The public-private partnership is the second-largest water production DBO contract in the United States.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
FW: Who controls our water?
Stock Symbol - Veolia Environment - VE - http://finance.aol.com/lookup/veolia/usa
Florida
Local company Utilities, Inc. of Florida National parent company Utilities, Inc.
610.337.1000 (Valley Forge, PA) jswope@ugi.com www.ugicorp.com/Multinational parent company American International Group (AIG) Contract status: May 2005 Utilities Inc. no longer privately owned but publicly traded corporation acquisitioned by AIG (for more information go to www.citizen.org/cmep/water/general/majorwater/aig)
Tampa, Florida
Local company N/A National parent company United Water Resources
www.unitedwater.comMultinational parent company Suez
Tampa (St. Petersburg and New Port Richey), Florida
Local company Tampa Bay Water Surface Water Treatment System National parent company Veolia Water North America
800.522.4774 (Houston, Texas); general.information@veoliawaterna.com; www.veoliawaterna.comMultinational parent company Veolia Environnement Contract type: 15 year agreement; design, construct and operate
Date of privatization: 2000
Number of people served: 1500000
Veolia, aka Vivendi --
...risk that Veolia Environnement may incur environmental liability in connection with its past, present and future operations, and the risks related to Veolia Environnement's relationship with Vivendi Universal...
Vivendi, as Veolia, gains access to Tampa's water:
April, 2007
The Veolia Water North America - South LLC (Veolia Water) project will nearly double capacity at the Tampa Bay Water Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant from 72 million-gallons-per-day (MGD) to 120 MGD. Veolia Water designed, built and now operates what will be the regional water authority's largest treatment facility and among the world's most technologically sophisticated, having led a team of companies first selected in 2000. The contract amendment amounting to $158.4 million over its term was unanimously approved by Tampa Bay Water's board of directors, making the Brandon, Fla., treatment facility the nation's largest DBO project, sharing the honor with Seattle Public Utilities' 120-MGD Tolt Treatment Facility. The project also reunites Veolia Water with Camp Dresser & McKee, the project's design engineer of record. Tampa Bay Water provides wholesale water to the public utility systems of Hillsborough, Pasco and Pinellas counties as well as the cities of New Port Richey, St. Petersburg and Tampa. Veolia Water North America - South, LLC, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Veolia Water North America, providing services to more than 14 million people in approximately 600 communities. The company is part of Veolia Water, the No. 1 water company in the world, serving more than 108 million customers. Veolia Water is the water division of Veolia Environnement
After evaluating several proposals, the water authority selected the Veolia Water North America (formerly USFilter Operating Services, Inc.) team of Tampa-based general contractor The Clark Construction Group, engineer Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. (CDM) of Sarasota, Fla., and, of course, the water treatment system and service provider and project leader Veolia. The $144 million, 15-year agreement with an optional 5-year renewal is one of the largest water treatment DBO contracts in the United States.Tampa Bay Water is Florida's largest public wholesale water supplier, drawing approximately 632,000 cubic meters/day of water from numerous surface water sources and serving 1.5 million customers.... the authority developed a $609 million Master Water Plan to address new water sources. The first phase ....concentrates on surface water. Looking ...the authority entered into a 15-year design-build-operate (DBO) agreement with a team led by Veolia Water for a 250,000 cubic meters/day regional surface water treatment plant. As part of the March 2000 agreement, Veolia Water carried out the design and construction of the plant and today provides for its day-to-day operation.Tampa Bay Water has selected Veolia Water, through its American subsidiary, Veolia Water North America – South LLC, for the project extension (design, build, operate) of its regional surface water treatment plant, Brandon, in Florida, which will nearly double its capacity, from 72 million-gallons-per-day (MGD) to 120 MGD. Planned completion and acceptance of the facility is scheduled for the end of 2010 at the latest, the date when plant operation will commence for a period of 13 years. The contract is worth US$158,4million" We are delighted that Tampa Bay Water has renewed its confidence in the company by awarding us with the capacity extension of this big plant. "The Brandon treatment plant blends a mixture of water from the Alafia River, the Tampa Bypass Canal, the Hillsborough River and the C.W. Bill Young Regional Reservoir through a 72-inch diameter pipeline to the plant. Upgrades to the plant are expected to be finished in 2010, with the current contract with Veolia in place through 2023. It will directly serve Hillsborough, Pasco and Pinellas counties as well as the cities of New Port Richey, St. Petersburg and Tampa.
Veolia is the top supplier of water in the world with more than 108 million customers. It is a division of Veolia Environnement (NYSE: VE) with revenues of $38.7 billion in 2006.
Tampa Bay Water selected Veolia Water of North America as the private partner. The partnership arrangement commits Tampa Bay Water to expand surface water capacity by 120 million gallons a day (MGD). The project involves two design-build phases. The first phase involves developing 97 MGD between 1998 and 2007 at a cost of $85 million. This has already been accomplished. The second phase involves developing an additional 25 MGD between 2006 and 2011 at a cost of $80 million.
