http://altlantic-internationalpartnership.com/2011/04/hello-world/
New job: Gordon Brown will work at the World Economic Forum
Gordon Brown accepted a new international economic job yesterday – and said his task is to save the world from the next financial crisis.
The former prime minister was handed a post co-ordinating strategy for the World Economic Forum, a collection of leading politicians and businessmen.
The unpaid position will come with a staffing allowance of £750,000 a year.
It comes after David Cameron and George Osborne made clear they would veto any move to make Mr Brown the £270,000-a-year head of the International Monetary Fund, a job for which he has been lobbying.
Mr Brown’s spokesman was quick to say that his new role will be to ‘stop the next financial crisis’. His remarks echoed Mr Brown’s assertion that he ‘saved the world’ after the international credit crunch of 2009.
Tory deputy chairman Michael Fallon said Mr Brown has yet to face up to the legacy of debt that he bequeathed to taxpayers. ‘This is a case of putting the arsonist in charge of the fire station,’ he said.
‘It beggars belief that somebody who is yet to apologise for the mess he made in our finances should be advising the rest of the world.’
Mr Brown will join the World Economic Forum as chairman of the Policy and Initiatives Co-ordination Board.
Strategy: Irish rock star Bono talks with Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo about African poverty at the World Economic Forum in January 2006
Critics will point out that the role will be an addition to Mr Brown’s duties as an MP, a job he intends to retain. Since he quit as PM last May, he has not attended any of the major budget debates in the Commons and has one of the worst voting records of any MP.
Mr Brown’s new job, unlike the IMF post he craved, lacks concrete powers. The WEF is a private organisation and while Mr Brown can cajole politicians and businessmen to work together, he has little leverage. By contrast, the IMF post would have put him in charge of a worldwide organisation charged with distributing billions to the developing world.
Sunday, May 8, 2011
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines: Why Jaguar gives us reasons to be cheerful
http://altlantic-internationalpartnership.com/2011/04/atlantic-international-partnership-headlines-why-jaguar-gives-us-reasons-to-be-cheerful/
Many years ago, when the Bay City Rollers were still described as “heart-throbs” and Margaret Thatcher had just replaced Edward Heath as Conservative Party leader, there was a joke in America about Jaguar cars.
Even with the China plan, Jaguar Land Rover is a positive UK story. Last year Tata Motors, after plunging into the red as it was caught up in the consumer slump following the financial crisis, dropped plans to close one of its three major factories already operating in Britain. Such was the surge in orders and revenue, the company decided that far from retrenchment the story was all about expansion.
As we reveal today, that expansion is hopefully about to hit a higher gear. Jaguar Land Rover is well advanced in planning for a new engine plant in either the Midlands or South Wales. Although an as yet unnamed site in India could still overcome the two UK favourites, the fact that it would mean shipping the engines back to the UK to be put together with the cars that are assembled here must make it an outsider.
It is unlikely that Jaguar Land Rover will be looking for direct Government support for the plant. After getting entangled in a turf war between the then trade secretary Lord Mandelson’s business department and the Treasury over a £290m rescue package in 2008, it would be well advised to raise any money needed this time in the markets. As Sheffield Forgemasters found to its cost, relying on public grants is a risky game.
What Jaguar Land Rover does need is the type of business-friendly environment conducive to growth. That means more from the Government than simply saying you are business friendly.
It must be hoped that George Osborne and Vince Cable – who have both visited Jaguar Land Rover plants in the past year – do all they can to ensure Tata Motors does choose to bring at least 1,000 new employment opportunities to the UK. Beyond that headline number there are, of course, all the extra supply-chain jobs at local firms which will be linked to the new factory. Do not underestimate either the “good news” boost of a global firm committing to Britain.
There is much talk from the Government about the need to “rebalance the economy” away from an over-reliance on the financial sector and towards manufacturing. This is an opportunity to put such talk into action.
Many years ago, when the Bay City Rollers were still described as “heart-throbs” and Margaret Thatcher had just replaced Edward Heath as Conservative Party leader, there was a joke in America about Jaguar cars.
Such was their atrocious build quality you had to buy them two at a time – one to drive while the other one was in the garage being fixed.
The demise of the British car industry became a metaphor for the decline of the UK. The fact that we couldn’t make the door fit on a sludge brown Austin Allegro (renamed the “All-aggro” and voted the UK’s worst car ever) said a lot about our inability to run world-class businesses. Strikes, poor material and build quality and failing management came together in a toxic virus that left us the Sick Man of Europe.
Roll forward four decades and we see a much healthier picture – and no more Bye, Bye, Baby complete with tartan scarves and the infamous “mullet” hairstyle either. The automotive renaissance is well embedded in the UK, although often unsung. We now build 1.4m vehicles a year, below the 2m (badly produced) in the early 1970s but well up on the dark days of the late 1970s and early 1980s. Japanese giants Nissan, Toyota and Honda have made significant commitments to the UK and their plants – in Sunderland, Burnaston, Derbyshire, and Swindon – are some of the most productive in the world. The automotive sector contributes more than 10pc of UK exports with a value of $25bn (£15bn) over the last five years.
When it was announced in March 2008 that the Indian conglomerate Tata was taking over Jaguar Land Rover from Ford in a £1.15bn deal, concerns were raised that the well-surfaced motorway of automotive progress was about to hit a speed bump. Surely Tata would announce the mother of all Indian takeaways, sending Jaguar Land Rover manufacturing eastwards and out of the UK?
The opposite has been the case, with Tata Motors investing heavily in its UK business. Yes, Jaguar Land Rover is in talks with potential Chinese partners about building some assembly capability in China but that is a sensible move given the import cost of bringing wholly finished goods into the country. China is a huge growth market for luxury cars and Jaguar sold 30,000 cars there last year.
Related Articles
- The fall and rise of the British car industry: timeline23 Apr 2011
- Jaguar plans UK expansion set to create 1,000 jobs23 Apr 2011
- Jaguar Land Rover plans assembly plant in China19 Apr 2011
- Business is booming for the car industry09 Apr 2011
- Jaguar Land Rover sales roar to record06 Apr 2011
- Tata Motors to invest £50m in UK research and development28 Mar 2011
As we reveal today, that expansion is hopefully about to hit a higher gear. Jaguar Land Rover is well advanced in planning for a new engine plant in either the Midlands or South Wales. Although an as yet unnamed site in India could still overcome the two UK favourites, the fact that it would mean shipping the engines back to the UK to be put together with the cars that are assembled here must make it an outsider.
It is unlikely that Jaguar Land Rover will be looking for direct Government support for the plant. After getting entangled in a turf war between the then trade secretary Lord Mandelson’s business department and the Treasury over a £290m rescue package in 2008, it would be well advised to raise any money needed this time in the markets. As Sheffield Forgemasters found to its cost, relying on public grants is a risky game.
What Jaguar Land Rover does need is the type of business-friendly environment conducive to growth. That means more from the Government than simply saying you are business friendly.
It must be hoped that George Osborne and Vince Cable – who have both visited Jaguar Land Rover plants in the past year – do all they can to ensure Tata Motors does choose to bring at least 1,000 new employment opportunities to the UK. Beyond that headline number there are, of course, all the extra supply-chain jobs at local firms which will be linked to the new factory. Do not underestimate either the “good news” boost of a global firm committing to Britain.
There is much talk from the Government about the need to “rebalance the economy” away from an over-reliance on the financial sector and towards manufacturing. This is an opportunity to put such talk into action.
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines: The United States faces a crisis not seen since the Depression
http://altlantic-internationalpartnership.com/2011/04/atlantic-international-partnership-headlines-the-united-states-faces-a-crisis-not-seen-since-the-depression/
The poisonous atmosphere surrounding the role of the state and taxation allows no realistic budget bargaining
Will Hutton in America
The Observer, Sunday 24 April 2011
Maybe it’s because Boston is different, a semi-detached city in one of the US’s most liberal states. But the news that the world’s biggest economy had had its creditworthiness challenged for the first time by the upstart rating agency Standard & Poor’s (S&P) hardly seemed to register with the locals.
No one I met fulminated about loss of economic sovereignty or that S&P, whose purblind approval of junk mortgage debt as triple A was one of the causes of the financial crisis, had finally over-reached itself. Bostonians seemed unconcerned. Perhaps this was because it was just one more surreal moment in the pantomime that is American economic and political life.
That was how the markets judged the news. There was a momentary tremor in the Dow Jones. Some analysts shrugged it off; others thought it profoundly serious. But soon the markets were on the rise again as if nothing had happened.
The Obama administration played it down. Tim Geithner, the secretary of state for the Treasury, said that S&P was behind the political curve; the prospects for a bipartisan deal were now better than they had been for months. If the hope was to provoke a change in the debate about the US’s record budget deficit, S&P must have been disappointed.
The Republicans rehearsed their battle cry that Obama was mortgaging the future and that the only plan in town to respond to the agency’s “wake-up call” was their own – to take federal spending back to pre-modern levels, while offering further tax relief to the rich. To all this Democrats are ferociously opposed.
You can see why. The Republican position, set out in detail by Paul Ryan, the Republican chair of the congressional budget committee, is not really a budget plan at all. It is a map for dismantling the US state so that it would do little more than provide threadbare pensions and healthcare for the very poorest and almost nothing else, with even defence in the line of fire. Democrats believe in a different role for the state and that the boom story with no role for public spending on science and infrastructure is a nonsense. It is a battle for the very soul of the United States.
For months, President Obama has played the conciliator. In December, he agreed to extend the Bush 2001 and 2003 tax cuts that have so grievously undermined the US’s long-run budgetary position, once again giving ground and so implicitly accepting the logic of the Republican position.
But to general surprise, 10 days ago he showed unexpected spine in a set-piece speech. Turning on his tormentors, he declared that the state was essential to economic growth and what he described as the US’s social compact. Its dismantlement was off-limits on his watch. There would be painful cuts under his deficit-reduction plan, including cuts to defence, but it would involve tax increases for the rich. Warren Buffett, he declared, did not need another tax cut.
The battle is about to become very real. On 16 May, the US will exceed the legal $14.3 trillion limit for its national debt. There has to be a vote to allow it to rise. What worries S&P is that the two parties are still far apart, with the Republicans taking positions that seem to allow no room for reason or compromise.
The threat of the US government closing down will probably be averted, but the poisonous atmosphere surrounding the role of the state and taxation allows no realistic budget bargaining. In the gap, debt and deficits will carry on rising unsustainably, hence the first “negative watch” on US public debt.
The Republican position is part sheer lunacy, but in part it also draws on deep roots and it is hard to disentangle the two. For lunacy, look no further than the debate about whether or not Barack Obama was born in Honolulu and thus eligible to be president. I arrived in the US as billionaire property dealer and publicity-hungry Donald Trump, plainly positioning himself for the Republican presidential nomination race, was saying that his newly employed investigators into Obama’s birth were discovering some interesting material, although he refused to say quite what. Obama’s birth certificate is on public release and Dr Chiyome Fukino, former director of health in Hawaii, has repeatedly said that it is genuine .
Trump must know it is a slur but can’t resist it because a segment of the public is so hungry for such material, even if it is a palpable lie. His approval ratings have soared. And this is where the debate about the debt intersects with the daffy birther movement (those who question whether Obama really is an American and thus eligible for the presidency). A large constituency in the US is disoriented by the continual squeeze on middle-class American living standards, the fall-out of the banking crisis and the rise of China. Taken together, they spell a US in decline and it is felt personally. For them, the US’s problems stem from having strayed from the ideals of the founding fathers and the lessons from the frontier .
This is why Sarah Palin’s homespun, God-fearing philosophy formed in the last American frontier – Alaska – has such political resonance. Her TV series, Sarah Palin’s Alaska, has her climbing rock faces and cooking in the wild, relying on her own capabilities and faith to get her through. No dependency culture here. More of that is what is now needed, not Obama’s cleverness and moderate faith in government. Obviously he can’t have been born an American.
It is powerful, but it is deluded and self-delusion runs deep in the US. Even the smart people at MIT, where so much US innovative technology originates, buy the cultural assertion that their success is all about individual entrepreneurship and brilliance; the cumulative trillions of US government grants are a side-show. Too few see growing federal debt as the necessary flipside of the banking crisis. The state is cast as the public enemy, not its friend.
The poisonous atmosphere surrounding the role of the state and taxation allows no realistic budget bargaining
Will Hutton in America
The Observer, Sunday 24 April 2011
Maybe it’s because Boston is different, a semi-detached city in one of the US’s most liberal states. But the news that the world’s biggest economy had had its creditworthiness challenged for the first time by the upstart rating agency Standard & Poor’s (S&P) hardly seemed to register with the locals.
No one I met fulminated about loss of economic sovereignty or that S&P, whose purblind approval of junk mortgage debt as triple A was one of the causes of the financial crisis, had finally over-reached itself. Bostonians seemed unconcerned. Perhaps this was because it was just one more surreal moment in the pantomime that is American economic and political life.
That was how the markets judged the news. There was a momentary tremor in the Dow Jones. Some analysts shrugged it off; others thought it profoundly serious. But soon the markets were on the rise again as if nothing had happened.
The Obama administration played it down. Tim Geithner, the secretary of state for the Treasury, said that S&P was behind the political curve; the prospects for a bipartisan deal were now better than they had been for months. If the hope was to provoke a change in the debate about the US’s record budget deficit, S&P must have been disappointed.
The Republicans rehearsed their battle cry that Obama was mortgaging the future and that the only plan in town to respond to the agency’s “wake-up call” was their own – to take federal spending back to pre-modern levels, while offering further tax relief to the rich. To all this Democrats are ferociously opposed.
You can see why. The Republican position, set out in detail by Paul Ryan, the Republican chair of the congressional budget committee, is not really a budget plan at all. It is a map for dismantling the US state so that it would do little more than provide threadbare pensions and healthcare for the very poorest and almost nothing else, with even defence in the line of fire. Democrats believe in a different role for the state and that the boom story with no role for public spending on science and infrastructure is a nonsense. It is a battle for the very soul of the United States.
For months, President Obama has played the conciliator. In December, he agreed to extend the Bush 2001 and 2003 tax cuts that have so grievously undermined the US’s long-run budgetary position, once again giving ground and so implicitly accepting the logic of the Republican position.
But to general surprise, 10 days ago he showed unexpected spine in a set-piece speech. Turning on his tormentors, he declared that the state was essential to economic growth and what he described as the US’s social compact. Its dismantlement was off-limits on his watch. There would be painful cuts under his deficit-reduction plan, including cuts to defence, but it would involve tax increases for the rich. Warren Buffett, he declared, did not need another tax cut.
The battle is about to become very real. On 16 May, the US will exceed the legal $14.3 trillion limit for its national debt. There has to be a vote to allow it to rise. What worries S&P is that the two parties are still far apart, with the Republicans taking positions that seem to allow no room for reason or compromise.
The threat of the US government closing down will probably be averted, but the poisonous atmosphere surrounding the role of the state and taxation allows no realistic budget bargaining. In the gap, debt and deficits will carry on rising unsustainably, hence the first “negative watch” on US public debt.
The Republican position is part sheer lunacy, but in part it also draws on deep roots and it is hard to disentangle the two. For lunacy, look no further than the debate about whether or not Barack Obama was born in Honolulu and thus eligible to be president. I arrived in the US as billionaire property dealer and publicity-hungry Donald Trump, plainly positioning himself for the Republican presidential nomination race, was saying that his newly employed investigators into Obama’s birth were discovering some interesting material, although he refused to say quite what. Obama’s birth certificate is on public release and Dr Chiyome Fukino, former director of health in Hawaii, has repeatedly said that it is genuine .
Trump must know it is a slur but can’t resist it because a segment of the public is so hungry for such material, even if it is a palpable lie. His approval ratings have soared. And this is where the debate about the debt intersects with the daffy birther movement (those who question whether Obama really is an American and thus eligible for the presidency). A large constituency in the US is disoriented by the continual squeeze on middle-class American living standards, the fall-out of the banking crisis and the rise of China. Taken together, they spell a US in decline and it is felt personally. For them, the US’s problems stem from having strayed from the ideals of the founding fathers and the lessons from the frontier .
This is why Sarah Palin’s homespun, God-fearing philosophy formed in the last American frontier – Alaska – has such political resonance. Her TV series, Sarah Palin’s Alaska, has her climbing rock faces and cooking in the wild, relying on her own capabilities and faith to get her through. No dependency culture here. More of that is what is now needed, not Obama’s cleverness and moderate faith in government. Obviously he can’t have been born an American.
It is powerful, but it is deluded and self-delusion runs deep in the US. Even the smart people at MIT, where so much US innovative technology originates, buy the cultural assertion that their success is all about individual entrepreneurship and brilliance; the cumulative trillions of US government grants are a side-show. Too few see growing federal debt as the necessary flipside of the banking crisis. The state is cast as the public enemy, not its friend.
