[Mb-civic] Re: Buying Support in Latin America

[EAN at sbcglobal.net]

This article is a hatchet job on the most popular 
democratically elected leader in S America--and the 
most reviled because he is the only one openly 
standing up against the vicious capitalist and 
imperialist system (forgive my hyerbole but it is 
actually true!) that has wreaked such havoc on south 
American for so many long years.  Chavez is the one 
actually using the natural wealth (oil) of his nation 
to help the poor (which comprise well over 1/2 the 
people which is why he keeps getting easily elected) 
as opposed to the rest of the world in which the US 
and other rich nations take the oil and other 
resources, pay off that country's leaders and wealthy 
elite, and leave the bulk of the people to suffer in 
poverty.....
mha atma

:>Message: 6
>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 07:09:44 -0400
>From: William Swiggard <swiggard at comcast.net>
>Subject: [Mb-civic] Buying Support in Latin America -
 Jackson Diehl -
>	Washington Post
>To: mb-civic <mb-civic at islandlists.com>
>Message-ID: <4337D6F8.5070801 at comcast.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"us-ascii"
>
>Buying Support in Latin America
>
>By Jackson Diehl
>Monday, September 26, 2005; Page A23
>
>Thanks to the United Nations General Assembly, the 
presidents of three=20
>big South American countries visited the United 
States simultaneously=20
>this month. Two are close U.S. allies who, through 
the diligent pursuit=20
>of free-market policies, have overseen impressive 
economic growth and a=20
>reduction of poverty in their nations. The other is 
a self-declared=20
>enemy of Washington who, despite enjoying an 
extraordinary bonanza of=20
>oil revenue, has managed to increase the poor 
population in his country=20
>by a quarter.
>
>Chances are you heard about only one of these guys. 
Hugo Chavez, the=20
>"revolutionary" president of Venezuela, cut a 
flamboyant swath through=20
>New York, touring Harlem and the Bronx, chatting 
with Ted Koppel,=20
>basking in the applause of the General Assembly for 
his hyperbolic=20
>denunciations of American "imperialism" and 
capitalism.
>
>By contrast, Alvaro Uribe of Colombia and Alejandro 
Toledo of Peru=20
>passed through New York and Washington with barely a 
ripple. Not only=20
>that, they didn't really want to be noticed. True, 
both agreed to meet=20
>with editors and reporters of The Post. But neither 
one was willing to=20
>speak publicly about the biggest development in 
Latin America in years.=20
>That is, of course, the increasingly conspicuous 
emergence of Chavez as=20
>the political and ideological successor to Fidel 
Castro, and his=20
>aggressive attempt to succeed where Castro failed in 
constructing an=20
>anti-American alliance.
>
>It's not that Uribe and Toledo, like the left-wing 
leaders of Brazil and=20
>Argentina, secretly sympathize with Chavez: They 
don't. Toledo, once a=20
>victim of Alberto Fujimori's Peruvian=20
>dictatorship-in-the-shape-of-democracy, can hardly 
admire Chavez's=20
>similar destruction of Venezuela's political 
freedom. Uribe fights a=20
>leftist guerrilla movement created with Castro's 
help decades ago and=20
>now backed by Chavez, who granted asylum and even 
citizenship to one of=20
>its top leaders.
>
>Still, Uribe refused to say anything for publication 
about Chavez.=20
>Toledo doggedly limited himself to the new formula 
of the Organization=20
>of American States: "It's not enough to be elected 
democratically; it's=20
>also indispensable to govern democratically." He 
also let slip: "If I=20
>had as much money from oil as President Chavez, the 
story would be=20
>different."
>
>What's striking about all this is not Chavez's New 
York antics -- which=20
>were copied almost exactly from U.N. appearances by 
Castro -- but the=20
>silence and seeming demoralization of those Latin 
leaders who have stuck=20
>with the "Washington consensus" of free markets and 
democratic politics.=20
>By any reasonable measure, both Uribe and Toledo 
have succeeded: Their=20
>economies are growing rapidly, exports and foreign 
investment are way=20
>up, and extreme poverty is down.
