On Thursday, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), made the case for why the piecemeal approach shouldn't have been put together in the first place. In remarks that came shortly after the bipartisan health care summit reconvened after lunch, the Iowa Democrat spoke to how integrally tied together all of the reform proposals in the bill truly are. Take one out (the individual mandate) and the entire enterprise collapses (you can no longer simply stop discrimination of pre-existing conditions). That's why the bill is over 2,000 pages.
"An incremental approach is like throwing a drowning man 50 foot out a 10 foot rope," said Harkin
Friday, February 26, 2010
Friday, February 12, 2010
Saturday, February 6, 2010
This Crisis Won’t Stop Moving
This Crisis Won’t Stop Moving
By GRETCHEN MORGENSON
Published: February 6, 2010
YOU know we’re in trouble when we’re told that the economic problems in Greece, Portugal and Spain, the most indebted countries in the euro zone, are likely to remain safely contained in those nations.
Related
Times Topics: Gretchen Morgenson
After all, we heard the same nonsense in 2007 from United States financial leaders talking about the subprime mortgage mess. Both Ben S. Bernanke, the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, and Henry M. Paulson Jr., then the Treasury secretary, rolled out to reassure concerned investors that troubles in mortgage land wouldn’t permeate the rest of the economy.
As we all now know, mortgage woes were contained — to planet Earth. And so it may be with overleveraged nations in Europe.
Simply put, contagion is a fact of life in our interconnected global economy and financial markets. And that means investors must strap in for more gyrations in the stock and bond markets as the great and painful deleveraging that began in 2007 continues around the world.
Sure, there are rays of light amid the gloom. The slightly upbeat jobs report on Friday, for example, is an example. But it is only one data point and not enough to move the needle on much larger issues that remain, including investor fears that Greece, Portugal and Spain will default on their debts.
“This is a reminder that every country has its limit,” said David A. Rosenberg, chief economist and strategist at Gluskin Sheff & Associates in Toronto, one of Canada’s top wealth management firms. “And our heightened concerns over sovereign credit quality are not going to abate anytime soon.”
During his years as chief economist at Merrill Lynch in New York, Mr. Rosenberg was perspicacious indeed. So his take on the potential fallout from financially stressed countries is a valued one.
First, Mr. Rosenberg reckons that the flight to the dollar will continue. Even though the United States has plenty of its own economic challenges — enormous public debt weighing on a struggling economy, for example — our lot is far better than others’, he maintains. “In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king,” he said. “The U.S. dollar is that one-eyed man.”
But that does not mean we are finished with our own debt purge.
“Watching the situation in Europe, it’s not even clear that the root cause of problems here at home has been solved,” Mr. Rosenberg said. “We still have a very fragile situation: household balance sheets, and delinquencies, defaults and home prices are still vulnerable to another down leg. People think because you finish one chapter in this post-bubble credit collapse that the book is done.”
As for housing prices, Mr. Rosenberg expects further declines of 10 to 15 percent over the next few years. He pointed to the roughly nine million residential housing units available for sale across the country, a very high vacancy rate when judged against a total housing stock of 130 million units.
If his forecast is accurate, the numbers of borrowers who owe more than their homes are worth will rise significantly. Mr. Rosenberg estimates that fully half of the mortgage-holding population in the country could be underwater by 2011.
For now, these borrowers are getting little to no help from lenders — no surprise — or from the government. Indeed, the Obama administration’s loan modification program has more or less allowed banks that own second mortgages on troubled borrowers’ homes to continue to press for full repayment of these obligations.
When it comes to writing down principal amounts on mortgages, the government has pressured those holding the first mortgages more than the institutions holding the seconds. Never mind that the second liens are worthless and should be written down to zero.
THIS see-no-evil approach to second mortgages is part of an overall denial on the part of policy makers, politicians, bankers and regulators that has prolonged the agony of this crisis. Owning up to reality about what loans are worth is rough medicine to take, but denying that problems exist only puts off the inevitable.
“We are much further along the road to price discovery and full disclosure than Japan was at this same stage of their credit contraction,” Mr. Rosenberg said. “There are still some very significant credit problems in the U.S. and as they pertain to commercial real estate are still extremely problematic. Some banks will likely be whipped very hard.”
The challenge for Mr. Obama is that he has thrown oodles of taxpayer money at these problems and still the unemployment rate stands at 9.7 percent.
“We came off a year when you could not have asked for more government stimulus and we lost five million jobs,” Mr. Rosenberg pointed out. “What do you do for an encore? The deleveraging is ongoing and yet the government stimulus is largely behind us. That is problematic for an economic forecaster.”
The fact is, to save the world from economic collapse we have transferred the liabilities of the private sector to the public. And not every country has the money to service or repay that debt.
“We are in a post-bubble credit collapse and there are going to be periods of calm and stormy weather. Investors will have to navigate through the volatility,” Mr. Rosenberg said. “Unfortunately, I think we are still in the early stages. The next recession will happen more quickly than people think.”
By GRETCHEN MORGENSON
Published: February 6, 2010
YOU know we’re in trouble when we’re told that the economic problems in Greece, Portugal and Spain, the most indebted countries in the euro zone, are likely to remain safely contained in those nations.
Related
Times Topics: Gretchen Morgenson
After all, we heard the same nonsense in 2007 from United States financial leaders talking about the subprime mortgage mess. Both Ben S. Bernanke, the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, and Henry M. Paulson Jr., then the Treasury secretary, rolled out to reassure concerned investors that troubles in mortgage land wouldn’t permeate the rest of the economy.
As we all now know, mortgage woes were contained — to planet Earth. And so it may be with overleveraged nations in Europe.
Simply put, contagion is a fact of life in our interconnected global economy and financial markets. And that means investors must strap in for more gyrations in the stock and bond markets as the great and painful deleveraging that began in 2007 continues around the world.
Sure, there are rays of light amid the gloom. The slightly upbeat jobs report on Friday, for example, is an example. But it is only one data point and not enough to move the needle on much larger issues that remain, including investor fears that Greece, Portugal and Spain will default on their debts.
“This is a reminder that every country has its limit,” said David A. Rosenberg, chief economist and strategist at Gluskin Sheff & Associates in Toronto, one of Canada’s top wealth management firms. “And our heightened concerns over sovereign credit quality are not going to abate anytime soon.”
During his years as chief economist at Merrill Lynch in New York, Mr. Rosenberg was perspicacious indeed. So his take on the potential fallout from financially stressed countries is a valued one.
First, Mr. Rosenberg reckons that the flight to the dollar will continue. Even though the United States has plenty of its own economic challenges — enormous public debt weighing on a struggling economy, for example — our lot is far better than others’, he maintains. “In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king,” he said. “The U.S. dollar is that one-eyed man.”
But that does not mean we are finished with our own debt purge.
“Watching the situation in Europe, it’s not even clear that the root cause of problems here at home has been solved,” Mr. Rosenberg said. “We still have a very fragile situation: household balance sheets, and delinquencies, defaults and home prices are still vulnerable to another down leg. People think because you finish one chapter in this post-bubble credit collapse that the book is done.”
