Mark Steyn flails Climate Research Unit docs. "[T]he global warm-mongers have wholly corrupted the 'peer-review process', says National Review to introduce it's contributor on the topic of drudgery and skullduggery in the eco-biz of climate documents. "The CRU global-warming scandal," Mark Steyn, National Review Online (Nov28,2k9).
Steyn himself comes up with the prize-winnable phrase, "the Climategate / Climaquiddick scandal" -- except, why squeeze deceased Senator Ted Kennedy into this discourse, citing a tragedy of causing another's death while driving drunk. Is Steyn trying to imply that the CRU document/emails generators killed a dissenting colleague while they were driving drunk? For shame! to demand a reader fathom what actually is fancy gibberish logically, but perhaps effective rhetorically. In wr+ting too, "s+multaneity of norm-realization" (Bernard Zylstra) is often required.
Rather, we woud-be rhetoricians, coud we work up some embellishment to a better metaphory-rich formulation around the organized deceit of scientists leading the earth-is-warming alarmists. But not all who worry or, even, protest against perceived warming are alarmists and, therefore, somehow mindless.
Need I add, the Ecology Scientists par excellence (we were told) have now been outed as professional deceivers--impacting, not least of all, their believers who will never understand the actual science or the emails and other docs. Still, a modified version of a scientific understanding of human contribution/dominance in climate change coud yet well prove correct, at least somewhat correct. It's unsettling that the science is still unsettled, especially now complicated by the gurus of deceit who have lost their credibility as scientists, become mere "gurus", leading environment-concerned fowks in all their doability and generosity (and sometimes hypocrisy, as in all causes movements and churches, and current atheist movements / advertizing).
Monday, November 30, 2009
Mark Steyn flails Climate Research Unit docs. "[T]he global warm-mongers have wholly corrupted the 'peer-review process', says National Review to introduce it's contributor on the topic of drudgery and skullduggery in the eco-biz of climate documents. "The CRU global-warming scandal," Mark Steyn, National Review Online (Nov28,2k9).
World of wonders!, just after a week or so of twists and turns in official Chinese govt (however, of more than one governmental tier) policy/practice toward Christians outside the official govt-system of Church-registration; lo and behold, Iran overleaps China's previous tolerance on the world nuclear front. In reaction to "Iran's defiance of the International Nuclear Agency to desist its development," China, with fellow stalemate Russia, suddenly reverse their stances on the board of IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) to join USA, UK, and France in condemning Iran's dramatic announcement of plans to build 10 more uranium-enriching plants useable in missiles bearing nuclear weapons of mass destruction. Of course, Iran declared it wanted nuke facilities for peaceful purposes only. Raymond J. Learsy, "With Russia and China on board, Iran can now be stopped," Huffington Post (Nov30,2k9)
The game changer in this vote was that Russia and China joined the U.S. and its allies in the majority. With Russia and China on board, swift and immediate action becomes possible.There are other interests involved, for instance the industrial boom
Some 80% of Iran's export earnings come from oil. Oil sale revenues are the paymaster of more than 50% of the government's budget, including the salaries and financing of the Mullah's goon brigades brutally oppressing Iran's brave citizenry.
Iran's oil exports have been ranging in the vicinity of 2.1 million barrels a day, with Japan and China as Iran's largest buyers, each pulling some 500,000 bbls /day. Other major destinations for Iranian oil are India (375 mm/bbls) and South Korea (250 mm/bbls) with South Africa, Italy, France, Spain and Greece all with over 100mm bbls/day each.
An entente between Russia, China, the United States and some friendly persuasion by Saudi Arabia could bring this offtake [the aforementioned importers] -- shipments that are the lifeblood of Iran's renegade regime -- to a halt almost overnight.
of Chinese corporations in countries like Papua New Ginuee and thru-out the world, "The World of China Inc.," Time mag Dec7,2k9.
There are other simultaneous focii in the news from/about China these days. One newsworthy focus is the sometimes-sly, sometimes-brazen suppression of the Christian minority which has been indigenous to China for six millenium (at least since the 7th Century AD).
"China sentences megachurch leaders to prison," by Michelle A. Vu,--------------
"WEA leadersvisit fast-growing Chinese megachurch," Christian Post (online) Nov27,2k9
Posted by Albert Gedraitis at 1:07 AM
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Three climate-change doctrinalists who will figure largely in the looming Copenhagen Conference, have been cawt up short. Dr Richard Somerville, Distinguished Professor Emeritus at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Dr Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University, and Dr Eric Steig, University of Washington have suddenly been put on the defensive as a result of what's being called ClimateGate, exposed by an unknown hacker stealing their emails from UK University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit.
Somebody will rake thru the emails and float up whatever evidence there is that they "cooked the science to make this thing look as if the science was settled...." At some point, anyone interested will have to decide for her/himself whether ClimateGate is a hoax or the real deal.
As for the Copehagen Conference, we wish conferees the best to the extent that their intent remains to arrive at the truth as best they can know it in their scientific capacities.
In the end, most of us simply cannot master the actual science of those now claiming the stealing of the emails is a "smear campaign" because the email texts will be "cherrypicked' for use against them. Too bad! These doctors of science have to be vetted by other means than being voted authorities par excellence by some mass of their peers who can follow the actual science ... to some extent ... usually. Obviously, there are marginalized scientists who can understand the Troika (but perhaps not replicate the Troika's findings, a requirement). The important thing is to bring qualified scientists who are the dissenters on this crucial matter (given established Science's churchlike absolutes about their empirical-statistical findings, and in dependence on their particular thoeretical models).
So we have also dissidents in the political realm, who cannot perhaps follow "the science", but have an immense responsiblity to explore and investigate the conditions under which these conclusions have become definitive to the apparent-majority of established Science, establishing the Orthodox Doctrine of Science on Climate Change: namely, Human-created Natural Collapse of Earth as a Human Habitat.
For instance, Sen James Inhofe (Republican, Oklahoma) is known as a GlobalWarming skeptic. He has every reason of public justice to call for an investigation of the emails to make a good sounding toward determination public-justicially into the conditions whereby UN climate change research was conducted, directed, and promulgated. Ihnofe's way of knowing is politic/al, not scientific/al.