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines: Teaching new dogs old tricks
http://altlantic-internationalpartnership.com/2011/04/atlantic-international-partnership-headlines-teaching-new-dogs-old-tricks/
Remember that scene in “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” when Jimmy Stewart arrives in the capital for the first time? The freshman senator shakes off his handlers in Union Station and jumps onto a sightseeing bus, eager to see all the statues and monuments honoring the greats of American history.
“I don’t think I’ve ever been so thrilled in my life,” he says afterward. “And that Lincoln Memorial — gee whiz! Mr. Lincoln, there he is. Just looking straight at you as you come up those steps. Just sitting there like he was waiting for somebody to come along.”
For all their talk of the Founding Fathers, the Constitution and core principles, you’d have thought that the current freshman class of Congress, the sprouted seed of Tea Partyers and the 2010 midterms, would have made a similar tour their first priority on arrival. And for all I know, many of them did just that. But for some, the siren song of cash and influence has proven stronger, already luring them onto the rocks of privilege and corruption that lurk just inside the Beltway. They’ve made a beeline not for the hallowed shrines of patriots’ pride but for the elegant suites of K Street lobbyists, where the closest its residents have been to Lincoln is the bearded face peering from the $5 bill — chump change. So much for fiercely resisting the wicked, wicked ways of Washington. These new members were seduced faster than Dustin Hoffman in “The Graduate.”
In an April 2 editorial, the New York Times reported:
AP/Susan Walsh
House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio delivers the oath of office to Republican members of the House of Representatives during the first session of the 112th Congress, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Jan. 5, 2011.
“I don’t think I’ve ever been so thrilled in my life,” he says afterward. “And that Lincoln Memorial — gee whiz! Mr. Lincoln, there he is. Just looking straight at you as you come up those steps. Just sitting there like he was waiting for somebody to come along.”
For all their talk of the Founding Fathers, the Constitution and core principles, you’d have thought that the current freshman class of Congress, the sprouted seed of Tea Partyers and the 2010 midterms, would have made a similar tour their first priority on arrival. And for all I know, many of them did just that. But for some, the siren song of cash and influence has proven stronger, already luring them onto the rocks of privilege and corruption that lurk just inside the Beltway. They’ve made a beeline not for the hallowed shrines of patriots’ pride but for the elegant suites of K Street lobbyists, where the closest its residents have been to Lincoln is the bearded face peering from the $5 bill — chump change. So much for fiercely resisting the wicked, wicked ways of Washington. These new members were seduced faster than Dustin Hoffman in “The Graduate.”
In an April 2 editorial, the New York Times reported:
Since last year’s Republican victories, nearly 100 lawmakers have hired former lobbyists as their chiefs of staff or legislative directors, according to data compiled by two watchdog groups, the Center for Responsive Politics and Remapping Debate. That is more than twice as many as in the previous two years.
In that same period, 40 lobbyists have been hired as staff members of Congressional committees and subcommittees, the boiler rooms where legislation is drafted. That again dwarfs the number from the previous two years. While some of those lobbyist-staffers were hired by Democrats, the vast majority are working for Republicans… In many cases, those hiring lobbyists were Tea Party candidates who vowed to end business as usual in Washington.
The revolving door between government and lobbyists has never spun faster. Then there’s this, from Wednesday”s Washington Post:
According to the nonpartisan Sunlight Foundation, Rep. Noem, who pledged to voters not to make Washington her home, held at least 10 fundraisers in D.C. during that first quarter, her first months as a member of Congress. They included two dinners at the Capital Grille, at which attendees donated between $1,500 and $2,000 apiece, and lunch at We, the Pizza on Pennsylvania Avenue.
A CQ MoneyLine study reports that during the first three months of the year the 87 Republican freshmen pulled in a total of $14.7 million from individuals as well as PACs. Leading the crowd was Diane Black of Tennessee with $926,000, but more than two-thirds of it was her own money. In second place was West Virginia’s David B. McKinley, with $540,000.
Rep. McKinley was one of nine new GOP members spotlighted this week by the website Politico as members who have done things “the Washington way, using a legislative process they once railed against to try to assist donors, protect favored industries or settle scores with their political enemies.”
Three weeks after his swearing in, McKinley introduced a bill to overturn an Environmental Protection Agency ruling that vetoed an Army Corps of Engineers water permit for mountaintop mining, the practice that blasts the tops off mountains and sends debris raining down on communities, streams and rivers. The bill has ramifications for the entire mining industry, but the specific mine in question is owned by Arch Coal. Its PAC contributed $2,500 to McKinley’s 2010 election campaign and another thousand so far this year.
The mining industry was McKinley’s largest corporate campaign contributor — $51,751. And a month after he took office, Politico reported, he introduced another bill “that would block a proposed EPA regulation against coal-ash bricks and drywall, materials architectural and engineering firms — such as one founded by McKinley — routinely recommend in construction project bids.”
Others cited by the Politico investigation include freshmen Bill Johnson of Ohio and Morgan Griffith of Virginia. They, too, have been going to bat for mine executives. The mining sector was Johnson’s biggest corporate donor at $25,146; same with Griffith, who received $40,450.
Texas freshman Bill Flores has been going after the Interior Department’s procedures for offshore oil drilling permits, trying to get the department to impose tighter deadlines and pay back billions in leasing rights to oil companies whose permits are denied. He’s the former president and CEO of an exploratory oil firm. Its employees were his second largest campaign contributor and the oil and gas industry threw in more than $200,000.
In rebuttal, the office of each congressman has generated the appropriate, high-minded spin. “West Virginia is coal, and coal is West Virginia,” said McKinley’s spokeswoman. “He’s doing what he said he would — fighting tooth and nail to stop the EPA’s war on coal …” Rep. Flores told Politico, “This is an issue that is very important to me as I have been involved in finding solutions to America’s long-term energy independence for the last thirty years.”
And so it goes. At this rate, if the Abraham Lincoln so venerated by the idealistic Mr. Smith is still at his memorial hoping for someone to come along, someone with integrity and dedication to the people and not the almighty dollar, he’s going to have a long wait.
The new dogs have learned the old tricks of Capitol Hill with remarkable speed, and their big business masters, armed with their Supreme Court-sanctioned ability to throw bottomless bags of money around, have more control of the leash than ever.
Michael Winship, senior writing fellow at Demos and president of the Writers Guild of America, East, is former senior writer of “Bill Moyers Journal” on PBS.
Many of the Republican freshmen in the House won election vowing to shake up Washington, so it’s a little surprising that many of them seem to be playing an old Washington game: raising much of their campaign money from corporate political action committees.For example, freshman star Kristi Noem of South Dakota — one of the two newbies anointed as liaison to the Republican House leadership — raised $169,000 in PAC money, including cash from General Electric, Boeing, Raytheon, Wells Fargo, Fedex, AFLAC, Altria (the parent company of Philip Morris and Kraft Foods) and pharmaceutical giants Bayer and GlaxoSmithKline.
More than 50 members of the class of 87 GOP freshmen took in more than $50,000 from PACs during the first quarter of 2011, according to new campaign disclosure reports filed with the Federal Election Commission. Eighteen of the lawmakers took in more than $100,000.
According to the nonpartisan Sunlight Foundation, Rep. Noem, who pledged to voters not to make Washington her home, held at least 10 fundraisers in D.C. during that first quarter, her first months as a member of Congress. They included two dinners at the Capital Grille, at which attendees donated between $1,500 and $2,000 apiece, and lunch at We, the Pizza on Pennsylvania Avenue.
A CQ MoneyLine study reports that during the first three months of the year the 87 Republican freshmen pulled in a total of $14.7 million from individuals as well as PACs. Leading the crowd was Diane Black of Tennessee with $926,000, but more than two-thirds of it was her own money. In second place was West Virginia’s David B. McKinley, with $540,000.
Rep. McKinley was one of nine new GOP members spotlighted this week by the website Politico as members who have done things “the Washington way, using a legislative process they once railed against to try to assist donors, protect favored industries or settle scores with their political enemies.”
Three weeks after his swearing in, McKinley introduced a bill to overturn an Environmental Protection Agency ruling that vetoed an Army Corps of Engineers water permit for mountaintop mining, the practice that blasts the tops off mountains and sends debris raining down on communities, streams and rivers. The bill has ramifications for the entire mining industry, but the specific mine in question is owned by Arch Coal. Its PAC contributed $2,500 to McKinley’s 2010 election campaign and another thousand so far this year.
The mining industry was McKinley’s largest corporate campaign contributor — $51,751. And a month after he took office, Politico reported, he introduced another bill “that would block a proposed EPA regulation against coal-ash bricks and drywall, materials architectural and engineering firms — such as one founded by McKinley — routinely recommend in construction project bids.”
Others cited by the Politico investigation include freshmen Bill Johnson of Ohio and Morgan Griffith of Virginia. They, too, have been going to bat for mine executives. The mining sector was Johnson’s biggest corporate donor at $25,146; same with Griffith, who received $40,450.
Texas freshman Bill Flores has been going after the Interior Department’s procedures for offshore oil drilling permits, trying to get the department to impose tighter deadlines and pay back billions in leasing rights to oil companies whose permits are denied. He’s the former president and CEO of an exploratory oil firm. Its employees were his second largest campaign contributor and the oil and gas industry threw in more than $200,000.
In rebuttal, the office of each congressman has generated the appropriate, high-minded spin. “West Virginia is coal, and coal is West Virginia,” said McKinley’s spokeswoman. “He’s doing what he said he would — fighting tooth and nail to stop the EPA’s war on coal …” Rep. Flores told Politico, “This is an issue that is very important to me as I have been involved in finding solutions to America’s long-term energy independence for the last thirty years.”
And so it goes. At this rate, if the Abraham Lincoln so venerated by the idealistic Mr. Smith is still at his memorial hoping for someone to come along, someone with integrity and dedication to the people and not the almighty dollar, he’s going to have a long wait.
The new dogs have learned the old tricks of Capitol Hill with remarkable speed, and their big business masters, armed with their Supreme Court-sanctioned ability to throw bottomless bags of money around, have more control of the leash than ever.
Michael Winship, senior writing fellow at Demos and president of the Writers Guild of America, East, is former senior writer of “Bill Moyers Journal” on PBS.
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines: Robotics morphs into more-mainstream investmentAtlantic International Partnership Headlines: Robotics morphs into more-mainstream investment
http://altlantic-internationalpartnership.com/2011/05/atlantic-international-partnership-headlines-robotics-morphs-into-more-mainstream-investment/
BEDFORD, Mass. — Top scientists around the world are trying to improve upon robots, which can already detect bombs, perform surgery and even go into battle.
At iRobot Corp., they’re trying to make a better vacuum.
Of course, iRobot’s scientists do other things too. The company, best known for its Roomba floor vacuum, recently sent machines to Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant disaster to help detect radiation, to the war zone in Afghanistan to find bombs, and to the Gulf of Mexico to locate spilled oil in the water.
But home robots — dominated by vacuums — make up 55 percent of the company’s revenue and are part of the reason iRobot is on a tear. Shares are up 43 percent since the start of the year, and the company earned a profit of $26 million on sales of $401 million last year, up from $3 million on $299 million in revenue the year before.
The company recently announced it had won a contract to make bomb disposal robots for the Navy.
That iRobot, the only public company that focuses purely on robotics, is getting attention from investors indicates that this young industry is becoming more mainstream. As analysts and consumers get more comfortable with robots, more companies might succeed in the space.
“It’s almost like buying Internet companies in the 1990s,” said Alex Hamilton, an analyst with Early Bird Capital who covers iRobot. “The sky’s the limit.”
Not everyone is a fan. A 2008 Consumer Reports review of vacuums found that the Roomba 560 “was among the worst performers at cleaning edges and corners.” On consumer tech site CNET, comments ranged from “always broken, warranty poor” to “It’s awesome! Great for what it costs.”
The company is now trying to boost sales of secondary items, such as pool and gutter cleaners, to go along with its bestselling Roomba and Scooba robots.
Next up: a device on wheels that can follow you around the house like Rosie from “The Jetsons” and someday maybe even bring you a beer. The company predicts an expanding market in robots that assist the country’s aging population.
“No one has ever made money with robots before,” said Chief Executive Colin Angle, a freckle-faced 43-year-old who happens to be married to Erika Ebbel, Miss Massachusetts 2004. “But ours create more value than they cost to build.”
The growth is evident at the company’s headquarters in a Bedford, Mass., office park, where young men in ties and white shirts follow a tour on their first day of orientation. Awards from the last decade sit along the walls: gold-plated and silver Roombas, a crystal Entrepreneur of the Year award for Angle. IRobot now employs about 650 people.
The success is new for a company that teetered on the edge of survival for its first decade and a half. Founded in 1990 by Angle, MIT professor Rodney Brooks and graduate student Helen Greiner, the company’s mission was initially vague: to make practical robots that could be useful in everyday lives.
At the time, few investors believed this was a profitable venture, so the three put company expenses on their credit cards, and struggled.
“We were unfundable,” said Angle, walking through an exhibit in the company’s headquarters of experiments from iRobot’s past — a baby doll robot, a Zamboni-like vacuum, a furry creature that runs away from humans when it senses anger.
IRobot didn’t receive its first venture funding until 1998. Even then, its endeavors were disjointed, spread across eight divisions: robots that could vacuum floors, entertain children and work on oil wells, to name just a few. It sent robots to work in war zones in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the government contracts weren’t profitable enough to support the flailing consumer side.
The company nearly went under in 2002 as it tried to find retailers that would stock the newly completed Roomba. Just when its founders had given up hope, the Brookstone retailing chain called, saying that a test run of the machines had gone well and that consumer demand was increasing.
“We went from the lowest of the low to the most exciting time,” Angle said. “Suddenly, things started to work.”
Even after the company went public in 2005, its financial problems continued. Its stock slid, precipitously at times, to a low of $7 in 2009 as the company burned through cash because of manufacturing issues and the high price of nickel, which is used to make batteries.
A new chief financial officer, John Leahy, has helped the company better manage its finances, analysts say, as has a focus on what it does best: robotic vacuums. Demand is growing overseas as the company expands into Latin America and Europe. International sales grew 70 percent in 2010, and international home robot revenue made up two-thirds of the company’s home robot sales.
The military machines have been a success too: IRobot is one of only two companies that provided robots to the military that have actually ended up on the ground, said Barbara Coffey, managing director at Brigantine Advisors, an investment research company. And the contracts keep coming in. Aside from the Navy deal, the Army said in March that it had ordered 76 small unmanned ground vehicles from iRobot.
“The company during that period really did grow from focused on the next flashy thing to the nuts and bolts of running a business,” Coffey said. “Things like quality assurance and all the heavy lifting stuff came to bear.”
IRobot hopes next to enter the health care field with Ava, essentially a device on wheels that works with existing tablet computers and can follow people around, sensing walls and other obstacles. If someone is trying to reach a senior citizen who isn’t answering the phone, for example, Ava can go find the person, Angle said.
The company is inviting iPad developers to get into the game, designing apps for Ava.
It’s just one way the company is expanding outside of cleaning products to make robots a more common presence in our lives.
“Nearly 100 percent of robots are going to help us do more and more and be part of a better life,” Angle said. “It’s the stuff of dreams.”
BEDFORD, Mass. — Top scientists around the world are trying to improve upon robots, which can already detect bombs, perform surgery and even go into battle.
At iRobot Corp., they’re trying to make a better vacuum.
Of course, iRobot’s scientists do other things too. The company, best known for its Roomba floor vacuum, recently sent machines to Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant disaster to help detect radiation, to the war zone in Afghanistan to find bombs, and to the Gulf of Mexico to locate spilled oil in the water.
But home robots — dominated by vacuums — make up 55 percent of the company’s revenue and are part of the reason iRobot is on a tear. Shares are up 43 percent since the start of the year, and the company earned a profit of $26 million on sales of $401 million last year, up from $3 million on $299 million in revenue the year before.
The company recently announced it had won a contract to make bomb disposal robots for the Navy.
That iRobot, the only public company that focuses purely on robotics, is getting attention from investors indicates that this young industry is becoming more mainstream. As analysts and consumers get more comfortable with robots, more companies might succeed in the space.
“It’s almost like buying Internet companies in the 1990s,” said Alex Hamilton, an analyst with Early Bird Capital who covers iRobot. “The sky’s the limit.”
Not everyone is a fan. A 2008 Consumer Reports review of vacuums found that the Roomba 560 “was among the worst performers at cleaning edges and corners.” On consumer tech site CNET, comments ranged from “always broken, warranty poor” to “It’s awesome! Great for what it costs.”
The company is now trying to boost sales of secondary items, such as pool and gutter cleaners, to go along with its bestselling Roomba and Scooba robots.
Next up: a device on wheels that can follow you around the house like Rosie from “The Jetsons” and someday maybe even bring you a beer. The company predicts an expanding market in robots that assist the country’s aging population.