As for housing prices, Mr. Rosenberg expects further declines of 10 to 15 percent over the next few years. He pointed to the roughly nine million residential housing units available for sale across the country, a very high vacancy rate when judged against a total housing stock of 130 million units.
If his forecast is accurate, the numbers of borrowers who owe more than their homes are worth will rise significantly. Mr. Rosenberg estimates that fully half of the mortgage-holding population in the country could be underwater by 2011.
For now, these borrowers are getting little to no help from lenders — no surprise — or from the government. Indeed, the Obama administration’s loan modification program has more or less allowed banks that own second mortgages on troubled borrowers’ homes to continue to press for full repayment of these obligations.
When it comes to writing down principal amounts on mortgages, the government has pressured those holding the first mortgages more than the institutions holding the seconds. Never mind that the second liens are worthless and should be written down to zero.
THIS see-no-evil approach to second mortgages is part of an overall denial on the part of policy makers, politicians, bankers and regulators that has prolonged the agony of this crisis. Owning up to reality about what loans are worth is rough medicine to take, but denying that problems exist only puts off the inevitable.
“We are much further along the road to price discovery and full disclosure than Japan was at this same stage of their credit contraction,” Mr. Rosenberg said. “There are still some very significant credit problems in the U.S. and as they pertain to commercial real estate are still extremely problematic. Some banks will likely be whipped very hard.”
The challenge for Mr. Obama is that he has thrown oodles of taxpayer money at these problems and still the unemployment rate stands at 9.7 percent.
“We came off a year when you could not have asked for more government stimulus and we lost five million jobs,” Mr. Rosenberg pointed out. “What do you do for an encore? The deleveraging is ongoing and yet the government stimulus is largely behind us. That is problematic for an economic forecaster.”
The fact is, to save the world from economic collapse we have transferred the liabilities of the private sector to the public. And not every country has the money to service or repay that debt.
“We are in a post-bubble credit collapse and there are going to be periods of calm and stormy weather. Investors will have to navigate through the volatility,” Mr. Rosenberg said. “Unfortunately, I think we are still in the early stages. The next recession will happen more quickly than people think.”
Monday, February 1, 2010
Steve Jobs calls google mantra "don't be evil' a bunch of crap
Steve Jobs ripped into Google and Adobe at a town hall company meeting, according to anonymous sources.
The CEO reportedly had harsh words for Google--calling its 'don't be evil' mantra 'a load of crap'--as well as for Adobe. He also shared information about forthcoming product updates, noted MacRumors.
So what did he purportedly say, according to unconfirmed, second-hand reports compiled by Wired, Daring Fireball, and MacRumors?
Jobs' take on Google was that 'teams at Google want to kill us,' a source told Daring Fireball. Jobs also apparently called Google's 'don't be evil' mantra 'a load of crap,' and noted, 'We did not enter the search business. [..] They entered the phone business.'
What Jobs said about Adobe, according to Wired:
They are lazy, Jobs says. They have all this potential to do interesting things but they just refuse to do it. They don't do anything with the approaches that Apple is taking, like Carbon. Apple does not support Flash because it is so buggy, he says. Whenever a Mac crashes more often than not it's because of Flash. No one will be using Flash, he says. The world is moving to HTML5.
Jobs also expressed some nostalgia for the Adobe of years past, according to Daring Fireball.
MacRumors reported that Jobs dished on some forthcoming updates. These include 'aggressive updates to iPhone that Android/Google won't be able to keep up with,' an 'A+' update to the iPhone, and additional integration between the Lala and iTunes team.
MacRumors' source also claims that Jobs cited the iPad as 'up there with the iPhone and Mac as the most important products Jobs has been a part of.'
Though his exact words have not been confirmed, Wired says that multiple people in attendance at the town hall meeting have anonymously confirmed Jobs' quotes.
Some earlier rumors add some credence to Jobs' alleged quotes. TechCrunch wrote earlier that Jobs had said the iPad 'will be the most important thing I've ever done.' CNBC, citing 'knowledgeable sources,' wrote that Steve Jobs 'hates' Google CEO Eric Schmidt.
The CEO reportedly had harsh words for Google--calling its 'don't be evil' mantra 'a load of crap'--as well as for Adobe. He also shared information about forthcoming product updates, noted MacRumors.
So what did he purportedly say, according to unconfirmed, second-hand reports compiled by Wired, Daring Fireball, and MacRumors?
Jobs' take on Google was that 'teams at Google want to kill us,' a source told Daring Fireball. Jobs also apparently called Google's 'don't be evil' mantra 'a load of crap,' and noted, 'We did not enter the search business. [..] They entered the phone business.'
What Jobs said about Adobe, according to Wired:
They are lazy, Jobs says. They have all this potential to do interesting things but they just refuse to do it. They don't do anything with the approaches that Apple is taking, like Carbon. Apple does not support Flash because it is so buggy, he says. Whenever a Mac crashes more often than not it's because of Flash. No one will be using Flash, he says. The world is moving to HTML5.
Jobs also expressed some nostalgia for the Adobe of years past, according to Daring Fireball.
MacRumors reported that Jobs dished on some forthcoming updates. These include 'aggressive updates to iPhone that Android/Google won't be able to keep up with,' an 'A+' update to the iPhone, and additional integration between the Lala and iTunes team.
MacRumors' source also claims that Jobs cited the iPad as 'up there with the iPhone and Mac as the most important products Jobs has been a part of.'
Though his exact words have not been confirmed, Wired says that multiple people in attendance at the town hall meeting have anonymously confirmed Jobs' quotes.
Some earlier rumors add some credence to Jobs' alleged quotes. TechCrunch wrote earlier that Jobs had said the iPad 'will be the most important thing I've ever done.' CNBC, citing 'knowledgeable sources,' wrote that Steve Jobs 'hates' Google CEO Eric Schmidt.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
the US Pushes back
U.S. Starts to Push Back Against China in Growing Rift
SIGN IN TO RECOMMEND
TWITTER
SIGN IN TO E-MAIL
PRINT
REPRINTS
SHARE
By HELENE COOPER
Published: January 31, 2010
WASHINGTON — For the past year, China has adopted an increasingly muscular position toward the United States, berating American officials for the global economic crisis, stage-managing President Obama’s visit to China in November, refusing to back a tougher climate change agreement in Copenhagen and standing fast against American demands for tough new Security Council sanctions against Iran.
Enlarge This Image
Pool Photo by David Gray
Prime Minister Wen Jiabao of China with President Obama during the president's visit to China last November.
Related
Times Topics: China
Now, the Obama administration has started to push back. In announcing an arms sales package to Taiwan worth $6 billion on Friday, the United States leveled a direct strike at the heart of the most sensitive diplomatic issue between the two countries since America affirmed the “one China” policy in 1972.
The arms package was doubly infuriating to Beijing coming so soon after the Bush administration announced a similar arms package for Taiwan in 2008, and right as tensions were easingsomewhat in Beijing and Taipei’s own relations. China’s immediate, and outraged, reaction — cancellation of some military exchanges and announcement of punitive sanctions against American companies — demonstrates, China experts said, that Beijing is feeling a little burned, particularly because the Taiwan arms announcement came on the same day that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton publicly berated China for not taking a stronger position on holding Iran accountable for its nuclear program.