Then, there's the relatively "naive" way of knowing typical of those of us who can't know sphere-specifically in either Science or Politics, and certainly can not replicate the science (both the particular theoretical models Climate-doctrinaire scientists are using, and everything the official models cherrypick as "facts" -- what the model itself elicits/constitutes as a relevant fact to the instituted model and the measuring instruments with their imposed metric (a primal element in the mathematization of science (Cassirer) -- such field-indigenous facts must be shattered out from the terrible wholeness of the reality on Earth of climate, however from the hand of the Creator thru evolution, or due to human need, greed, and hubris.
If we can acknowledge at least three different ways of knowing being necessarily operative in the determination of public order regarding climate change, then we can begin to face up to how most of us must live by faith in the sources we trust.
I'd like to see these purloined emails being vetted forensically, something of the actual historical process of reaching the floodtide of climate-changism we are now in. But in any case Copenhagen will push climate-change triumphalists further along to the destination they intend for all of us. I'm curious as to just how our #1 American Salesman will do in his return to the Danish capital for the upcoming conference. Wow!, it occurs to me that since this is an international conference, some groups may wish to occasion a protest. Please, all, no violence!
Posted by Albert Gedraitis at 2:26 AM
Monday, November 23, 2009
Senate Majority leader Harry Reid (Democrat, Nevada) has entered a peak moment of his longtime public service, having successfully herded his majority to group-write a Senate version of a Healthcare Insurance Reform bill. He deserves credit for getting the law out of committee and onto the full Senate floor for debate, and ultimately passage or failure in just that attempt. The vote was 60 for bringing the committee's draft to the floor for debate, while 36 opposed.
A handful of Democrat centrists say they can't support the government-sponsored health-insurance plan -- known as the public option -- that is included in the bill. And Democrats are divided over abortion, an issue that nearly derailed the House earlier this month when it narrowly passed a health bill that blocked abortion coverage from federally subsidized insurance plans [the Stupak Proviso], including some run by private insurers.The timing of the Manhatten Declaration signatories -- piloted thru the political waters by nonother than Chuck Colson, in creating a new social-conservative moralistic alliance led by Roman Catholic prelates, evangelical preachers, and even some Orthodox hierarchs--has been quite breathtaking. Christian ecumenicity around anti-abortion, anti-Gay extremism (they want to crush 2women unions, and 2men unions -- whether or not any given state of the Union wants non-marriage recognitions of other kinds of actually existing intimate unions, in need of legal reception and regulation instead of endangered in some legal twil+t zone. These types of law shoud be determined regionally, not one type for all 50 states.
To my mind, a more porous overall pattern shoud obtain so that the country itself becomes self-aware as a pluriformity of mores (as evidenced by morally-differentiated communities) with some regional variation of population densities, so as to occasion some refuge somewhere for its "deviant" nativeborn, resultantly acknowledging a morally-differentiated society that consists, in part, of different moral communities. Somewhere in the overall pattern there have to be geographical sociographical locations where alternative mores are permitted full expression and may set the public tone there in those places, as in Cape Cod, the Florida Keys, and neiborhoods in San Fransisco. The malingering problem is that states/Federal division of powers and responsibilities, as provided in the US Constitution, needs to be rethawt in terms that acknowledge who actually is born into and immigrates into our country and exists in the overall empirical diversity of our society.
Another growing concern even as the bill progresses is the political heat on Democrats over expanded government spending amid rising unemployment and deficit concerns. "We simply cannot ignore the growth in the federal government," said Sen. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, one of those centrists. She was the last Democrat ahead of the vote to declare her support, ensuring Democrats would have the 60 they needed to overcome Republican stalling tactics. But she and other holdouts warned that doesn't mean they'll support final passage.The latter point is quite reasonable, since there doesn't yet exist a final text. The group-writing process of our democratic-republican lawmaking is just now going into action in the full US Senate, or has that process been put off, to sometime after Thanksgiving?, or after Christmas and New Year's.
Finally, there's the problem of the double jeopardy into which Lesbian couples are put by the anti-woman bias in American medicine, most recently signalled by the proposed rationing of mammographs to certain age levels of women.
Posted by Albert Gedraitis at 1:22 PM
PoliticsUSA: Moralistic Politics: 'Manhattan Declaration' a 'reactionary reflex' otherwise historically reasonable
Rewritten by Politicarp and Lawt, Nov25,2k9
The Manhattan Declaration that was issued last week (but apparently long in the making) is an instance of moralistic politics in a morally-differentiated society, a working moralistic politics launched to crystallize an active resistance to the humanist-hegemonic exclusions that are prophetically perhaps anticipated by these notable prelates and preachers.
A morally-differentiated society needs mechanisms that satisfy the communities that form and come to visiblity in the public square, perhaps in two opposing moral doctrines / systems, perhaps facing-off as presently around the Stupak Proviso in the healthcare reform bill sent up to the Senate by the US House of Representatives, will the Stupak Doctrine also become embedded in the Senate's Healthcare Reform bill about to be debated? It's certainly an American problem, but so is it also a problem in many national societies around the globe.
The solution suggested by rW has centered on the co-op idea, thus different from the public option (as called for by Pres. Obama) but different as well from the present scalding greediness of the leading medical-insurance megacorporations.
There's some possibility that in the final legislation there is no distinction between mutual insurance companies (forprofit, perhaps; but at least owned by the policyholders, not stockholders -- of which there are none, apparently) -- as we were saying, no distinction between mutuals and the stockholder-owned/publically-traded "greed corporations" we mentioned critically elsewhere [following Ungar]). I wonder if the proposed text of the forthcoming law sufficiently was mindful of different forms of corporations, companies, ownership structures -- wherein profits and nonprofits, curtailed greed corporations and mutuals, etc., will all be encouraged to enter the competition sawt in the govt reconstellation of the market -- to make only one point here, by not disincentivizing the mutuals, the nonprofts, the differentiated-moral-community stances among hospitals, doctors, nurses, pharmacists and healthcare insurers. It's the competitive mix of all the firms in the healthcare insurance industry that has the best chance of undercutting the industry ethos at present -- the immoral ethos of driving prices skyh+ repetitively to the hurt of the customer / consumer / patient.Somewhere in, at least, the detritus of the present bill, there is apparently somewhere a conscientious-objector provision for two nonprofit co-ops, one for those policyholders / premium-payers who choose not to pay any premiums any portion of which is deployed to cover any medical insurer's actuarial cost-increases due to financing abortion procedures; that's the first of the two.