Water privatization and harm, etc:
- Great Britain's environmental agency rated Great Britain's environmental agency rated Vivendi Vivendi one of top 5 one of top 5 polluters.
- Argentina faulted Vivendi for poor performance and poor water Argentina faulted Vivendi for poor performance and poor water quality in quality in Tucuman Tucuman. . Vivendi Vivendi took Argentina to international dispute took Argentina to international dispute center under bilateral agreement with France claiming Argentina center under bilateral agreement with France claiming Argentina had had not fulfilled its obligations. not fulfilled its obligations.
- In New Orleans, US Filter subsidiary PSG had contract with city. In New Orleans, US Filter subsidiary PSG had contract with city. In In July 2001 PSG diverted raw sewage into Mississippi River for two July 2001 PSG diverted raw sewage into Mississippi River for two hours after electrical fire.
- Suez/ United Water, Vivendi/ US Filter, RWE/Thames (the German/ Suez/ United Water, Vivendi/ US Filter, RWE/Thames (the German/British conglomerate) were major contenders to take over Ne British conglomerate) were major contenders to take over New w Orleans water system.
Veolia Environnement operates hundreds of private sector water projects in almost 50 countries around the world, reaching an estimated 110 million people. Until 2002, Veolia, formerly known as Vivendi Environnement, was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Vivendi Universal... But whatever distance the water company manages to put between itself and Vivendi in the eyes of the financial community, the company can't distance itself from its record—a record reflecting a corporation that views water not as a right or a necessity of life, but as an opportunity for monopoly profits. While Veolia's focus remains developed urban markets in Europe, the US, and Asia, the corporation is hedging its bets with increasingly substantive roles in service delivery in the developing world, often in collusion with the World Bank.Social organizations define water as a public good that should be managed by national governments, but international finance organizations such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) say that only private sector investment — to the tune of US$50 billion a year — can guarantee universal water access in Latin America.In the 1990s... many Latin American and Caribbean countries passed their water sources, drinking water services and bottled water supply over to private multinational water companies, such as French companies Vivendi and Suez and their many subsidiaries, as well as large food and beverage corporations such as Nestlé, Danone, Coca-Cola and PepsiCo.
In all cases, a common scheme was followed. It began with the self-destruction of the state-run water companies in order to justify low-cost privatizations.
Later came an increase in water service fees, the breach of concession contract because of a lack of investment, ending with the reselling of the companies, indebted and obsolete, back to the governments that granted the concessions.
After the Compañía de Aguas, a subsidiary of Vivendi, ran the Aqueducts and Sewer System Authority of Puerto Rico from 1995 to 2001, it left a legacy of operational and maintenance failures in the drinking water and sewage treatment plants.
The company's successor, another French company, Ondeo, a Suez subsidiary, did no better, and in 2004 the government cancelled the contract and transferred the company to public hands.Nestlé and French company Danone already dominate the bottled water business in Mexico, Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay.There are a handful of major international private water companies, but two French multinational corporations dominate the sector: Vivendi SA (soon to be called Veolia Environnement) and Suez Lyonnaise des Eaux (soon to be called Ondeo). These two companies own or have interests in water projects in more than 120 countries and each by their own claims provide water to around 100 million people.
Despite Vivendi's dominant position in water privatization, water activities are a small part of the larger company, Vivendi Universal, which was created in December 2000 when it merged with the Seagram Company to form a global media and telecommunications company. The total annual revenue from the interlocking subsidiaries of Vivendi in 2000 exceeded $37 billion, of which more than 25 percent came from the water business.4
Vivendi's water division - Vivendi Water - was formed from Vivendi Water Systems, Compagnie Generale des Eaux and US Filter .
BRIBERY -
... in July 2001, Alain Maetz, a senior manager in Vivendi's water division, was convicted for bribery and received a prison sentence of one year and eight months with conditional discharge. Judges said that Mr. Maetz had paid a bribe of ITL 25m (about £8,000) to Mr. De Carolis, the president of Milan city council, who expected to receive up to ITL 200m (over £64,000) to favour OTV, a subsidiary of Vivendi) in the bidding procedure for the contract for a wastewater treatment plant in the south of Milan.
In July 1997, a junior French minister Jean-Michel Boucheron was jailed for two years, with a further two suspended, and fined one million francs (£94,800) for taking bribes from companies bidding in public tenders. Boucheron reportedly had received fees of 327,000 francs (£31,000) for a fictitious job by Compagnie Generale des Eaux (Vivendi) in exchange for giving the utility a water distribution contract in Angouleme.
