Obama hits new snag as Cabinet nominee questionedThe Associated PressPublished: February 3, 2009
WASHINGTON: President Barack Obama's young administration hit a new snag as a second Cabinet nominee faced questions over his tax returns, an unwelcome distractionas the president urges swift passage of his massive economic stimulus plan.
Former Sen. Tom Daschle apologized Monday for failing to pay more than $120,000 in taxes and appealed to his former colleagues in the Senate to approvehim all the same. Obama said he was "absolutely" sticking with his nominee for health secretary.
The White House both underscored the magnitude of the problem and tried to downplay it in the space of seven words. "Nobody's perfect," said press secretaryRobert Gibbs. "It was a serious mistake. ..."
The administration did receive some good news Monday, as another Cabinet choice, Eric Holder, was confirmed as the first African-American U.S. attorneygeneral.
Holder's nomination initially had been viewed as problematic because of questions over his role in controversial pardons when he was the No. 2 Justice Departmentofficial under President Bill Clinton. Now Holder will be the country's chief law enforcement official as head of the Justice Department.
Today in AmericasBolivia has lithium, and the president intends to make world pay for itObama's promise of ethics reform faces early testHolder is confirmed as U.S. attorney general
Nobody was predicting defeat for Daschle's nomination as secretary of health and human services, but it was proving an unsavory pill to swallow for senatorswho only last week confirmed Timothy Geithner as treasury secretary despite his separate tax-payment problems. The issue strikes a nerve as many Americansare struggling with their own serious money problems.
The Commerce Department reported that personal spending fell for the sixth straight month in December by 1 percent. Analysts had predicted a decline of0.9 percent. Incomes also dipped, and the personal savings rate shot higher, a sign that consumers remain extremely nervous about the economy.
The president predicted Monday some of America's troubled banks still could fail, despite a $700 billion financial bailout program, half of which has alreadybeen spent by the former Bush administration. The bailout program is separate from the Obama administration's more than $800 billion stimulus plan.
Obama has struggled to win Republican support on his stimulus plan. He did not win Republican votes when the $819 billion version of the bill passed theHouse of Representatives last week. Republican senators also have not been well disposed toward it, declaring the measure too focused on government spendingto the exclusion of tax cuts. The Senate version of the plan totals $900 billion and a vote was expected later this week.
The president appealed to Congress on Monday saying that "very modest differences" should not keep it from getting approved quickly.
Obama issued his new appeal at a meeting with Vermont Gov. Jim Douglas, the Republican vice chairman of the National Governors Association. Douglas is amongseveral Republican governors who have broken with their party colleagues in Congress in seeking approval of the Obama measure.
Separately, the financial bailout program appeared likely to be expanded beyond the $700 billion now allocated by Congress.
"We can expect that we're going to have to do more to shore up the financial system," Obama said in an interview with NBC television.
An announcement is expected next week on how the Obama administration plans to use the last $350 billion of that effort, which has come under heavy congressionaland public criticism.
The massive infusion of taxpayer money into the financial sector has largely failed to thaw U.S. credit markets, while some financial institutions usedthe money to pay dividends, buy other banks and pay out big year-end bonuses to employees.
The president also said that he was taking full responsibility for rescuing the U.S. economy, which is facing its worst downturn in 80 years.
In the NBC interview, Obama referred to establishing a review board for the financial bailout program, but aides later corrected that, saying he meant tosay it would be put in place for the stimulus package.
"If I don't have this done in three years then there's going to be a one-term proposition," Obama said, already looking forward to the 2012 presidentialelection.
Also Monday, Daschle sought to explain how he overlooked taxes on income for consulting work and the use of a car service. He also deducted more in charitablecontributions than he should have.
"I apologize for the errors and profoundly regret that you have had to devote time to them," he told committee members.
Daschle was an early supporter of Obama's presidential bid, and several of Daschle's former congressional staffers went to work for Obama after Daschlelost his re-election bid in 2004.