And, second, another nonprofit co-op for those who choose to pay (presumably larger) premiums to cover abortions that may occur in the family and the society, along with their general medical needs (which conceivably may otherwise be identical to those insuring medically thru the other national co-op, the one for abortion-support refuseniks. It coud be that the bulk of abortion-providing medical insurance policies in which premiums cover abortions are held by employers in co-operation with employees under union labor-contracts: a workers spouse in the female instances presumably coud have an abortion on the breadwinner's policy at work under, say, the United Auto Workers or corporation-specific affiliate thereof, say, the Chrysler UAW. The buried govt 2 co-ops approach is anticipated to attract only a small percentage of insurance policyholders, many of them buried in unions which a while ago adopted abortion-coverage demands of the union in negotiations.
Where perhaps the dual nonprofit co-op approach is conceded in the present draft of the bill, one hopefully is not exceptionally jaundiced because one entertains the notion that the legislative drafters assume the overwhelming number of people will stay put where they are, holding onto their traditional policies of healthcare insurance, rather than risk one of these new-fangled morally-differentiated nonprofit co-ops for medical insurance. I suspect they expect that the dual nonprofit co-op system based on morally-differentiated communities woud remain utterly marginal in the great scheme of insurance medical under the new Healthcare Reform law.
It seems that the new coalition of the Manhatten Declaration feels the necessity of prioritizing three issues at their basics, forming them into a moral-doctrinal list as relevant to the public square. In contrast, ours is a public justice approach that takes seriously the strong moral differences (differences of moral behaviors and moral systems). In it's way, rW's proposal is moderate. Presumably it is unacceptable to the R+twings of both Democrats and Republicans.
But anything from the American r+t is in turn largely suspect by the media and intellectual elites, especially when the "anything" is delivered by clerics -- a dozen or so Catholic prelates, several Evangelical Protestant big-timers with Chuck Colson starring (you know him: Watergate, prison, did his time, started Prison Fellowship to bring parishioners into the prisons to initiate and maintain supportive contact with the incarcerated). Along his way, Colson found a mentor in Francis Schaeffer's writings and linked up with a leading neo-schaefferian Nancy Pearcey, a student of Albert Wolters, professor recently retiring from Redeemer University College, Ancaster, Ontario).
And notably participating in the number of Declaration signatories, 125 or so at the start, were also some Orthodox prelates.
They collectively tried to create space for future dissidents who refuse to facilitate taking policyholder or government monies to pay the costs of abortions, and thus refuse to help pay salaries to abortuary doctors. In the meantime, the signers baffled pro-abortion people who coudn't/can't comprehend how the hamfist of the law is likely to come down on such future Christian refuseniks, who may have to face negative professional consequences and even future suffering as a result of what woud amount to blacklisting.
As sociologically inevitable as it seems upon examination of American demographics, still, the Manhattan Declaration is a 'reactionary reflex' -- again, altho otherwise historically-sociologically reasonable. Anyone who appreciates the seething surface of largely unorganized moral communities in America, realizes that fault-lines can sometimes turn out to be entities with blendable borders, pastels blurring slowly into one another and out the other, rather than only hard-edged lines and sharply contrasting continuous spaces. The sociology of these tensions and blends means we must find a public legal justice for all.
The Manhattan Declarers are telling us that they have enuff moxy to join an anti-abortion stance with an anti-GayAgenda stance (no recognition of same-sex/gender intimate unions with cohabitancy). To me that's a big leap. I oppose same-sex marriage, as well as does any Archbishop or Preacher Man, but it's ridiculous to deny all USA states room to recognize other than marriages. Reserve marriage to its traditional 1woman1man definition, but allow room to the states to decide more regionally the recognition or nonrecognition of intimate unions between either 2women or 2men.
Anti-abortion + anti-homo + religiousFreedom
I'm afraid this combined Defense of the Alamo and Custer's Last Stand was belatedly finalized and issued by this coalition to define and crystallize organizationally an alignment to fite against new forces bent on forcing members of these moral communities to become complicit in abortion-support and destruction of the family's once-distinctive legal status. Also, there's the importance of marriage generally to the reproduction of the species and the civilization (Stafleu), and the production of a new human being, making a baby with both parents ready to cradle and educate till the kids grow up join the workforce or finish college.
The debate, however, has gone too far in its polarizing rhetoric and selective logics. In the meantime, we have to make peace in the society, whether some women are having an abortion or not. The state shoud not finance abortions, but shoud not outlaw women from having the abortion she intends and (with allied men) establishing connections with healthcare insurers and medical facilities ready to co-operate within the pro-abortion ethos. The state shoud provide the public-legal framework to achieve justice for both morally-differentiated communities, and the precise healthcare insurance as variously appropriate to each.
There is much more to think about in the Declaration. It green-lited the start of a nonviolent civil disobedience movement invoking Martin Luther King, Jr. one of us will get back to that in a later blog-entry.
At the same time, the Declaration was/is, powerfully, both prophetic and martyrological, a centuries-distant experience in the Church/es, a tradition that has been renewed again and again but never so drastically in the USA as now. These prelates and preachers will be joined by many more over the next months, but that move will be pondered, in that it woud require a signer to preach the calling to people whose moral witness is presently being compromised by the demands of unions and employers to insinuate and implicate their financial complicity thru their tie-in with the abortion medical infrastructure.
"No compromise," Worldevnglcl mag, by Joel Belz.
The Manhattan Declaration, by Timothy George, guest writer, WaPo.
Under God: Catholic, Evangelical leaders team up to fite abortion, same-sex marriage, by Michelle Boorstein.
Religious leaders warn of civil disobedience by Tark Tarkas at Forums >SomethingAwful
Signers of the Declaration pledge to "...not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other anti-life act,” nor will signers “bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships” or “treat them as marriages.” The list of backers reads like a who’s who of the pro-life movement, and the document essentially argues that supporters of the movement deserve conscience rights.