“No one has ever made money with robots before,” said Chief Executive Colin Angle, a freckle-faced 43-year-old who happens to be married to Erika Ebbel, Miss Massachusetts 2004. “But ours create more value than they cost to build.”
The growth is evident at the company’s headquarters in a Bedford, Mass., office park, where young men in ties and white shirts follow a tour on their first day of orientation. Awards from the last decade sit along the walls: gold-plated and silver Roombas, a crystal Entrepreneur of the Year award for Angle. IRobot now employs about 650 people.
The success is new for a company that teetered on the edge of survival for its first decade and a half. Founded in 1990 by Angle, MIT professor Rodney Brooks and graduate student Helen Greiner, the company’s mission was initially vague: to make practical robots that could be useful in everyday lives.
At the time, few investors believed this was a profitable venture, so the three put company expenses on their credit cards, and struggled.
“We were unfundable,” said Angle, walking through an exhibit in the company’s headquarters of experiments from iRobot’s past — a baby doll robot, a Zamboni-like vacuum, a furry creature that runs away from humans when it senses anger.
IRobot didn’t receive its first venture funding until 1998. Even then, its endeavors were disjointed, spread across eight divisions: robots that could vacuum floors, entertain children and work on oil wells, to name just a few. It sent robots to work in war zones in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the government contracts weren’t profitable enough to support the flailing consumer side.
The company nearly went under in 2002 as it tried to find retailers that would stock the newly completed Roomba. Just when its founders had given up hope, the Brookstone retailing chain called, saying that a test run of the machines had gone well and that consumer demand was increasing.
“We went from the lowest of the low to the most exciting time,” Angle said. “Suddenly, things started to work.”
Even after the company went public in 2005, its financial problems continued. Its stock slid, precipitously at times, to a low of $7 in 2009 as the company burned through cash because of manufacturing issues and the high price of nickel, which is used to make batteries.
A new chief financial officer, John Leahy, has helped the company better manage its finances, analysts say, as has a focus on what it does best: robotic vacuums. Demand is growing overseas as the company expands into Latin America and Europe. International sales grew 70 percent in 2010, and international home robot revenue made up two-thirds of the company’s home robot sales.
The military machines have been a success too: IRobot is one of only two companies that provided robots to the military that have actually ended up on the ground, said Barbara Coffey, managing director at Brigantine Advisors, an investment research company. And the contracts keep coming in. Aside from the Navy deal, the Army said in March that it had ordered 76 small unmanned ground vehicles from iRobot.
“The company during that period really did grow from focused on the next flashy thing to the nuts and bolts of running a business,” Coffey said. “Things like quality assurance and all the heavy lifting stuff came to bear.”
IRobot hopes next to enter the health care field with Ava, essentially a device on wheels that works with existing tablet computers and can follow people around, sensing walls and other obstacles. If someone is trying to reach a senior citizen who isn’t answering the phone, for example, Ava can go find the person, Angle said.
The company is inviting iPad developers to get into the game, designing apps for Ava.
It’s just one way the company is expanding outside of cleaning products to make robots a more common presence in our lives.
“Nearly 100 percent of robots are going to help us do more and more and be part of a better life,” Angle said. “It’s the stuff of dreams.”
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines: Robotics morphs into more-mainstream investment
http://altlantic-internationalpartnership.com/2011/05/atlantic-international-partnership-headlines-robotics-morphs-into-more-mainstream-investment/
BEDFORD, Mass. — Top scientists around the world are trying to improve upon robots, which can already detect bombs, perform surgery and even go into battle.
At iRobot Corp., they’re trying to make a better vacuum.
Of course, iRobot’s scientists do other things too. The company, best known for its Roomba floor vacuum, recently sent machines to Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant disaster to help detect radiation, to the war zone in Afghanistan to find bombs, and to the Gulf of Mexico to locate spilled oil in the water.
But home robots — dominated by vacuums — make up 55 percent of the company’s revenue and are part of the reason iRobot is on a tear. Shares are up 43 percent since the start of the year, and the company earned a profit of $26 million on sales of $401 million last year, up from $3 million on $299 million in revenue the year before.
The company recently announced it had won a contract to make bomb disposal robots for the Navy.
That iRobot, the only public company that focuses purely on robotics, is getting attention from investors indicates that this young industry is becoming more mainstream. As analysts and consumers get more comfortable with robots, more companies might succeed in the space.
“It’s almost like buying Internet companies in the 1990s,” said Alex Hamilton, an analyst with Early Bird Capital who covers iRobot. “The sky’s the limit.”
Not everyone is a fan. A 2008 Consumer Reports review of vacuums found that the Roomba 560 “was among the worst performers at cleaning edges and corners.” On consumer tech site CNET, comments ranged from “always broken, warranty poor” to “It’s awesome! Great for what it costs.”
The company is now trying to boost sales of secondary items, such as pool and gutter cleaners, to go along with its bestselling Roomba and Scooba robots.
Next up: a device on wheels that can follow you around the house like Rosie from “The Jetsons” and someday maybe even bring you a beer. The company predicts an expanding market in robots that assist the country’s aging population.
“No one has ever made money with robots before,” said Chief Executive Colin Angle, a freckle-faced 43-year-old who happens to be married to Erika Ebbel, Miss Massachusetts 2004. “But ours create more value than they cost to build.”
The growth is evident at the company’s headquarters in a Bedford, Mass., office park, where young men in ties and white shirts follow a tour on their first day of orientation. Awards from the last decade sit along the walls: gold-plated and silver Roombas, a crystal Entrepreneur of the Year award for Angle. IRobot now employs about 650 people.
The success is new for a company that teetered on the edge of survival for its first decade and a half. Founded in 1990 by Angle, MIT professor Rodney Brooks and graduate student Helen Greiner, the company’s mission was initially vague: to make practical robots that could be useful in everyday lives.
At the time, few investors believed this was a profitable venture, so the three put company expenses on their credit cards, and struggled.
“We were unfundable,” said Angle, walking through an exhibit in the company’s headquarters of experiments from iRobot’s past — a baby doll robot, a Zamboni-like vacuum, a furry creature that runs away from humans when it senses anger.
IRobot didn’t receive its first venture funding until 1998. Even then, its endeavors were disjointed, spread across eight divisions: robots that could vacuum floors, entertain children and work on oil wells, to name just a few. It sent robots to work in war zones in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the government contracts weren’t profitable enough to support the flailing consumer side.
The company nearly went under in 2002 as it tried to find retailers that would stock the newly completed Roomba. Just when its founders had given up hope, the Brookstone retailing chain called, saying that a test run of the machines had gone well and that consumer demand was increasing.
“We went from the lowest of the low to the most exciting time,” Angle said. “Suddenly, things started to work.”
Even after the company went public in 2005, its financial problems continued. Its stock slid, precipitously at times, to a low of $7 in 2009 as the company burned through cash because of manufacturing issues and the high price of nickel, which is used to make batteries.
A new chief financial officer, John Leahy, has helped the company better manage its finances, analysts say, as has a focus on what it does best: robotic vacuums. Demand is growing overseas as the company expands into Latin America and Europe. International sales grew 70 percent in 2010, and international home robot revenue made up two-thirds of the company’s home robot sales.
The military machines have been a success too: IRobot is one of only two companies that provided robots to the military that have actually ended up on the ground, said Barbara Coffey, managing director at Brigantine Advisors, an investment research company. And the contracts keep coming in. Aside from the Navy deal, the Army said in March that it had ordered 76 small unmanned ground vehicles from iRobot.
“The company during that period really did grow from focused on the next flashy thing to the nuts and bolts of running a business,” Coffey said. “Things like quality assurance and all the heavy lifting stuff came to bear.”
IRobot hopes next to enter the health care field with Ava, essentially a device on wheels that works with existing tablet computers and can follow people around, sensing walls and other obstacles. If someone is trying to reach a senior citizen who isn’t answering the phone, for example, Ava can go find the person, Angle said.
The company is inviting iPad developers to get into the game, designing apps for Ava.
It’s just one way the company is expanding outside of cleaning products to make robots a more common presence in our lives.
BEDFORD, Mass. — Top scientists around the world are trying to improve upon robots, which can already detect bombs, perform surgery and even go into battle.
At iRobot Corp., they’re trying to make a better vacuum.
Of course, iRobot’s scientists do other things too. The company, best known for its Roomba floor vacuum, recently sent machines to Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant disaster to help detect radiation, to the war zone in Afghanistan to find bombs, and to the Gulf of Mexico to locate spilled oil in the water.
But home robots — dominated by vacuums — make up 55 percent of the company’s revenue and are part of the reason iRobot is on a tear. Shares are up 43 percent since the start of the year, and the company earned a profit of $26 million on sales of $401 million last year, up from $3 million on $299 million in revenue the year before.
The company recently announced it had won a contract to make bomb disposal robots for the Navy.
That iRobot, the only public company that focuses purely on robotics, is getting attention from investors indicates that this young industry is becoming more mainstream. As analysts and consumers get more comfortable with robots, more companies might succeed in the space.
“It’s almost like buying Internet companies in the 1990s,” said Alex Hamilton, an analyst with Early Bird Capital who covers iRobot. “The sky’s the limit.”
Not everyone is a fan. A 2008 Consumer Reports review of vacuums found that the Roomba 560 “was among the worst performers at cleaning edges and corners.” On consumer tech site CNET, comments ranged from “always broken, warranty poor” to “It’s awesome! Great for what it costs.”
The company is now trying to boost sales of secondary items, such as pool and gutter cleaners, to go along with its bestselling Roomba and Scooba robots.
Next up: a device on wheels that can follow you around the house like Rosie from “The Jetsons” and someday maybe even bring you a beer. The company predicts an expanding market in robots that assist the country’s aging population.
“No one has ever made money with robots before,” said Chief Executive Colin Angle, a freckle-faced 43-year-old who happens to be married to Erika Ebbel, Miss Massachusetts 2004. “But ours create more value than they cost to build.”
The growth is evident at the company’s headquarters in a Bedford, Mass., office park, where young men in ties and white shirts follow a tour on their first day of orientation. Awards from the last decade sit along the walls: gold-plated and silver Roombas, a crystal Entrepreneur of the Year award for Angle. IRobot now employs about 650 people.
The success is new for a company that teetered on the edge of survival for its first decade and a half. Founded in 1990 by Angle, MIT professor Rodney Brooks and graduate student Helen Greiner, the company’s mission was initially vague: to make practical robots that could be useful in everyday lives.
At the time, few investors believed this was a profitable venture, so the three put company expenses on their credit cards, and struggled.
“We were unfundable,” said Angle, walking through an exhibit in the company’s headquarters of experiments from iRobot’s past — a baby doll robot, a Zamboni-like vacuum, a furry creature that runs away from humans when it senses anger.
IRobot didn’t receive its first venture funding until 1998. Even then, its endeavors were disjointed, spread across eight divisions: robots that could vacuum floors, entertain children and work on oil wells, to name just a few. It sent robots to work in war zones in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the government contracts weren’t profitable enough to support the flailing consumer side.
The company nearly went under in 2002 as it tried to find retailers that would stock the newly completed Roomba. Just when its founders had given up hope, the Brookstone retailing chain called, saying that a test run of the machines had gone well and that consumer demand was increasing.
“We went from the lowest of the low to the most exciting time,” Angle said. “Suddenly, things started to work.”
Even after the company went public in 2005, its financial problems continued. Its stock slid, precipitously at times, to a low of $7 in 2009 as the company burned through cash because of manufacturing issues and the high price of nickel, which is used to make batteries.
A new chief financial officer, John Leahy, has helped the company better manage its finances, analysts say, as has a focus on what it does best: robotic vacuums. Demand is growing overseas as the company expands into Latin America and Europe. International sales grew 70 percent in 2010, and international home robot revenue made up two-thirds of the company’s home robot sales.
The military machines have been a success too: IRobot is one of only two companies that provided robots to the military that have actually ended up on the ground, said Barbara Coffey, managing director at Brigantine Advisors, an investment research company. And the contracts keep coming in. Aside from the Navy deal, the Army said in March that it had ordered 76 small unmanned ground vehicles from iRobot.
“The company during that period really did grow from focused on the next flashy thing to the nuts and bolts of running a business,” Coffey said. “Things like quality assurance and all the heavy lifting stuff came to bear.”
IRobot hopes next to enter the health care field with Ava, essentially a device on wheels that works with existing tablet computers and can follow people around, sensing walls and other obstacles. If someone is trying to reach a senior citizen who isn’t answering the phone, for example, Ava can go find the person, Angle said.
The company is inviting iPad developers to get into the game, designing apps for Ava.
It’s just one way the company is expanding outside of cleaning products to make robots a more common presence in our lives.
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines: Panthers protect their investment in rounds 6 and 7
http://altlantic-internationalpartnership.com/2011/05/panthers-protect-their-investment-in-rounds-6-and-7/
I’ve always been of the opinion that you can never have too many DL or OL. The trenches are always fraught with exceptionally hard play, and by extension injuries. No one knows this better than the Carolina Panthers who have at times been forced to piecemeal together a makeshift offensive line while dealing with the oft injured Jeff Otah, while even the stalwart Travelle Wharton missed games in 2010.
It wasn’t a surprise the Panthers addressed the OL in the draft, but the names may not be household (sense a theme here?). With their 6th round compensatory pick the Panthers added C Zachary Williams out of Washington State and T Lee Ziemba out of Auburn.
At the next level Williams projects to add depth at guard, while helping where needed at center. If you remember correctly the Panthers were relying on Mackenzey Bernadeau to help snapping the ball during the preseason last year, with disastorous results. Meanwhile Ziemba played right tackle for Auburn, but he figures to move over to right guard and will likely compete for the starting job there. He is more NFL ready than Williams at this point, and the move to guard should hide the issues with his lack of athleticism.
I’ve always been of the opinion that you can never have too many DL or OL. The trenches are always fraught with exceptionally hard play, and by extension injuries. No one knows this better than the Carolina Panthers who have at times been forced to piecemeal together a makeshift offensive line while dealing with the oft injured Jeff Otah, while even the stalwart Travelle Wharton missed games in 2010.
It wasn’t a surprise the Panthers addressed the OL in the draft, but the names may not be household (sense a theme here?). With their 6th round compensatory pick the Panthers added C Zachary Williams out of Washington State and T Lee Ziemba out of Auburn.
At the next level Williams projects to add depth at guard, while helping where needed at center. If you remember correctly the Panthers were relying on Mackenzey Bernadeau to help snapping the ball during the preseason last year, with disastorous results. Meanwhile Ziemba played right tackle for Auburn, but he figures to move over to right guard and will likely compete for the starting job there. He is more NFL ready than Williams at this point, and the move to guard should hide the issues with his lack of athleticism.
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines: Berkshire stands by investment in BYD
http://altlantic-internationalpartnership.com/2011/05/atlantic-international-partnership-headlines-berkshire-stands-by-investment-in-byd/
Reuters) – Berkshire Hathaway is happy with its investment in Chinese car maker BYD Co Ltd, despite product delays and declining sales, Berkshire’s vice chairman Charlie Munger said on Saturday.
Munger and Warren Buffett were asked at the company’s annual meeting whether they still considered BYD a good investment despite the company’s recent problems.
“I’m quite encouraged by what’s going on, and I expect delays and glitches,” said Munger. Buffett has said that Munger was the inspiration for Berkshire’s September 2008 purchase of nearly 10 percent of BYD.
BYD’s March sales were down more than 40 percent from a year earlier, and its entry into the U.S. market has been repeatedly delayed. Munger said such growing pains were natural given BYD’s aggressive growth plans
Reuters) – Berkshire Hathaway is happy with its investment in Chinese car maker BYD Co Ltd, despite product delays and declining sales, Berkshire’s vice chairman Charlie Munger said on Saturday.
Munger and Warren Buffett were asked at the company’s annual meeting whether they still considered BYD a good investment despite the company’s recent problems.
“I’m quite encouraged by what’s going on, and I expect delays and glitches,” said Munger. Buffett has said that Munger was the inspiration for Berkshire’s September 2008 purchase of nearly 10 percent of BYD.
BYD’s March sales were down more than 40 percent from a year earlier, and its entry into the U.S. market has been repeatedly delayed. Munger said such growing pains were natural given BYD’s aggressive growth plans
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines:Facebook: Now Serving Over 500 Million Users and 346 Billion Ads
http://altlantic-internationalpartnership.com/2011/05/facebook-now-serving-over-500-million-users-and-346-billion-ads/
On his Facebook page, Mark Zuckerberg explains that his social networking site is fashioning a more open world where people can “share what’s important to them.” Increasingly, the world’s advertisers are also leveraging the platform to share what’s important to them–to the tune of 346 billion display ad impressions in the first quarter of 2011.