>
>
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2005/09/25/AR2005092=
>501268.html
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-
civic/attachments/20050926/e=
>301dfe4/attachment-0001.htm
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 7
>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 07:13:56 -0400
>From: William Swiggard <swiggard at comcast.net>
>Subject: [Mb-civic] Lessons from a fallen empire - 
James Carroll -
>	Boston	Globe
>To: mb-civic <mb-civic at islandlists.com>
>Message-ID: <4337D7F4.2060506 at comcast.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"us-ascii"
>
>Lessons from a fallen empire
>
>By James Carroll  |  September 26, 2005
>
>ROME
>TO BE IN Rome is to stand, as it were, before a 
canyon wall on which the=20
>tell-tale marks were made by human hands instead of 
wind, sun, and rain.=20
>The primordial world lives in the ruined Forum, 
the=20
>stripped-to-the-brick facades of temples and 
theaters, the surviving=20
>arches of long-gone aqueducts and imperial palaces.
>
>The legacy of that civilization is a structure of 
thinking that informs=20
>the very words on this page, which attempt to do for 
ideas what=20
>lightning rods do for electricity in the sky. 
Polarities between=20
>republic and empire, beauty and decay, order and 
tyranny, expression and=20
>silence -- these are the tensions which found 
balance in ancient Rome=20
>and uphold still the pillar of culture.
>
>In the post-Constantinian Rome of Christianity, 
holiness found its match=20
>in power, and the match is not over. Its archaeology 
is in the street.=20
>Basilicas began as palaces and became cathedrals 
without dropping an=20
>arch. Emperors became popes and, as they say here, 
vice versa. The=20
>monumental tombs make the point. Yet the message of 
love found its way=20
>into stone as well. Try dismissing belief in Rome's 
new gospel in the=20
>presence of Bernini's ''Saint Teresa in Ecstasy." 
Nor has any critic of=20
>religion ever surpassed the humanist fervor of 
Michelangelo's ''Last=20
>Judgment" -- in the stern presence of which the 
newest pope was chosen.
>
>In Rome, that is, the corruptions of all that is 
meant by ''church" are=20
>obvious. But the grace undefeated by those 
corruptions is magnificent,=20
>too. Indeed, what is the Renaissance but the moment 
when corruption=20
>itself became the occasion of grace, when the fully 
human emerged at=20
>last from the translucent shell of the will to be 
divine? The world we=20
>know and love came next.
>
>Rome may be the ultimate display of memory, but it 
is also the world=20
>capital of style. Sleek-suited men, supremely 
composed women, designer=20
>cars, the burnished leather of shoes and bags, the 
front edge of=20
>personal invention -- modernity congratulates itself 
here. The future is=20
>as palpable in the people as the past is in the 
stone. Because the=20
>contrast between the present and what precedes it is 
so dramatic, every=20
>trip to Rome requires a reassessment of impression. 
But such=20
>reassessment is precisely the endless work of 
history. The past is not=20
>dead, as Faulkner said; it isn't even past. Memory, 
therefore, is more=20
>about today than yesterday, which is why we visit 
the so-called foreign=20
>country of the past every chance we get.
>
>School children learn to think this way by reading 
Caesar, and then,=20
>perhaps, by learning of Luther. Across millennia, 
the lesson is=20
>absolute. The educational value of glorious Rome is 
that it fell, and=20
>fell again. And each time that happened, out from 
the ruins crawled the=20
>people who had borne the full weight of the imperial 
structure -- the=20
>ones who had actually paved the famous roads, and 
quarried the infinite=20
>supply of marble, and heaped coals on the fires that 
cut the chill of=20
>palace floors; the ones who had faced the 
inquisitors, questioned=20
>orthodoxy, chosen conscience over obedience.
>
>http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/op
ed/articles/2005/09/=
>26/lessons_from_a_fallen_empire/
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-
civic/attachments/20050926/2=
>269179e/attachment-0001.htm
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 8
>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 07:15:32 -0400
>From: William Swiggard <swiggard at comcast.net>
>Subject: [Mb-civic] Sharing the oil price windfall - 
Joseph P. Kennedy
>	II -	Boston Globe
>To: mb-civic <mb-civic at islandlists.com>
>Message-ID: <4337D854.3010102 at comcast.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"us-ascii"
>
>Sharing the oil price windfall
>
>By Joseph P. Kennedy II  |  September 26, 2005
>
>THE HUGE run-ups in energy prices have created 
record profits for oil=20
>and gas companies, refiners, shippers, and other 
players in the energy=20
>industry.