What does noncompliance look like? Nonviolent civil disobedience. "Dr. King was very clear about nonviolence and we are committed to nonviolence,” said Robert George, drafting committee member and jurisprudence professor at Princeton University. He listed some examples of what religious civil disobedience might look like, such as a pharmacist quitting before providing abortion drugs or a physician changing jobs before performing an abortion or taking part in an assisted suicide. “There are limits to what can be asked of people,” said George, who was flanked by 15 religious leaders, including the Archdioceses of Washington and Philadelphia and evangelical leaders like Chuck Colson and Tony Perkins.Addressed not only to Christians, but to President Obama, Congress, and civil authorities, the treatise will be available online for individuals to sign as well. When asked whether nonpayment of taxes would be an acceptable form of protest, George, who is also a lawyer, said he was currently representing a West Virginia taxpayer who is refusing to pay the small percentage of her bill that might go toward state-funded abortions (“Litigation is still pending,” said George). Institutions were also called on to participate in the civil disobedience if, for example, if a Catholic hospital is under pressure to provide services that go against Catholic beliefs. Although conscience protections do exist for many institutions already, there are areas, cited on Friday, such as when the Catholic Charities of Boston halted adoption services, rather than comply with state law and allow children to be adopted by homosexual couples.
According to the Declaration, “We must be willing to defend, even at risk and cost to ourselves and our institutions, the lives of our brothers and sisters at every stage of development and in every condition.” Yet similar documents, such as last year’s Evangelical Manifesto, have been unveiled with great fanfare but little consequence. Civil disobedience, especially giving up a job, is a lot to ask in the current economy and is a hard notion, even for some signers of the Declaration.
with rewrite assistance and research by Lawt
Posted by Albert Gedraitis at 6:02 AM
Sunday, November 15, 2009
I found this in the niche blog, OurKingdom - power and liberty in Britain, that has been spun-off from and is linked to openDemocracy, a most formidible website. Tom Griffin writes an article in OurKingdom (Nov12,2k9):
When will the walls in Belfast come down?Historically-traumatized people are trying to create neiborhoods and streets that are safe for families and children. There's apparently a certain tribality present, in which a pisteutic aspect is constantly at work, given the great historical face-off between Roman Catholics and Protestant Christians in Northern Ireland.
As Ian Parsley noted at OurKingdom last year, the wall may be down in Berlin, but there are still plenty of them in Belfast. The BBC this week highlighted the work of some of the people who are trying to change that.
Among them is Tony Macaulay, who outlined the scale of the problem at a recent talk in London.
There are 88 barriers, they arent all walls. There are 88 what we would call interface barriers in Northern Ireland. There are a few in Derry/Londonderry, a few in Portadown/Craigavon. The vast majority are in Belfast. Most of them are in North Belfast. The biggest one is in West Belfast, separating the Falls from the Shankill, where I come from.
More barriers have gone up in the ten years following the ceasefires, than in the ten years before the ceasefires. These walls have continued to be erected through the peace process, through the political agreement, the ceasefires and all of that.
The most recent official one was erected in the grounds of an integrated primary school, And there are also now walls still being erected to this day in new private developments, where the private developer decides that people will want to live in an area more if there's a wall separating them from "the other side".
Meanwhile, south of Northern Ireland's border, there's a resurge of the culture wars in the Irish Republic. Colin Murphy, a jouralist in Dublin, writes about the current face-off in Ireland's culture wars: "Ireland's new culture war" (Sept18,2k9 Prospect). The worry: voting for the Lisbon Treaty in the upcoming national referendum will result in the forced opening of Ireland to legal abortions, however paid for, perhaps thru the medical system? How does the EU's proposed Lisbon Treaty affect Irish abortion rates? You'll have to read the article for the intriguing answer.
Oh, I almost forgot: Ireland's unemployment rate -- 13% -- is the h+est in Europe for the period of time summarized.
Update Nov6,2k9:::I just found this item focussed directly on the most recent aggregates of Britain's current unemployment, so I can make comparisons.
Wednesday October 14, 11:53 AM
British unemployment rate steady at 7.9%: data
LONDON (AFP) - Britain's unemployment rate held at 7.9 percent in the three months to August, official data showed on Wednesday, holding stable on a quarterly basis for the first time since March 2008.
The news, published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS), comes amid rising hopes that data next week will show the British economy has officially exited a deep recession.
Market expectations had been for a rate of 8.0 percent. Since March 2008, the jobless rate has increased every subsequent month as companies slashed jobs to save cash amid the downturn.
However, the ONS added Wednesday that the number of people unemployed in Britain rose by just 88,000 people in the three months to August to reach 2.47 million people -- which is the highest level since 1995.
"The brief summary is that unemployment is going up but more slowly than economists expected," said ECU Group analyst Kit Juckes in a note to clients.
"Further rises in unemployment are inevitable but the trend in job losses is slowing," he added.
In addition, despite fears of a youth unemployment crisis, the number of unemployed young people seeking a job eased to 946,000 in the three months to August.
That compared with 947,000 young people in the three months to July, which was the highest figure since records began in 1992.
Working with the first table above -- "European Unemployment" where Ireland is registrerd as having the h+est rate of joblessness 13% -- and adding the figure in the news article about British Unemployment -- 7.9% -- while, the USA jobless rate has risen to 10.2. Interestingly, while unemployment is 13% in Ireland, in Northern Ireland, unemployment is a relatively low 7.1 %, also below Britain, and of course the USA these days.
Were we to analyze according to the American sociological paradigm, but indigenously to the Northern Ireland situation. If we analyze the 7.1% relatively favourable figure into the whatever is the great tribal/clan/religion divide there, we woud have to ask what percentage of the figure as a total (7.1) is to be configured to the Cat minority as compared to the Prod majority. Is the Prod unemployment figure 3.0, while the Cat unemployment figures is 4.1? (My question is entirely hypothetical, but were it so, then one coud approach the historical specifics of why woud Prods have less unemployment than Cats?
Why the Ulster Prods have less unemployment than the larger entity the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, 7.9 %? Why the Prods + Cats in Northern Ireland are so superior to those of "Ireland" which has the mostest at 13 % unemployed. Overall the Ulster statistic lowers the UK statistic, which woud be h+er without Ulster's weiting the UK's downward.
Without figuring in NI, the Brit proper unemployment percentage woud be h+er. Thus, the NI figure helps put a sl+tly better face on the Brit Island's present putative level, conjecturally but conservatively, I woud put the aggregate joblessness of England, Scotland, Wales, and the Duchy of East Lothian (without NI) actually above 8.0 %.
The job of UK reformationals confronted by these statistics woud be to get at least a two-way breakdown of unemployment by region (as above) and by tribal/clan/religion primarily along minority racial lines -- in order to discover whether members of various racial minorities in cosmopolitan Britain are less employed (without a money income) than the mainstream stocks of the racial majority which includes both Protestants and Catholics.