ComScore is reporting today that Facebook doubled the number of ads it delivered during the same period last year and crushed all other online publishers, serving a whopping one in three online ads in the U.S. Yahoo, Microsoft, AOL, and Google rounded out the top five (AOL’s display advertising, in fact, has been a bright spot in the company’s otherwise dismal financial performance). The ranks of the top online advertisers were dominated by finance and telecom: AT&T finished first, followed by the credit information company Experian, the online trading and investing company Scottrade, the accounting software company Intuit, and Verizon (we were surprised the acai berry people didn’t make the cut). In all, America’s internet users were flooded with over one trillion ads during the quarter.
Erick Schonfeld at TechCrunch explains that Facebook’s strong performance doesn’t necessarily mean the company is stealthily transforming social networking into a blaring billboard. Facebook’s growing popularity allows it serve more ads on more pages, Schonfeld notes, and the company is also experimenting with social ads that look more like News items shared by friends.
ComScore is reporting today that Facebook doubled the number of ads it delivered during the same period last year and crushed all other online publishers, serving a whopping one in three online ads in the U.S. Yahoo, Microsoft, AOL, and Google rounded out the top five (AOL’s display advertising, in fact, has been a bright spot in the company’s otherwise dismal financial performance). The ranks of the top online advertisers were dominated by finance and telecom: AT&T finished first, followed by the credit information company Experian, the online trading and investing company Scottrade, the accounting software company Intuit, and Verizon (we were surprised the acai berry people didn’t make the cut). In all, America’s internet users were flooded with over one trillion ads during the quarter.
Erick Schonfeld at TechCrunch explains that Facebook’s strong performance doesn’t necessarily mean the company is stealthily transforming social networking into a blaring billboard. Facebook’s growing popularity allows it serve more ads on more pages, Schonfeld notes, and the company is also experimenting with social ads that look more like News items shared by friends.
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines: Stock Market News for May 4, 2011
http://altlantic-internationalpartnership.com/2011/05/atlantic-international-partnership-headlines-stock-market-news-for-may-4-2011/
On Tuesday, markets felt the pinch of disappointing quarterly results and the benchmarks slid a few points as investors feared profitability might drop over the coming quarters. Over the past couple of weeks, markets have remained upbeat, climbing to multi-year highs following robust corporate results. Additionally, a drop in crude prices weighed down the energy sector.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) was the only gainer among the benchmarks as it edged up 0.2% to 12,807.51. The Standard & poor 500 dropped 0.3% and the Nasdaq slipped 0.8% to settle at 1,356.62 and 12,807.51, respectively. After hitting its highest level in three years last week, the S&P 500 has now declined for two-straight days. On the New York Stock Exchange, composite volumes were at 4.5 billion shares. For every one stock that advanced on the NYSE, two stocks declined.
While earnings had been a favorable factor for the markets over the past few weeks, the markets had to suffer the flip side as companies posted lower-than-expected results yesterday. Pfizer Inc. (NYSE:PFE – Analyst Report) (2.8%) was one of the biggest laggards for the Dow as it failed to beat sales estimates. Joining the list of disappointing results were companies like Clorox Corporation (NYSE:CLX – Analyst Report), Molson Coors Brewing Company (NYSE:TAP – Analyst Report), Beazer Homes USA Inc. (NYSE:BZH – Snapshot Report) and Sears Holdings Corporation (NASDAQ:SHLD – Analyst Report). These shares dropped 3.6%, 6.0%, 5.0% and 9.9%, respectively.
Pfizer Inc. posted a heavily disappointing result. Earnings for the quarter managed to top estimates but shares slid significantly as the drug major failed to cross revenue estimates. Moreover, the company also lowered its revenue guidance. Pfizer Inc. reported first quarter earnings of 60 cents per share, flat from the year-ago period. First quarter revenues declined 0.4% to $16.5 billion. Shares were down 2.8% and finally closed at $20.44.
Meanwhile, Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp. (NASDAQ:CTSH – Analyst Report) reported revenues of $1.37 billion in the first quarter of 2011, up 42.9% year over year and up 4.6% sequentially. Net income came in at $208.3 million or 67 cents per diluted share compared to a net income of $151.5 million or 49 cents per share in the year-ago quarter. Cognizant Technology’s figures managed to beat estimates but its slowing growth rate dragged the shares down. The company’s shares dropped 5.75 to settle at $77.52.
As crude prices retreated, energy shares slid into the red, dragging down the broader markets. The June crude oil contract dropped $2.47 and settled at $111.05 a barrel Exxon Mobil Corporation (NYSE:XOM – Analyst Report), ConocoPhillips (NYSE:COP – Analyst Report), Chevron Corp. (NYSE:CVX – Analyst Report), Valero Energy Corp. (NYSE:VLO – Analyst Report) and Western Refining Inc. (NYSE:WNR – Analyst Report) dropped 1.6%, 3.8%, 1.9%, 2.8% and 3.4%, respectively.
Economic data, released on Tuesday did little to boost market sentiment. The Commerce Department reported that Factory Orders increased by 3.0%, $13.5 billion, to $462.9 billion in March against expectations that the measure would increase by 1.9%, following a 0.7% increase in February. Factory Orders are up following five consecutive monthly increases. Excluding transportation, Factory Orders increased by 2.6%.
On Tuesday, markets felt the pinch of disappointing quarterly results and the benchmarks slid a few points as investors feared profitability might drop over the coming quarters. Over the past couple of weeks, markets have remained upbeat, climbing to multi-year highs following robust corporate results. Additionally, a drop in crude prices weighed down the energy sector.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) was the only gainer among the benchmarks as it edged up 0.2% to 12,807.51. The Standard & poor 500 dropped 0.3% and the Nasdaq slipped 0.8% to settle at 1,356.62 and 12,807.51, respectively. After hitting its highest level in three years last week, the S&P 500 has now declined for two-straight days. On the New York Stock Exchange, composite volumes were at 4.5 billion shares. For every one stock that advanced on the NYSE, two stocks declined.
While earnings had been a favorable factor for the markets over the past few weeks, the markets had to suffer the flip side as companies posted lower-than-expected results yesterday. Pfizer Inc. (NYSE:PFE – Analyst Report) (2.8%) was one of the biggest laggards for the Dow as it failed to beat sales estimates. Joining the list of disappointing results were companies like Clorox Corporation (NYSE:CLX – Analyst Report), Molson Coors Brewing Company (NYSE:TAP – Analyst Report), Beazer Homes USA Inc. (NYSE:BZH – Snapshot Report) and Sears Holdings Corporation (NASDAQ:SHLD – Analyst Report). These shares dropped 3.6%, 6.0%, 5.0% and 9.9%, respectively.
Pfizer Inc. posted a heavily disappointing result. Earnings for the quarter managed to top estimates but shares slid significantly as the drug major failed to cross revenue estimates. Moreover, the company also lowered its revenue guidance. Pfizer Inc. reported first quarter earnings of 60 cents per share, flat from the year-ago period. First quarter revenues declined 0.4% to $16.5 billion. Shares were down 2.8% and finally closed at $20.44.
Meanwhile, Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp. (NASDAQ:CTSH – Analyst Report) reported revenues of $1.37 billion in the first quarter of 2011, up 42.9% year over year and up 4.6% sequentially. Net income came in at $208.3 million or 67 cents per diluted share compared to a net income of $151.5 million or 49 cents per share in the year-ago quarter. Cognizant Technology’s figures managed to beat estimates but its slowing growth rate dragged the shares down. The company’s shares dropped 5.75 to settle at $77.52.
As crude prices retreated, energy shares slid into the red, dragging down the broader markets. The June crude oil contract dropped $2.47 and settled at $111.05 a barrel Exxon Mobil Corporation (NYSE:XOM – Analyst Report), ConocoPhillips (NYSE:COP – Analyst Report), Chevron Corp. (NYSE:CVX – Analyst Report), Valero Energy Corp. (NYSE:VLO – Analyst Report) and Western Refining Inc. (NYSE:WNR – Analyst Report) dropped 1.6%, 3.8%, 1.9%, 2.8% and 3.4%, respectively.
Economic data, released on Tuesday did little to boost market sentiment. The Commerce Department reported that Factory Orders increased by 3.0%, $13.5 billion, to $462.9 billion in March against expectations that the measure would increase by 1.9%, following a 0.7% increase in February. Factory Orders are up following five consecutive monthly increases. Excluding transportation, Factory Orders increased by 2.6%.
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines: 2 Emerging-Market Mining Stocks to Buy
http://altlantic-internationalpartnership.com/2011/05/atlantic-international-partnership-headlines-2-emerging-market-mining-stocks-to-buy/
NEW YORK (InvestorPlace) — I was asked recently for a good reason why Southern Copper Corp.(SCCO_) was underperforming not just the price of copper, but also other huge copper mines like Freeport-McMoRan(FCX_).
The company-specific news flow certainly didn’t suggest that it should be massively trailing Freeport, especially since Southern had better reserves than Freeport. There were violent protests over a mine in Peru that resulted in a delay after the company had already invested serious money, but that wasn’t unusual. This happens in mining all the time, and it should have been mostly priced into the stock some time ago.
And then I saw the recent election results and I immediately understood — it was Peru itself.
The leftist candidate for Peru’s presidency, Ollanta Humala, won the biggest number of votes in the April 10 election and was leading the polls for the June 5 presidential runoff election. This is similar to what we saw in the 2006 election, as companies with huge exposure to Peru underperformed significantly.
Then, Humala campaigned “wearing red T-shirts and expressing admiration for Venezuelan socialist leader Hugo Chavez. This year, he’s donning business suits and vowing to expand ties with investor-favorite Brazil,” according to Bloomberg. The former army officer’s abrupt about-face has helped put him in first place in polls, and the outcome of the likely runoff is currently too close to call.
Related Article: Why Obama is doomed to be a one-term president
While investors want to see Peru go the direction of Brazil, a Latin American success story, there is fear that the country may go the way of Venezuela and Bolivia, which have been governed with a remarkable lack of pragmatism.
So investors are wary — and with good reason — that Humala may enter office wearing a suit, but he may still have those red shirts from 2006 in his closet.
If mining royalties rise and the state increases control of the country’s gas reserves, there is about $42 billion worth of foreign investment in the mining industry earmarked over the next 10 years that is at risk.
Related Article: 5 stocks for $150 oil
We have seen this recurring problem in many emerging markets where the (primarily leftist) governments are worried that greedy foreign multinationals will plunder their natural resources, not realizing that without foreign investment they don’t have the huge amounts of money or expertise necessary to develop the deposits. Metals and oil deposits in the ground are worth very little if they stay in the ground.
NEW YORK (InvestorPlace) — I was asked recently for a good reason why Southern Copper Corp.(SCCO_) was underperforming not just the price of copper, but also other huge copper mines like Freeport-McMoRan(FCX_).
The company-specific news flow certainly didn’t suggest that it should be massively trailing Freeport, especially since Southern had better reserves than Freeport. There were violent protests over a mine in Peru that resulted in a delay after the company had already invested serious money, but that wasn’t unusual. This happens in mining all the time, and it should have been mostly priced into the stock some time ago.
And then I saw the recent election results and I immediately understood — it was Peru itself.
The leftist candidate for Peru’s presidency, Ollanta Humala, won the biggest number of votes in the April 10 election and was leading the polls for the June 5 presidential runoff election. This is similar to what we saw in the 2006 election, as companies with huge exposure to Peru underperformed significantly.
Then, Humala campaigned “wearing red T-shirts and expressing admiration for Venezuelan socialist leader Hugo Chavez. This year, he’s donning business suits and vowing to expand ties with investor-favorite Brazil,” according to Bloomberg. The former army officer’s abrupt about-face has helped put him in first place in polls, and the outcome of the likely runoff is currently too close to call.
While investors want to see Peru go the direction of Brazil, a Latin American success story, there is fear that the country may go the way of Venezuela and Bolivia, which have been governed with a remarkable lack of pragmatism.
So investors are wary — and with good reason — that Humala may enter office wearing a suit, but he may still have those red shirts from 2006 in his closet.
If mining royalties rise and the state increases control of the country’s gas reserves, there is about $42 billion worth of foreign investment in the mining industry earmarked over the next 10 years that is at risk.
We have seen this recurring problem in many emerging markets where the (primarily leftist) governments are worried that greedy foreign multinationals will plunder their natural resources, not realizing that without foreign investment they don’t have the huge amounts of money or expertise necessary to develop the deposits. Metals and oil deposits in the ground are worth very little if they stay in the ground.
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines: Islamic scholars criticize bin Laden’s sea burial
http://atlanticinternationalpartnershipreviews.com/?p=9
Updated: May 02, 2011 22:44 IST,Associated Press
Sea burials can be allowed, they said, but only in special cases where the death occurred aboard a ship.
“The Americans want to humiliate Muslims through this burial, and I don’t think this is in the interest of the US administration,” said Omar Bakri Mohammed, a
A US official said the burial decision was made after concluding that it would have been difficult to find a country willing to accept the remains. There was also speculation about worry that a grave site could have become a rallying point for militants.
The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive national security matters.
President Barack Obama said the remains had been handled in accordance with Islamic custom, which requires speedy burial, and the Pentagon later said the body was placed into the waters of the northern Arabian Sea after adhering to traditional Islamic procedures – including washing the corpse – aboard the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson.
But the Lebanese cleric Mohammed called it a “strategic mistake” that was bound to stoke rage.
In Washington, CIA director Leon Panetta warned that “terrorists almost certainly will attempt to avenge” the killing of the mastermind behind the September 11 attacks.
“Bin Laden is dead,” Panetta wrote in a memo to CIA staff. “Al-Qaeda is not.”
According to Islamic teachings, the highest honor to be bestowed on the dead is giving the deceased a swift burial, preferably before sunset. Those who die while traveling at sea can have their bodies committed to the bottom of the ocean if they are far off the coast, according to Islamic tradition.
“They can say they buried him at sea, but they cannot say they did it according to Islam,” Mohammed al-Qubaisi, Dubai’s grand mufti, said about bin Laden’s burial. “If the family does not want him, it’s really simple in Islam: You dig up a grave anywhere, even on a remote island, you say the prayers and that’s it.”
“Sea burials are permissible for Muslims in extraordinary circumstances,” he added. “This is not one of them.”
But Mohammed Qudah, a professor of Islamic law at the University of Jordan, said burying the Saudi-born bin Laden at sea was not forbidden if there was nobody to receive the body and provide a Muslim burial.
“The land and the sea belong to God, who is able to protect and raise the dead at the end of times for Judgment Day,” he said. “It’s neither true nor correct to claim that there was nobody in the Muslim world ready to receive bin Laden’s body.”
Clerics in Iraq – where an offshoot of Al-Qaeda is blamed for the death of thousands of people since 2003 – also criticized the US action. One said it only benefited fish.
“If a man dies on a ship that is a long distance from land, then the dead man should be buried at the sea,” said Shiite cleric Ibrahim al-Jabari. “But if he dies on land, then he should be buried in the ground, not to be thrown into the sea. Otherwise, this would be only inviting fish to a banquet.”
The Islamic tradition of a quick burial was the subject of intense debate in Iraq in 2003 when US forces embalmed the bodies of Saddam Hussein’s two sons after they were killed in a firefight. Their bodies were later shown to media.
“What was done by the Americans is forbidden by Islam and might provoke some Muslims,” said another Islamic scholar from Iraq, Abdul-Sattar al-Janabi, who preaches at Baghdad’s famous Abu Hanifa mosque. “It is not acceptable and it is almost a crime to throw the body of a Muslim man into the sea. The body of bin Laden should have been handed over to his family to look for a country or land to bury him.”
Prominent Egyptian Islamic analyst and lawyer Montasser el-Zayat said bin Laden’s sea burial was designed to prevent his grave from becoming a shrine. But an option was an
unmarked grave.
“They don’t want to see him become a symbol, but he is already a symbol in people’s hearts.”
Updated: May 02, 2011 22:44 IST,Associated Press
Cairo: Muslim clerics said on Monday that Osama bin Laden’s burial at sea was a violation of Islamic tradition that may further provoke militant calls for revenge attacks against American targets.
Although there appears to be some room for debate over the burial – as with many issues within the faith – a wide range of Islamic scholars interpreted it as a humiliating disregard for the standard Muslim practice of placing the body in a grave with the head pointed toward the holy city of Mecca.Sea burials can be allowed, they said, but only in special cases where the death occurred aboard a ship.
“The Americans want to humiliate Muslims through this burial, and I don’t think this is in the interest of the US administration,” said Omar Bakri Mohammed, a
A US official said the burial decision was made after concluding that it would have been difficult to find a country willing to accept the remains. There was also speculation about worry that a grave site could have become a rallying point for militants.
The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive national security matters.
President Barack Obama said the remains had been handled in accordance with Islamic custom, which requires speedy burial, and the Pentagon later said the body was placed into the waters of the northern Arabian Sea after adhering to traditional Islamic procedures – including washing the corpse – aboard the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson.
But the Lebanese cleric Mohammed called it a “strategic mistake” that was bound to stoke rage.