Hingham and Hull, Massachusetts
Massachusetts-American, an American Water Works subsidiary, more than doubled water rates over a five-year period, claiming the increase was needed to build a new water treatment facility. There is evidence, however, that the company inflated the costs of the new facility to increase its profits.(2)
Huber Heights, Ohio
In 1993, American Water Works purchased Ohio Suburban Water, a small outfit that provided water for 40,000 customers in Huber Heights and parts of the Mad River Township. The city opposed the sale, concerned that the company would raise rates and extend service to areas beyond the city limits without annexation, thus impairing the city's ability to grow. The city's fears soon materialized – the company increased its rates by 30 percent. At the same time the company moved to contract with Industrial Water to deliver up to 2 million gallons of Huber Heights' water a day to the Wiley Industrial Park, located outside the city.(2)
Pekin, Illinois
In 1982, Illinois-American, another subsidiary of American Water Works, acquired Pekin's water system from a local private owner. In the 18 years that followed, rates increased by 204 percent. At the same time, the company failed to keep infrastructure up-to-date. The company's behavior negatively impacted the city's economic growth and added to its expenses.(2)
One of the main arguments for privatization of water systems is that it will save municipalities millions of dollars. For example, the Mayor of Stockton, California, a proponent of privatization, claims that the city's 20-year, $600-million deal with OMI-Thames Water, which went into effect on August 1, 2003, will save the city as much as $97 million compared to continued public utility operation. Several studies suggest that this may not be true. A study by the Pacific Institute finds that Stockton stands to lose $1.7 million over the life of the deal.
Veolia:
Veolia Water has won a contract for the design, construction, operation and maintenance of a seawater desalination plant using reverse osmosis. The plant will be located at Campo de Dalías in the province of Almeria in southern Spain.The Campo de Dalías project is part of the national desalination plant program launched by the Spanish Ministry for the Environment through Acuamed, the public water agency responsible for the development of the plan.
Veolia Water Solutions & Technologies will be in charge of the process components, and Spanish companies Sando, Inypsa and Montajes Electricos Crescencio Perez will be responsible for the construction, civil engineering and management components. On completion, Veolia Water will operate the plant.
Veolia Water already has three major references: Ashkelon in Israel, (320,000 cubic meters/day), the world's biggest reverse osmosis desalination plant, which has been in operation since September 2005; Gold Coast in Queensland, Australia (delivery end-2008, 125,000 cubic meters/day), and Sur in Oman (delivery early 2009, 80,000 cubic meters/day). This new success confirms the company's position as world leader in seawater desalination.
The company has been built up on the rationale that there were significant synergies between supplying water equipment and operating water services.The equipment business benefited from a captive customer, while the operating services business benefited from in-house technologies
By the end of 2010, the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District and Veolia Environmental Services plan to open a 17-mile, $80 million methane pipeline from Muskego to the Jones Island Water Reclamation facility... Veolia is the private contracting firm that operates the MMSD Jones Island water treatment plant.http://www.polarisinstitute.org/files/rwe%20september%202005.pdf (search for veolia, starts around page 12)RWE acquired Thames Water and American Water ... Thames Water (now officially known as RWE Thames Water), based in the UK, has regularly topped that country's list of the worst polluters and annually forks out undreds of thousands of Pounds in fines to the British Environment Agency.
In Australia, for example, where the company is part of a consortium made up of Veolia Environment and Halliburton's Kellogg Brown and Root, Thames Water is involved with the problem (and odor) plagued privatization experiment in Adelaide. Thames has also come under pressure in Indonesia over poor water quality and raised rates.
RWE Thames Water may be looking to expand in these areas if it can limit its financial risk. If recent contracts for the construction of desalination plants in the US (Florida) and the UK are any indication, the company's technical expertise is expanding into new arenas.
RWE Thames has entered into a number of joint ventures with the world's two water giants, Suez and Veolia/Vivendi.
In 1995, Adelaide privatized its water services when it awarded United Water, a consortium of Vivendi (now Veolia Environment), Thames Water and Halliburton's Brouwn and Root, a $1.5 billion contract. United Water failed to deliver on many of the promises that were at the centre of its contract bid. While water prices quickly went up and jobs were cut by 33 percent, United Water began making excellent returns off of the project. Since the project began, United Water's profits have increased every year. In 1997, just over a year after winning the contract, the city was overwhelmed by a strong sewage smell. The odor remained for over three months and was eventually tracked to Adelaide's largest wastewater treatment plant. Equipment failures and a lack of monitoring allowed raw sewage to run directly into settling lagoons for six days while a gate was being repaired. The State Government eventually paid $72 million to upgrade the plant.
Other Vivendi recent news:
Friday, November 13, 2009
Happy 10th Anniversary of Glass-Steagall Repeal -- an email exchange.