While administration officials sounded a uniform public note, cautioning Beijing not to allow this latest tiff to damage overall relations, some administration officials suggested privately that the timing of the arms sales and the tougher language on Iran was calculated to send a message to Beijing to avoid assumptions that President Obama would be deferential to China over American security concerns and existing agreements.
“This was a case of making sure that there was no misunderstanding that we will act in our own national security interests,” one senior administration official said. A second Obama administration official, also speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said pointedly: “Unlike the previous administration, we did not wait until the end of our administration to go ahead with the arms sales to Taiwan. We did it early.”
But larger questions remain about where the Obama administration is heading on China policy, and whether the new toughness signals a fundamentally new direction and will yield results that last year’s softer approach did not.
Beyond the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, management of the American relationship with China is one of Mr. Obama’s biggest foreign policy challenges. Flush with cash, China’s economy is growing mightily, and China has become one of the biggest foreign lenders to the United States. China also is an increasingly critical American trading partner and a global rival in influence and economic power.
“The president’s view is that obviously we have to have a mature enough relationship with China that we can be candid and firm where we disagree and cooperate forcefully when we agree,” a senior administration official said. He insisted that the timing of the arms package and Mrs. Clinton’s tough words were “not designed to send a gratuitous message to China, but to demonstrate the firmness of our position.”
China has a history of getting off to a tough start with American administrations. President Bill Clinton alienated Beijing with tough talk on human rights, even signing an executive order that made renewal of trade privileges for China dependent on progress on human rights. But Mr. Clinton reversed himself in 1994, saying that the United States and China would move forward faster on issues of mutual concern if Beijing was not isolated.
Similarly, President George W. Bush’s first dealings with the Chinese were also fractious, including an effort to recover American airmen whose spy plane was forced down off the Chinese coast.
“The Obama administration came in exactly the opposite,” said Steven Clemons, director of foreign policy programs at the New America Foundation. “They needed China on economic issues, climate change, Iran, North Korea. So they came in wanting to do this lovely dance with China, but that didn’t work.”
Instead, China pushed back hard, including at the Copenhagen climate change summit meeting in December, when Beijing balked at American and European demands that China agree to an international monitoring system for emissions targets. Twice, the Chinese prime minister, Wen Jiabao, sent an underling to represent him at meetings with Mr. Obama, in what diplomats said was an intentional snub. Mr. Obama later had to track down Mr. Wen, surprising him and appearing at the doorway of a conference room where Mr. Wen was meeting with the leaders of South Africa, Brazil and India.
The United States and China eventually reached a compromise on the monitoring agreement, but the whole incident left a bad taste in the mouths of many Obama administration officials, who believed China had deliberately set out to belittle Mr. Obama, and who were determined to push back and reassert American authority.
“The Chinese,” said James J. Shinn, who was assistant secretary of defense for Asia during the Bush administration, “now seem to have a palpable sense of confidence that they’re more in the driver’s seat than two years ago, across a whole range of issues.”
For Mr. Obama, the arms sale to Taiwan, which China considers a breakaway province, may be only the first of many instances this year in which he will run afoul of Beijing.
Some foreign policy experts said that the administration now seemed intent on poking at the sovereignty issues that have long been China’s Achilles’ heel. Mrs. Clinton noted on Friday that Mr. Obama would soon be meeting with the Tibetan spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama — a meeting that White House officials put off last summer to avoid alienating Beijing in advance of Mr. Obama’s China trip. China regards the Dalai Lama as an advocate of Tibetan independence.
“China is feeling very confident these days, but the one thing that the Chinese freak out about consistently are sovereignty issues,” said Mr. Clemons of the New America Foundation. “So anything related to Taiwan or Tibet will get them going.”
Added to that, the administration has been championing Internet freedom recently, another source of public tension with Beijing. China’s government is embroiled in a fight with Google over that company’s complaints about Internet censorship and hacking attacks it says originated in China.
But the tougher American positions do not change the fact that Mr. Obama needs Chinese cooperation on a host of issues. Beyond his efforts to rein in Iran’s nuclear ambitions, the president is also working with Beijing on similar ambitions in North Korea.
And Mr. Obama announced in his State of the Union address last week that he planned to double American exports in the next five years, an ambitious goal that cannot be met unless he somehow persuades China to let its currency appreciate, making Chinese products more expensive in the United States and American products more affordable in China.
SIGN IN TO RECOMMEND
SIGN IN TO E-MAIL
REPRINTS
SHARE
By HELENE COOPER
Published: January 31, 2010
WASHINGTON — For the past year, China has adopted an increasingly muscular position toward the United States, berating American officials for the global economic crisis, stage-managing President Obama’s visit to China in November, refusing to back a tougher climate change agreement in Copenhagen and standing fast against American demands for tough new Security Council sanctions against Iran.
Enlarge This Image
Pool Photo by David Gray
Prime Minister Wen Jiabao of China with President Obama during the president's visit to China last November.
Related
Times Topics: China
Now, the Obama administration has started to push back. In announcing an arms sales package to Taiwan worth $6 billion on Friday, the United States leveled a direct strike at the heart of the most sensitive diplomatic issue between the two countries since America affirmed the “one China” policy in 1972.
The arms package was doubly infuriating to Beijing coming so soon after the Bush administration announced a similar arms package for Taiwan in 2008, and right as tensions were easingsomewhat in Beijing and Taipei’s own relations. China’s immediate, and outraged, reaction — cancellation of some military exchanges and announcement of punitive sanctions against American companies — demonstrates, China experts said, that Beijing is feeling a little burned, particularly because the Taiwan arms announcement came on the same day that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton publicly berated China for not taking a stronger position on holding Iran accountable for its nuclear program.
While administration officials sounded a uniform public note, cautioning Beijing not to allow this latest tiff to damage overall relations, some administration officials suggested privately that the timing of the arms sales and the tougher language on Iran was calculated to send a message to Beijing to avoid assumptions that President Obama would be deferential to China over American security concerns and existing agreements.
“This was a case of making sure that there was no misunderstanding that we will act in our own national security interests,” one senior administration official said. A second Obama administration official, also speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said pointedly: “Unlike the previous administration, we did not wait until the end of our administration to go ahead with the arms sales to Taiwan. We did it early.”
But larger questions remain about where the Obama administration is heading on China policy, and whether the new toughness signals a fundamentally new direction and will yield results that last year’s softer approach did not.
Beyond the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, management of the American relationship with China is one of Mr. Obama’s biggest foreign policy challenges. Flush with cash, China’s economy is growing mightily, and China has become one of the biggest foreign lenders to the United States. China also is an increasingly critical American trading partner and a global rival in influence and economic power.
“The president’s view is that obviously we have to have a mature enough relationship with China that we can be candid and firm where we disagree and cooperate forcefully when we agree,” a senior administration official said. He insisted that the timing of the arms package and Mrs. Clinton’s tough words were “not designed to send a gratuitous message to China, but to demonstrate the firmness of our position.”
