Indians in Privatisation Strike
From BBC News:Millions of workers in India have held a nationwide strike in protest at government plans to privatise state-owned businesses. The one-day stoppage severely affected the banking, transport, insurance and mining sectors, and brought Calcutta to a virtual standstill as protesters marched through the streets...The strike was called by trade unions including the All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC), Centre for Indian Trade Unions (CITU) and the Hind Mazdoor Sabha, who claimed about 40 million workers were participating in the walk-out....The government's privatisation plans aim to raise 132 billion rupees ($2.75bn) by selling off state-run companies in the year ending March 2004...."We want a complete halt to privatisation and other economic policies that favour only the rich," said Swadesh Dev Roye, leader of the National United Forum, an umbrella group of labour unions in state-run oil companies....The government has said labour reforms are needed to allow Indian industry to compete with countries such as China. And it claims privatisation is needed to bridge its increasing fiscal deficit. [21 May 2003]
Why?
In today's USA Today:Smarting from criticism it has been caught flat-footed in postwar Iraq, the Bush administration is set to ask the U.N. to lift sanctions there and create a fund to disburse Iraqi oil revenue. ["US to ask UN to end Iraq sanctions"]
The first question is: why? Given that the U.S. unilaterally went against the Security Council when it invaded Iraq, why is it going the the U.N. now? To make "Old Europe" happy?
As early as Wednesday, the U.S. will ask the United Nations Security Council to approve a resolution ending all trade and economic sanctions imposed on Iraq after it invaded Kuwait in 1990. The resolution calls for establishment of a reconstruction fund at Iraq's central bank to collect oil revenue. Occupying U.S. and British authorities, consulting an interim Iraqi administration, would have power over spending.
The article makes no mention on why the so-called United Nations Security Council has not dropped the sanctions already. Clearly, the fate of Iraq is not the Security Council's main concern--hampering U.S. efforts to establish an orderly society an Iraq is. After all, if the U.S. succeeds in establishing peace in Iraq--by acting against the whims of the U.N. what does this say about the UN? (The answer, of course, is obvious--the UN is evil.)
The real question is: why does the U.S. play along in propping up the U.N. farce? Appeasement masquerading behind "diplomacy"?
WorldCom: The Price of Dishonesty in a Mixed Economy
I am not sure I agree with the entire USA Today editorial, but I do agree with this point:WorldCom plans to emerge from bankruptcy protection this fall with a new name -- MCI -- and most of its debts wiped off the books. Rival telecommunication companies say that will give WorldCom a substantial advantage over them, since they still have to cover heavy debt burdens when setting prices. ["$500 million Wrist Slap"]
Cost Whom?
A headline for an ABC article reads "Dividend Tax Cut Cost More Than Thought."Message to ABC News: Tax cuts save taxpayers money.
Don’t Believe What You Read in the New York Times
Capitalism Magazine readers should be aware of New York Times writer "Jayson Blair, a 27-year-old reporter, had lifted quotes, made up scenes and faked interviews--all in the pages of the most powerful newspaper in the world." Here is what Blair had to say:I can't say anything other than the fact that I feel a range of emotions including guilt, shame, sadness, betrayal, freedom and appreciation for those who have stood by me, been tough on me, and have taken the time to understand that there is a deeper story and not to believe everything they read in the newspapers. [Emphasis added, Times Bomb, May 26, 2003]
(Especially when Jayson writes them under the editorial supervision of the Executive Editor for the New York Times?)
The deeper story is that Jayson got away with his deception, in part, because he was not white:
"Our paper has a commitment to diversity and by all accounts [Blair] appeared to be a promising young minority reporter," Mr. [Howell] Raines said. "I believe in aggressively providing hiring and career opportunities for minorities." "Does that mean I personally favored Jayson?" he added, a moment later. "Not consciously. But you have a right to ask if I, as a white man from Alabama, with those convictions, gave him one chance too many by not stopping his appointment to the sniper team. When I look into my heart for the truth of that, the answer is yes." [NY Times]
This of course is pure racism; but, it is not called racism. This form of racism is called racial "diversity"--at the expense of real diversity, i.e. diversity of ideas.
What of the executive editor--Howell Raines--who let Blair get away with his deception? He still runs the operation of the so-called "newspaper of record", but accepts "full responsibility" for his actions. Raine's excuse? He let Jayson get by with his deceptions for so long because Jayson is black and he Raines felt "guilt" as a white man from Alabama.
