TT Note: Manipulated to fail? Interesting story and theory to read.
/PRNewswire/ -- SRB Documentaries is pleased to announce the release of "Demographic Bomb: demography is destiny," the long-awaited sequel to 2008's "Demographic Winter: the decline of the human family."
Barry McLerran, producer of both documentaries, observed, "Like 'Demographic Winter,' 'The Demographic Bomb' deals with rapidly falling birth rates and their consequences for humanity in the 21st century."
Viewers of "Demographic Winter" heard from demographers, sociologists, economists and historians on the demographic crisis confronting us.
McLerran commented: "'Demographic Bomb: demography is destiny' explores the history of the modern population-control movement -- how it persuaded the public that there are too many people in the world, and how these fallacies became institutionalized."
Among those interviewed in "Demographic Bomb" is Paul Ehrlich of Stanford University, author of 1968's The Population Bomb, which popularized the myth of overpopulation.
Mathew Connelly of Columbia University (author of Fatal Misconception: The Struggle To Control World Population) reveals how organizations, institutions, governments and the United Nations manipulated and coerced families, evaded political accountability and violated basic human rights to achieve their population-reduction agenda.
Former Yale Professor of Economics Jennifer Roback Morse, USC Professor of Urban Planning and Demography Dowell Myers, Harvard PhD Nick Eberstadt, Harvard MBA, Harry Dent (author of The Great Depression Ahead) and Nobel Prize winning economist Gary Becker uncover the roots of the crisis that has shaken the world's economies.
McLerran noted: "'Demographic Winter' predicted the financial crash of 2008 to within 12 months. 'Demographic Bomb' reveals how this is just the beginning."
"'Demographic Bomb' shows what happens when countries comprising 80% of the world's economy have plummeting numbers of workers, consumers and innovators - leading to falling consumer spending, and too few workers to support the elderly," McLerran disclosed.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Showing posts with label economy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label economy. Show all posts
Monday, June 29, 2009
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Semi-Automatic Rifle Ban Would Reduce Jobs, Not Crime
/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Responding to Attorney General Eric Holder's comment yesterday that the Obama Administration will attempt to reinstate a ban against semi-automatic rifles, the National Shooting Sports Foundation reminded Congress and all Americans that such a ban would cause jobs to be lost in a difficult economy, have no effect on reducing crime and would deprive millions of law-abiding sportsmen and gun owners of their Constitutional right to own the firearm of their choice.
Holder made his comments in connection with criminals supplying illegal guns from the United States to drug dealers in Mexico.
"The problem of criminals breaking the law to acquire firearms and illegally smuggling them across the border is not remedied by legislation that would violate the rights of Americans to own semi-automatic firearms," said Steve Sanetti, president of NSSF, the trade association of the firearms industry.
"These types of firearms, which are erroneously called 'assault weapons,' are used by millions of Americans for hunting, sporting and personal defense purposes," Sanetti added. "We can only conclude that certain officials are waiting for any politically advantageous excuse to announce the intention to seek a new ban on sporting rifles, a ban that would break the president's campaign promise to gun owners that 'I'm not going to take away your guns.'"
The industry and firearms owners were understandably outraged by Holder's comments yesterday, and today even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi backed away from the idea of a new gun ban. "On that score, I think we need to enforce the laws we have right now," said Pelosi, surprisingly taking the position of pro-gun advocates.
Holder's use of the inaccurate term "assault weapons" is one that is deliberately used by gun-ban advocates to create confusion between legally sold, semi-automatic rifles and look-a-like, fully automatic military versions. While the civilian version of these rifles may resemble their military counterparts, the civilian rifle fires only one round with each pull of the trigger. Additionally, these rifles fire ammunition calibers no more powerful than traditional-looking sporting arms. Civilian access to fully automatic machine guns has been severely restricted since 1934.
Studies show that the ban against sporting firearms, known as the Assault Weapons Ban, that was in place from 1994 to 2004 did not reduce crime. Furthermore, there has been no increase in crime involving these types of firearms since Congress allowed the ban to expire.
A ban on sporting firearms also would have a severe effect on jobs and the economy. Sales of semi-automatic rifles have been strong over the last several months -- overall sales of firearms have increased as much as 42 percent -- and have allowed companies in the firearms industry to withstand, to some extent, the downturn in the economy.