In Washington, CIA director Leon Panetta warned that “terrorists almost certainly will attempt to avenge” the killing of the mastermind behind the September 11 attacks.
“Bin Laden is dead,” Panetta wrote in a memo to CIA staff. “Al-Qaeda is not.”
According to Islamic teachings, the highest honor to be bestowed on the dead is giving the deceased a swift burial, preferably before sunset. Those who die while traveling at sea can have their bodies committed to the bottom of the ocean if they are far off the coast, according to Islamic tradition.
“They can say they buried him at sea, but they cannot say they did it according to Islam,” Mohammed al-Qubaisi, Dubai’s grand mufti, said about bin Laden’s burial. “If the family does not want him, it’s really simple in Islam: You dig up a grave anywhere, even on a remote island, you say the prayers and that’s it.”
“Sea burials are permissible for Muslims in extraordinary circumstances,” he added. “This is not one of them.”
But Mohammed Qudah, a professor of Islamic law at the University of Jordan, said burying the Saudi-born bin Laden at sea was not forbidden if there was nobody to receive the body and provide a Muslim burial.
“The land and the sea belong to God, who is able to protect and raise the dead at the end of times for Judgment Day,” he said. “It’s neither true nor correct to claim that there was nobody in the Muslim world ready to receive bin Laden’s body.”
Clerics in Iraq – where an offshoot of Al-Qaeda is blamed for the death of thousands of people since 2003 – also criticized the US action. One said it only benefited fish.
“If a man dies on a ship that is a long distance from land, then the dead man should be buried at the sea,” said Shiite cleric Ibrahim al-Jabari. “But if he dies on land, then he should be buried in the ground, not to be thrown into the sea. Otherwise, this would be only inviting fish to a banquet.”
The Islamic tradition of a quick burial was the subject of intense debate in Iraq in 2003 when US forces embalmed the bodies of Saddam Hussein’s two sons after they were killed in a firefight. Their bodies were later shown to media.
“What was done by the Americans is forbidden by Islam and might provoke some Muslims,” said another Islamic scholar from Iraq, Abdul-Sattar al-Janabi, who preaches at Baghdad’s famous Abu Hanifa mosque. “It is not acceptable and it is almost a crime to throw the body of a Muslim man into the sea. The body of bin Laden should have been handed over to his family to look for a country or land to bury him.”
Prominent Egyptian Islamic analyst and lawyer Montasser el-Zayat said bin Laden’s sea burial was designed to prevent his grave from becoming a shrine. But an option was an
unmarked grave.
“They don’t want to see him become a symbol, but he is already a symbol in people’s hearts.”
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines: Capitol Hill Urges UBL Photo Release
http://atlanticinternationalpartnershipreviews.com/?p=11
U.S. officials still haven’t decided whether or not to release photo proof that terror mastermind Usama bin Laden is dead, so Sen. Lindsey Graham is trying to make the case by saying it’s in the country’s best interest.
“I know the Geneva Convention very well,” the South Carolina Republican and member of the Armed Services Committee told Fox News Radio, “but this is a circumstance where I believe it’s not a violation of the convention, it would be in our national interests to make a case, documented case, that this was Usama bin Laden, he is dead.”
Graham does admit, though, that there will always be doubters and conspiracy theorists. “I think [releasing the photo] would be a smart thing to do, and have it rolled out in a sensitive way, but prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, and some people still won’t believe it,” he told Kilmeade and Friends.
Others on Capitol Hill agree. Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., both of who sit on the Armed Services and Homeland Security Committees, conceded in a news conference Monday that it may be necessary to release the photo.
Lieberman said that it was a “very difficult decision” to make, but that a photo release would help to quell doubts. Collins echoed her colleague, explaining that while she has “no doubt” UBL is dead there are some that could peddle a myth that he is alive.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers said it’s important to “maintain dignity,” while not inflaming falsehoods and tension worldwide.
Obama counterterrorism adviser John Brennan told reporters at the White House briefing Monday that the administration is still trying to determine if and what will be released “to make sure nobody has any basis to deny that we got bin Laden.”
Photo proof isn’t the only thing Graham thinks would help prove that the mission was, in fact, accomplished.
“[T]his idea of disposing the body within 24 hours because of tradition bothers me a bit,” Graham said, speaking of the decision to bury the body at sea earlier Monday. “[W]e will be under attack as to whether or not it really was him. And I’m not so sure that was a wise move, I’d like to hear more about that. I think that may have been sensitivity taken too far.”
Trish Turner contributed to this report
U.S. officials still haven’t decided whether or not to release photo proof that terror mastermind Usama bin Laden is dead, so Sen. Lindsey Graham is trying to make the case by saying it’s in the country’s best interest.
“I know the Geneva Convention very well,” the South Carolina Republican and member of the Armed Services Committee told Fox News Radio, “but this is a circumstance where I believe it’s not a violation of the convention, it would be in our national interests to make a case, documented case, that this was Usama bin Laden, he is dead.”
Graham does admit, though, that there will always be doubters and conspiracy theorists. “I think [releasing the photo] would be a smart thing to do, and have it rolled out in a sensitive way, but prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, and some people still won’t believe it,” he told Kilmeade and Friends.
Others on Capitol Hill agree. Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., both of who sit on the Armed Services and Homeland Security Committees, conceded in a news conference Monday that it may be necessary to release the photo.
Lieberman said that it was a “very difficult decision” to make, but that a photo release would help to quell doubts. Collins echoed her colleague, explaining that while she has “no doubt” UBL is dead there are some that could peddle a myth that he is alive.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers said it’s important to “maintain dignity,” while not inflaming falsehoods and tension worldwide.
Obama counterterrorism adviser John Brennan told reporters at the White House briefing Monday that the administration is still trying to determine if and what will be released “to make sure nobody has any basis to deny that we got bin Laden.”
Photo proof isn’t the only thing Graham thinks would help prove that the mission was, in fact, accomplished.
“[T]his idea of disposing the body within 24 hours because of tradition bothers me a bit,” Graham said, speaking of the decision to bury the body at sea earlier Monday. “[W]e will be under attack as to whether or not it really was him. And I’m not so sure that was a wise move, I’d like to hear more about that. I think that may have been sensitivity taken too far.”
Trish Turner contributed to this report
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines: Obama to Visit NYC’s Ground Zero, Calls for National Unity Like After 9/11
http://atlanticinternationalpartnershipreviews.com/?p=14
One day after he announced the killing of Usama bin Laden, President Obama said he will travel to Ground Zero in New York City to meet with the families of 9/11 victims.
Ground Zero, the site of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks by Al Qaeda that felled the World Trade Center’s Twin Towers, has turned into a rallying site since New Yorkers learned the Al Qaeda leader was killed Sunday during a raid by U.S. Navy SEALs.
Former President George W. Bush also notably visited the site in the days after the attacks in 2001, gave his memorable speech by megaphone to emergency workers.
Obama addressed members of Congress at the White House Monday and said he felt the “same sense of unity as 9/11.” He also thanked the heroes who carried out the mission.
“I know that unity that we felt on 9/11 has frayed a little bit over the years, and I have no illusions about the difficulties, the debates we’ll have to be engaged in in the weeks and months to come,” Obama said. “But I also know there have been several moments like this during the course of this year that have brought us together as an American family, whether it was the tragedy in Tucson or most recently our unified response to storms that have taken place in the South.”
U.S. forces killed bin Laden during a raid on a compound in Pakistan where he had been hiding, then buried him at sea.
Flag-waving crowds have been gathering at the lower Manhattan site of the attack since Obama announced bin Laden’s death late Sunday.
Some local law enforcement agencies in the U.S. were adding security measures Monday, including at the site of the Sept. 11 attacks.
The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey said it will add more police at the facilities it runs, which include the airports, the George Washington Bridge and Ground Zero. The measures aren’t a response to any current threat and all the facilities will operate normally otherwise, the Port Authority said.
“This response is not based on a current threat, but out of an abundance of caution until we have the chance to learn more,” the agency said.
One day after he announced the killing of Usama bin Laden, President Obama said he will travel to Ground Zero in New York City to meet with the families of 9/11 victims.
Ground Zero, the site of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks by Al Qaeda that felled the World Trade Center’s Twin Towers, has turned into a rallying site since New Yorkers learned the Al Qaeda leader was killed Sunday during a raid by U.S. Navy SEALs.
Former President George W. Bush also notably visited the site in the days after the attacks in 2001, gave his memorable speech by megaphone to emergency workers.
Obama addressed members of Congress at the White House Monday and said he felt the “same sense of unity as 9/11.” He also thanked the heroes who carried out the mission.
“I know that unity that we felt on 9/11 has frayed a little bit over the years, and I have no illusions about the difficulties, the debates we’ll have to be engaged in in the weeks and months to come,” Obama said. “But I also know there have been several moments like this during the course of this year that have brought us together as an American family, whether it was the tragedy in Tucson or most recently our unified response to storms that have taken place in the South.”
U.S. forces killed bin Laden during a raid on a compound in Pakistan where he had been hiding, then buried him at sea.
Flag-waving crowds have been gathering at the lower Manhattan site of the attack since Obama announced bin Laden’s death late Sunday.
Some local law enforcement agencies in the U.S. were adding security measures Monday, including at the site of the Sept. 11 attacks.
The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey said it will add more police at the facilities it runs, which include the airports, the George Washington Bridge and Ground Zero. The measures aren’t a response to any current threat and all the facilities will operate normally otherwise, the Port Authority said.
“This response is not based on a current threat, but out of an abundance of caution until we have the chance to learn more,” the agency said.
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines:Japanese economy more important than it seems
http://atlanticinternationalpartnershipreviews.com/?tag=japanese-economy-more-important-than-it-seems
Even in an age of global diversification, Japan is one big economy that gets scarcely any respect from investors. Maybe that should change.
This, at least, is the contention of Peter Berezin, a managing editor of Montreal’s Bank Credit Analyst investment publication.
Berezin, who formerly worked as an economist for Goldman Sachs and the International Monetary Fund, is quite aware of Japan’s long, lamentable record of deflation and stock-market disappointments. Over the past decade, Japan’s Nikkei 225 index has lost fully 30 per cent of its value. Over this same period, Canada’s commodity-fuelled S&P/TSX index has gained 75 per cent.
Indeed, he joked Monday, “the bar for upside surprises is pretty low.”
But this, of course, can be quite a good thing in the investment world. If good news is not a surprise, then it’s already priced into an investment.
That’s certainly not the case in Japan. Investors are less than impressed with the outlook for a country whose economy has been in a coma for two decades, struggling to recover from big real estate and stock bubbles that imploded at the end of the 1980s. Indeed, nominal GDP hasn’t grown since 1990, Berezin notes, and the country’s future is clouded by the developed world’s heaviest debt load and an aging workforce that’s actually shrinking year after year.
Japan’s credit rating reflects these awful trends. Although it’s a rich country that is home to many of the world’s most successful multinational corporations, Japan has seemed unable to take control of its enormous national debt.
As a result, its credit rating was cut in January to AA-, three notches below that of Canada or the U.S. There’s even the risk that it could be cut again, this time because of hefty new borrowing to fund an estimated $300 billion in reconstruction needed after the massive earthquake and tsunami that struck in March.
But to an experienced eye, all this doom and gloom has actually accomplished some encouraging things.
A key one, Berezin points out, is that after many years of bloodletting, Japanese stocks are “dirt cheap.” That cuts the room for any more disappointments and increases the odds that earnings and prices will hold pleasant surprises in the future.
This is certainly not a get-rich-quick trading opportunity, since national turnarounds don’t happen overnight. But for investors who are content to prosper more slowly, Berezin believes Japan will be a better-than-average place to park some money over the coming five years.
For good things to happen, of course, there will need to be more than merely the attractive starting point of cheap equities. There must be a solution to the government-debt problem as well as some sustained growth in the economy.
The debt problem, while big, isn’t nearly as intractable as one might think, Berezin notes. All that’s required is political will.
Even in an age of global diversification, Japan is one big economy that gets scarcely any respect from investors. Maybe that should change.
This, at least, is the contention of Peter Berezin, a managing editor of Montreal’s Bank Credit Analyst investment publication.
Berezin, who formerly worked as an economist for Goldman Sachs and the International Monetary Fund, is quite aware of Japan’s long, lamentable record of deflation and stock-market disappointments. Over the past decade, Japan’s Nikkei 225 index has lost fully 30 per cent of its value. Over this same period, Canada’s commodity-fuelled S&P/TSX index has gained 75 per cent.
Indeed, he joked Monday, “the bar for upside surprises is pretty low.”
But this, of course, can be quite a good thing in the investment world. If good news is not a surprise, then it’s already priced into an investment.
That’s certainly not the case in Japan. Investors are less than impressed with the outlook for a country whose economy has been in a coma for two decades, struggling to recover from big real estate and stock bubbles that imploded at the end of the 1980s. Indeed, nominal GDP hasn’t grown since 1990, Berezin notes, and the country’s future is clouded by the developed world’s heaviest debt load and an aging workforce that’s actually shrinking year after year.
Japan’s credit rating reflects these awful trends. Although it’s a rich country that is home to many of the world’s most successful multinational corporations, Japan has seemed unable to take control of its enormous national debt.
As a result, its credit rating was cut in January to AA-, three notches below that of Canada or the U.S. There’s even the risk that it could be cut again, this time because of hefty new borrowing to fund an estimated $300 billion in reconstruction needed after the massive earthquake and tsunami that struck in March.
But to an experienced eye, all this doom and gloom has actually accomplished some encouraging things.
A key one, Berezin points out, is that after many years of bloodletting, Japanese stocks are “dirt cheap.” That cuts the room for any more disappointments and increases the odds that earnings and prices will hold pleasant surprises in the future.
This is certainly not a get-rich-quick trading opportunity, since national turnarounds don’t happen overnight. But for investors who are content to prosper more slowly, Berezin believes Japan will be a better-than-average place to park some money over the coming five years.
For good things to happen, of course, there will need to be more than merely the attractive starting point of cheap equities. There must be a solution to the government-debt problem as well as some sustained growth in the economy.
The debt problem, while big, isn’t nearly as intractable as one might think, Berezin notes. All that’s required is political will.
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines :Bin Laden’s war against the U.S. economy
http://atlanticinternationalpartnershipreviews.com/?p=46
Did Osama bin Laden win? No. Did he succeed? Well, America is still standing, and he isn’t. So why, when I called Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, a counterterrorism expert who specializes in al-Qaeda, did he tell me that “bin Laden has been enormously successful”? There’s no caliphate. There’s no sweeping sharia law. Didn’t we win this one in a clean knockout?
Apparently not. Bin Laden, according to Gartenstein-Ross, had a strategy that we never bothered to understand, and thus that we never bothered to defend against. What he really wanted to do — and, more to the point, what he thought he could do — was bankrupt the United States of America. After all, he’d done the bankrupt-a-superpower thing before. And though it didn’t quite work out this time, it worked a lot better than most of us, in this exultant moment, are willing to admit.
Bin Laden’s transition from scion of a wealthy family to terrorist mastermind came in the 1980s, when the Soviet Union was trying to conquer Afghanistan. Bin Laden was part of the resistance, and the resistance was successful — not only in repelling the Soviet invasion, but in contributing to the communist super-state’s collapse a few years later. “We, alongside the mujaheddin, bled Russia for 10 years, until it went bankrupt,” he later explained.
The campaign taught bin Laden a lot. For one thing, superpowers fall because their economies crumble, not because they’re beaten on the battlefield. For another, superpowers are so allergic to losing that they’ll bankrupt themselves trying to conquer a mass of rocks and sand. This was bin Laden’s plan for the United States, too.
“He has compared the United States to the Soviet Union on numerous occasions — and these comparisons have been explicitly economic,” Gartenstein-Ross argues in a Foreign Policy article. “For example, in October 2004 bin Laden said that just as the Arab fighters and Afghan mujaheddin had destroyed Russia economically, al Qaeda was now doing the same to the United States, ‘continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy.’ ”
For bin Laden, in other words, success was not to be measured in body counts. It was to be measured in deficits, in borrowing costs, in investments we weren’t able to make in our country’s continued economic strength. And by those measures, bin Laden landed a lot of blows.
Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz estimates that the price tag on the Iraq War alone will surpass $3 trillion. Afghanistan likely amounts to another trillion or two. Add in the build-up in homeland security spending since 9/11 and you’re looking at yet another trillion. And don’t forget the indirect costs of all this turmoil: The Federal Reserve, worried about a fear-induced recession, slashed interest rates after the attack on the World Trade Center, and then kept them low to combat skyrocketing oil prices, a byproduct of the war in Iraq. That decade of loose monetary policy may well have contributed to the credit bubble that crashed the economy in 2007 and 2008.