At each point, the reformational economics theorist m+t well ask "Why? Why this particular statistical occurence at this time for this region or ethnic grouping or religous grouping or whatever? The priority analysis, usually, woud attempt to account for the differentials that appear in the main lines of tension and creativity in multiracial multiethnic multireligioned United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Posted by Albert Gedraitis at 11:58 PM
*Latest available was June
Hat Tip to Washington Post
But notice that Britain/UK unemployment is not listed, indeed neither Brit nor Lit is listed. Okay, Britain is not continental Europe, but it's a European Island just east of the Irish Isle and west of France. These both are major European islands. Still, like Cypress and Malta in the Mediterannean Sea, they are not geopolitically contiguous to the continent that makes Europe Europe, correct? They are are not in the Med, they are in the Atlantic Ocean off the continent. Okay, okay.
But why leave out the quite continental Lithuanians ("the Lits") in a bare bald list offered as a news report about European unemployment? Ah, the pressure of the urge toward completeness that haunts so many theoreticians, the urge toward a systematics.
One thing of concern by a pensioner in Canada, is the nexus of the post-Meltdown economic situation and the immigration into Europe of so many jihadists, forming themselves for, and waiting for their chances to come along. Like a 2nd generation American who woud make well known his direction and religious identity as a Muslim jihadist acting against his country by a public premeditated terrorist attack on his fellow US Army soldiers. Post-Meltdown joblessness crosses with a 2nd but much smaller 9/11 -- November 5, 2009 -- 11/5.
The martyr-soldiers of Fort Hood, US Army base in Texas, were consecrated such by the intent in the deepest Muslim heart of a particular anti-USA jihadist. At the same time, he was a deranged psychiatrist. But his lone act has shaken the societal feelings of statistical groups who now distrust on the opinion graphs a whole level down their distrust has plummeted, a full degree more wary of Muslim fellow citizens, and oftentimes neibors.
Along comes the Meltdown, with bouts of mass layoffs, then the 2nd terrorist attack, amidst increasing industrial and business shutdowns, layoffs, increase of joblessness. The TARP Stimulus swings into action, but many TARP funds are witheld from first-round distribution (those moneys went to banks like Bank of America, the insurance conglomerate AIG, etc). Now, the Recession, as named by the Federal Reserve Bank, is ended. The economy is getting better, for somebody's benefit; but official unemployment and more widely-experienced joblessnes increases.
The historical thematics of both elements of this nexus reverberate, exchanging nuclear matter, each to each, as it were.
But the account (General Account, specific national accounts) may pique your interest for a moment because of the comparisons you'll come up with, upon analyszing the list of jobless workers in the various countries and overall.
I'm interested in the unemployment situation in all Britain -- England, Wales, Scotland, Ulster, and perhaps the new duchy of East Lothian (I blogged on this idea a little while back. ... once it popped into mind while writing here today, I decided to look up East Lothian, and discovered there's a member of Parliament from an electoral riding denominated "East Lothian." The Member is Anne Moffat, sitting for the Labour Party there, and thus sits with the ruling party that maintains control of government. The Labour Party was headed by Tony Blair for a long time, and now UK's Prime Minister is Gordon Brown, a Scot I understand. So why not a Duchy of East Lothian? ... as suggested in ... as suggested in ... ).
Found it! A document quote (docquote) that says it all, but not in monarchist tones of "duchy," rather in the pragmatics of the UK's representational system, beginning with geocultural realities:
I may be mistaken, but there seems to be some connection with one writer's Duchy of East Lothian and the actual (micro-)movement for a regional Government of Cornwall among the already-established regions. See Philip Hosking, "Next steps for the Cornish constitutional convention," OurKingdom (Nov8,2k9).
23. Nobody asked Cornwall if it wished to be subsumed into a macro-south west regional zone. It’s a pity that a Government, flushed with electoral success and reforming zeal, with Wales and Scotland excited by the prospects of devolution, and with a unique opportunity to de-centralise and to invigorate by not being jealous of power and control, did not take a moment to ask around. If it had set about regionalisation by asking for proposals for a regional network that could effectively replace the outworn legacy of World War 2 rationing and munitions supply, which included the enormous and dysfunctional ‘south west’, it would have received some innovative ideas which would have created a patchwork of regions, big and small, some founded on expediency, some upon industrial synergies and one – Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly - founded upon an historical, constitutional and cultural base and with a rapidly emerging will to positively address its growing economic failure and social deprivation.
Posted by Albert Gedraitis at 7:49 AM
Thursday, November 12, 2009
There has been so much to remain sensitive to these past several days. November 11 is widely celebrated, with somber undertones, for the sacrifice of WWI men and women from the USA and Canada too. I saw a moment of commemoration from Britain's royal family, as well. The date has remained a constant
But, this year lashing thru Armistice Day / Veterans Day, already having commemorated the fall of Communism more recently, lashing thru everything was the apparent terrorist attack on a facility and its occupants at Fort Hood, Texas, USA. Many soldiers dead, even more wounded. Surviving it all, the terrorist shooter.
The terrorist Major Nidal Malik Hasan, 39, was a military psychiatrist. Now he faces chareges of 13 counts of murder.
...[I]nformation about the background of the alleged shooter has surfaced in the media. The criticisms, which initially focused on the failure of the administration and the Army to use the word “terrorism” or “jihadism” in connection with Fort Hood, are now being merged with ... the Obama administration’s approach toward terrorism generally.This is the nation's second 9/11, a small kill-score compareed to the first, but lethal beyond it's hideous numbers because it happened within the military and raised questions about the presence of American Muslims among our solders, most of them completely loyal to this country. But are there a few more jihadist independents in the USA military and other key institutions?
Posted by Albert Gedraitis at 7:38 PM
Saturday, November 07, 2009
Paul Hollander on the Fall of Communism
by Ilya Somin, posting on The Volokh Conspiracy blog (Nov6,2k9)
This fall is the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall and other events associated with the collapse of communism. Paul Hollander, a sociologist who has written numerous works on communism and Western attitudes towards it, has an op ed in the Washington Post, noting some of the lessons of the communist experience, and the failure of most Westerners to fully appreciate them:I obviously admire the work of lawyer Somin on the subject matter he and Hollander have attended to in a historiographically rigourous way. I've pirated his quote, text, and live-links for the purpose of this seasonal commoration. Thanks!