China has a history of getting off to a tough start with American administrations. President Bill Clinton alienated Beijing with tough talk on human rights, even signing an executive order that made renewal of trade privileges for China dependent on progress on human rights. But Mr. Clinton reversed himself in 1994, saying that the United States and China would move forward faster on issues of mutual concern if Beijing was not isolated.
Similarly, President George W. Bush’s first dealings with the Chinese were also fractious, including an effort to recover American airmen whose spy plane was forced down off the Chinese coast.
“The Obama administration came in exactly the opposite,” said Steven Clemons, director of foreign policy programs at the New America Foundation. “They needed China on economic issues, climate change, Iran, North Korea. So they came in wanting to do this lovely dance with China, but that didn’t work.”
Instead, China pushed back hard, including at the Copenhagen climate change summit meeting in December, when Beijing balked at American and European demands that China agree to an international monitoring system for emissions targets. Twice, the Chinese prime minister, Wen Jiabao, sent an underling to represent him at meetings with Mr. Obama, in what diplomats said was an intentional snub. Mr. Obama later had to track down Mr. Wen, surprising him and appearing at the doorway of a conference room where Mr. Wen was meeting with the leaders of South Africa, Brazil and India.
The United States and China eventually reached a compromise on the monitoring agreement, but the whole incident left a bad taste in the mouths of many Obama administration officials, who believed China had deliberately set out to belittle Mr. Obama, and who were determined to push back and reassert American authority.
“The Chinese,” said James J. Shinn, who was assistant secretary of defense for Asia during the Bush administration, “now seem to have a palpable sense of confidence that they’re more in the driver’s seat than two years ago, across a whole range of issues.”
For Mr. Obama, the arms sale to Taiwan, which China considers a breakaway province, may be only the first of many instances this year in which he will run afoul of Beijing.
Some foreign policy experts said that the administration now seemed intent on poking at the sovereignty issues that have long been China’s Achilles’ heel. Mrs. Clinton noted on Friday that Mr. Obama would soon be meeting with the Tibetan spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama — a meeting that White House officials put off last summer to avoid alienating Beijing in advance of Mr. Obama’s China trip. China regards the Dalai Lama as an advocate of Tibetan independence.
“China is feeling very confident these days, but the one thing that the Chinese freak out about consistently are sovereignty issues,” said Mr. Clemons of the New America Foundation. “So anything related to Taiwan or Tibet will get them going.”
Added to that, the administration has been championing Internet freedom recently, another source of public tension with Beijing. China’s government is embroiled in a fight with Google over that company’s complaints about Internet censorship and hacking attacks it says originated in China.
But the tougher American positions do not change the fact that Mr. Obama needs Chinese cooperation on a host of issues. Beyond his efforts to rein in Iran’s nuclear ambitions, the president is also working with Beijing on similar ambitions in North Korea.
And Mr. Obama announced in his State of the Union address last week that he planned to double American exports in the next five years, an ambitious goal that cannot be met unless he somehow persuades China to let its currency appreciate, making Chinese products more expensive in the United States and American products more affordable in China.
Saturday, January 30, 2010
arms package to Taiwan angers China
BEIJING — China suspended military exchanges with the United States, threatened unprecedented sanctions against American defense companies and warned Saturday that cooperation would suffer after Washington announced $6.4 billion in planned arms sales to Taiwan.
The response to Friday's U.S. announcement, while not entirely unexpected, was swift and indicated that China plans to put up a greater challenge than usual as it deals with the most sensitive topic in U.S.-China relations.
"This is the strongest reaction we've seen so far in recent years," said Stephanie T. Kleine-Ahlbrandt, northeast Asia project director for the International Crisis Group. "China is really looking to see what kind of reaction it's going to receive from Obama on this."
China's Defense Ministry said the arms sales to self-governing Taiwan, which the mainland claims as its own, cause "severe harm" to overall U.S.-China cooperation, the state-run Xinhua News Agency reported. Vice ministerial-level talks on arms control and strategic security were postponed.
The warning comes as the U.S. seeks Beijing's help on issues including the global financial crisis and nuclear standoffs in North Korea and Iran. Tensions were already high after recent U.S. comments on Internet freedom and a dispute between Google and China, as well as President Barack Obama's plan to meet with Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama this year.
China's Vice Foreign Minister He Yafei told U.S. Ambassador Jon Huntsman that the sales of Black Hawk helicopters, Patriot Advanced Capability-3 missiles and other weapons to Taiwan would "cause consequences that both sides are unwilling to see," a ministry statement said.
The Foreign Ministry also threatened sanctions against U.S. companies involved in the arms sales, which hasn't happened in past sales to Taiwan.
"Our action regarding Taiwan reinforces our commitment to stability in the region," U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said Saturday. "We know China has a different view. Given our broad relationship with China, we will manage this issue as we have in the past."
Story continues below
The United States is Taiwan's most important ally and largest arms supplier, and it's bound by law to ensure the island is able to respond to Chinese threats.
China responds angrily to any proposed arms sales, however, and it also cut off military ties with the U.S. in 2008 after the former Bush administration announced a multibillion-dollar arms sale to Taiwan.
A similar cutoff of military ties was expected this time, but it comes as Washington and Beijing wanted to improve normally frosty relations between their armed forces. The U.S. has tried to use military visits to build trust with Beijing and learn more about the aims of its massive military buildup.
"In the past, these kinds of suspensions have lasted for three to six months, with some parts of the military-to-military relationship suspended beyond that," said Phillip Saunders, a distinguished research fellow at the National Defense University in Washington. "I expect something similar this time."
It's not known whether the arms sale will affect President Hu Jintao's expected visit to the U.S. this year or a summit on nuclear safety in the U.S. this spring.
Experts on China warned Beijing could take further steps to punish the United States to show its newfound power and confidence in world affairs.
Jin Canrong, a professor of international studies at China's Renmin University, said the sale would give Beijing a "fair and proper reason" to accelerate weapons testing. China test-fired rockets in recent weeks for an anti-missile defense system in what security experts said was a display of anger at the pending arms sale.
"The U.S. will pay a price for this. Starting now, China will make some substantial retaliation, such as reducing cooperation on the North Korea and Iran nuclear issues and anti-terrorism work," Jin added.
The latest suspension of military ties should affect planned visits to China by U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Admiral Michael Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff. A visit to the U.S. by the Chinese military's chief of the general staff, Gen. Chen Bingde, could also be called off.
The U.S. Congress has 30 days to comment on the newest arms sales before the plan goes forward. Lawmakers traditionally have supported such sales.
Though Taiwan's ties with China have warmed considerably since Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou took office 20 months ago, Beijing has threatened to invade if the island ever formalizes its de facto independence. China has more than 1,000 ballistic missiles aimed at Taiwan.
China often argues that arms sales to Taiwan hurt their relations, but Saunders said that despite the latest announcement and the one in 2008, "cross-Strait relations have never been better."
The arms package announced Friday dodged a thorny issue: The more advanced F-16 fighter jets that Taiwan covets are not included.