>
>What may surprise many people is that one of the 
principal beneficiaries=20
>of the price spikes is the US government. When 
energy costs soar, the=20
>federal treasury sees massive infusions of royalties 
from energy=20
>companies for oil and gas extracted from federal 
lands and waters.
>
>While the government collects a windfall, the poor 
just reap the cold.=20
>The federal treasury should not be making money off 
of elderly Americans=20
>and working families shivering in their homes during 
the winter.
>
>It's time that every cent of unearned windfall goes 
toward fuel=20
>assistance for the poor. Using $25 a barrel as a 
baseline -- the=20
>mid-range of OPEC's preferred price band for crude 
oil -- the federal=20
>government ought to channel royalties collected on 
higher prices into=20
>energy aid for low-income households.
>
>With crude oil prices now above $60 a barrel, the 
federal government=20
>earns over 200 percent more a barrel in royalties 
than it did during the=20
>2002-03 heating season, when prices hovered around 
$25 a barrel, and 62=20
>percent more than it did last year. In 2004, oil 
producers pumping crude=20
>from federal lands paid $1.5 billion in royalties to 
the federal=20
>government. The $12 a barrel premium above the 
baseline brought in a=20
>$500 million windfall -- all of which should go 
toward fuel assistance.=20
>Similar calculations ought to be made for coal and 
natural gas.
>
>While royalties rise with fuel prices, energy 
companies also pay huge=20
>bonuses, as much as $1 billion in a single year, to 
the federal=20
>government in the competitive-bid process to extract 
the resources.=20
>Annual lease payments for development rights add 
hundreds of millions of=20
>dollars more. Both sources ought to contribute to 
fuel assistance as well.
>
>Federal energy revenues, which have topped as much 
as $10 billion=20
>annually, derive from resources belonging to every 
American. Under=20
>current law, the federal government doles out half 
the royalties to the=20
>states from which the onshore oil and gas are 
extracted -- except for=20
>Alaska, which gets 90 percent. For off-shore 
production, Washington=20
>keeps 63 percent of the royalties from oil and gas 
pumped from waters=20
>within three miles of state shorelines and 100 
percent for fossil fuels=20
>taken beyond the boundary.
>
>A small portion of the federal revenue goes into 
conservation and water=20
>projects while the vast majority disappears into the 
treasury's general=20
>fund. It's wrong that multi-billion dollar transfers 
of energy wealth=20
>take place with no provisions for helping those 
struggling with rising=20
>energy costs. A provision in the recently passed 
energy bill authorizes=20
>the secretary of the interior to earmark some 
portion of royalties for=20
>fuel assistance. That doesn't go far enough. The 
full windfall should go=20
>to help the poor.
>
>Just putting one-third of last year's $6 billion in 
federal offshore=20
>rents, royalties, and bonuses into heating 
assistance would double the=20
>Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program's $2 
billion budget and=20
>restore the benefit's eroding value, which purchases 
just half as much=20
>heat as it did three years ago.
>
>To middle-class households, higher energy prices 
mean less disposable=20
>income. But for the poor, higher prices and eroding 
benefits mean=20
>cutting back on necessities, huddling around the 
kitchen stove, using=20
>dangerous space heaters, closing off rooms to cut 
fuel bills, and=20
>wearing coats indoors. Child nutrition in poor 
neighborhoods=20
>dramatically declines during periods of cold weather 
and rising fuel bill=
>s.
>
>http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/op
ed/articles/2005/09/=
>26/sharing_the_oil_price_windfall/
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-
civic/attachments/20050926/a=
>96e3584/attachment-0001.htm
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 9
>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 11:43:18 -0300
>From: "Alexander Harper" <harperalexander at mail.com>
>Subject: [Mb-civic] Bush's lost gamble
>To: MB-Civic at islandlists.com
>Message-ID: <20050926144319.C50FA1CE303 at ws1-
6.us4.outblaze.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"iso-8859-1"
>
>It is very bad luck on all of you, none of whom will 
be surprised that an=
>ything connected with George W and his coterie was 
bound to end in tears,=
> but I cannot understand how so many americans can 
have been (and continu=
>e to be)fooled by so few for so long.