Daschle filed the amended tax returns after Obama announced he intended to nominate him as secretary of health and human services.
Before Daschle's difficulties over back taxes, Geithner's confirmation as treasury secretary was delayed after it was revealed that he had failed to paymore than $34,000 in taxes.
Meanwhile, Democratic officials said Obama will nominate Republican Sen. Judd Gregg as commerce secretary on Tuesday. The two Democratic officials familiarwith the plan disclosed Gregg's pending nomination late Monday on condition of anonymity because a formal announcement had yet to be made.
Gregg would be the third Republican to join Obama's Cabinet, if confirmed. The others are Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Transportation Secretary RayLahood.___Associated Press Writer Laurie Kellman contributed to this report.
Monday, 2 February 2009
Commuting | Home again, home again | The Economist
Correspondent's Diary
Commuting
Home again, home again
Feb 2nd 2009From Economist.com
Getting from one place to another in four cities
IT SEEMS odd to be talking about the daily grind of commuting on a day when most of London stayed at home. There were no buses running, many trains werecancelled and if The Economist’s Monday morning conference was anything to go by, people whose presence is normally regarded as essential phoned in instead.But as it happens my train from Cambridge ran only a few minutes late, and although I had to walk my bike much of the way from King’s Cross to The Economist’soffices in St James’s (why are London’s roads not gritted in preparation for snow that has been forecast for days?) I got to work only a little later anddamper than usual.
I moved out of London for the same reason as thousands of others: I became a parent. I was no longer getting any benefit from the good stuff (theatres,galleries, shops and so on) and suddenly the bad stuff—the dirt, the lack of space, the cost and above all the schools, so many of them depressingly dreadful—startedto matter. I was working a day or two a week in Cambridge at the time, so in 2003 I traded one three-bed Victorian semi-detached house for another. Mynew house was almost identical to my old, but it was within a short cycle of one of the world’s most beautiful town centres, on a quiet street, with ahundred-foot garden and facing a park. It was cheaper, too.
So two years later, when The Economist offered me a job in London, I was not keen to move back. Instead I acquired a folding bike and an eye-wateringlyexpensive yearly season ticket (every year the price goes up by more than retail-price inflation; it now costs £3,500), and became one of around 700,000people who commute by train into London every day.ReutersShut it all down
My trains come and go from King’s Cross, one of London’s biggest and busiest stations, which is undergoing seemingly interminable renovation. The platformson the underground get dangerously overcrowded during the morning rush hour as people change between the six lines that stop there, so one of the entrancesto the underground station is closed, forcing my fellow commuters who need to use the tube for their onward travel to queue at the other entrance in singlefile. Many of them will already have endured a cramped and uncomfortable journey: the line from Cambridge to King’s Cross is Britain’s most overcrowded,with figures published last August showing that it had four of the six trains with the highest ratios of standers to sitters in the country. I am lucky:I can work varied hours and mostly miss the worst of it.
I lived in London for a spell in the early 1990s. I didn’t know it at the time, but I was experiencing London at almost its most depopulated in 50 years.In 1939 8.6m people lived in Greater London, but that fell to a low of 6.7m in 1988. Since then the population of London has risen by almost 50,000 a year—anincrease largely fuelled by immigration. Around 7.5m people now live in the city.
In the past year or so, however, net migration has turned negative, and there is a great deal of churn: last year around 150,000 people come to London fromabroad, and around the same number from other bits of the United Kingdom—most of them young and childless. Roughly 380,000 Londoners left, many of themolder, or parents.
Modern travel patterns poorly suit an old, crowded city, and much of London’s infrastructure is crumbling. London’s underground was the world’s first (theMetropolitan line opened in 1863), and in recent decades repairs on the ageing trains and escalators were often let slide, creating a huge backlog. Otherdevelopments over that period: the congestion charge, introduced in 2003, without which London would presumably face total gridlock; “bendy buses”, anincomprehensible waste of precious road real estate; and unpredictable diversions due to Thames Water’s constantly shifting upgrade-works on London’s Victoriansewers and water mains.