The Pentagon's decision not to include the fighters and a design plan for diesel submarines – two items Taiwan wants most – "shows that the Obama administration is deeply concerned about China's response," said Wang Kao-cheng, a defense expert at Taipei's Tamkang University.
Taiwan's Ma told reporters Saturday that the deal should not anger the mainland because the weapons are defensive, not offensive.
___
Associated Press writers Foster Klug and Robert Burns in Washington, Charles Hutzler in Beijing and Annie Huang in Taipei contributed to this report.
The response to Friday's U.S. announcement, while not entirely unexpected, was swift and indicated that China plans to put up a greater challenge than usual as it deals with the most sensitive topic in U.S.-China relations.
"This is the strongest reaction we've seen so far in recent years," said Stephanie T. Kleine-Ahlbrandt, northeast Asia project director for the International Crisis Group. "China is really looking to see what kind of reaction it's going to receive from Obama on this."
China's Defense Ministry said the arms sales to self-governing Taiwan, which the mainland claims as its own, cause "severe harm" to overall U.S.-China cooperation, the state-run Xinhua News Agency reported. Vice ministerial-level talks on arms control and strategic security were postponed.
The warning comes as the U.S. seeks Beijing's help on issues including the global financial crisis and nuclear standoffs in North Korea and Iran. Tensions were already high after recent U.S. comments on Internet freedom and a dispute between Google and China, as well as President Barack Obama's plan to meet with Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama this year.
China's Vice Foreign Minister He Yafei told U.S. Ambassador Jon Huntsman that the sales of Black Hawk helicopters, Patriot Advanced Capability-3 missiles and other weapons to Taiwan would "cause consequences that both sides are unwilling to see," a ministry statement said.
The Foreign Ministry also threatened sanctions against U.S. companies involved in the arms sales, which hasn't happened in past sales to Taiwan.
"Our action regarding Taiwan reinforces our commitment to stability in the region," U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said Saturday. "We know China has a different view. Given our broad relationship with China, we will manage this issue as we have in the past."
Story continues below
The United States is Taiwan's most important ally and largest arms supplier, and it's bound by law to ensure the island is able to respond to Chinese threats.
China responds angrily to any proposed arms sales, however, and it also cut off military ties with the U.S. in 2008 after the former Bush administration announced a multibillion-dollar arms sale to Taiwan.
A similar cutoff of military ties was expected this time, but it comes as Washington and Beijing wanted to improve normally frosty relations between their armed forces. The U.S. has tried to use military visits to build trust with Beijing and learn more about the aims of its massive military buildup.
"In the past, these kinds of suspensions have lasted for three to six months, with some parts of the military-to-military relationship suspended beyond that," said Phillip Saunders, a distinguished research fellow at the National Defense University in Washington. "I expect something similar this time."
It's not known whether the arms sale will affect President Hu Jintao's expected visit to the U.S. this year or a summit on nuclear safety in the U.S. this spring.
Experts on China warned Beijing could take further steps to punish the United States to show its newfound power and confidence in world affairs.
Jin Canrong, a professor of international studies at China's Renmin University, said the sale would give Beijing a "fair and proper reason" to accelerate weapons testing. China test-fired rockets in recent weeks for an anti-missile defense system in what security experts said was a display of anger at the pending arms sale.
"The U.S. will pay a price for this. Starting now, China will make some substantial retaliation, such as reducing cooperation on the North Korea and Iran nuclear issues and anti-terrorism work," Jin added.
The latest suspension of military ties should affect planned visits to China by U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Admiral Michael Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff. A visit to the U.S. by the Chinese military's chief of the general staff, Gen. Chen Bingde, could also be called off.
The U.S. Congress has 30 days to comment on the newest arms sales before the plan goes forward. Lawmakers traditionally have supported such sales.
Though Taiwan's ties with China have warmed considerably since Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou took office 20 months ago, Beijing has threatened to invade if the island ever formalizes its de facto independence. China has more than 1,000 ballistic missiles aimed at Taiwan.
China often argues that arms sales to Taiwan hurt their relations, but Saunders said that despite the latest announcement and the one in 2008, "cross-Strait relations have never been better."
The arms package announced Friday dodged a thorny issue: The more advanced F-16 fighter jets that Taiwan covets are not included.
The Pentagon's decision not to include the fighters and a design plan for diesel submarines – two items Taiwan wants most – "shows that the Obama administration is deeply concerned about China's response," said Wang Kao-cheng, a defense expert at Taipei's Tamkang University.
Taiwan's Ma told reporters Saturday that the deal should not anger the mainland because the weapons are defensive, not offensive.
___
Associated Press writers Foster Klug and Robert Burns in Washington, Charles Hutzler in Beijing and Annie Huang in Taipei contributed to this report.
what this says about the"establishment
Finally, the iPad is proof positive that Apple has the financial resources to develop completely new products from the ground up. The fact that Apple designed and manufactured its own processor specifically for the iPad speaks volumes about the company's vitality, even in an uncertain economy. And it bodes well for Apple's ability to innovate in the years ahead.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
THURSDAY JANUARY 14
5:21 PM ET: China has 'dismissed' Google's threat to leave the country.
The Financial Times reports:
One of China's top propaganda officials on Thursday reaffirmed the state's commitment to censoring the internet, showing no sign of compromising in the face of Google's threat to quit the country.
Wang Chen, head of the State Council Information Office and deputy head of the Communist party's propaganda department, said internet media "must live up to their responsibility of maintaining internet security".
4:14 PM ET: The White House has officially endorsed Google's position.
MarketWatch cites White House spokesperson Robert Gibbs:
"We support [Google's] action ... in a decision to no longer censor searches that happen using the [Google] platform," Gibbs told reporters. He added that "our concern is with actions that threaten the universal rights of a free Internet."
According to MarketWatch, President Barack Obama "supports Google Inc.'s decision to stop voluntarily censoring its search results in China, even though the move could imperil the company's ability to do business in a prized international market."
3:50 PM ET: Get a visual summary of the what China censors and blocks online.
Story continues below
David McCandless, via Fast Company, has created an infographic illustrating what material and sites are censored by the Chinese government. See it below:
5:21 PM ET: China has 'dismissed' Google's threat to leave the country.
The Financial Times reports:
One of China's top propaganda officials on Thursday reaffirmed the state's commitment to censoring the internet, showing no sign of compromising in the face of Google's threat to quit the country.
Wang Chen, head of the State Council Information Office and deputy head of the Communist party's propaganda department, said internet media "must live up to their responsibility of maintaining internet security".
4:14 PM ET: The White House has officially endorsed Google's position.
MarketWatch cites White House spokesperson Robert Gibbs:
"We support [Google's] action ... in a decision to no longer censor searches that happen using the [Google] platform," Gibbs told reporters. He added that "our concern is with actions that threaten the universal rights of a free Internet."
According to MarketWatch, President Barack Obama "supports Google Inc.'s decision to stop voluntarily censoring its search results in China, even though the move could imperil the company's ability to do business in a prized international market."
3:50 PM ET: Get a visual summary of the what China censors and blocks online.