------------------------
My Original Email
------------------------
On 10th Anniversary of Glass-Steagall Repeal, Watchdog Says Bailout “Almost Certainly” Will Result in Taxpayer Loss
The top oversight official for the $700 billion Wall Street bailout says the program will “almost certainly” result in a loss for US taxpayers. Special Inspector General Neil Barofsky also says he’s conducting sixty-five probes into possible fraud by bailout recipients. Barofsky’s comments came on the tenth anniversary of the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, a key deregulatory move widely seen as helping lead to the nation’s financial collapse. The repeal ended the separation of commercial and investment banking. In this clip from before the 1999 vote, Senator Byron Dorgan of South Dakota predicted how the repeal would be remembered on its tenth anniversary.
My Original Email
------------------------
On 10th Anniversary of Glass-Steagall Repeal, Watchdog Says Bailout “Almost Certainly” Will Result in Taxpayer Loss
The top oversight official for the $700 billion Wall Street bailout says the program will “almost certainly” result in a loss for US taxpayers. Special Inspector General Neil Barofsky also says he’s conducting sixty-five probes into possible fraud by bailout recipients. Barofsky’s comments came on the tenth anniversary of the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, a key deregulatory move widely seen as helping lead to the nation’s financial collapse. The repeal ended the separation of commercial and investment banking. In this clip from before the 1999 vote, Senator Byron Dorgan of South Dakota predicted how the repeal would be remembered on its tenth anniversary.
Sen. Byron Dorgan: “We are, with this piece of legislation, moving towards greater risk. We are almost certainly moving towards substantial new concentration and mergers in the financial services industry, that is almost certainly not in the interests of consumers. And we are deliberately and certainly, with this legislation, moving towards inheriting much greater risk in our financial services industries. And so, I come to the floor to say that I regret that I cannot support the legislation. I think we will, in ten years’ time, look back and say we should not have done that, because we forgot the lessons of the past.”
-------------------
His Response:
-------------------
His Response:
-------------------
There was a lot of controversy surrounding that decision back then.
Not everything that led to this crisis is because of that repeal.
Remember that the government propped up Fannie and Freddie and allowed people who cannot afford to buy a home, afford one.
If Fannie and Freddie don't exist, derivatives are not rated AAA that were not truly AAA and so banks and businesses aren't caught with these.
The financial picture would be different.
Many would say if Fannie and Freddie did not exist, many people couldn't afford a house. To that I say sorry. Save more while renting like the rest of us did.
-------------------
My Response:
-------------------
It's a very odd system really. Fannie and Freddie aside, I think our monetary system is tragically flawed. It works, and has worked for us well, but we've laxed regulations that used to control known flaws -- and today, I feel, those flaws have been exploited.
As we discussed already the Fractional Reserve system of Banking... some 95-97% of all money in "circulation" is commercial money created when consumers chose to take on debt.
Knowing this allows us to understand that basically all US currency is the Principal of a loan.
In circulation we have P but owe P + I
In order for citizens to acquire the money needed to pay the Interest in addition to the Principal more money must be injected to the system -- the ability to easily allow consumers to make payments on P+I owed is done by contributing to inflation.
The Federal Government can borrow from the Federal Reserve and add additional currency by giving public jobs to citizens, or consumers themselves can take on loans from the bank, resulting in the creation of commercial money -- regardless, this new money represents only the Principal of a new loan... adding again to the total P + I collectively owed creating the need for even more inflation.
Unless we wish to allow defaults on loans, foreclosures, bankruptcies and a general loss to the public at large -- a self perpetuating loss of consumer confidence to borrow and spend -- we must maintain an ever growing injection of debt to give us the ability to pay the P + I on our debt money. Again, we can either increase government spending (through tax and spend, or Federal Reserve borrowing) or increase the available commercial money by an increase in consumer loans.
Those who disagree with idea of government borrowing and taxing in order to spend are likely to promote consumer borrowing -- which we saw first through massive credit programs which allowed many a "new" car, followed by the ease of obtaining a mortgage and the housing boom -- in order to inject more currency into circulation.
All of this commercial money created through this boom of consumer debt had made so much money available it had been easy for consumers to maintain their payments of P+I owed. More money in turn was available to these businesses to spend on goods and services which provide jobs... more money too was borrowed by businesses because there wasn't some percieved near-future inability to pay back these debts... . homeowners gained lots of equity in the housing boom as well, allowing for even more loans.. . you know, this self perpetuating cycle of success through the creation of debt.
But, something happened.
Even though so much more money was created, it all wasn't being kept in circulation. Much of the Interest on these loans is kept as profit, it isn't all spent -- it is saved and invested and otherwise kept out of circulation. Also, during the boom years, we saw such a vast majority of the record profits going very disproportionately to the already wealthy -- not distributed amongst those who need it to pay the debts they owe.
Basically, not enough money was made available to those who took the loans. I think there are a couple ways to correct this -- as I suggest above, we could be distributing the profits a bit more evenly to workers as well as owners/CEOs/etc, or we could tax those who benefit most from the current system and allow the government to create public jobs (not simply award contracts to the largest players in the industry if we can avoid it -- much would be lost on its long trickle down to those at the bottom of the economic ladder.) -- either way would put more money in the hands of consumers and minimize loan defaults, bankruptcies, and the loss of confidence that results in a self perpetuating cycle of failure.