In other words I feel sorry, so let's forget the facts about what I actually did. That is like saying, I am sorry for killing your wife, but I don't think I should face the death penalty because I feel bad about it. (Maybe he is related to CNN's Eason Jordan.)
The message from all this is: all sins are forgiven so long as you support the Leftist dream of "diversity"--even if the price is truth and integrity.
Thatcher Praises Bush, Blair, and Capitalists and Condemns the French, UN, and Terrorists
Speaking in New York, former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher thundered:For years, many governments played down the threats of Islamic revolution, turned a blind eye to international terrorism and accepted the development of weaponry of mass destruction. Indeed, some politicians were happy to go further, collaborating with the self-proclaimed enemies of the West for their own short-term gain -- but enough about the French. So deep had the rot set in that the UN security council itself was paralysed.
...Our own Prime Minister was staunch and our forces were superb. But, above, all, it is President Bush who deserves the credit for victory.
...[Ronald Reagan and I] knew, too, what did not work, namely socialism in every shape or form. Nowadays socialism is more often dressed up as environmentalism, feminism, or international concern for human rights. All sound good in the abstract. But scratch the surface and you will as likely as not discover anti-capitalism, patronising and distorting quotas, and intrusions upon the sovereignty and democracy of nations.
...There are too many people who imagine that there is something sophisticated about always believing the best of those who hate your country, and the worst of those who defend it." ["Thatcher's back and gunning for the French", Times Online, May 15, 2003]
State of Denial
From Cox and Forkum:
For hundreds of more great political cartoons check out their new book
Buried Treasure
From Cox and Forkum:
We Have a Terrorist Problem Here…
The Saudi Arab News has an editorial titled "The Enemy Within" which declares:We have to face up to the fact that we have a terrorist problem here. Last week's Interior Ministry announcement that 19 Al-Qaeda members, 17 of them Saudis, had planned terrorist attacks in the country and were being hunted was a wake-up call -- particularly to those who steadfastly refuse to accept that individual Saudis or Muslims could ever do anything evil, who still cling to the fantasy that Sept. 11 and all the other attacks laid at the doors of terrorists who happen to be Arab or Muslim were in fact the work of the Israelis or the CIA. For too long we have ignored the truth. We did not want to admit that Saudis were involved in Sept. 11. We can no longer ignore that we have a nest of vipers here, hoping that by doing so they will go away. They will not. They are our problem and we all their targets now... [May 14, 2003]
Blair’s Even Handedness
From Cox and Forkum:
NAACP mourns: Hispanics, Blacks ruled responsible for their own behavior
NEW YORK--A federal jury yesterday ruled that 45 gun manufacturers and distributors are not responsible for violence in black and Hispanic neighborhoods.This comes as a blow to the NAACP, which filed the lawsuit against gun manufacturers based on its long-standing belief that all blacks and Hispanics are mindless puppets of "big business" incapable of making their own decisions.The NAACP is now expected to begin looking for some other group of large corporations to blame (outside of Hollywood) for various societal ills.Meanwhile, many blacks and Hispanics are still wondering why the NAACP considers itself qualified to speak on their behalf.Economy woes: Declined demand for Klingon translators
PORTLAND--Multnomah County officials announced today that they are no longer looking to employ Klingon interpreters. "Klingon" was removed from the list of 55 languages that incoming patients at the county mental health office might be expected to speak.First the dot-com crash, and now this. Just what is a warp-core engineer to do?
Ka 'Pla!
Byrd Yapping
From Cox and Forkum:
Related: Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd, Ex-Klansman.
UN vs. Freedom, Once Again
Taiwan, unlike communist China, has been forthright about the infections that have arisen within its borders and eager to notify the international community, as well as to receive assistance. For a period in early April, the WHO was actually refusing to accept SARS numbers from the democratic island nation. The communists insisted that Taiwan could submit numbers to their regime, which would pass them on to the WHO--more than a bit cheeky, coming from the very regime whose secrecy is largely to blame for the virus's spread. When the WHO finally relented and accepted Taiwan's numbers--and sent two doctors to the scene--it did so under the designation, "Taiwan, province of China." ... When Taiwan was admitted to the World Trade Organization, it came in, after much wrangling, as the "Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, and Matsu." Too many countries are ready to kowtow to Beijing's strong-arming when it comes to any move that might confer international legitimacy on Taiwan's morally legitimate claim to sovereignty.... The nations that have opposed Taiwan are taking sides against a free nation facing down a tyranny. [New York Sun, 5/9/03]
The WHO is a UN agency.