Story continues below
David McCandless, via Fast Company, has created an infographic illustrating what material and sites are censored by the Chinese government. See it below:
Number Of U.S. Business Start-Ups Drop 24%,
Number Of U.S. Business Start-Ups Drop 24%, Leading Global Decline
Huffington Post | Grace Kiser First Posted: 01-14-10 01:32 PM | Updated: 01-14-10 04:49 PM
Share Comments 18
Politicians love to repeat that small businesses are the "engine of our economy." But, according to a new report, that engine is in need of serious repair.
The number of new businesses launched in the U.S. declined 24 percent in the United States in 2009 and 10 percent in the 20 most affluent countries over the same period, according to the annual Global Entrepreneurship Monitor.
The GEM conducted 180,000 interviews in 54 countries in 2009 and found a year-over-year decline in the number of people around the world who thought there were attractive opportunities for business formation.
For an increasing number of people in the world's richest countries, the impetus to start a business was driven by necessity. But interestingly, a small number perceived an increase in opportunity during -- and because of -- the recession. Of this optimistic segment of survey respondents, Niels Bosma, the report's director of research, told the WSJ:
"What surprised me was that as much as one in four new entrepreneurs in wealthy countries believed that the global slowdown had created more opportunities for their business, not less. This is a significant and interesting group. They are more likely to be young, well-educated and expect to create a lot of jobs for others."
Another particularly striking finding in the study was that the rate of Americans entering into entrepreneurship seemed to slow even before the financial crisis started. Based on the data, "the American population acted from around 2006 as if it anticipated trouble ahead." Here's the report:
"From 2006 through 2009, fear of failure rose, as did the share of necessity-driven entrepreneurship, while nascent entrepreneurial activity dropped from a high of 8% in 2005 to 5% in 2009. While new entrepreneurial activity is a smoothed measure, it too showed a decline."
For would-be start-ups, the report found, funding remains tight. Venture capital investment declined considerably in 2008 and 2009. Actually, according to the report, "in the United States a person has a higher chance of winning a million dollars or more in a state lottery than getting venture capital to launch a new venture." In 2008, venture capital helped to fund only about 15,000 start-ups, but informal investment -- from founders and/or their friends, family, and colleagues -- helped pay for tens of millions of new business initiatives.
Read the full report here.
Huffington Post | Grace Kiser First Posted: 01-14-10 01:32 PM | Updated: 01-14-10 04:49 PM
Share Comments 18
Politicians love to repeat that small businesses are the "engine of our economy." But, according to a new report, that engine is in need of serious repair.
The number of new businesses launched in the U.S. declined 24 percent in the United States in 2009 and 10 percent in the 20 most affluent countries over the same period, according to the annual Global Entrepreneurship Monitor.
The GEM conducted 180,000 interviews in 54 countries in 2009 and found a year-over-year decline in the number of people around the world who thought there were attractive opportunities for business formation.
For an increasing number of people in the world's richest countries, the impetus to start a business was driven by necessity. But interestingly, a small number perceived an increase in opportunity during -- and because of -- the recession. Of this optimistic segment of survey respondents, Niels Bosma, the report's director of research, told the WSJ:
"What surprised me was that as much as one in four new entrepreneurs in wealthy countries believed that the global slowdown had created more opportunities for their business, not less. This is a significant and interesting group. They are more likely to be young, well-educated and expect to create a lot of jobs for others."
Another particularly striking finding in the study was that the rate of Americans entering into entrepreneurship seemed to slow even before the financial crisis started. Based on the data, "the American population acted from around 2006 as if it anticipated trouble ahead." Here's the report:
"From 2006 through 2009, fear of failure rose, as did the share of necessity-driven entrepreneurship, while nascent entrepreneurial activity dropped from a high of 8% in 2005 to 5% in 2009. While new entrepreneurial activity is a smoothed measure, it too showed a decline."
For would-be start-ups, the report found, funding remains tight. Venture capital investment declined considerably in 2008 and 2009. Actually, according to the report, "in the United States a person has a higher chance of winning a million dollars or more in a state lottery than getting venture capital to launch a new venture." In 2008, venture capital helped to fund only about 15,000 start-ups, but informal investment -- from founders and/or their friends, family, and colleagues -- helped pay for tens of millions of new business initiatives.
Read the full report here.
2009 Sales See Biggest Drop In 27 Years
December Retail Sales Drop .3 Percent, 2009 Sales See Biggest Drop In 27 Years
BY MARTIN CRUTSINGER | 01/14/10 09:00 AM |
The Commerce Department said Thursday that retail sales declined 0.3 percent in December compared with November, much weaker than the 0.5 percent rise that economists had been expecting. Excluding autos, sales dropped by 0.2 percent, also weaker than the 0.3 percent rise analyst had forecast.
For the year, sales fell 6.2 percent, the biggest decline on records that go back to 1992. The only other year that annual sales fell was in 2008, when they slipped by 0.5 percent.
The 0.3 percent decline in December was the first setback since September, when sales had fallen 2 percent. Sales posted strong gains of 1.2 percent in October and 1.8 percent in November, raising hopes that the consumer is starting to mount a comeback.
Consumer spending is considered critical to any sustained economic revival since consumer spending accounts for 70 percent of total economic activity.
The December drop in sales was a surprise given that the nation's big retailers had reported better-than-expected results last week, reflecting a surge of last-minute holiday shopping. But even with the rebound reported by the nation's biggest chains, these retailers suffered their worst annual performance in more than four decades in 2008, according to data from the International Council of Shopping Centers.
The 6.2 percent fall in the government's retail sales figure is only the second decline on records that go back to 1992. In all other years, even during previous recessions, retail sales, which are not adjusted for inflation, have managed to increase.
Story continues below
For December, sales of autos dropped by 0.8 percent following a 1.2 percent rise in November.
Sales at specialty clothing stores fell by 0.6 percent while sales at general merchandise stores, a category that includes big retailers such as Wal-Mart, were down by 0.8 percent while sales at department stores were flat.
Sales at electronics and appliance stores dropped by 2.6 percent and sales at hardware stores dropped by 0.4 percent.
The weakness over the year reflected the battering that consumers have taken from the worst recession since the Great Depression, a downturn that has cost 7.2 million jobs and left households trying to rebuild savings depleted by losses on Wall Street and a crash in housing prices.
Economists are worried about consumer spending in the months ahead given their forecasts that unemployment, currently at 10 percent, will keep rising until perhaps midyear.
The overall economy, as measured by the gross domestic product, grew at an annual rate of 2.2 percent in the July-September quarter and many economists believe that growth strengthened even further in the final three months of last year. However, the worry is that GDP will slow significantly in the early part of 2010 unless consumers continue to spend.
For December, a diverse group of retailers including Costco Wholesale Corp., Target Corp., Macy's Inc. and TJX all reported increases. Luxury stores like Saks Inc. and Nordstrom also saw strong December sales gains and even Sears Holdings posted a small gain on rising sales at its Kmart chain.
Also helping to support retail spending in December was a hint of better days ahead for the battered auto industry. Automakers in the United States ended their worst year in almost three decades in December with slight improvements, led by gains in sales of small cars.