Then there’s the post-9/11 slowdown in the economy, the time wasted in airports, the foregone returns on investments we didn’t make, the rise in oil prices as a result of the Iraq War, the cost of rebuilding Ground Zero, health care for the first responders and much, much more.
But it isn’t quite right to say bin Laden cost us all that money. We decided to spend more than a trillion dollars on homeland security measures to prevent another attack. We decided to invade Iraq as part of a grand, post-9/11 strategy of Middle Eastern transformation. We decided to pass hundreds of billions of dollars in unpaid-for tax cuts and add an unpaid-for prescription drug benefit in Medicare while we were involved in two wars. And now, partially though not entirely because of these actions, we are deep in debt. Bin Laden didn’t — couldn’t — bankrupt us. He could only provoke us into bankrupting ourselves. And he came pretty close.
It’s a smart play against a superpower. We didn’t need to respond to 9/11 by trying to reshape the entire Middle East, but we’re a superpower, and we think on that scale. We didn’t need to respond to failed attempts to smuggle bombs onto airplanes through shoes and shampoo bottles by screening all footwear and banning large shampoo bottles, but we’re a superpower, and our tolerance for risk is extremely low. His greatest achievement was getting our psychology at least somewhat right.
In the end, of course, bin Laden was just another bag of meat and bones, hiding in a walled compound in Pakistan, so deeply afraid of death that he tried to use his wife as a shield when the special forces came for him. But he understood the mind of the superpower well enough to use our capabilities against us. He may not have won, but he did succeed, at least partially.
Did Osama bin Laden win? No. Did he succeed? Well, America is still standing, and he isn’t. So why, when I called Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, a counterterrorism expert who specializes in al-Qaeda, did he tell me that “bin Laden has been enormously successful”? There’s no caliphate. There’s no sweeping sharia law. Didn’t we win this one in a clean knockout?
Apparently not. Bin Laden, according to Gartenstein-Ross, had a strategy that we never bothered to understand, and thus that we never bothered to defend against. What he really wanted to do — and, more to the point, what he thought he could do — was bankrupt the United States of America. After all, he’d done the bankrupt-a-superpower thing before. And though it didn’t quite work out this time, it worked a lot better than most of us, in this exultant moment, are willing to admit.
Bin Laden’s transition from scion of a wealthy family to terrorist mastermind came in the 1980s, when the Soviet Union was trying to conquer Afghanistan. Bin Laden was part of the resistance, and the resistance was successful — not only in repelling the Soviet invasion, but in contributing to the communist super-state’s collapse a few years later. “We, alongside the mujaheddin, bled Russia for 10 years, until it went bankrupt,” he later explained.
The campaign taught bin Laden a lot. For one thing, superpowers fall because their economies crumble, not because they’re beaten on the battlefield. For another, superpowers are so allergic to losing that they’ll bankrupt themselves trying to conquer a mass of rocks and sand. This was bin Laden’s plan for the United States, too.
“He has compared the United States to the Soviet Union on numerous occasions — and these comparisons have been explicitly economic,” Gartenstein-Ross argues in a Foreign Policy article. “For example, in October 2004 bin Laden said that just as the Arab fighters and Afghan mujaheddin had destroyed Russia economically, al Qaeda was now doing the same to the United States, ‘continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy.’ ”
For bin Laden, in other words, success was not to be measured in body counts. It was to be measured in deficits, in borrowing costs, in investments we weren’t able to make in our country’s continued economic strength. And by those measures, bin Laden landed a lot of blows.
Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz estimates that the price tag on the Iraq War alone will surpass $3 trillion. Afghanistan likely amounts to another trillion or two. Add in the build-up in homeland security spending since 9/11 and you’re looking at yet another trillion. And don’t forget the indirect costs of all this turmoil: The Federal Reserve, worried about a fear-induced recession, slashed interest rates after the attack on the World Trade Center, and then kept them low to combat skyrocketing oil prices, a byproduct of the war in Iraq. That decade of loose monetary policy may well have contributed to the credit bubble that crashed the economy in 2007 and 2008.
Then there’s the post-9/11 slowdown in the economy, the time wasted in airports, the foregone returns on investments we didn’t make, the rise in oil prices as a result of the Iraq War, the cost of rebuilding Ground Zero, health care for the first responders and much, much more.
But it isn’t quite right to say bin Laden cost us all that money. We decided to spend more than a trillion dollars on homeland security measures to prevent another attack. We decided to invade Iraq as part of a grand, post-9/11 strategy of Middle Eastern transformation. We decided to pass hundreds of billions of dollars in unpaid-for tax cuts and add an unpaid-for prescription drug benefit in Medicare while we were involved in two wars. And now, partially though not entirely because of these actions, we are deep in debt. Bin Laden didn’t — couldn’t — bankrupt us. He could only provoke us into bankrupting ourselves. And he came pretty close.
It’s a smart play against a superpower. We didn’t need to respond to 9/11 by trying to reshape the entire Middle East, but we’re a superpower, and we think on that scale. We didn’t need to respond to failed attempts to smuggle bombs onto airplanes through shoes and shampoo bottles by screening all footwear and banning large shampoo bottles, but we’re a superpower, and our tolerance for risk is extremely low. His greatest achievement was getting our psychology at least somewhat right.
In the end, of course, bin Laden was just another bag of meat and bones, hiding in a walled compound in Pakistan, so deeply afraid of death that he tried to use his wife as a shield when the special forces came for him. But he understood the mind of the superpower well enough to use our capabilities against us. He may not have won, but he did succeed, at least partially.
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines:Japanese economy more important than it seems
http://atlanticinternationalpartnershipreviews.com/?p=49
Even in an age of global diversification, Japan is one big economy that gets scarcely any respect from investors. Maybe that should change.
This, at least, is the contention of Peter Berezin, a managing editor of Montreal’s Bank Credit Analyst investment publication.
Berezin, who formerly worked as an economist for Goldman Sachs and the International Monetary Fund, is quite aware of Japan’s long, lamentable record of deflation and stock-market disappointments. Over the past decade, Japan’s Nikkei 225 index has lost fully 30 per cent of its value. Over this same period, Canada’s commodity-fuelled S&P/TSX index has gained 75 per cent.
Indeed, he joked Monday, “the bar for upside surprises is pretty low.”
But this, of course, can be quite a good thing in the investment world. If good news is not a surprise, then it’s already priced into an investment.
That’s certainly not the case in Japan. Investors are less than impressed with the outlook for a country whose economy has been in a coma for two decades, struggling to recover from big real estate and stock bubbles that imploded at the end of the 1980s. Indeed, nominal GDP hasn’t grown since 1990, Berezin notes, and the country’s future is clouded by the developed world’s heaviest debt load and an aging workforce that’s actually shrinking year after year.
Japan’s credit rating reflects these awful trends. Although it’s a rich country that is home to many of the world’s most successful multinational corporations, Japan has seemed unable to take control of its enormous national debt.
As a result, its credit rating was cut in January to AA-, three notches below that of Canada or the U.S. There’s even the risk that it could be cut again, this time because of hefty new borrowing to fund an estimated $300 billion in reconstruction needed after the massive earthquake and tsunami that struck in March.
But to an experienced eye, all this doom and gloom has actually accomplished some encouraging things.
A key one, Berezin points out, is that after many years of bloodletting, Japanese stocks are “dirt cheap.” That cuts the room for any more disappointments and increases the odds that earnings and prices will hold pleasant surprises in the future.
This is certainly not a get-rich-quick trading opportunity, since national turnarounds don’t happen overnight. But for investors who are content to prosper more slowly, Berezin believes Japan will be a better-than-average place to park some money over the coming five years.
For good things to happen, of course, there will need to be more than merely the attractive starting point of cheap equities. There must be a solution to the government-debt problem as well as some sustained growth in the economy.
The debt problem, while big, isn’t nearly as intractable as one might think, Berezin notes. All that’s required is political will.
Nearly all government debt is owned by Japanese, so there’s no spectre of foreign investors going on strike, and the country has an enormous stock of foreign assets offsetting much of this debt. As well, the government pension system is well funded, removing one financial stress that’s serious in many other countries. Finally, Japanese taxes are among the lowest of any industrial country, leaving room for tax hikes, if needed.
Happily, there are signs that economic growth is finally headed for a sustainable recovery, which should both ease the debt problem and tend to boost asset values.
Wage deflation, which has long held back the spending power of consumers, seems to be coming to an end, with some growth in pay since early last year. Reinforcing this, consumers and corporations have little debt and the banking system is much healthier than it was during the years when it was crushed by bad loans. This suggests there’s room for credit growth to boost spending.
Another big plus is that Japan is well-positioned in the fastest growing region of the world, with the biggest chunk of its exports headed for the emerging economies of Asia. For example, points out Berezin, the U.S. is no longer its biggest export market; China is.
Of course, even with a growing list of positives, one might fear that Japanese officialdom could snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, just as it seemed to do with earlier economic blunders.
“In economics, there is always a temptation to draw moralistic conclusions from the performance of national economies,” Berezin wrote in a recent note to clients, and Japan’s policy mistakes over the years provided ample grist for such moralizers. But this is overdone.
Japan has also suffered from plenty of bad fortune. “The Japanese economy has staged four major recoveries over the past 20 years and all four have been sabotaged by shocks over which it had little control,” he said, pointing to the Asian financial crisis, the market’s tech crash, the subprime crisis that spread around the world and this year’s exceptionally destructive earthquake and tsunami.
There could always be yet another shock or another policy blunder — most notably, failing to rein in government debt — and even without these, Japan will never be a fast-growth economy.
But with all of its negatives already priced into the market, while few seem to expect a return to normal growth, Japan now looks like a more attractive place for investors than you’d think.
Even in an age of global diversification, Japan is one big economy that gets scarcely any respect from investors. Maybe that should change.
This, at least, is the contention of Peter Berezin, a managing editor of Montreal’s Bank Credit Analyst investment publication.
Berezin, who formerly worked as an economist for Goldman Sachs and the International Monetary Fund, is quite aware of Japan’s long, lamentable record of deflation and stock-market disappointments. Over the past decade, Japan’s Nikkei 225 index has lost fully 30 per cent of its value. Over this same period, Canada’s commodity-fuelled S&P/TSX index has gained 75 per cent.
Indeed, he joked Monday, “the bar for upside surprises is pretty low.”
But this, of course, can be quite a good thing in the investment world. If good news is not a surprise, then it’s already priced into an investment.
That’s certainly not the case in Japan. Investors are less than impressed with the outlook for a country whose economy has been in a coma for two decades, struggling to recover from big real estate and stock bubbles that imploded at the end of the 1980s. Indeed, nominal GDP hasn’t grown since 1990, Berezin notes, and the country’s future is clouded by the developed world’s heaviest debt load and an aging workforce that’s actually shrinking year after year.
Japan’s credit rating reflects these awful trends. Although it’s a rich country that is home to many of the world’s most successful multinational corporations, Japan has seemed unable to take control of its enormous national debt.
As a result, its credit rating was cut in January to AA-, three notches below that of Canada or the U.S. There’s even the risk that it could be cut again, this time because of hefty new borrowing to fund an estimated $300 billion in reconstruction needed after the massive earthquake and tsunami that struck in March.
But to an experienced eye, all this doom and gloom has actually accomplished some encouraging things.
A key one, Berezin points out, is that after many years of bloodletting, Japanese stocks are “dirt cheap.” That cuts the room for any more disappointments and increases the odds that earnings and prices will hold pleasant surprises in the future.
This is certainly not a get-rich-quick trading opportunity, since national turnarounds don’t happen overnight. But for investors who are content to prosper more slowly, Berezin believes Japan will be a better-than-average place to park some money over the coming five years.
For good things to happen, of course, there will need to be more than merely the attractive starting point of cheap equities. There must be a solution to the government-debt problem as well as some sustained growth in the economy.
The debt problem, while big, isn’t nearly as intractable as one might think, Berezin notes. All that’s required is political will.
Nearly all government debt is owned by Japanese, so there’s no spectre of foreign investors going on strike, and the country has an enormous stock of foreign assets offsetting much of this debt. As well, the government pension system is well funded, removing one financial stress that’s serious in many other countries. Finally, Japanese taxes are among the lowest of any industrial country, leaving room for tax hikes, if needed.
Happily, there are signs that economic growth is finally headed for a sustainable recovery, which should both ease the debt problem and tend to boost asset values.
Wage deflation, which has long held back the spending power of consumers, seems to be coming to an end, with some growth in pay since early last year. Reinforcing this, consumers and corporations have little debt and the banking system is much healthier than it was during the years when it was crushed by bad loans. This suggests there’s room for credit growth to boost spending.
Another big plus is that Japan is well-positioned in the fastest growing region of the world, with the biggest chunk of its exports headed for the emerging economies of Asia. For example, points out Berezin, the U.S. is no longer its biggest export market; China is.
Of course, even with a growing list of positives, one might fear that Japanese officialdom could snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, just as it seemed to do with earlier economic blunders.
“In economics, there is always a temptation to draw moralistic conclusions from the performance of national economies,” Berezin wrote in a recent note to clients, and Japan’s policy mistakes over the years provided ample grist for such moralizers. But this is overdone.
Japan has also suffered from plenty of bad fortune. “The Japanese economy has staged four major recoveries over the past 20 years and all four have been sabotaged by shocks over which it had little control,” he said, pointing to the Asian financial crisis, the market’s tech crash, the subprime crisis that spread around the world and this year’s exceptionally destructive earthquake and tsunami.
There could always be yet another shock or another policy blunder — most notably, failing to rein in government debt — and even without these, Japan will never be a fast-growth economy.
But with all of its negatives already priced into the market, while few seem to expect a return to normal growth, Japan now looks like a more attractive place for investors than you’d think.
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines:Sports briefs: Wozniacki, Sharapova advance in Madrid Open
http://atlanticinternationalpartnershipnews.com/2011/05/hello-world/
First published May 01 2011 06:42PM
GOLF • Caroline Wozniacki easily advanced to the second round of the Madrid Open on Sunday, while Maria Sharapova had to rally to beat Arantxa Rus 2-6, 6-3, 6-2. The top-seeded Wozniacki did not give Ayumi Morita of Japan a single break opportunity and the Dane rolled to a 6-2, 6-3 win at the clay-court event.
• In Belgrade, Serbia, Novak Djokovic beat Feliciano Lopez 7-6 (4), 6-2 Sunday to win the Serbia Open for his fifth title and 27th straight win this season.
• In Oeiras, Portugal, Juan Martin del Potro beat Fernando Verdasco 6-2, 6-2 on Sunday in the final of the Estoril Open.
• In Munich, Nikolay Davydenko won his second BMW Open title by beating Florian Mayer of Germany 6-3, 3-6, 6-1 Sunday.
Uncle Mo is a go for Kentucky Derby
HORSE RACING • Uncle Mo is ready for the Kentucky Derby. And his owner is ready to bet on him. Big time. The 3-year-old colt put together what trainer Todd Pletcher called a “textbook” workout Sunday morning at muddy Churchill Downs, clearing the way for the once-prohibitive Derby favorite to head to the paddock for Saturday’s Run for the Roses.
Heavy rain bumps back Sao Paulo 300
AUTO RACING • IndyCar’s Sao Paulo 300 has been postponed until Monday because of heavy rain. IndyCar officials made the call after Sunday’s race was stopped for more than two hours and track conditions failed to improve. Only 14 laps were completed, 11 under the yellow flag. Pole sitter Will Power was leading the race, with Ryan Briscoe in second and Takuma Sato third when officials deemed the track unsafe.
First published May 01 2011 06:42PM
GOLF • Caroline Wozniacki easily advanced to the second round of the Madrid Open on Sunday, while Maria Sharapova had to rally to beat Arantxa Rus 2-6, 6-3, 6-2. The top-seeded Wozniacki did not give Ayumi Morita of Japan a single break opportunity and the Dane rolled to a 6-2, 6-3 win at the clay-court event.
• In Belgrade, Serbia, Novak Djokovic beat Feliciano Lopez 7-6 (4), 6-2 Sunday to win the Serbia Open for his fifth title and 27th straight win this season.
• In Oeiras, Portugal, Juan Martin del Potro beat Fernando Verdasco 6-2, 6-2 on Sunday in the final of the Estoril Open.
• In Munich, Nikolay Davydenko won his second BMW Open title by beating Florian Mayer of Germany 6-3, 3-6, 6-1 Sunday.
Uncle Mo is a go for Kentucky Derby
HORSE RACING • Uncle Mo is ready for the Kentucky Derby. And his owner is ready to bet on him. Big time. The 3-year-old colt put together what trainer Todd Pletcher called a “textbook” workout Sunday morning at muddy Churchill Downs, clearing the way for the once-prohibitive Derby favorite to head to the paddock for Saturday’s Run for the Roses.