"These semi-automatic rifles are the most popular rifle in America today and they are largely behind the recent increase in firearms sales," said Sanetti. "This is a bright spot in our economy and has helped save jobs in our industry."
Since the election last November gun owners have feared the Obama Administration would seek legislation that would infringe on their Second Amendment rights. "It appears gun owners' fears were well-founded given Attorney General Holder's comment that the Obama Administration will seek new restrictions on gun owners. A new gun ban would fly in the face of last year's Supreme Court decision in the Heller case that reaffirmed the Second Amendment right of all Americans to keep and bear arms," said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Holder made his comments in connection with criminals supplying illegal guns from the United States to drug dealers in Mexico.
"The problem of criminals breaking the law to acquire firearms and illegally smuggling them across the border is not remedied by legislation that would violate the rights of Americans to own semi-automatic firearms," said Steve Sanetti, president of NSSF, the trade association of the firearms industry.
"These types of firearms, which are erroneously called 'assault weapons,' are used by millions of Americans for hunting, sporting and personal defense purposes," Sanetti added. "We can only conclude that certain officials are waiting for any politically advantageous excuse to announce the intention to seek a new ban on sporting rifles, a ban that would break the president's campaign promise to gun owners that 'I'm not going to take away your guns.'"
The industry and firearms owners were understandably outraged by Holder's comments yesterday, and today even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi backed away from the idea of a new gun ban. "On that score, I think we need to enforce the laws we have right now," said Pelosi, surprisingly taking the position of pro-gun advocates.
Holder's use of the inaccurate term "assault weapons" is one that is deliberately used by gun-ban advocates to create confusion between legally sold, semi-automatic rifles and look-a-like, fully automatic military versions. While the civilian version of these rifles may resemble their military counterparts, the civilian rifle fires only one round with each pull of the trigger. Additionally, these rifles fire ammunition calibers no more powerful than traditional-looking sporting arms. Civilian access to fully automatic machine guns has been severely restricted since 1934.
Studies show that the ban against sporting firearms, known as the Assault Weapons Ban, that was in place from 1994 to 2004 did not reduce crime. Furthermore, there has been no increase in crime involving these types of firearms since Congress allowed the ban to expire.
A ban on sporting firearms also would have a severe effect on jobs and the economy. Sales of semi-automatic rifles have been strong over the last several months -- overall sales of firearms have increased as much as 42 percent -- and have allowed companies in the firearms industry to withstand, to some extent, the downturn in the economy.
"These semi-automatic rifles are the most popular rifle in America today and they are largely behind the recent increase in firearms sales," said Sanetti. "This is a bright spot in our economy and has helped save jobs in our industry."
Since the election last November gun owners have feared the Obama Administration would seek legislation that would infringe on their Second Amendment rights. "It appears gun owners' fears were well-founded given Attorney General Holder's comment that the Obama Administration will seek new restrictions on gun owners. A new gun ban would fly in the face of last year's Supreme Court decision in the Heller case that reaffirmed the Second Amendment right of all Americans to keep and bear arms," said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Friday, December 19, 2008
A Marketplace Free From Government Interference
(NAPSI)-While the U.S. must fight any number of battles in order to protect its people and its shores, the nation is currently involved in one where the two sides can't even agree on the rules.
It's all part of competing in a free marketplace. On a world stage, countries develop products for export, and other countries shop around and find the best price and supply to fit their national needs. And if one producing country can find a way to lower its prices, it can gain an important advantage.
That's the way it should work. But when it comes to steel-which the U.S. imports and exports-America is presently locking horns with China. That's because the Chinese government subsidizes the nation's steel companies, creating unfair advantage in an otherwise free marketplace. By covering some of the manufacturing costs, the Chinese government enables its stainless steel producers to charge less for its products.
What does this mean for American manufacturers? Consider that the total U.S. consumption of specialty steel decreased 11.5 percent between June 2007 and June 2008, but the percentage of foreign steel-known as the import penetration-actually increased from 35.6 percent to 39.9 percent. At the same time, U.S. steel exports dropped.
The primary increase stems from the importation of stainless steel sheet/strip, which has jumped 13.4 percent despite the fact that the nation's total consumption went down.