BY MARTIN CRUTSINGER | 01/14/10 09:00 AM |
The Commerce Department said Thursday that retail sales declined 0.3 percent in December compared with November, much weaker than the 0.5 percent rise that economists had been expecting. Excluding autos, sales dropped by 0.2 percent, also weaker than the 0.3 percent rise analyst had forecast.
For the year, sales fell 6.2 percent, the biggest decline on records that go back to 1992. The only other year that annual sales fell was in 2008, when they slipped by 0.5 percent.
The 0.3 percent decline in December was the first setback since September, when sales had fallen 2 percent. Sales posted strong gains of 1.2 percent in October and 1.8 percent in November, raising hopes that the consumer is starting to mount a comeback.
Consumer spending is considered critical to any sustained economic revival since consumer spending accounts for 70 percent of total economic activity.
The December drop in sales was a surprise given that the nation's big retailers had reported better-than-expected results last week, reflecting a surge of last-minute holiday shopping. But even with the rebound reported by the nation's biggest chains, these retailers suffered their worst annual performance in more than four decades in 2008, according to data from the International Council of Shopping Centers.
The 6.2 percent fall in the government's retail sales figure is only the second decline on records that go back to 1992. In all other years, even during previous recessions, retail sales, which are not adjusted for inflation, have managed to increase.
Story continues below
For December, sales of autos dropped by 0.8 percent following a 1.2 percent rise in November.
Sales at specialty clothing stores fell by 0.6 percent while sales at general merchandise stores, a category that includes big retailers such as Wal-Mart, were down by 0.8 percent while sales at department stores were flat.
Sales at electronics and appliance stores dropped by 2.6 percent and sales at hardware stores dropped by 0.4 percent.
The weakness over the year reflected the battering that consumers have taken from the worst recession since the Great Depression, a downturn that has cost 7.2 million jobs and left households trying to rebuild savings depleted by losses on Wall Street and a crash in housing prices.
Economists are worried about consumer spending in the months ahead given their forecasts that unemployment, currently at 10 percent, will keep rising until perhaps midyear.
The overall economy, as measured by the gross domestic product, grew at an annual rate of 2.2 percent in the July-September quarter and many economists believe that growth strengthened even further in the final three months of last year. However, the worry is that GDP will slow significantly in the early part of 2010 unless consumers continue to spend.
For December, a diverse group of retailers including Costco Wholesale Corp., Target Corp., Macy's Inc. and TJX all reported increases. Luxury stores like Saks Inc. and Nordstrom also saw strong December sales gains and even Sears Holdings posted a small gain on rising sales at its Kmart chain.
Also helping to support retail spending in December was a hint of better days ahead for the battered auto industry. Automakers in the United States ended their worst year in almost three decades in December with slight improvements, led by gains in sales of small cars.
Monday, December 28, 2009
Friday, December 18, 2009
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Christopher Hitchens on Sarah Palin
Christopher Hitchens on Sarah Palin: "A Disgraceful Opportunist And Real Moral Coward" That pretty much sums it all up.
Sunday, December 13, 2009
the propaganda continues
Former Prime Minister Tony Blair's recent admission that he would have invaded Iraq even if he knew from the start that it did not have weapons of mass destruction has sparked public outrage and calls for his prosecution for war crimes in the ongoing war inquiry, the AFP reported.
Blair's administration originally used WMDs to justify going to war, leaving the public feeling that the former minister had entered Iraq under false pretenses, using the language that was most convenient at the time.
Blair maintains that Saddam Hussein's presence in the region would have been enough of a threat to justify the war.
"I would still have thought it right to remove him. I mean, obviously you would have had to use and deploy different arguments about the nature of the threat," Blair told the BBC.
"It was the notion of him as a threat to the region, of which the development of WMD was obviously one, and because you'd had 12 years of United Nations to and fro on this subject, he used chemical weapons on his own people -- so this was obviously the thing that was uppermost in my mind," Blair continued.
Blair's admission has gotten a reaction from all corners-- even Defense Secretary Bob Ainsworth told the BBC he was "a little bit" surprised by Blair's comments.
"I supported the war in Iraq based on the arguments that were put at the time and a big part of those arguments was - and I firmly believed that they existed - was the existence of WMD at that time," Ainsworth said.
Journalist Andrew Gilligan commented in the Sunday Telegraph that Blair's "game-changing admission" will give the war panel "license to be tougher and more prosecutorial."
Blair will provide evidence at the Iraq war hearings early next year.
Blair's administration originally used WMDs to justify going to war, leaving the public feeling that the former minister had entered Iraq under false pretenses, using the language that was most convenient at the time.
Blair maintains that Saddam Hussein's presence in the region would have been enough of a threat to justify the war.
"I would still have thought it right to remove him. I mean, obviously you would have had to use and deploy different arguments about the nature of the threat," Blair told the BBC.
"It was the notion of him as a threat to the region, of which the development of WMD was obviously one, and because you'd had 12 years of United Nations to and fro on this subject, he used chemical weapons on his own people -- so this was obviously the thing that was uppermost in my mind," Blair continued.
Blair's admission has gotten a reaction from all corners-- even Defense Secretary Bob Ainsworth told the BBC he was "a little bit" surprised by Blair's comments.
"I supported the war in Iraq based on the arguments that were put at the time and a big part of those arguments was - and I firmly believed that they existed - was the existence of WMD at that time," Ainsworth said.
Journalist Andrew Gilligan commented in the Sunday Telegraph that Blair's "game-changing admission" will give the war panel "license to be tougher and more prosecutorial."
Blair will provide evidence at the Iraq war hearings early next year.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
a dimension for every outcome
Robert Lanza, M.D.Scientist; author, "Biocentrism"
Posted: December 8, 2009 04:06 PM
BIOBecome a Fan Get Email AlertsBloggers' Index
Does Death Exist? New Theory Says 'No'
digg stumble reddit del.ico.us
Read More: Albert Einstein, Biocentrism, Brain, Death, Death &Amp; Dying, Mind.Body.Soul, Physics, Science, Living News
WHAT'S YOUR REACTION?
Inspiring
Enlightening
Crazy
Scary
Helpful
Amazing
Innovative
Important
Many of us fear death. We believe in death because we have been told we will die. We associate ourselves with the body, and we know that bodies die. But a new scientific theory suggests that death is not the terminal event we think.
One well-known aspect of quantum physics is that certain observations cannot be predicted absolutely. Instead, there is a range of possible observations each with a different probability. One mainstream explanation, the "many-worlds" interpretation, states that each of these possible observations corresponds to a different universe (the 'multiverse'). A new scientific theory - called biocentrism - refines these ideas. There are an infinite number of universes, and everything that could possibly happen occurs in some universe. Death does not exist in any real sense in these scenarios. All possible universes exist simultaneously, regardless of what happens in any of them. Although individual bodies are destined to self-destruct, the alive feeling - the 'Who am I?'- is just a 20-watt fountain of energy operating in the brain. But this energy doesn't go away at death. One of the surest axioms of science is that energy never dies; it can neither be created nor destroyed. But does this energy transcend from one world to the other?