Among the biggest changes in commuting habits has been the increase in cycling. In 1992 it was an eccentric habit I had picked up while studying in Cambridge—bya wide margin Britain’s most cycle-friendly city. Now lots of Londoners do it, which is good—other road users are more aware of us—and bad—now that theynotice we exist, they almost uniformly hate us. Ask them why and most will say it’s because cyclists break rules, which they do—but no more frequentlythan pedestrians or motorists. As I leave behind the morning hordes queuing to go underground at King’s Cross, or sail past a bendy bus straddling threelanes and blocking a busy junction as it tries to turn a corner, I know the true reason is jealousy.
When I came back from maternity leave after my second child our editorial manager asked if a BlackBerry would help me to manage my time. I turned the offerdown on the grounds that I needed somewhere to get some real work done. In the mornings, the 50-minute journey is perfect for sketching out an article;in the evenings I read, usually something work-related, or muse over a story lead or title, or (on Wednesdays) sleep. I feel sorry for commuters I seereading newspapers, or emailing: they are wasting the best bit of the day.
Commuting
Home again, home again
Feb 2nd 2009From Economist.com
Getting from one place to another in four cities
IT SEEMS odd to be talking about the daily grind of commuting on a day when most of London stayed at home. There were no buses running, many trains werecancelled and if The Economist’s Monday morning conference was anything to go by, people whose presence is normally regarded as essential phoned in instead.But as it happens my train from Cambridge ran only a few minutes late, and although I had to walk my bike much of the way from King’s Cross to The Economist’soffices in St James’s (why are London’s roads not gritted in preparation for snow that has been forecast for days?) I got to work only a little later anddamper than usual.
I moved out of London for the same reason as thousands of others: I became a parent. I was no longer getting any benefit from the good stuff (theatres,galleries, shops and so on) and suddenly the bad stuff—the dirt, the lack of space, the cost and above all the schools, so many of them depressingly dreadful—startedto matter. I was working a day or two a week in Cambridge at the time, so in 2003 I traded one three-bed Victorian semi-detached house for another. Mynew house was almost identical to my old, but it was within a short cycle of one of the world’s most beautiful town centres, on a quiet street, with ahundred-foot garden and facing a park. It was cheaper, too.
So two years later, when The Economist offered me a job in London, I was not keen to move back. Instead I acquired a folding bike and an eye-wateringlyexpensive yearly season ticket (every year the price goes up by more than retail-price inflation; it now costs £3,500), and became one of around 700,000people who commute by train into London every day.ReutersShut it all down
My trains come and go from King’s Cross, one of London’s biggest and busiest stations, which is undergoing seemingly interminable renovation. The platformson the underground get dangerously overcrowded during the morning rush hour as people change between the six lines that stop there, so one of the entrancesto the underground station is closed, forcing my fellow commuters who need to use the tube for their onward travel to queue at the other entrance in singlefile. Many of them will already have endured a cramped and uncomfortable journey: the line from Cambridge to King’s Cross is Britain’s most overcrowded,with figures published last August showing that it had four of the six trains with the highest ratios of standers to sitters in the country. I am lucky:I can work varied hours and mostly miss the worst of it.
I lived in London for a spell in the early 1990s. I didn’t know it at the time, but I was experiencing London at almost its most depopulated in 50 years.In 1939 8.6m people lived in Greater London, but that fell to a low of 6.7m in 1988. Since then the population of London has risen by almost 50,000 a year—anincrease largely fuelled by immigration. Around 7.5m people now live in the city.
In the past year or so, however, net migration has turned negative, and there is a great deal of churn: last year around 150,000 people come to London fromabroad, and around the same number from other bits of the United Kingdom—most of them young and childless. Roughly 380,000 Londoners left, many of themolder, or parents.