>Al B
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------
--------------------=
>-------
>Main page content:
>US suffers as Bush=92s gamble fails=20
>By Philip Verleger=20
>Published: September 25 2005 20:18 | Last updated: 
September 25 2005 20:1=
>8
>
>After his 1964 landslide election, President Lyndon 
Johnson gambled that =
>the US economy could support a war and his Great 
Society programme. He lo=
>st. The expenditures exceeded economic capacity. 
Shortages occurred, pric=
>es rose, and a 15-year inflationary spiral began. 
Within two years, the F=
>ederal Reserve had to intervene by raising interest 
rates. Economic growt=
>h stopped and harsh economic conditions brought an 
end to Johnson=92s dre=
>am.
>=20
>Forty years later, another president from Texas made 
another wager: betti=
>ng the US could fight a war, reduce taxes and avoid 
conserving energy. He=
> also lost. Over the next two years, President 
George W. Bush will see in=
>flation return and the Federal Reserve Board act to 
offset his profligate=
> energy and fiscal policies.
>
>Johnson=92s hope that the US economy could sustain 
the Vietnam war and do=
>mestic economic expansion ended when US industry 
failed to meet military =
>and civilian demands. Unfinished aeroplanes sat 
waiting for galleys and o=
>ther gear needed to complete them. Homes stood 
unfinished as builders wai=
>ted for lumber, plumbing and other finishings. 
Prices rose. The Federal R=
>eserve took matters into its own hands when Congress 
refused to reduce th=
>e growing deficit. In 1969, as they made way for the 
incoming Nixon admin=
>istration, Johnson=92s departing economic advisers 
noted ruefully: =93In =
>the absence of a full measure of timely fiscal 
restraint, an undue share =
>of the burden of dampening the excessive expansion 
fell on monetary polic=
>y.=94=20
>
>Today, President Bush is in a similar situation. He 
and his advisers also=
> gambled, although in a different game. Johnson 
tried to provide guns and=
> butter without raising taxes. George Bush tried to 
serve up large tax cu=
>ts without reducing spending or addressing the 
nation=92s rapacious thirs=
>t for motor fuels, particularly gasoline.=20
>
>The Bush wager failed when Hurricanes Katrina and 
Rita destroyed a large =
>part of the US Gulf coast. The storm put additional 
strain on an economy =
>operating near capacity, while simultaneously 
closing part of the nation=92=
>s petroleum refining and natural gas industries. The 
extensive damage has=
> forced the government to enact large spending 
increases to rebuild commu=
>nities and support displaced individuals.=20
>
>This is a classic Keynesian stimulus package. Given 
the state of the busi=
>ness cycle, inflation can be expected to rise even 
without offsetting red=
>uctions in government outlays. The huge rebuilding 
requirements will send=
> prices up and create shortages for materials, 
capital equipment and crit=
>ical labour resources. Home builders already report 
a wide scarcity of pl=
>ywood.
>
>The loss of natural gas supplies adds to 
inflationary pressures. Katrina =
>and Rita destroyed perhaps 5 per cent of the 
nation=92s natural gas suppl=
>y, causing large price increases. Heating bills 
could double this winter.=
> Furthermore, the cost of goods manufactured using 
natural gas, such as P=
>VC pipe, will climb sharply even before rebuilding 
efforts boost demand.
>
>The economic stimulus will also put pressure on 
petroleum markets. The ec=
>onomic spur from reconstruction will heighten 
gasoline and diesel demand.=
> But the increase cannot be met because of storm 
damage to US refineries.=
> Thus, Katrina and Rita will leave a legacy of much 
higher gasoline and d=
>iesel prices in 2006. These price hikes could have 
been avoided had we pu=
>rsued a programme to limit increases in motor fuel 
consumption.