Consider an experiment that was recently published in the journal Science showing that scientists could retroactively change something that had happened in the past. Particles had to decide how to behave when they hit a beam splitter. Later on, the experimenter could turn a second switch on or off. It turns out that what the observer decided at that point, determined what the particle did in the past. Regardless of the choice you, the observer, make, it is you who will experience the outcomes that will result. The linkages between these various histories and universes transcend our ordinary classical ideas of space and time. Think of the 20-watts of energy as simply holo-projecting either this or that result onto a screen. Whether you turn the second beam splitter on or off, it's still the same battery or agent responsible for the projection.
According to Biocentrism, space and time are not the hard objects we think. Wave your hand through the air - if you take everything away, what's left? Nothing. The same thing applies for time. You can't see anything through the bone that surrounds your brain. Everything you see and experience right now is a whirl of information occurring in your mind. Space and time are simply the tools for putting everything together.
Death does not exist in a timeless, spaceless world. In the end, even Einstein admitted, "Now Besso" (an old friend) "has departed from this strange world a little ahead of me. That means nothing. People like us...know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion." Immortality doesn't mean a perpetual existence in time without end, but rather resides outside of time altogether.
This was clear with the death of my sister Christine. After viewing her body at the hospital, I went out to speak with family members. Christine's husband - Ed - started to sob uncontrollably. For a few moments I felt like I was transcending the provincialism of time. I thought about the 20-watts of energy, and about experiments that show a single particle can pass through two holes at the same time. I could not dismiss the conclusion: Christine was both alive and dead, outside of time.
Christine had had a hard life. She had finally found a man that she loved very much. My younger sister couldn't make it to her wedding because she had a card game that had been scheduled for several weeks. My mother also couldn't make the wedding due to an important engagement she had at the Elks Club. The wedding was one of the most important days in Christine's life. Since no one else from our side of the family showed, Christine asked me to walk her down the aisle to give her away.
Soon after the wedding, Christine and Ed were driving to the dream house they had just bought when their car hit a patch of black ice. She was thrown from the car and landed in a banking of snow.
"Ed," she said "I can't feel my leg."
She never knew that her liver had been ripped in half and blood was rushing into her peritoneum.
After the death of his son, Emerson wrote "Our life is not so much threatened as our perception. I grieve that grief can teach me nothing, nor carry me one step into real nature."
Whether it's flipping the switch for the Science experiment, or turning the driving wheel ever so slightly this way or that way on black-ice, it's the 20-watts of energy that will experience the result. In some cases the car will swerve off the road, but in other cases the car will continue on its way to my sister's dream house.
Christine had recently lost 100 pounds, and Ed had bought her a surprise pair of diamond earrings. It's going to be hard to wait, but I know Christine is going to look fabulous in them the next time I see her.
Robert Lanza, MD is considered one of the leading scientists in the world. He is the author of "Biocentrism," a book that lays out his theory of everything.
Posted: December 8, 2009 04:06 PM
BIOBecome a Fan Get Email AlertsBloggers' Index
Does Death Exist? New Theory Says 'No'
digg stumble reddit del.ico.us
Read More: Albert Einstein, Biocentrism, Brain, Death, Death &Amp; Dying, Mind.Body.Soul, Physics, Science, Living News
WHAT'S YOUR REACTION?
Inspiring
Enlightening
Crazy
Scary
Helpful
Amazing
Innovative
Important
Many of us fear death. We believe in death because we have been told we will die. We associate ourselves with the body, and we know that bodies die. But a new scientific theory suggests that death is not the terminal event we think.
One well-known aspect of quantum physics is that certain observations cannot be predicted absolutely. Instead, there is a range of possible observations each with a different probability. One mainstream explanation, the "many-worlds" interpretation, states that each of these possible observations corresponds to a different universe (the 'multiverse'). A new scientific theory - called biocentrism - refines these ideas. There are an infinite number of universes, and everything that could possibly happen occurs in some universe. Death does not exist in any real sense in these scenarios. All possible universes exist simultaneously, regardless of what happens in any of them. Although individual bodies are destined to self-destruct, the alive feeling - the 'Who am I?'- is just a 20-watt fountain of energy operating in the brain. But this energy doesn't go away at death. One of the surest axioms of science is that energy never dies; it can neither be created nor destroyed. But does this energy transcend from one world to the other?
Consider an experiment that was recently published in the journal Science showing that scientists could retroactively change something that had happened in the past. Particles had to decide how to behave when they hit a beam splitter. Later on, the experimenter could turn a second switch on or off. It turns out that what the observer decided at that point, determined what the particle did in the past. Regardless of the choice you, the observer, make, it is you who will experience the outcomes that will result. The linkages between these various histories and universes transcend our ordinary classical ideas of space and time. Think of the 20-watts of energy as simply holo-projecting either this or that result onto a screen. Whether you turn the second beam splitter on or off, it's still the same battery or agent responsible for the projection.
According to Biocentrism, space and time are not the hard objects we think. Wave your hand through the air - if you take everything away, what's left? Nothing. The same thing applies for time. You can't see anything through the bone that surrounds your brain. Everything you see and experience right now is a whirl of information occurring in your mind. Space and time are simply the tools for putting everything together.
Death does not exist in a timeless, spaceless world. In the end, even Einstein admitted, "Now Besso" (an old friend) "has departed from this strange world a little ahead of me. That means nothing. People like us...know that the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion." Immortality doesn't mean a perpetual existence in time without end, but rather resides outside of time altogether.
This was clear with the death of my sister Christine. After viewing her body at the hospital, I went out to speak with family members. Christine's husband - Ed - started to sob uncontrollably. For a few moments I felt like I was transcending the provincialism of time. I thought about the 20-watts of energy, and about experiments that show a single particle can pass through two holes at the same time. I could not dismiss the conclusion: Christine was both alive and dead, outside of time.
Christine had had a hard life. She had finally found a man that she loved very much. My younger sister couldn't make it to her wedding because she had a card game that had been scheduled for several weeks. My mother also couldn't make the wedding due to an important engagement she had at the Elks Club. The wedding was one of the most important days in Christine's life. Since no one else from our side of the family showed, Christine asked me to walk her down the aisle to give her away.
Soon after the wedding, Christine and Ed were driving to the dream house they had just bought when their car hit a patch of black ice. She was thrown from the car and landed in a banking of snow.
"Ed," she said "I can't feel my leg."
She never knew that her liver had been ripped in half and blood was rushing into her peritoneum.
After the death of his son, Emerson wrote "Our life is not so much threatened as our perception. I grieve that grief can teach me nothing, nor carry me one step into real nature."
Whether it's flipping the switch for the Science experiment, or turning the driving wheel ever so slightly this way or that way on black-ice, it's the 20-watts of energy that will experience the result. In some cases the car will swerve off the road, but in other cases the car will continue on its way to my sister's dream house.
Christine had recently lost 100 pounds, and Ed had bought her a surprise pair of diamond earrings. It's going to be hard to wait, but I know Christine is going to look fabulous in them the next time I see her.
Robert Lanza, MD is considered one of the leading scientists in the world. He is the author of "Biocentrism," a book that lays out his theory of everything.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