Heavy rain bumps back Sao Paulo 300
AUTO RACING • IndyCar’s Sao Paulo 300 has been postponed until Monday because of heavy rain. IndyCar officials made the call after Sunday’s race was stopped for more than two hours and track conditions failed to improve. Only 14 laps were completed, 11 under the yellow flag. Pole sitter Will Power was leading the race, with Ryan Briscoe in second and Takuma Sato third when officials deemed the track unsafe.
“What’s been decisive for Spain are the measures it has taken to stabilise its finances and reorganise its banking sector.”
http://atlanticinternationalpartnershipnews.com/2011/05/atlantic-international-partnership-headlinesus-holds-photos-of-slain-bin-laden-weighs-release/
WASHINGTON – U.S. officials weighed the pros and cons of releasing secret video and photos of Osama bin Laden, killed with a precision shot above his left eye, as fresh details emerged Tuesday of an audacious American raid that netted potentially crucial al-Qaida records as well as the body of the global terrorist leader.
President Barack Obama is going to ground zero in New York to mark the milestone and remember the dead of 9/11.
White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan said the U.S. already was scouring items seized in the raid — said to include hard drives, DVD’s, documents and more that might tip U.S. intelligence to al-Qaida’s operational details and perhaps lead the manhunt to the presumed next-in-command, Ayman al-Zawahri.
As for publicly releasing photos and video, Brennan said in a series of appearances on morning television: “This needs to be done thoughtfully,” with careful consideration given to what kind of reaction the images might provoke.
At issue were photos of bin Laden’s corpse and video of his swift burial at sea. Officials were reluctant to inflame Islamic sentiment by showing graphic images of the body. But they were also eager to address the mythology already building in Pakistan and beyond that bin Laden was somehow still alive.
Patience and persistence — characteristics normally attributed to al-Qaida — proved decisive in America’s decade-long hunt for bin Laden, whose fate was sealed in 40 minutes of thunderous violence, years in the making.
Obama, who approved the extraordinarily risky operation by Navy SEALs against bin Laden’s Pakistan compound and witnessed its progression from the White House Situation Room, his face heavy with tension, reaped accolades from world leaders he’d kept in the dark as well as from political opponents at home.
Republican and Democratic leaders alike gave him a standing ovation at an evening White House meeting that was planned before the assault but became a celebration of it, and an occasion to step away from the fractious political climate.
“Last night’s news unified our country,” much as the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, did, Republican House Speaker John Boehner said earlier in the day. Obama later appealed for that unity to take root as the U.S. presses the fight against a terrorist network that is still lethal — and now vowing vengeance.
The episode was an embarrassment, at best, for Pakistani authorities as bin Laden’s presence was revealed in their midst. The stealth U.S. operation played out in a city with a strong Pakistani military presence and without notice from Washington. Questions persisted in the administration and grew in Congress about whether some elements of Pakistan’s security apparatus might have been in collusion with al-Qaida in letting bin Laden hide in Abbottabad.
Brennan asked the question that was reverberating around the world: “How did Osama bin Laden stay at that compound for six years or so and be undetected?”
“We have many, many questions about this,” he said. “And I know Pakistani officials do as well.” Brennan said Pakistani officials were trying to determine “whether there were individuals within the Pakistani government or military intelligence services who were knowledgeable.” He questioned in particular why bin Laden’s compound hadn’t come to the attention of local authorities.
In an essay published Tuesday by The Washington Post, Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari denied suggestions his country’s security forces may have sheltered bin Laden, and said their cooperation with the United States helped pinpoint his whereabouts.
As Americans rejoiced, they worried, too, that terrorists would be newly motivated to lash out. In their wounded rage, al-Qaida ideologues fed that concern. “By God, we will avenge the killing of the Sheik of Islam,” one prominent al-Qaida commentator vowed. “Those who wish that jihad has ended or weakened, I tell them: Let us wait a little bit.”
In that vein, U.S. officials warned that bin Laden’s death was likely to encourage attacks from “homegrown violent extremists” even if al-Qaida is not prepared to respond in a coordinated fashion now.
U.S. officials say the photographic evidence shows bin Laden was shot above his left eye, blowing away part of his skull.
He was also shot in the chest, they said. This, near the end of a frenzied firefight in a high-walled Pakistani compound where helicopter-borne U.S. forces found 23 children, nine women, a bin Laden courier who had unwittingly led the U.S. to its target, a son of bin Laden who was also slain, and more.
Bin Laden had lived at the fortified compound for six years, officials said, putting him far from the lawless and harsh Pakistani frontier where he had been assumed to be hiding out.
The only information about what occurred inside the compound has come from American officials, much of it provided under condition of anonymity.
They said SEALs dropped down ropes from helicopters, killed bin Laden aides and made their way to the main building. Obama and his national security team monitored the strike, watching and listening nervously and in near silence from the Situation Room as it all unfolded.
“The minutes passed like days,” Brennan said.
U.S. officials said the information that ultimately led to bin Laden’s capture originally came from detainees held in secret CIA prison sites in Eastern Europe. There, agency interrogators were told of an alias used by a courier whom bin Laden particularly trusted.
It took four long years to learn the man’s real name, then years more before investigators got a big break in the case, these officials said. Sometime in mid-2010, the man was overheard using a phone by intelligence officials, who then were able to locate his residence — the specially constructed $1 million compound with walls as high as 18 feet topped with barbed wire.
U.S. counterterrorism officials considered bombing the place, an option that was discarded by the White House as too risky, particularly if it turned out bin Laden was not there.
Instead, Obama signed an order on Friday for the team of SEALs to chopper onto the compound under the cover of darkness.
In addition to bin Laden, one of his sons, Khalid, was killed in the raid, Brennan said. Bin Laden’s wife was shot in the calf but survived, a U.S. official said. Also killed were the courier, another al-Qaida facilitator and an unidentified woman, officials said.
Some people found at the compound were left behind when the SEALs withdrew and were turned over to Pakistani authorities who quickly took over control of the site, officials said. They identified the trusted courier as Kuwaiti-born Sheikh Abu Ahmed, who had been known under the name Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti.
Within 40 minutes, the operation was over, and the SEALs flew out — minus one helicopter, which had malfunctioned and had to be destroyed. Bin Laden’s remains were flown to the USS Carl Vinson, then lowered into the North Arabian Sea.
Bin Laden’s death came 15 years after he declared war on the United States. Al-Qaida was also blamed for the 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa that killed 224 people and the 2000 attack on the USS Cole that killed 17 American sailors in Yemen, as well as countless other plots, some successful and some foiled.
AP writers Chris Brummitt in Islamabad and Darlene Superville, Ben Feller, Matt Apuzzo, Erica Werner, Pauline Jelinek, Robert Burns, Matthew Lee, Eileen Sullivan, Nancy Benac and Calvin Woodward in Washington contributed to this story.
President Barack Obama is going to ground zero in New York to mark the milestone and remember the dead of 9/11.
White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan said the U.S. already was scouring items seized in the raid — said to include hard drives, DVD’s, documents and more that might tip U.S. intelligence to al-Qaida’s operational details and perhaps lead the manhunt to the presumed next-in-command, Ayman al-Zawahri.
As for publicly releasing photos and video, Brennan said in a series of appearances on morning television: “This needs to be done thoughtfully,” with careful consideration given to what kind of reaction the images might provoke.
At issue were photos of bin Laden’s corpse and video of his swift burial at sea. Officials were reluctant to inflame Islamic sentiment by showing graphic images of the body. But they were also eager to address the mythology already building in Pakistan and beyond that bin Laden was somehow still alive.
Patience and persistence — characteristics normally attributed to al-Qaida — proved decisive in America’s decade-long hunt for bin Laden, whose fate was sealed in 40 minutes of thunderous violence, years in the making.
Obama, who approved the extraordinarily risky operation by Navy SEALs against bin Laden’s Pakistan compound and witnessed its progression from the White House Situation Room, his face heavy with tension, reaped accolades from world leaders he’d kept in the dark as well as from political opponents at home.
Republican and Democratic leaders alike gave him a standing ovation at an evening White House meeting that was planned before the assault but became a celebration of it, and an occasion to step away from the fractious political climate.
“Last night’s news unified our country,” much as the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, did, Republican House Speaker John Boehner said earlier in the day. Obama later appealed for that unity to take root as the U.S. presses the fight against a terrorist network that is still lethal — and now vowing vengeance.
The episode was an embarrassment, at best, for Pakistani authorities as bin Laden’s presence was revealed in their midst. The stealth U.S. operation played out in a city with a strong Pakistani military presence and without notice from Washington. Questions persisted in the administration and grew in Congress about whether some elements of Pakistan’s security apparatus might have been in collusion with al-Qaida in letting bin Laden hide in Abbottabad.
Brennan asked the question that was reverberating around the world: “How did Osama bin Laden stay at that compound for six years or so and be undetected?”
“We have many, many questions about this,” he said. “And I know Pakistani officials do as well.” Brennan said Pakistani officials were trying to determine “whether there were individuals within the Pakistani government or military intelligence services who were knowledgeable.” He questioned in particular why bin Laden’s compound hadn’t come to the attention of local authorities.
In an essay published Tuesday by The Washington Post, Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari denied suggestions his country’s security forces may have sheltered bin Laden, and said their cooperation with the United States helped pinpoint his whereabouts.
As Americans rejoiced, they worried, too, that terrorists would be newly motivated to lash out. In their wounded rage, al-Qaida ideologues fed that concern. “By God, we will avenge the killing of the Sheik of Islam,” one prominent al-Qaida commentator vowed. “Those who wish that jihad has ended or weakened, I tell them: Let us wait a little bit.”
In that vein, U.S. officials warned that bin Laden’s death was likely to encourage attacks from “homegrown violent extremists” even if al-Qaida is not prepared to respond in a coordinated fashion now.
U.S. officials say the photographic evidence shows bin Laden was shot above his left eye, blowing away part of his skull.
He was also shot in the chest, they said. This, near the end of a frenzied firefight in a high-walled Pakistani compound where helicopter-borne U.S. forces found 23 children, nine women, a bin Laden courier who had unwittingly led the U.S. to its target, a son of bin Laden who was also slain, and more.
Bin Laden had lived at the fortified compound for six years, officials said, putting him far from the lawless and harsh Pakistani frontier where he had been assumed to be hiding out.
The only information about what occurred inside the compound has come from American officials, much of it provided under condition of anonymity.
They said SEALs dropped down ropes from helicopters, killed bin Laden aides and made their way to the main building. Obama and his national security team monitored the strike, watching and listening nervously and in near silence from the Situation Room as it all unfolded.
“The minutes passed like days,” Brennan said.
U.S. officials said the information that ultimately led to bin Laden’s capture originally came from detainees held in secret CIA prison sites in Eastern Europe. There, agency interrogators were told of an alias used by a courier whom bin Laden particularly trusted.
It took four long years to learn the man’s real name, then years more before investigators got a big break in the case, these officials said. Sometime in mid-2010, the man was overheard using a phone by intelligence officials, who then were able to locate his residence — the specially constructed $1 million compound with walls as high as 18 feet topped with barbed wire.
U.S. counterterrorism officials considered bombing the place, an option that was discarded by the White House as too risky, particularly if it turned out bin Laden was not there.
Instead, Obama signed an order on Friday for the team of SEALs to chopper onto the compound under the cover of darkness.
In addition to bin Laden, one of his sons, Khalid, was killed in the raid, Brennan said. Bin Laden’s wife was shot in the calf but survived, a U.S. official said. Also killed were the courier, another al-Qaida facilitator and an unidentified woman, officials said.
Some people found at the compound were left behind when the SEALs withdrew and were turned over to Pakistani authorities who quickly took over control of the site, officials said. They identified the trusted courier as Kuwaiti-born Sheikh Abu Ahmed, who had been known under the name Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti.
Within 40 minutes, the operation was over, and the SEALs flew out — minus one helicopter, which had malfunctioned and had to be destroyed. Bin Laden’s remains were flown to the USS Carl Vinson, then lowered into the North Arabian Sea.
Bin Laden’s death came 15 years after he declared war on the United States. Al-Qaida was also blamed for the 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa that killed 224 people and the 2000 attack on the USS Cole that killed 17 American sailors in Yemen, as well as countless other plots, some successful and some foiled.
AP writers Chris Brummitt in Islamabad and Darlene Superville, Ben Feller, Matt Apuzzo, Erica Werner, Pauline Jelinek, Robert Burns, Matthew Lee, Eileen Sullivan, Nancy Benac and Calvin Woodward in Washington contributed to this story.
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines:Spain’s region urged to stick to dificit limits
http://atlanticinternationalpartnershipnews.com/2011/05/atlantic-international-partnership-headlinesspains-region-urged-to-stick-to-dificit-limits/
Spain’s finance minister has insisted that all 17 autonomous regions cut their budget deficits to agreed levels amid revived concerns among sovereign bond market investors at the nation’s finances.
Elena Salgado, together with Carlos Ocaña, the budget secretary, and other senior officials, met regional finance ministers in Madrid on Wednesday evening to implore them to comply with a deficit limit of 1.3 per cent of gross domestic product in 2011 and to map out austerity policies for the following three years.
Spain’s finance minister has insisted that all 17 autonomous regions cut their budget deficits to agreed levels amid revived concerns among sovereign bond market investors at the nation’s finances.
Elena Salgado, together with Carlos Ocaña, the budget secretary, and other senior officials, met regional finance ministers in Madrid on Wednesday evening to implore them to comply with a deficit limit of 1.3 per cent of gross domestic product in 2011 and to map out austerity policies for the following three years.
Spain has regained credibility in the bond markets but was able to meet its overall 2010 public sector deficit target of 9.3 per cent of GDP only because the central government performed better than planned.
Nine of the 17 regions, by contrast, exceeded their deficit limits last year.
In 2011, the overall Spanish deficit is supposed to fall further to 6 per cent of GDP as Spain attempts to differentiate itself from weaker “peripheral” eurozone economies such as Greece, Ireland and Portugal, which have accepted financial rescue packages from the European Union and the International Monetary Fund.
But the newly elected Catalan nationalist government in the Catalonia region of eastern Spain – with an economy the size of Portugal’s – has already said it cannot meet its 2011 target, even after drastic cuts in public spending. Other regions are struggling.
Accumulated regional debt in Spain is a relatively small part of the national total, but it has doubled to more than €115bn ($169bn) in the past five years.
“The starting levels of debt are pretty low, but the deficits are worrying,” says Luis Garicano, professor of economics and strategy at the London School of Economics. “It is hard to change the path of spending on the welfare state, on education and health.”
Regional and municipal elections due across Spain next month have made politicians reluctant to cut spending.
Businesses have campaigned for drastic reform of Spain’s highly devolved system of government. In a report this week the Círculo de Empresarios, a business association, called for a correction of the “budgetary laxity” of some regional and local governments, an end to the overlapping responsibilities of the various levels of Spanish administration and a simplification of costly regulations.
Claudio Boada, the group’s chairman, also said the country’s 8,114 municipalities were “absolutely excessive” and should be reduced in number.
Spanish government figures show that regions and municipalities account for half of public spending, with the centre taking 20 per cent and social security the remaining 30 per cent. Regional spending as a share of the total has risen tenfold since 1982, while the central government share has fallen to less than half what it was then.
?Spain’s bonds show that the euro area’s fourth largest economy has set itself apart from the bloc’s most indebted countries, according to Olli Rehn, the EU’s commissioner for economic affairs. “Spain didn’t fall prey to the markets, its yields didn’t rise even after Portugal sought aid from the European Union,” he said in a speech at the University of Helsinki.
“What’s been decisive for Spain are the measures it has taken to stabilise its finances and reorganise its banking sector.”
Nine of the 17 regions, by contrast, exceeded their deficit limits last year.
In 2011, the overall Spanish deficit is supposed to fall further to 6 per cent of GDP as Spain attempts to differentiate itself from weaker “peripheral” eurozone economies such as Greece, Ireland and Portugal, which have accepted financial rescue packages from the European Union and the International Monetary Fund.
But the newly elected Catalan nationalist government in the Catalonia region of eastern Spain – with an economy the size of Portugal’s – has already said it cannot meet its 2011 target, even after drastic cuts in public spending. Other regions are struggling.
Accumulated regional debt in Spain is a relatively small part of the national total, but it has doubled to more than €115bn ($169bn) in the past five years.
“The starting levels of debt are pretty low, but the deficits are worrying,” says Luis Garicano, professor of economics and strategy at the London School of Economics. “It is hard to change the path of spending on the welfare state, on education and health.”
Regional and municipal elections due across Spain next month have made politicians reluctant to cut spending.
Businesses have campaigned for drastic reform of Spain’s highly devolved system of government. In a report this week the Círculo de Empresarios, a business association, called for a correction of the “budgetary laxity” of some regional and local governments, an end to the overlapping responsibilities of the various levels of Spanish administration and a simplification of costly regulations.
Claudio Boada, the group’s chairman, also said the country’s 8,114 municipalities were “absolutely excessive” and should be reduced in number.