>
>Here, too, George Bush made a bet. Efforts to 
tighten fuel economy standa=
>rds for new vehicles were rejected when his energy 
programme was introduc=
>ed and Congress refused to change it. The president 
declined to push a ga=
>soline tax following 9/11. He wagered that an 
already stretched refining =
>industry could meet mounting gasoline demand, which 
is largely linked to =
>American affinity for large SUVs and trucks. The 
president and his advise=
>rs understood that the higher demand would require 
US refineries to opera=
>te at maximum capacity. They knew no new refineries 
were being built. The=
>y also knew no new offshore facilities capable of 
meeting EPA standards h=
>ad been constructed. Not until this summer, after 
months of the industry =
>operating flat out, did they realise new capacity 
was necessary.
>
>The president lost this gamble as well when the two 
hurricanes hit the Gu=
>lf coast, taking a severe toll on the refining 
industry. It may take a ye=
>ar or more to bring it back to its pre-Katrina 
state. Until then, supply =
>will be lower and prices much higher. Although the 
calculations are hard =
>to believe, econometric models suggest retail 
gasoline prices might need =
>to double by next summer to maintain market balance. 
The price rise will =
>add to inflation.
>
>There is only one end to this scenario: higher 
interest rates. A vigilant=
> Federal Reserve Board will have to boost rates to 
suppress demand, just =
>as during the Johnson administration. The pressure 
for higher rates will =
>be even greater given the forthcoming retirement of 
Alan Greenspan as Fed=
> chairman. His replacement will need to convince 
financial markets that t=
>he Board remains determined to keep inflation in 
check. The consequences =
>will be a slowdown or worse.=20
>
>As the rebuilding effort slows, high interest rates 
and high gasoline pri=
>ces may pull the economy into recession. Like 
President Johnson, Presiden=
>t Bush took a chance and lost.
>
>The writer is a senior fellow at the =ADInstitute 
for International Econo=
>mics
>=20
>=20
>
>
>--=20
>_____________________________________________________
______
>Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
>http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 10
>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 14:56:15 +0000 (GMT)
>From: mblaxill at yahoo.com
>Subject: [Mb-civic] NYTimes.com: Many Contracts for 
Storm Work Raise
>	Questions
>To: mb-civic at islandlists.com
>Message-ID: <20050926145615.CF98D24AE94 at lax-
gw02.mroute.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"us-ascii"
>
>This page was sent to you by: mblaxill at yahoo.com.
>
>who whouda thought?
>
>
>NATIONAL / NATIONAL SPECIAL | September 26, 2005
>Rebuilding: Many Contracts for Storm Work Raise 
Questions
>By ERIC LIPTON and RON NIXON
>More than 80 percent of the $1.5 billion in 
contracts signed by FEMA were=
> awarded without bidding or with limited competition.
>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/26/national/nationalsp
ecial/26spend.html?e=
>x=3D1128398400&en=3D8763e021ceeefed5&ei=3D5070&emc=3D
eta1
>
>
>
>----------------- Advertisement ---------------------
-----
>
>The Academy loved these movies enough to name each
>one Best Picture.  What did the original New York
>Times movie reviews have to say about these Oscar
>winning films? =20
>Go to the Best Pictures review archive:
>
>http://ads.nyt.com/th.ad/nytnyt-textEmailThisdefault-
Center1A/academyawar=
>ds_text/?
_RM_REDIR_=3Dhttp://www.nytimes.com/ref/movies/oscars/
bestpictur=
>es.html
>
>
>
>
>----------------- Advertisement ---------------------
-----
>
>0
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------
-----
>
>ABOUT THIS E-MAIL
>This e-mail was sent to you by a friend through 
NYTimes.com's E-mail This=
> Article service.  For general information about 
NYTimes.com, write to he=
>lp at nytimes.com.
>
>NYTimes.com 500 Seventh Avenue New York, NY 10018
>
>Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-
civic/attachments/20050926/a=
>4baa00d/attachment.htm
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Mb-civic mailing list
>Mb-civic at islandlists.com
>http://www.islandlists.com/cgi-
bin/mailman/listinfo/mb-civic
>
>End of Mb-civic Digest, Vol 15, Issue 89
>****************************************