The Berlin Wall that came down 20 years ago this month was an apt symbol of communism. It represented a historically unprecedented effort to prevent people from “voting with their feet” and leaving a society they rejected. The wall was only the most visible segment of a vast system of obstacles and fortifications: the Iron Curtain, which stretched for thousands of miles along the border of the “Socialist Commonwealth....”
While greatly concerned with communism in the late 1940s and early 1950s, Americans — hostile or sympathetic — actually knew little about communism, and little is said here today about the unraveling of the Soviet empire. The media’s fleeting attention to the momentous events of the late 1980s and early 1990s matched their earlier indifference to communist systems. There is little public awareness of the large-scale atrocities, killings and human rights violations that occurred in communist states, especially compared with awareness of the Holocaust and Nazism (which led to to far fewer deaths). The number of documentaries, feature films or television programs about communist societies is minuscule compared with those on Nazi Germany and/or the Holocaust, and few universities offer courses on the remaining or former communist states....
The different moral responses to Nazism and communism in the West can be interpreted as a result of the perception of communist atrocities as byproducts of noble intentions that were hard to realize without resorting to harsh measures. The Nazi outrages, by contrast, are perceived as unmitigated evil lacking in any lofty justification and unsupported by an attractive ideology....
In the aftermath of the fall of Soviet communism, many Western intellectuals remain convinced that capitalism is the root of all evil. There has been a long tradition of such animosity among Western intellectuals who gave the benefit of doubt or outright sympathy to political systems that denounced the profit motive and proclaimed their commitment to create a more humane and egalitarian society, and unselfish human beings. The failure of communist systems to improve human nature doesn’t mean that all such attempts are doomed, but improvements will be modest and are unlikely to be attained by coercion.
Hollander expands on his analysis in [a longer article for a security studies center (available in digital form)].
As he points out, communist atrocities have not received their full due in the West, despite the fact that the victims of communism (including some 100 million dead) far outnumber even those of the Nazis. Part of the reason is that the communists, unlike the Nazis, were perceived as having noble motives. However, this is a poor distinction. After all, Hitler and his supporters also believed they were doing the right thing, every bit as strongly as Lenin or Stalin did.
The second distinction often drawn between the two is that the Nazis killed people because of immutable characteristics such as race and ethnicity, while the communists did not. This argument also fails, for two reasons that I discussed in greater detail in this series of posts. First, Communist regimes often did kill people based on immutable characteristics. For instance, they often murdered people because of their class origins; no one could help being born a “Kulak” or a “bourgeois.” Also, Pol Pot, Joseph Stalin, and several other communist rulers targeted various ethnic minorities for deportation and extermination. Second, it is not clear that the distinction between killing innocent people for immutable characteristics and killing them because of mutable ones carries any moral weight. In my view, the case for distinguishing them falls apart on close inspection (see here).
Yet even if one ultimately concludes that the Nazis were somewhat worse than the communists, that still does not justify the massive size of the disparity between the enormous attention paid to the crimes of the former and the relative neglect of the latter.
UPDATE: One of the few Western organizations specifically devoted to promoting public awareness of communist crimes is the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, which has a website with lots of helpful information. I will probably mark the occasion of the fall of the Berlin Wall by making a contribution. Political scientist Rudolph Rummel, a leading academic expert on mass murder, has this website with lots of quantitative data on the extent of communist crimes (as well as those of other dictatorships).
Posted by Albert Gedraitis at 9:08 PM
Friday, November 06, 2009
The Career section of today's Wall Street Journal offers a stark article by Luca di Leo and Jeff Bater, "October Jobless Rate Tops 10%" (Nov6,2k9). That's quite a percentage of the workforce, the unemployed who are actively hunting new jobs (does not include "under the table" work, nor does it include those now labelled "discouraged workers" who no longer hunt a job). Yes, we are still a Hunter-Gatherer culture, no matter how technically advanced we may be. Perhaps in America we may now have become a Hunter-Gatherer-Consumer culture, and our society is built somewhat for that.
As to America's job figures, actually, we find the official quantification released today by the Labor Department is precisely: 10.2% of American workers are jobless workers. So, by definition, they are actively looking for work, and apparently going on to, or are already enrolled in pogey, there being a couple of weeks or months "deductible," delaying the time when you can start receiving your first govt welfare/workfare checks, in this round in your life. A(n other) round of unemployment insurance benefits ("pogey" as they say in Canada and UK).
The waiting period varies state by state, where it is often subject to workfare provisions resulting from the move of former President Bill Clinton in alliance with the renown conservative House Speaker, Republican, originally from the Carolinas somewhere, Newt Gingrich. Newt wrote the workfare reform laws (reform of earlier welfare programs that often offered the wrong incentives to recipients, and in too many cases, resulted in welfare fraud due to bureaucratic boredom and sloth ... and to some extent perhaps a lack of funding to the lower rungs of the bureaucracy). Cheating and inadequately incentivized recipients aside, we have to note nevertheless, there were many truly ill people who coudn't work but also coud not get/be diagnosed for health reasons: in medical limbo and mental-health based inability to work.
But, hey, we can't give way to a mere recognition of some complex nuances of the present situation. What's here is that a full 10.2% of willing workers can't find jobs with pay to support the costs of their particular lifestyles. That's one factor of joblessnes: can't pay the costs of individual's or breadwinners' family's particular lifestyle (which for some includes church-life and tithing -- 10% of income; for others it includes regular afterwork pubbing and partying, which can consume all potential savings and a large percentage of weekly expenses [a footnote here woud include creditcardagery that often pays for excesses in spending on the micro-economic-optimatics level of personal/familial stewardship ]).
U.S. unemployment rose by more than expected in October to hit its highest level in more than 26 years and employers cut more jobs than forecast, a sign the labor market continues to struggle as the economy emerges from its deep recession.
The current Recession of the US economy has been declared a "turn around" (Ben Bernanke, Federal Reserve Bank) and "over" by a legion of economists. The cliché said, The Recession is over -- except of course in the special-case of employment levels, job retention, new job creation. A national economy that can recover from a Class A Recession (remember the term "meltdown"?) without creating new jobs, is not so much a Recession-recovery, as it is instead a restructuration of the economic institutions especially those of larger sizes, across a range of industrial sectors. I see this both in the enterprises of the economy and in the govt bureaucratic expansion to dominate all spheres of life, including what in Canada are called "Crown Corporations," like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mae in America.The unemployment rate, calculated using a survey of households as opposed to companies, rose by 0.4 percentage point to 10.2%, the Labor Department said Friday. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires had forecast an increase to 9.9%.