"Stainless steel imports of sheet and strip products continue to surge, even in the midst of a 10 percent decline in U.S. consumption," said Doug Kittenbrink, chairman of the Specialty Steel Industry of North America. "Currency manipulation and other subsidies are enabling Asian competitors to unfairly target our markets. We strongly believe it is time for the U.S. Congress to address the issue of China currency manipulation."
Many Americans concerned about the country's economy-as well as their own-are calling on the new Congress to enact legislation to help level the playing field for the nation's steel manufacturers. You can reach your senators at www.senate.gov and your representatives at www.house.gov. For additional information, visit www.ssina.com.
Steel may be considered the fabric of America, but much of it is coming from overseas.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
It's all part of competing in a free marketplace. On a world stage, countries develop products for export, and other countries shop around and find the best price and supply to fit their national needs. And if one producing country can find a way to lower its prices, it can gain an important advantage.
That's the way it should work. But when it comes to steel-which the U.S. imports and exports-America is presently locking horns with China. That's because the Chinese government subsidizes the nation's steel companies, creating unfair advantage in an otherwise free marketplace. By covering some of the manufacturing costs, the Chinese government enables its stainless steel producers to charge less for its products.
What does this mean for American manufacturers? Consider that the total U.S. consumption of specialty steel decreased 11.5 percent between June 2007 and June 2008, but the percentage of foreign steel-known as the import penetration-actually increased from 35.6 percent to 39.9 percent. At the same time, U.S. steel exports dropped.
The primary increase stems from the importation of stainless steel sheet/strip, which has jumped 13.4 percent despite the fact that the nation's total consumption went down.
"Stainless steel imports of sheet and strip products continue to surge, even in the midst of a 10 percent decline in U.S. consumption," said Doug Kittenbrink, chairman of the Specialty Steel Industry of North America. "Currency manipulation and other subsidies are enabling Asian competitors to unfairly target our markets. We strongly believe it is time for the U.S. Congress to address the issue of China currency manipulation."
Many Americans concerned about the country's economy-as well as their own-are calling on the new Congress to enact legislation to help level the playing field for the nation's steel manufacturers. You can reach your senators at www.senate.gov and your representatives at www.house.gov. For additional information, visit www.ssina.com.
Steel may be considered the fabric of America, but much of it is coming from overseas.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Is the Media to Blame for Making Economic Crisis Worse?
/PRNewswire/ -- An overwhelming 77 percent of Americans believe that the US media is making the economic situation worse by projecting fear into people's minds. The majority of those surveyed feel that the financial press, by focusing on and embellishing negative news, is damaging consumer confidence and damping investment, making a difficult situation much worse.
Richard L. Scheff, a national expert on corporate liability and white collar crime issues, warns media that they could potentially be exposed to liability despite apparent constitutional protections:
"Although statements by the media are protected by the First Amendment, the survey results demonstrate that the public believes that the press bears some responsibility for the lack of confidence in the economy. One would hope that these media would act less out of self-interest in these times of national crisis. I could see creative lawyers attempting to pierce constitutional protections by constructing theories of liability for losses they may allege were driven by irresponsible news releases," said Mr. Scheff, vice chairman and partner with Philadelphia-based law firm Montgomery McCracken Walker & Rhoads.
The US survey of 1000 adults was conducted by Opinion Research Corporation, on behalf of Park Lane Communications, and is statistically representative of the total U.S. population. The survey question asked was: "Do you think the financial press is making the economic crisis worse by projecting fear into people's minds?" While the overall response indicated that 77% of Americans answered YES, here are some highlights of note:
Household Incomes:
$25k - $35k - 79% answered YES
$35k - $50k - 88% answered YES
$50k - $75k - 76% answered YES
$75k - more - 78% answered YES
Demographics:
85% of young adults (18-24 yrs old) answered YES
77% of males and females alike answered YES
65% of blacks answered YES
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Richard L. Scheff, a national expert on corporate liability and white collar crime issues, warns media that they could potentially be exposed to liability despite apparent constitutional protections:
"Although statements by the media are protected by the First Amendment, the survey results demonstrate that the public believes that the press bears some responsibility for the lack of confidence in the economy. One would hope that these media would act less out of self-interest in these times of national crisis. I could see creative lawyers attempting to pierce constitutional protections by constructing theories of liability for losses they may allege were driven by irresponsible news releases," said Mr. Scheff, vice chairman and partner with Philadelphia-based law firm Montgomery McCracken Walker & Rhoads.
