of buying only safe U.S. government debt, the Fed announced this week that it would put $400 billion - almost half its available funds - into other stuff, including bonds backed by, yes, home mortgages. The hope is that this will stabilize markets and end the panic.

    Officially, the Fed won't be buying mortgage-backed securities outright: it's only accepting them as collateral in return for loans. But it's definitely taking on some mortgage risk. Is this, to some extent, a bailout for banks? Yes.

    Still, that's not what has me worried. I'm more concerned that despite the extraordinary scale of Mr. Bernanke's action - to my knowledge, no advanced-country's central bank has ever exposed itself to this much market risk - the Fed still won't manage to get a grip on the economy. You see, $400 billion sounds like a lot, but it's still small compared with the problem.

    Indeed, early returns from the credit markets have been disappointing. Indicators of financial stress like the "TED spread" (don't ask) are a little better than they were before the Fed's announcement - but not much, and things have by no means returned to normal.

    What if this initiative fails? I'm sure that Mr. Bernanke and his colleagues are frantically considering other actions that they can take, but there's only so much the Fed - whose resources are limited, and whose mandate doesn't extend to rescuing the whole financial system - can do when faced with what looks increasingly like one of history's great financial crises.

    The next steps will be up to the politicians.

    I used to think that the major issues facing the next president would be how to get out of Iraq and what to do about health care. At this point, however, I suspect that the biggest problem for the next administration will be figuring out which parts of the financial system to bail out, how to pay the cleanup bills and how to explain what it's doing to an angry public.



Labels:
--

Subscribe to emails from :
- Better World News: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/bwn_at7l.us
- Learning News - children learning, how mind works: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/learn_at7l.us
-
Health News - better ways of healthy living: http://at7l.us/mailman/listinfo/health_at7l.us
- Good Morning World - Robert & Barbara Muller's daily idea-dream for a better world: http://www.goodmorningworld.org/emaillist/#subscribe
or send a request a subscription to any of the three lists here.

View these blogs:
- Better World News
- Learning News
- Health News
- Good Morning World