However, if in your definition of Recession-recovery, you prioritize the creation of new employment, jobs for the unemployed, and thus thru new jobs created by enterprises, the provision of spendable income to those just previously thrown into the "reserve pool of unpaid labor" without any income -- the so-called Jobless now able to purchase shelter, food, other necessities at least, and medical insurance -- if so, then, the Recession of the economy is not over.
Rather what's going on in this no-new-jobs "Recession-recovery" is precisely an internal restructuration of the economic institutions of our society (enterprises -- in particular MONEY PROCESSORS (banks, financials, insurers, hedge funds, etc) and AUTO MANUFACTURERS (GM, Chrysler, "Cash for Clunkers" which also helped Ford etc), such a restructuation itself coud be read as a deception to mask the quite apparent actuality of post-meltdown recovery without the creation of new jobs; instead, the business institutions (inclusive of all legal forprofit enterprises) are attempting to streamline themselves without having to create any statistically-significant new jobs.
If we reify "the economy," as a literary device, we coud say our American economy resists the status of a full-employment society. As long as a full-employment society is not part of an enterprise's core drives (along with profit, for example), it cannot meet the norm, as expressed by Prof Bernard Zylstra, of simultaneity of norm realization in its enterprising.
Posted by Albert Gedraitis at 3:24 PM
Thursday, November 05, 2009
PoliticsEU: UK Tories: France says Conserv leader Cameron "autistic," some EastGermans pine for old days of Communism
Pierre Lellouche, considered pro-Brit in Sarkozy-era cabinet (France), blasts UK's Tory leader, David Cameron, "France: autistic Tories have castrated UK in Europe" (by Nicolas Watt, Patrick Wintour, and Allegra Stratton, Guardian, Nov4,2k4). The piece reports the furious response of European leaders to yesterday's letter of Cameron to the President of the EU, acknowledging the very recent full adoption of the EU's Lisbon Treaty. And therefore the appropriate but reluctant dropping of Cameron's previously proposed referendum for lessened UK involvement with Europe, altogther. Cameron, then -- in his mentioned letter to CzechRep's Klaus (presently head of European Parliament) -- went on to build a new moat, closer to the castle, so to speak, that woud set impregnable barriers, thus containing European sway over Britain.
On the man initiating all these wordy reverberations, see: David Cameron, for a profile and a survey of recent event's involving this newmaker.
Meanwhile, Germany is undergoing a longterm reappraisal of the "split over the past" that divides the former West Germany from its soulmate the former East Germany which was Communist-dominated for some decades -- until precisely the fall of the Berlin Wall. This page in Washington Post, "In unified Germany, split over the past" carries a photo gallery feature "Tearing down the Wall in 1989."
Recall the USA's President, Ronald Reagan's appeal, "Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall." And the wall came tumblin down.
Apparently some regions and movements in Europe are feeling claustrophobic just now, around the time of the closing of the mechanisms that allowed meandering from the Eurofold, closing down around the Treaty of Lisbon which had been held in abeyance for a number of years, until Klaus affixed his signature the other day, Cameron wrote his letter accepting the basis for his promised UK referendum on European relations, shoud he be elected Britain, UK, England's new Prime Minister.
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
EconomicsUSA: Treasury: Geithner shafts public, fakes negotiatn wth weak-loan-loaded CIT, no bailout retrns to taxpayers in CIT bankruptcy
Yahoo! Finance reports on its TechTicker website the exposure of the federal Treasury Secretary's desertion of taxpayers' interests in negotiated earlier settlement with "one of the nation's largest lenders," CIT.
William Black, professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law is dumbfounded. "We put ourselves on the hook in a completely inept way where we lose first. We lose entirely as the taxpayers."And so do I.
Black, a former top federal banking regulator, blames Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner for negotiating such a bad deal on behalf of the American public.
Please read the article linked above, and the Wikipedia article on what used to be Commercial Investment Trust (hence the pomo name CIT Group, "not to be confused with Citigroup) another large financial services company."
CIT Group, Inc. is a large American commercial and consumer finance company, founded in 1908. The company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2009. The company is included in the Fortune 500 and is a leading participant in vendor financing, factoring, equipment and transportation financing, Small Business Administration loans, and asset-based lending. The company does business with more than 80% of the Fortune 1000, and lends to a million small and medium businesses. It was a part of the S&P 500 Index, was replaced by Red Hat at the close of trading July 24, 2009.Now, CIT in bankruptcy will repay special-status creditors at the rate of return of only 70% on each dollar CIT owes; the other creditors apparently will be written off, politely and litigiuously of course . The more privileged set of creditors should have included the United States taxpayers (to whom Geithener is supposedly devoting his expertize under the Constitution and the reformational principle of economics (optimal stewardship).
The company has its headquarters in New York City, and employs more than 7,300 people in locations throughout North America, Europe, Latin America, and Asia Pacific. The company's name is an abbreviation of an early corporate name, Commercial Investment Trust.
In 2008, CIT Group became a bank holding company in order to qualify for, and ultimately receive $2.3 billion in Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds.
It's this transgression, occuring this deep into his ministry's time-line (as Secretary of the Treasury of the US Government for the US people and the US taxpayers who put out the dollars in the first place). Geithener's ministry had a shakey start, but thru those shakes I mostly held back from making any finalizing negative judgment. They say he's smart, I think he's very smart.
But on this one, he's smart and wrong and unprincipled not to seek status for the USA Treasury, acting on his authority as derived from taxpayers' earnings under government taxation, unprincipled in that he did not seek status as a special creditor (the Paulson-Geithener $2.3 million paid out in TARP funds, again underwritten by the taxpayers, a massive payout but did not insist on Treasury's/taxpayers' entitlement to a 70% return on their 100% lost TARP contributions. Our federal Treasury, under our esteemed Secretary of the Treasury Dr Richard Geithener shoud be 70% fatter on this account.
I do realize that had the US Treasury adequately carried out its office, responsiblity of optimizing stewardship of taxpayers' contributions ("office" in Dutch: ambt)) from the beginning of its transactions and negotiations with CIT, before its initial TARP outpay to CIT, the whole math that determined "70%" as the benchmark, m+t have worked out differently, to say, "65%".