The US survey of 1000 adults was conducted by Opinion Research Corporation, on behalf of Park Lane Communications, and is statistically representative of the total U.S. population. The survey question asked was: "Do you think the financial press is making the economic crisis worse by projecting fear into people's minds?" While the overall response indicated that 77% of Americans answered YES, here are some highlights of note:
Household Incomes:
$25k - $35k - 79% answered YES
$35k - $50k - 88% answered YES
$50k - $75k - 76% answered YES
$75k - more - 78% answered YES
Demographics:
85% of young adults (18-24 yrs old) answered YES
77% of males and females alike answered YES
65% of blacks answered YES
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Saturday, January 12, 2008
China, lead and coal mines
I've talked toxic about this before... the number of products coming from China laden with lead. Seeing all of the recalls for products I'm well aware of how many recalls include the manufacturing location of China. It's not just lead paint, it's also defective or below standard products.
In my toxic note on the subject I tossed out the possibility that they were out to get us... Who needs nuclear weapons when you can poison the kids and destroy the economy? Destroy the economy you say??? It's killing some of these companies to have to recall all the toys and other products.
Today a news story floated across my screen (posted below) that stated China had the worst record in the world for deaths in coal mines. I had thought all the lead based paints on toys and products from China might be happening due to the low cost of paint (maybe they bought all our rejects) or, as said earlier, a desire to cripple the U.S.
Now I'm thinking this through a little deeper. I know they have a large population in China. Maybe human life doesn't have a high enough value in China (by my standards).
All those people who are involved in painting our lead covered toys are being exposed on a much higher level than our kids. Expendable? Lower caste? Lead soaked brains make happy drones?
If they didn't make so many of our products it would be easier to boycott China-made. But that begs a bigger question. If we're not buying then where do the factory workers in China go? If life is bad for them now, and it must be horrific if they're breathing and touching lead all day, then what would it be like on the streets?
I think we need to toughen up our standards and figure out a way to enforce them. Big money involved in enforcement.
See how easy it is to get off on a tangent? I start writing about life and end up on enforcing regulations.
It would be interesting to do some comparative stats between life in America vs. life in China. Quality, life expectancy and other comparisons could tell an interesting story. Maybe I'll add that to my list of things to do someday.
Here's the story:
China's coal mines kill 3,786 in 2007
BEIJING - Accidents in China's notoriously dangerous coal mines killed nearly 3,800 people last year, state media reported Saturday — a toll that is a marked improvement from previous years, but still leaves China's mines the world's deadliest.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080112/ap_on_re_as/china_deadly_mines
In my toxic note on the subject I tossed out the possibility that they were out to get us... Who needs nuclear weapons when you can poison the kids and destroy the economy? Destroy the economy you say??? It's killing some of these companies to have to recall all the toys and other products.
Today a news story floated across my screen (posted below) that stated China had the worst record in the world for deaths in coal mines. I had thought all the lead based paints on toys and products from China might be happening due to the low cost of paint (maybe they bought all our rejects) or, as said earlier, a desire to cripple the U.S.
Now I'm thinking this through a little deeper. I know they have a large population in China. Maybe human life doesn't have a high enough value in China (by my standards).
All those people who are involved in painting our lead covered toys are being exposed on a much higher level than our kids. Expendable? Lower caste? Lead soaked brains make happy drones?
If they didn't make so many of our products it would be easier to boycott China-made. But that begs a bigger question. If we're not buying then where do the factory workers in China go? If life is bad for them now, and it must be horrific if they're breathing and touching lead all day, then what would it be like on the streets?
I think we need to toughen up our standards and figure out a way to enforce them. Big money involved in enforcement.
See how easy it is to get off on a tangent? I start writing about life and end up on enforcing regulations.
It would be interesting to do some comparative stats between life in America vs. life in China. Quality, life expectancy and other comparisons could tell an interesting story. Maybe I'll add that to my list of things to do someday.
Here's the story:
China's coal mines kill 3,786 in 2007
BEIJING - Accidents in China's notoriously dangerous coal mines killed nearly 3,800 people last year, state media reported Saturday — a toll that is a marked improvement from previous years, but still leaves China's mines the world's deadliest.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080112/ap_on_re_as/china_deadly_mines
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
