- Login | Register
- Current Issue
- Most Read
- Back Issues
Saudi Arabia and Arab allies that have cut ties with Qatar will hold talks in Egypt today on the Gulf diplomatic crisis, a
Credit Suisse said today it had reached an agreement with US authorities to pay almost USD 5.3 billion to settle disputes
The 2008 global economic crisis, and the rise in unemployment that accompanied it, was associated with more than 260,000 e
Rolling out GST, rationalising direct taxes and ensuring further ease of doing business will be at the top of his agenda i
On the eve of the most crucial US Fed meeting in eight years which is expected to take a call on the long-pending rate hik
The BSE Sensex is the fifth largest loser among its global peers witnessing a 7.5 per cent plunge ever since China devalue
Greece's eurozone partners were doubtful of a last-ditch bailout deal today, saying talks to stop it crashing out of the e
Greece faced an uncharted future as its interior ministry predicted today that more than 60 per cent of voters in a hastil
Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis accused Athens' creditors of "terrorism" in an interview published today
Domestic mutual fund houses expect some volatility in the short-term since they expect foreign investors to pull out some
Michael Moore on 20 years of film-making and his latest movie in the Democracy Now!
This is the way it is now in this country. The wealthiest one percent right have more financial wealth than the bottom 95 percent combined. When you have a situation like that, where the one percent essentially not only own all the wealth, but own Congress, call the shots, are we really telling the truth when we call this a democracy? I know we get to vote every two or four years. Is that it? Just because we get to vote every now and then, we can call this a democracy, when the economy is anything but? You and I have no say in it. The people watching this, listening to us today have no say in how this economy is run. There’s not democracy in the workplace. I mean, through most of our daily lives, the idea of democracy is fairly nonexistent. And I think things work better when the people who have to work with whatever it is we’re working with have a say in how it’s working.
So I made this movie to do a number of things. One, to just go head on at this system. I’m not a reformer. I’m not looking for Congress to pass a few new regulations, which, by the way, it’s been a year since the crash, and they haven’t passed one of these things, which is what they said they were going to do right away, right? “All we need is a few rules. Don’t get rid of capitalism, just a few rules, and we’ll get everything back in shape.” Of course, they have no intention of doing that, and the banking industry has lobbied them successfully over the last year to leave them alone so that they can keep doing their crazy schemes. That’s one reason.
The second reason is, I wanted to present a filmed explanation of just what exactly did happen a year ago, what led up to it. I think a lot people, including myself—you know, we’re not economists. We don’t—we hear these terms, we don’t understand what they mean—derivatives, credit default swaps and all this stuff. And I thought, you know, I’ll bet you there’s a way to tell this story so that anybody will instantly get exactly what the looting was that took place a year ago this time. So I wanted to do that.
And then I guess I’m—I guess I’m doing what I’m always trying to do and what I think what all filmmakers try to do, is that I’m—I recognize that I’m asking you to leave the house on a Friday or Saturday night, get a babysitter, drive to the theater, spend money, spend outrageous amounts of money on popcorn and soda, and sit in the dark with 200 other strangers. I really want you, at the end of those two hours, to walk out of the theater saying to whoever you’re there with, “That was really—that was a good way to spend two hours. I learned something. I laughed my ass off. I cried.”
And I think this movie provides a range of not just emotions, but also really solid information and a number of exposés of things that have not been discussed in the media, or if they have been, they get brought up quickly and then are rejected, and nobody talks about them again. So I show you a number of things in the film. I think, you know, early audiences I’ve seen it with are fairly shocked at some of the stories that I presented.
Now, that is fast. General Motors hasn't wasted any time in trying to re-invent itself. But as the NYT asks, Can General Motors make up for decades of mistakes and misfires in a minute? The ad goes on to say, "This is not about going out of business. This is about getting down to business."
The Onion made my day:
After nearly four months of frank, honest, and open dialogue about the failing economy, a weary U.S. populace announced this week that it is once again ready to be lied to about the current state of the financial systemMore here
Tired of hearing the grim truth about their economic future, Americans demanded that the bald-faced lies resume immediately, particularly whenever politicians feel the need to divulge another terrifying problem with Wall Street, the housing market, or any one of a hundred other ticking time bombs everyone was better off not knowing about.
Warren Buffett has sounded a note of cautious optimism in an interview to CNBC. When asked if he still thinks America is in 'an economic Pearl Harbor', as he had described it last October, he replied:
"Well, no. We're at a war now to some degree, but Pearl Harbor was September. Pearl Harbor was September. At that point, you could have lost the war. And there was a strike at the heart of the American system, the financial system. And we got past that. Some of the right decisions were made then, so I give people great credit for doing that. The war isn't over, though."
Warren Buffett tells Charlie Rose on PBS: 'I haven't seen as much economic fear in my adult lifetime':
The Pew Research Center asked 1,003 Americans what they considered to be a necessity as against a luxury they could live without. This is what they found:
OK, I can off-hand explain the figures for TV (computers perhaps as alternatives?) But what good is a TV without cable or satellite -- so what explains the lower figure for these? And what explains this fascination for landlines? What really threw me was that only 31 percent want high-speed internet. Perhaps I should go back and read more carefully about the sample size, demographics etc. As for other things, has the recession also brought about an end of materialism?
It'd be fascinating to do a similar exercise for India -- but then which India? It's sobering to think about those without access to food, clothing, education, water, sanitation, electricity but for now perhaps we could start with a similar survey of those who access blogs such as this one: So tell us, which of the above are necessities for you?
In romance, and in finance, a seduction that relies on logic could be a play, shows John Allen Paulos in abcnews.com
Suppose a man flirts with a woman and then asks her, "Will you solemnly promise to give me right now your telephone number if I make a true statement and, conversely, not give me your number if I make a false statement?" ...
The man then makes his statement: "You will neither give me your telephone number now nor will you sleep with me tonight."
What's the trick? Note that she can't give him her number since, if she were to do so, his statement would be made false, and so she would have broken her promise to give him her number only if he made a true statement. (This is the crux of it.) Therefore, she must not give him her number under any circumstances.
But if she also refuses to sleep with him, his statement becomes true, and this would require her to give him her number.
The only way she can keep her promise is to sleep with him so that his statement becomes false. The woman's seemingly innocuous promise ensnares her...
HT: Kajal Chakravarti
What blew me about this speech was not the words but the silence with which the European Parliament heard Conservative MEP Daniel Hannan out, as he went about roasting Gordon Brown. Imagine our netas keeping so quiet.
And the fact that the press ignored it entirely.
But then there is the internet, youtube and the US media.
On the other hand, the likes of Varun Gandhi (or even MMS and LKA, going by recent evidence) might wonder what's all this fuss about tame stuff like a prime minister being described 'the devalued Prime Minister of a devalued Government.' or 'Brezhnev era apparatchik'