I do have a point to this rambling -- it's very likely that, while you (and many others) would blame Fannie and Freddie, consumer borrowing was something heavily promoted in order to keep the monetary system from collapsing earlier.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Roots of Revolution in a global shift of paradigms
"More than 29,000 people in 27 countries were questioned. In only two countries, the United States and Pakistan, did more than one in five people feel that capitalism works well as it stands."
"only 11% of those questioned across 27 countries said" capitalism was working well.
"23% of those who responded - feel it is fatally flawed."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8347409.stm
--------------
People the world over are well aware of the problems that arise from free market capitalism. Even those of us in the western world are being forced to accept this reality. The people should now know that the hope the world once saw in Obama was false -- this is clearly expressed by the words of Obama himself:
"only 11% of those questioned across 27 countries said" capitalism was working well.
"23% of those who responded - feel it is fatally flawed."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8347409.stm
--------------
People the world over are well aware of the problems that arise from free market capitalism. Even those of us in the western world are being forced to accept this reality. The people should now know that the hope the world once saw in Obama was false -- this is clearly expressed by the words of Obama himself:
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: "I fundamentally disagree with their view that the free market is the source of all ills. "
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/9/28/nearly_200_arrested_as_police_unleash
This shift in attitudes towards capitalism is only going to gain momentum as the recession continues, unemployment rises, and the corpo-political corruption is exposed more and more.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Commission on Presidential Debates (a threat to democracy)
"...was established in 1987 by the Democratic and Republican parties to establish the way that presidential election debates are run between candidates for President of the United States who garner at least 15% support across five national polls. The Commission is a non-profit, 501(c)(3) entity as defined by Federal US tax laws, whose debates are sponsored by private contributions from foundations and corporations.
The Commission sponsors and produces debates for the United States presidential and vice presidential candidates and undertakes research and educational activities relating to the debates. The organization, which is a nonprofit, bi-partisan corporation, has sponsored each of the presidential debates held since 1988. The Commission has moderated the 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004 and 2008 debates. Prior to this, the League of Women Voters moderated the 1976, 1980, 1984 debates.
The Commission is headed by Frank Fahrenkopf*, a former head of the Republican National Committee, and Paul Kirk**, a former head of the Democratic National Committee."
"In 1988, the League of Women Voters withdrew its sponsorship of the presidential debates after the George H.W. Bush and Michael Dukakis campaigns secretly agreed to a "memorandum of understanding" that would decide which candidates could participate in the debates, which individuals would be panelists (and therefore able to ask questions), and the height of the podiums. The League rejected the demands and released a statement saying that they were withdrawing support for the debates because "the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter."[4]
Christopher Hitchens speaking at a September, 2000 third party protest at the Commission's headquarters.At a press conference announcing the commission's creation, Fahrenkopf said that the commission was not likely to include third-party candidates in debates, and Kirk said he personally believed they should be excluded from the debates."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_on_Presidential_Debates
The Commission sponsors and produces debates for the United States presidential and vice presidential candidates and undertakes research and educational activities relating to the debates. The organization, which is a nonprofit, bi-partisan corporation, has sponsored each of the presidential debates held since 1988. The Commission has moderated the 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004 and 2008 debates. Prior to this, the League of Women Voters moderated the 1976, 1980, 1984 debates.
The Commission is headed by Frank Fahrenkopf*, a former head of the Republican National Committee, and Paul Kirk**, a former head of the Democratic National Committee."
"In 1988, the League of Women Voters withdrew its sponsorship of the presidential debates after the George H.W. Bush and Michael Dukakis campaigns secretly agreed to a "memorandum of understanding" that would decide which candidates could participate in the debates, which individuals would be panelists (and therefore able to ask questions), and the height of the podiums. The League rejected the demands and released a statement saying that they were withdrawing support for the debates because "the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter."[4]
Christopher Hitchens speaking at a September, 2000 third party protest at the Commission's headquarters.At a press conference announcing the commission's creation, Fahrenkopf said that the commission was not likely to include third-party candidates in debates, and Kirk said he personally believed they should be excluded from the debates."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_on_Presidential_Debates
* Frank Fahrenkopf, Jr is currently is president and CEO of the American Gaming Association, the national trade association for the commercial casino industry.
** Paul Grattan Kirk, Jr - From 1985 to 1989, he served as chairman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC). On September 24, 2009, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick appointed Kirk to fill the vacant seat of the late U.S. Senator Edward M. Kennedy; the term expires when a special election, held on January 19, 2010, is concluded
** Paul Grattan Kirk, Jr - From 1985 to 1989, he served as chairman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC). On September 24, 2009, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick appointed Kirk to fill the vacant seat of the late U.S. Senator Edward M. Kennedy; the term expires when a special election, held on January 19, 2010, is concluded
Friday, October 30, 2009
Hope, Change and Obama
Personally, I feel too many bought into this mascot representing "hope" because they cannot stir it up from within themselves. Change starts with us -- don't expect it to come from Obama.