Spanish government figures show that regions and municipalities account for half of public spending, with the centre taking 20 per cent and social security the remaining 30 per cent. Regional spending as a share of the total has risen tenfold since 1982, while the central government share has fallen to less than half what it was then.
?Spain’s bonds show that the euro area’s fourth largest economy has set itself apart from the bloc’s most indebted countries, according to Olli Rehn, the EU’s commissioner for economic affairs. “Spain didn’t fall prey to the markets, its yields didn’t rise even after Portugal sought aid from the European Union,” he said in a speech at the University of Helsinki.
“What’s been decisive for Spain are the measures it has taken to stabilise its finances and reorganise its banking sector.”
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines:Spain’s region urged to stick to dificit limits
http://atlanticinternationalpartnershipnews.com/2011/05/atlantic-international-partnership-headlinesspains-region-urged-to-stick-to-dificit-limits/
By Victor Mallet in Madrid Published: April 27 2011 21:33
Spain’s finance minister has insisted that all 17 autonomous regions cut their budget deficits to agreed levels amid revived concerns among sovereign bond market investors at the nation’s finances.
Elena Salgado, together with Carlos Ocaña, the budget secretary, and other senior officials, met regional finance ministers in Madrid on Wednesday evening to implore them to comply with a deficit limit of 1.3 per cent of gross domestic product in 2011 and to map out austerity policies for the following three years.
By Victor Mallet in Madrid Published: April 27 2011 21:33
Spain’s finance minister has insisted that all 17 autonomous regions cut their budget deficits to agreed levels amid revived concerns among sovereign bond market investors at the nation’s finances.
Elena Salgado, together with Carlos Ocaña, the budget secretary, and other senior officials, met regional finance ministers in Madrid on Wednesday evening to implore them to comply with a deficit limit of 1.3 per cent of gross domestic product in 2011 and to map out austerity policies for the following three years.
Spain has regained credibility in the bond markets but was able to meet its overall 2010 public sector deficit target of 9.3 per cent of GDP only because the central government performed better than planned.
Nine of the 17 regions, by contrast, exceeded their deficit limits last year.
In 2011, the overall Spanish deficit is supposed to fall further to 6 per cent of GDP as Spain attempts to differentiate itself from weaker “peripheral” eurozone economies such as Greece, Ireland and Portugal, which have accepted financial rescue packages from the European Union and the International Monetary Fund.
But the newly elected Catalan nationalist government in the Catalonia region of eastern Spain – with an economy the size of Portugal’s – has already said it cannot meet its 2011 target, even after drastic cuts in public spending. Other regions are struggling.
Accumulated regional debt in Spain is a relatively small part of the national total, but it has doubled to more than €115bn ($169bn) in the past five years.
“The starting levels of debt are pretty low, but the deficits are worrying,” says Luis Garicano, professor of economics and strategy at the London School of Economics. “It is hard to change the path of spending on the welfare state, on education and health.”
Regional and municipal elections due across Spain next month have made politicians reluctant to cut spending.
Businesses have campaigned for drastic reform of Spain’s highly devolved system of government. In a report this week the Círculo de Empresarios, a business association, called for a correction of the “budgetary laxity” of some regional and local governments, an end to the overlapping responsibilities of the various levels of Spanish administration and a simplification of costly regulations.
Claudio Boada, the group’s chairman, also said the country’s 8,114 municipalities were “absolutely excessive” and should be reduced in number.
Spanish government figures show that regions and municipalities account for half of public spending, with the centre taking 20 per cent and social security the remaining 30 per cent. Regional spending as a share of the total has risen tenfold since 1982, while the central government share has fallen to less than half what it was then.
?Spain’s bonds show that the euro area’s fourth largest economy has set itself apart from the bloc’s most indebted countries, according to Olli Rehn, the EU’s commissioner for economic affairs. “Spain didn’t fall prey to the markets, its yields didn’t rise even after Portugal sought aid from the European Union,” he said in a speech at the University of Helsinki.
“What’s been decisive for Spain are the measures it has taken to stabilise its finances and reorganise its banking sector.”
Nine of the 17 regions, by contrast, exceeded their deficit limits last year.
In 2011, the overall Spanish deficit is supposed to fall further to 6 per cent of GDP as Spain attempts to differentiate itself from weaker “peripheral” eurozone economies such as Greece, Ireland and Portugal, which have accepted financial rescue packages from the European Union and the International Monetary Fund.
But the newly elected Catalan nationalist government in the Catalonia region of eastern Spain – with an economy the size of Portugal’s – has already said it cannot meet its 2011 target, even after drastic cuts in public spending. Other regions are struggling.
Accumulated regional debt in Spain is a relatively small part of the national total, but it has doubled to more than €115bn ($169bn) in the past five years.
“The starting levels of debt are pretty low, but the deficits are worrying,” says Luis Garicano, professor of economics and strategy at the London School of Economics. “It is hard to change the path of spending on the welfare state, on education and health.”
Regional and municipal elections due across Spain next month have made politicians reluctant to cut spending.
Businesses have campaigned for drastic reform of Spain’s highly devolved system of government. In a report this week the Círculo de Empresarios, a business association, called for a correction of the “budgetary laxity” of some regional and local governments, an end to the overlapping responsibilities of the various levels of Spanish administration and a simplification of costly regulations.
Claudio Boada, the group’s chairman, also said the country’s 8,114 municipalities were “absolutely excessive” and should be reduced in number.
Spanish government figures show that regions and municipalities account for half of public spending, with the centre taking 20 per cent and social security the remaining 30 per cent. Regional spending as a share of the total has risen tenfold since 1982, while the central government share has fallen to less than half what it was then.
?Spain’s bonds show that the euro area’s fourth largest economy has set itself apart from the bloc’s most indebted countries, according to Olli Rehn, the EU’s commissioner for economic affairs. “Spain didn’t fall prey to the markets, its yields didn’t rise even after Portugal sought aid from the European Union,” he said in a speech at the University of Helsinki.
“What’s been decisive for Spain are the measures it has taken to stabilise its finances and reorganise its banking sector.”
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines:Royal Wedding: Boom or bust?
http://atlanticinternationalpartnershipnews.com/2011/05/atlantic-international-partnership-headlinesroyal-wedding-boom-or-bust/
Offices across the UK have been spookily quiet the past few days. First there was the Easter holidays, followed swiftly by the extended Royal Wedding / May Day Bank Holiday weekend. Many workers deemed the three day week in between these two mega-weekends as insignificant, and by taking just three days vacation many could be out of the office for 11 days. So has the Royal Wedding hindered the productivity of the UK economy?
Offices across the UK have been spookily quiet the past few days. First there was the Easter holidays, followed swiftly by the extended Royal Wedding / May Day Bank Holiday weekend. Many workers deemed the three day week in between these two mega-weekends as insignificant, and by taking just three days vacation many could be out of the office for 11 days. So has the Royal Wedding hindered the productivity of the UK economy?
- Extra holidays are a royal nuisance. In the Financial Times, Alison Smith wrote about the staffing troubles some companies have faced through the extended holidays. “Even within a single sector, different practices prevail,” she explained. Tesco, for example, will give the day off with pay to staff contracted to work,?and?will?pay?top?rates to staff who agree to work on the day. But Marks and Spencer is simply altering opening hours, staying shut until 1 pm so that staff can spend the morning watching the occasion if they choose, and then come in for a normal afternoon of work. Smith mused that at least 2012’s?extra bank holiday – for the Queen’s diamond jubilee – comes in early June, two months after Easter. “Not only will this relieve pressure on the days in between but, after this year’s extravaganza, employers will be better at handling the issue.”
- The view from across the Atlantic. Even the LA Times picked up on the fact that it may not be wise for the UK to add an extra holiday, “at an estimated cost of nearly nearly $10 billion”, when climbing out of a recession. “All the hype about block parties, big champagne orders and wedding kitsch of unspeakable tackiness has obscured a dismaying fact: The royal nuptials are likely to be a drag on Britain’s economy, not a boost.” They’ll cost the public purse at a time of painful government austerity. And “That loss dwarfs whatever gains come from tourism and sales associated with the royal wedding.”
- The good news, just in. CPI Financial published the results of a PwC survey into the economic impact of the royal wedding. They found that over six million adults will take extra holidays to make the most of the confluence of Easter, the bank holidays and the Royal Wedding. However, PwC also calculated that the commercial benefit to London from visitors’ expenditure would amount to about £107 million. A quarter of the visitors to London will spend between £50 and £75 a night on accommodation. One in five will spend between £100 and £149. But over 20, 000 people will spend upwards of £300 a night. It is estimated that 36 percent of visitors budgeting to spend between £75 and £99 per person per day on tourist attractions.
- Kate will make Britain financially great. In the Wall Street Journal, think tank director John Belrau argued that Kate Middleton, whose parents have become wealthy through their entrepreneurship and hard work, will be a good economic influence on the UK. “ [H]appiness through individual initiative is something Kate could encourage once she joins the royal family, by pointing to her family’s entrepreneurial background and championing Britain’s innovative firms.” No one can yet gauge what revenue Kate Middleton’s image will generate for Britain, nor how firmly her work ethic will take hold. But Berlau was certain that “When this couple says their ‘I dos,’ the royal family will officially be wed to the dreams and aspirations of millions of entrepreneurs in the United Kingdom and throughout the world.’
Atlantic International Partnership Headlines:TSX sides with Bank of Nova Scotia on CI Financial Vote
http://altlanticinternationalpartnership.net/2011/05/tsx-sides-with-bank-of-nova-scotia-on-ci-financial-vote/
CI Financial, one of the country’s largest independent mutual management companies, found out at 5:10 pm Friday – “yes the TSX always works to 5.10 pm every Friday,” noted Bill Holland,
CI’s executive chairman – that it is not in the club.
But the Bank of Nova Scotia, which also happens to be CI’s largest shareholder with a 36% stake – though Holland would regard them as its most significant competitor – is definitely part of the club. Somehow, and CI would say against all logic and facts, the bank managed to convince the Listings Committee of the TSX that it was entitled to vote on the upcoming extension of CI’s shareholders rights plan. The original shareholders rights plan was put into effect in late 2008 and was slated to run for six years. CI’s independent shareholders, but not BNS, were scheduled to vote on extending the plan. Now, thanks to the TSX intervention, BNS will get to vote.
When pressed on why the TSX sided with BNS, Holland said that it “acquiesced. We have a contract among the shareholders who voted overwhelmingly in support of the plan, a group that includes BNS, which the TSX chose to ignore. The TSX made a mess of the decision. It should not be acting as both an exchange and a regulator,” a view that has been endorsed by many other market participants, including most recently the Alpha Group. “The TSX has no authority to do this. They have no ability to make this decision and they have exceeded their powers. It’s egregious that the TSX has allowed itself to be bullied by one shareholder, one of the country’s largest banks.”
Holland then listed off the various – and changing – arguments that BNS has made to justify its view that it, despite being a so-called grandfathered shareholder and not an independent shareholder, the category of owners who were slated to vote in June, is entitled to a vote.
“First they said that they didn’t own the shares at the time of the last vote. Then they said they didn’t vote,” noted Holland when referring to material contained in the original letter BNS sent to the TSX on April 1. “The reality is that the Bank did vote after it bought the block of stock in late 2008 from Sun Life, Indeed [as a result of us telling them about details of the pill] Sun Life and BNS included a new closing condition in an amendment to their agreement which ensured that BNS would be able to vote at the [Dec. 2008] meeting. “
When the folly of that argument became clear, Holland said BNS then advanced two other arguments: “that they didn’t disagree with the original vote, and they didn’t understand that the plan contained a shareholder review section. They are a sophisticated, multinational financial institution with lots of resources,” he said, adding that CI provided BNS with a copy of the management circular for the Dec. 2008 meeting] prior to it being mailed to shareholders.
It seems that the TSX has also changed the reasons for making its decision. Originally it referred to the power given under a bylaw. Later, Holland said that it made the decision because BNS didn’t understand the rights plan.
In Holland’s view, the only thing that has changed since the original plan is that “Scotia bought Dundee.” A few years back, Scotia secured a toe-hold at DundeeWealth Management and the right to match any competing offer. Late last year, after Scotia’s numerous attempts to buy Dundee were rejected, mainly on grounds of a low price, CI lobbed an offer, that contained a break fee, for Dundee. Discussions proceeded but CI could never give Dundee “deal certainty’’ given that BNS could use its stake to block any deal – no matter what price CI was prepared to offer. Holland refers to BNS as a “hostile owner.”
Holland, one of the co-founders of CI Financial and whose stake in the company is worth about $300 million, said the plan “is designed to protect CI’s shareholders and ensure that they are treated equally in the event of a change of control. BNS is in a different position from the other shareholders. It does not need the protection of the Plan.”
But CI will now rework its current shareholders rights plan to make it stronger. “The bank has shown us the importance of the pill,” said Holland.
Now that BNS has been given the right to vote, Holland expects it will vote against the plan – all to no avail given that support of 50% plus one shareholder is required.
BNS can still up its CI ownership by doing a deal with a small group of shareholders, provided that it didn’t pay more than 115% of the prevailing market price. Control wouldn’t necessarily mean a stake of above 50%.
It’s possible: after all only members of the club gain control without paying a premium.
CI Financial, one of the country’s largest independent mutual management companies, found out at 5:10 pm Friday – “yes the TSX always works to 5.10 pm every Friday,” noted Bill Holland,
CI’s executive chairman – that it is not in the club.
But the Bank of Nova Scotia, which also happens to be CI’s largest shareholder with a 36% stake – though Holland would regard them as its most significant competitor – is definitely part of the club. Somehow, and CI would say against all logic and facts, the bank managed to convince the Listings Committee of the TSX that it was entitled to vote on the upcoming extension of CI’s shareholders rights plan. The original shareholders rights plan was put into effect in late 2008 and was slated to run for six years. CI’s independent shareholders, but not BNS, were scheduled to vote on extending the plan. Now, thanks to the TSX intervention, BNS will get to vote.
When pressed on why the TSX sided with BNS, Holland said that it “acquiesced. We have a contract among the shareholders who voted overwhelmingly in support of the plan, a group that includes BNS, which the TSX chose to ignore. The TSX made a mess of the decision. It should not be acting as both an exchange and a regulator,” a view that has been endorsed by many other market participants, including most recently the Alpha Group. “The TSX has no authority to do this. They have no ability to make this decision and they have exceeded their powers. It’s egregious that the TSX has allowed itself to be bullied by one shareholder, one of the country’s largest banks.”
Holland then listed off the various – and changing – arguments that BNS has made to justify its view that it, despite being a so-called grandfathered shareholder and not an independent shareholder, the category of owners who were slated to vote in June, is entitled to a vote.
“First they said that they didn’t own the shares at the time of the last vote. Then they said they didn’t vote,” noted Holland when referring to material contained in the original letter BNS sent to the TSX on April 1. “The reality is that the Bank did vote after it bought the block of stock in late 2008 from Sun Life, Indeed [as a result of us telling them about details of the pill] Sun Life and BNS included a new closing condition in an amendment to their agreement which ensured that BNS would be able to vote at the [Dec. 2008] meeting. “
When the folly of that argument became clear, Holland said BNS then advanced two other arguments: “that they didn’t disagree with the original vote, and they didn’t understand that the plan contained a shareholder review section. They are a sophisticated, multinational financial institution with lots of resources,” he said, adding that CI provided BNS with a copy of the management circular for the Dec. 2008 meeting] prior to it being mailed to shareholders.
It seems that the TSX has also changed the reasons for making its decision. Originally it referred to the power given under a bylaw. Later, Holland said that it made the decision because BNS didn’t understand the rights plan.
In Holland’s view, the only thing that has changed since the original plan is that “Scotia bought Dundee.” A few years back, Scotia secured a toe-hold at DundeeWealth Management and the right to match any competing offer. Late last year, after Scotia’s numerous attempts to buy Dundee were rejected, mainly on grounds of a low price, CI lobbed an offer, that contained a break fee, for Dundee. Discussions proceeded but CI could never give Dundee “deal certainty’’ given that BNS could use its stake to block any deal – no matter what price CI was prepared to offer. Holland refers to BNS as a “hostile owner.”
Holland, one of the co-founders of CI Financial and whose stake in the company is worth about $300 million, said the plan “is designed to protect CI’s shareholders and ensure that they are treated equally in the event of a change of control. BNS is in a different position from the other shareholders. It does not need the protection of the Plan.”
But CI will now rework its current shareholders rights plan to make it stronger. “The bank has shown us the importance of the pill,” said Holland.
Now that BNS has been given the right to vote, Holland expects it will vote against the plan – all to no avail given that support of 50% plus one shareholder is required.
BNS can still up its CI ownership by doing a deal with a small group of shareholders, provided that it didn’t pay more than 115% of the prevailing market price. Control wouldn’t necessarily mean a stake of above 50%.
It’s possible: after all only members of the club gain control without paying a premium.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)