Regulation: It’s Force vs. Mind
Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc. named Donald R. Keough and Thomas S. Murphy to its board of directors to comply with proposed corporate governance rules that the billionaire investor has criticized. ... Mr. Buffett has resisted changes to his board--which includes his wife, son, investing partner for the last four decades, and two executives with business ties to the company--and argued outside directors aren't a requirement for good corporate governance, a cause he's led since 1993. By naming two friends, he may not have hanged that view, some governance experts said.
"It's Berkshire's take on independence," said the senior vice president of Institutional Shareholder Services, Patrick McGurn, which advises investors on board decisions. "They may meet the letter of the law, but they don't meet the spirit of the law." [New York Sun, 5/9/03]
That is because the spirit of that law is statist. (Hat Tip: Paul Blair)
Government Waste
I guess I touched a nerve with my letter to the Sun last week, because J.P. Avlon took a few swipes at my position in his column last Thursday:Mayor La Guardia... saw nothing incompatible with showing compassion for ordinary New Yorkers and mercilessly cutting ineffective bureaucrats--eliminating redundancies, and increasing efficiency....One of the cardinal rules of government leadership is that every crisis contains an opportunity. Slashing the ranks of government workers outright during a time of multi-billion dollar surpluses would have provided a perfect example of E.L. Doctrow's edged quip that "The philosophical conservative is someone willing to pay the price of other people's suffering for his principles." [New York Sun, 5/1/03]
This last quip irked me the most, because it catches people by relying on the unfairness of sacrificing some people for others, when in fact it is defending sacrificing some people for others. I wrote a letter, which I figured wouldn't be printed as it was several days late--but I wanted to see if I could take on this kind of pragmatism in a compressed space.
Today the Sun printed my letter but omitted my conclusion (which I put in square brackets below):
J.P. Avlon (5/1) argues that the government can live within its means, if only it cuts waste, fraud and abuse. I've heard this refrain all my life, yet government has only grown bigger. Waste persists for a reason: If we allow the state to rob Peter to pay Paul, we can hardly be surprised when those doing the job turn out to be dishonest.
Suppose waste magically disappeared and the state conferred unearned benefits only on the "truly needy." The savings would soon vanish, for important needs would still be going unmet. There is always another vagrant to be fed or housed, another sick person to be cared for, another school to be built, another disease to be cured.
In no era can the state avoid telling needy people that it will not help them, for no budget can ever be big enough to satisfy all needs. [Thus it is absurd to insist, as Mr. Avlon does, that cutting government in good times is impossible. The challenge is the same in good times as in bad: repudiating the irrational "principle" that some must pay the price for the suffering of others--that a need is an entitlement. Philosophical ideas, not "bad times," are the true cause of budget shortfalls.] [New York Sun, 5/8/03]
The Sun also changed "vagrant" to "person."
When Will Colin Powell Be a Thing of the Past?
US Secretary of State Colin Powell has said that trans-Atlantic divisions over the US-led war on Iraq were a thing of the past and the United Nations would play a vital role in that country's future....Most of Powell's speech went to praising ties between the United States and the EU and within the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. "We are driven forward by common values," he said, "and when we disagree it is usually over means rather than the ends." [Agence France-Presse, 5/7/03]
Is he saying that because he thinks it's true--in which case he doesn't understand that the fundamental value of America is freedom and that of Europe isn't--or because his wish for diplomatic solutions doesn't allow him to say anything else?
Sure, Iraq Has Nothing to Do With Terrorism
American soldiers from MET Alpha, the "mobile exploitation team" that has been searching for nuclear, biological and chemical weapons in Iraq for the past three months, found maps featuring terrorist strikes against Israel dating to 1991....Team members floated out of the room a perfect mock-up of the Knesset, the Israeli Parliament, as well as mock-ups of downtown Jerusalem and official Israeli buildings in very fine detail. They also collected a satellite picture of Dimona, Israel's nuclear complex....Written in Arabic and dated May 20, 2001, the memo from the Iraqi intelligence station chief in an African country described an offer by a "holy warrior" to sell uranium and other nuclear material. The bid was rejected, the memo states, because of the United Nations "sanctions situation." But the station chief wrote that the source was eager to provide similar help at a more convenient time. [New York Times, 5/7/03]
And then there's this:
With the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq, the flow of millions of dollars that the Iraqi leader sent to support the Palestinian intifada has abruptly ended. [Independent, 5/7/03]
Taranto: "This gives the lie to the claim that Saddam's regime had nothing to do with terrorism--except to those who believe it isn't terrorism if the victims are only Jews. "