We've been involved in the mid east for a long long time. We installed Saddam Hussein after we helped overthrow a democratically elected government -- much like we tried to do in Venezuela -- and helped end a blooming democracy.. remember: "If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier" -- and oftentimes it's easier to deal with a corrupt dictator that'll side with wealth than to actually convince a well educated democratic public.
Obama dances to the same drums of war and songs of the US dominated multinational corporations. He's a kinder, gentler, face on the same US dominance and western led globalization. We shouldn't expect a whole lot from him.
The game is stacked against the public. There is a state sanctioned 2 party system that makes it next to impossible for 3rd party candidates to be heard -- they cannot even get into the debates unless welcomed by the two dominant parties. We are being played by the two party duopoly by some twisted good-cop/bad-cop scheme. They blatantly run things into the ground under the Republicans allowing everyone to see the evil, and then clean things up with their 'good' democrat and continue the same policies, hoping no one will notice.
Expecting change from Obama is like expecting Single Payer Healthcare Reform, or real energy independence through mandated solar installations -- it's not going to happen.
When you borrow from Banks...
... you contribute to inflation.
When you sign for a loan, the bank creates money-- yes, CREATES -- to cover your loan amount, adding to the pool of currency and contributing to inflation.
Through Fractional Reserve Banking a bank can theoretically take $10 million dollars and turn it into $90 million in this 'commercial' monopoly money. This fact coupled with the fact that our government BORROWS from the Federal Reserve, at interest, proves that all money is debt money.
All debt is expected to be paid back -- plus interest.
Through Fractional Reserve Banking a bank can theoretically take $10 million dollars and turn it into $90 million in this 'commercial' monopoly money. This fact coupled with the fact that our government BORROWS from the Federal Reserve, at interest, proves that all money is debt money.
All debt is expected to be paid back -- plus interest.
If there is $X in 'circulation' we collectively owe back $X + (X*interest rate) -- but with only $X in circulation we can never pay it back.
More money must be borrowed from the Fed to cover interest... . and so the cycle continues.
The inability to pay off debts amounts to indentured servitude -- just a kinder term for Slavery.
Learn more about Fractional Reserve Banking at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional-reserve_banking
More money must be borrowed from the Fed to cover interest... . and so the cycle continues.
The inability to pay off debts amounts to indentured servitude -- just a kinder term for Slavery.
Learn more about Fractional Reserve Banking at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional-reserve_banking
Friday, October 23, 2009
Knowledge is power...
... and we know that people with power will generally attempt to retain their power and try to gain even more.
In order to hold onto power we should expect the powerful to hold onto knowledge; to suppress it.
After all, knowledge is power -- and money is an expression of this power.
The suppression of knowledge is therefore beneficial for any entity wishing to accumulate money -- like corporations.
To deny this is idiocy.
It would then be a logical conclusion to agree that energy sources that promote independence would be suppressed to maximize power accumulation through profits.
So, I don't buy into the BS about solar and wind being unable to harness enough energy needed to supply our daily needs -- the technology has been suppressed.
Independence does not produce a recurring customer base and revenue supply, dependence does.
No corporation in their right mind is going to promote freeing customers on their dependence in their corporation.
Fractional Reserve Banking --
The different forms of money in government money supply statistics arise from the practice of fractional-reserve banking. <b>Whenever a bank gives out a loan in a fractional-reserve banking system, a new sum of money is <u>created.</u></b> This new type of money is what makes up the non-M0 components in the M1-M3 statistics. In short, there are two types of money in a fractional-reserve banking system:
1. <b>central bank money</b> (physical currency, government money)
2. <b>commercial bank money</b> (money created through loans) - sometimes referred to as private money, or checkbook money
2. <b>commercial bank money</b> (money created through loans) - sometimes referred to as private money, or checkbook money
Reserves are deposits that banks have received but have not loaned out. In the USA, the Federal Reserve regulates the percentage that banks must keep in their reserves before they can make new loans. This percentage is called the minimum reserve. This means that if a person makes a deposit for $1000.00 and the bank reserve mandated by the FED is 10% then the bank must increase its reserves by $100.00 and is able to loan the remaining $900.00. The amount of money the banking system generates with each dollar of reserves is called the money multiplier, and is calculated as the reciprocal of the minimum reserve. For a reserve of 10% the money multiplier, followed by the infinite geometric series formula, is the reciprocal of 10%, which is 10.
Example: Bob has 10 US $100 bills which represents $1000 central bank money. He then deposits it. Since the minimum reserve is 10%, the bank will keep $100 in it's reserve, and the remaining $900 can be loaned.