Or: 75% of the $2.3 billion dollars USA = $ 191 Billion. Am I correct?
Sunday, November 01, 2009
EconomicsUSA: Ecology Law: Greenery leads to Gashouse critique leads to Cap&Trade law with pro-nuke & -natural gas
In a Special Report for The Climate Agenda section of Washington Post (Wapo), entitled "A nuclear power boost for bill: WOOING LAWMAKERS -- Tax incentives offered with climate measure" (Oct28,2k9) by Stephen Munson.
I found this article to be especially informative in regard to the ecology program advocated by the Democrat regime in Washington DC. They just lost their Green-Marxist czar who advocated a racial thematics in ecological critique. All that aside, I'm particularly interested in reportage that contributes to outlining the present meme-chain: greenhouse-gas emissions > Cap & Trade Law proposal > nuke industry > tax incentives of perhaps major proportions that woud trigger (goverment-led) investment from the so-called "private sector." My slant, as m+t be expected, is the optimatics-economics aspect of the meme, as reflected in policy/industry. I think large nuke development for peaceful purposes (general energy needs in the USA), a path of development that woud be at once ecological and a display in the direction of energy diversity.
Also mentioned in Munson's article is the much cheaper incentivizing of the natural gas industry, which is underdeveloped but which woud compete favourably for the tax monies that m+te be, along with nuke power, written into the Cap & Trade Law proposed. NatGas woud be cheaper and come online sooner with Cap&Trade's stimulus to that industry. The blocker here, for me, woud be how woud emissions from buring NatGas (say in automobiles?) add to present emissions, prove less ecologically noxious than our present petrol-burning cars, trucks, airplanes, helicopters, snowmobiles, lawnmowers, etc.
I'm for both nuke development and NatGas development (at my present level of personal knowledge [Michael Polanyi]), but I'm really unsure about Cap&Trade itself (to return to another link in the meme-chain) the practice of C&T in numerous industries today woud seem to invite stockmarket and industries-specific fraud and abuse. On that score, however, we shoud checkout the recent proposal to legalize insider trading in the stock markets (but that's imaginally a whole other can of worms; as some kind of Calvinist, rather neo-Calvinist, I descend in those respects from a man who regularly referred to himself as "a worm" in Your s+t, O Lord).
Beyond my foregoing personal ironies, we shoud not incentivize fraud and abuse (inherent in C&T, I presently believe) in our public-legal contribution of tax monies to the development of cleaner air (anti-polluition of air), amelioration of greenhousing (anti-emmissions of particular gases that cluster in the stratosphere and effect negatively the biosphere that mantles the planet), diversification of energy sources perhaps to include Nukes, NatGas, etc. My foregiong "Etc." coud well include oil-based fuels and electricity. The problems in the deisel and petrol industrial sub-industries of oil-derivatives, are what "cars" call "gas" (Gimme, gimme!), and the ever-enlarging electricity grid and usage.
Car gas does give off fumes, but in the auto's motor car gas remains liquid until it's squirted by the distributor into various fire chambers of the engine, where car gas's oxygen ignites that car's driving power while the fuel burns in the motor also producing carbon dioxide as its waste (exhaust). The pollutants enter the air, the carbon dioxide then filters up into the stratosphere. Correct or not, under the new proposed Gap&Trade Law, companies and industries woud have an exchange where certificates of low-emission corporations coud be bawt from them by h+-emissions corporations, but new emissions over the cap woud be outlawed so that the total emissions is contained, does not enlarge, stabilizes thru the market of the exchange (the low-emission certificates become a new money, alongside the greenback) -- from this hopedfor stability the next task woud be to lower the level of the USA's carbon emissions, etc.
Optimatically speaking, the byproducts of Cap&Trade will be increase of use of electricity, which latter can be generated by water (hydroelectric power, as its known in Ontario where it's nicknamed "hydro," but not water, rather electricity), alternatively, by coal (problem of dirty vs. clean coal against which Pres. Obama has a bias, and noticeably it is not mentioned in Muson's artcle which then would embrace three alternatives among the candidates for Obama-Green stimulus money > nukery, natural-gas, clean-coal).
But my foregoing triadic conceptualization will probably prove itself to be far too industrially-evenhanded, emblematic of the principle of diversification of energy sources in USA's tax-supported greener-energy development. Then, as yet unmentioned, there's windmill energy, solar energy, volcanic-spouts (use your imagination) to be added to our list. Addition results -- a list:
clean-coal energy: in the USA, there's a political bias of Team Obama against coal-producing regions (a state like West Virginia has a large culture of coalminers' families, churches, nearness to sadness of accidents in the mines, miners in danger even blocked within a mine shaft, United Mineworkers Union (which built a string of hospitals in black-lung regions for miners suffering from this industrial disease in the Old Days), advances in mining safety and technology generally ...
electricity: -- electrical energy, electro-chemical energy (as in batteries in the wide range of new handheld technologies)
natural-gas energy: (some combustion, as in cars, trucks, airplanes, etc.; but can be converted to electricity)
nukery : (for conversion to electricity)
solar energy : (for photosynthesis and direct heating in nature; also for human uses, of course, rather direct heating in the home thru glass windows and/or electricty
volcanic spouts, volcanic-spouts energy : (the water-minerals-gases of which needs to be harnessed in some way to channel it for techno-natural purposes, as into a hot springs, or to techno-artefact for producing heat and mechanical energy, also, electricity
windmill energy: and air for conversion into electricity) energy
The tax-supported industrial incentivizing to deter carbon-dioxide emissions into the general environment, may be included in the Cap&Trade Bill on its way to law in the present Dem-dominated Congress.
To make the bill more palatable to all wings and factions of the Democrat majority, and a small cluster within the Republic minority, especially in the House of Representatives, provisions apparently coud include those for tax-supported development in the Nuclear Industry, and perhaps in the Natural Gas industry. These provisions are not guided by the principle of diversification of energy sources (this is a key domestic matter for the USA, but it fits with a healther foreign policy for the US regarding Saudiland and the Golf States). Nor are the provisions as heretofore booted about, committed and structured to represent the diversification of energy sources. And, second, electrical usage (largely Hydro in Ontario and under various corporate and state names in the USA) will be boosted by the development of both Nukes and NaturalGas (as I presently understand the matter).