When the bank loans the $900, $900 in commercial money has been created. When that $900 loan is deposited, the bank will have $900 deposit of which $90 must be reserved and $810 can be loaned... and the process will go on until that $1000 becomes $10,000 ....
*poof*
Debt = money........ and inflation.
---
Let's not forget, loans must be paid back -- at interest.
But there's only enough money in 'circulation' to cover existing debt -- not the interest it generates as more debt.... so there's never enough money in circulation to cover all debts and more money must be borrowed.... and so the cycle continues.
Debt, and inability to pay it are built into the system.
We are being scammed.
Worse yet, involuntary servitude, is slavery -- even if we're unaware.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Economic Shock Therapy
“In the name of global economic rebalancing and reform at home, the Obama administration is seeking to cut the consumption of the working class, slash production costs and drive up US exports.
“This amounts to subjecting American workers to the type of economic ‘shock therapy’ that the US-dominated International Monetary Fund has prescribed for a host of indebted Third World countries over the past quarter century. Currency devaluation, accompanied by cuts in state expenditure for social services and the use of mass unemployment to drive down wages and increase exploitation—these are the methods that are now being employed against the American working class.”
“This amounts to subjecting American workers to the type of economic ‘shock therapy’ that the US-dominated International Monetary Fund has prescribed for a host of indebted Third World countries over the past quarter century. Currency devaluation, accompanied by cuts in state expenditure for social services and the use of mass unemployment to drive down wages and increase exploitation—these are the methods that are now being employed against the American working class.”
-- Barry Grey
World Socialist Web Site -- 22 Oct 2009
-------------
"Let me tell you what Adolf Hitler did when he came to power... he cut taxes for the rich, he increased corporate subsidies and corporate profits, he destroyed labor unions, he increased armament spending, he pursued wars of aggression, he privatized the public sector."
Now does any of that sound familiar?
"it can happen in different ways in different political cultures but you're operating for the same things: which is to keep the hegemonic power of that society in tact."
--- Michael Parenti (PHD Political Science Yale 1962)
Jan 2008
-----------------
"The theory of economic shock therapy relies in part on the role of expectations on feeding an inflationary process. Reining in inflation requires not only changing monetary policy but also changing the behavior of consumers, employers and workers. The role of a sudden, jarring policy shift is that it quickly alters expectations, signaling to the public that the rules of the game have changed dramatically - prices will not keep rising, nor will wages."
World Socialist Web Site -- 22 Oct 2009
-------------
"Let me tell you what Adolf Hitler did when he came to power... he cut taxes for the rich, he increased corporate subsidies and corporate profits, he destroyed labor unions, he increased armament spending, he pursued wars of aggression, he privatized the public sector."
Now does any of that sound familiar?
"it can happen in different ways in different political cultures but you're operating for the same things: which is to keep the hegemonic power of that society in tact."
--- Michael Parenti (PHD Political Science Yale 1962)
Jan 2008
-----------------
"The theory of economic shock therapy relies in part on the role of expectations on feeding an inflationary process. Reining in inflation requires not only changing monetary policy but also changing the behavior of consumers, employers and workers. The role of a sudden, jarring policy shift is that it quickly alters expectations, signaling to the public that the rules of the game have changed dramatically - prices will not keep rising, nor will wages."
— Naomi Klein (The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism)
Monday, October 19, 2009
More of the same
Dontcha love it when ex-execs get to regulate those they used to work with?!
<b>Goldman Sachs Exec Tapped to Top Post at SEC</b><br><br>
Another former Goldman Sachs executive has been tapped for a top post in the Obama administration. The Securities and Exchange Commission has named <b>twenty-nine-year-old Adam Storch as the agency’s first-ever chief operating officer of the enforcement division.</b> For the past five years, Storch worked at Goldman Sachs, most recently as vice president in Goldman’s Business Intelligence Group.
Another former Goldman Sachs executive has been tapped for a top post in the Obama administration. The Securities and Exchange Commission has named <b>twenty-nine-year-old Adam Storch as the agency’s first-ever chief operating officer of the enforcement division.</b> For the past five years, Storch worked at Goldman Sachs, most recently as vice president in Goldman’s Business Intelligence Group.
Look more countries looking to escape the stranglehold of the dollar:
Latin American Leaders To Create New Currency
Leaders from Latin America and the Caribbean have agreed during a summit in Bolivia to create a regional currency to make Latin America less dependant on the dollar. Leaders from Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Cuba and other nations met at the two-day Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas summit in Cochabamba. The new currency will be known as the sucre.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Dollar Troubles?
Russia not against being paid for gas in roubles
http://www.reuters.com/article/usDollarRpt/idUSLE32179420091014 >>
Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:14am EDT
BEIJING, Oct 14 (Reuters) - Russia is not against the idea of selling its gas for roubles, and would be happy to pay in yuan for Chinese goods, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said on Wednesday.
Putin, speaking to reporters during a visit to Beijing, added that China has proposed discussion on launching international electronic foreign currency payments in a supranational currency.
Currently the dollar is the main currency in international trade. Big oil producing nations denied a British newspaper report earlier this month that Gulf Arab states were in secret talks with Russia, China, Japan and France to replace the dollar with a basket of currencies in trading oil. [ID:nSYD421795] (Reporting by Daria Korsunskaya; Writing by Toni Vorobyova, Editing by John Bowker)
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.e272eaa74dccc30f21c6ff7638b0f37b.461&show_article=1# >>
"The United Nations called on Tuesday for a new global reserve currency to end dollar supremacy which has allowed the United States the "privilege" of building a huge trade deficit."
"China had called in March for a new dominant world reserve currency instead of the dollar, in a system within the framework of the Washington-based IMF."
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aSp9VoPeHquI >>
"UN countries should agree on the creation of a global reserve bank to issue the currency and to monitor the national exchange rates..."
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=32020&Cr=financial+crisis&Cr1 >>
"high-level United Nations commission on the world financial crisis today called for a new global reserve system that does not rely on a single currency like the dollar, a new global credit facility to complement the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and a new global coordination council that would be more inclusive than the current G20 bloc of countries."
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/schultz-paints-bleak-picture-of-future >>
Harry Schultz Letter -- "Some U.S. embassies worldwide are being advised to purchase massive amounts of local currencies; enough to last them a year. Some embassies are being sent enormous amounts of U.S. cash to purchase currencies from those governments, quietly. But not pound sterling. "
----------------------------------------------------------
Thursday, October 8, 2009
The Goal
"...the goal was to distract and deter the social democratic impulses of working people. Big business was elevated from its public reputation as a kind of mafia to that of a patriotic force. 'Free enterprise' became a divinity. "
"...Obama's unerring theme has been not 'change'.. but America's right to rule and order the world... he says, 'we lead the world in battling immediate evils and promoting the ultimate good... At moments of great peril in the past century our leaders ensured that America, by deed and by example, led and lifted the world, that we stood and fought for the freedoms sought by billions of people beyond their borders.'
Since 1945, by deed and by example, the US has overthrown 50 governments, including democracies, crushed some 30 liberation movements and supported tyrannies from Egypt to Guatemala... Having stacked his government with warmongers, Wall Street cronies and polluters from the Bush and Clinton eras, the 45th president is merely upholding tradition."
-- John Pilger
( http://www.johnpilger.com )
( http://www.johnpilger.com )
Anti-American:
"It's what governments and their vested interests call those who honor America by objecting to war and the theft of resources and believing in all of humanity. There are millions of these anti-Americans in the United States. They are ordinary people who belong to no elite and who judge their government in moral terms though they would call it common decency. They are not in vain. They are the people with a wakeful conscience, the best of America's citizens. They can be counted on. They were in the South with the civil rights movement, ending slavery. They were in the streets, demanding an end to the wars in Asia. Sure, they disappear from view now and then, but they are like seeds beneath the snow. I would say they are truly exceptional."
-- Martha Gellhorn
American war correspondent & humanitarian
-- Martha Gellhorn
American war correspondent & humanitarian
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
FW:
| | Income | ||
| Top 1 percent | Next 19 percent | Bottom 80 percent | |
| 1982 | 12.80% | 39.10% | 48.10% |
| 1988 | 16.60% | 38.90% | 44.50% |
| 1991 | 15.70% | 40.70% | 43.70% |
| 1994 | 14.40% | 40.80% | 44.90% |
| 1997 | 16.60% | 39.60% | 43.80% |
| 2000 | 20.00% | 38.70% | 41.40% |
| 2003 | 17.00% | 40.80% | 42.20% |
| Share of capital income earned by top 1% and bottom 80%, |
 |
| Share of capital income flowing to households in various income categories | ||||
| Top 1% | Top 5% | Top 10% | Bottom 80% | |
| 1979 | 37.80% | 57.90% | 66.70% | 23.10% |
| 1981 | 35.80% | 55.40% | 64.60% | 24.40% |
| 1983 | 37.60% | 55.20% | 63.70% | 25.10% |
| 1985 | 39.70% | 56.90% | 64.90% | 24.90% |
| 1987 | 36.70% | 55.30% | 64.00% | 25.60% |
| 1989 | 39.10% | 57.40% | 66.00% | 23.50% |
| 1991 | 38.30% | 56.20% | 64.70% | 23.90% |
| 1993 | 42.20% | 60.50% | 69.20% | 20.70% |
| 1995 | 43.20% | 61.50% | 70.10% | 19.60% |
| 1997 | 45.70% | 64.10% | 72.60% | 17.50% |
| 1999 | 47.80% | 65.70% | 73.80% | 17.00% |
| 2001 | 51.80% | 67.80% | 74.80% | 16.00% |
| 2003 | 57.50% | 73.20% | 79.40% | 12.60% |
| Adapted from Shapiro & Friedman (2006). | ||||
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)