Modern travel patterns poorly suit an old, crowded city, and much of London’s infrastructure is crumbling. London’s underground was the world’s first (theMetropolitan line opened in 1863), and in recent decades repairs on the ageing trains and escalators were often let slide, creating a huge backlog. Otherdevelopments over that period: the congestion charge, introduced in 2003, without which London would presumably face total gridlock; “bendy buses”, anincomprehensible waste of precious road real estate; and unpredictable diversions due to Thames Water’s constantly shifting upgrade-works on London’s Victoriansewers and water mains.
Among the biggest changes in commuting habits has been the increase in cycling. In 1992 it was an eccentric habit I had picked up while studying in Cambridge—bya wide margin Britain’s most cycle-friendly city. Now lots of Londoners do it, which is good—other road users are more aware of us—and bad—now that theynotice we exist, they almost uniformly hate us. Ask them why and most will say it’s because cyclists break rules, which they do—but no more frequentlythan pedestrians or motorists. As I leave behind the morning hordes queuing to go underground at King’s Cross, or sail past a bendy bus straddling threelanes and blocking a busy junction as it tries to turn a corner, I know the true reason is jealousy.
When I came back from maternity leave after my second child our editorial manager asked if a BlackBerry would help me to manage my time. I turned the offerdown on the grounds that I needed somewhere to get some real work done. In the mornings, the 50-minute journey is perfect for sketching out an article;in the evenings I read, usually something work-related, or muse over a story lead or title, or (on Wednesdays) sleep. I feel sorry for commuters I seereading newspapers, or emailing: they are wasting the best bit of the day.
BBC NEWS | England | London | Heavy snow disrupts London travel
Heavy snow disrupts London travel
A skier in Pimlico, central LondonPeople are finding innovative ways to travel in London
Thousands of people are unable to travel as London's transport network has been disrupted due to snow.
The majority of the bus network and three Underground lines - the Circle, Hammersmith & City and Waterloo & City lines - have been suspended.
London Mayor Boris Johnson has suspended the city's congestion charge for the day.
Both runways at Heathrow Airport closed although one has since reopened. London City Airport remains closed.
The snow caused a Cyprus Airways flight to slip off a taxiway at Heathrow and land in grass.
Passengers were unharmed in the incident which took place at about 0820 GMT, airport operator BAA said.
The authority added it was the last flight to land before the runways were closed.
British Airways said it has cancelled all its flights until 1700 GMT.
Earlier, all bus services in the city were suspended. A few are being reintroduced but most remain withdrawn.
London has seen the heaviest snowfall in 18 years, weather experts said.
Buses and Tube
Up to 10cm (4in) of snow has already fallen in some parts of Greater London, with 6cm (2in) of snow reported at Heathrow Airport.
The conditions led the Met Office to issue an extreme weather warning for London and the south east of England.
On the Underground, the Circle, Hammersmith & City and Waterloo & City lines are fully suspended. The Bakerloo, Jubilee, Piccadilly, Northern and Districtlines are partly suspended.
There are severe delays on the Central Line. Several Tube stations are also closed.
Impact of the snowfallMost London buses suspendedCircle, Hammersmith and City, Waterloo and City lines suspendedSoutheastern Trains and Gatwick Express cancelledReduced service on Southern and First Great WesternLondon City airport closedOne runway at Heathrow closedTreacherous driving conditionsMore than 260 schools closed
A spokesman for Transport for London (TfL) said: "Heavy snowfall across the London area last night has severely disrupted transport services and furthersnow is forecast throughout Monday.
"The biggest difficulty today is the road conditions which are extremely dangerous and drivers should take extreme care."
All services are currently suspended until further notice on Southeastern Trains and there is no service on Gatwick Express. Southern and First Great Westernare running reduced services.
Although Gatwick Airport was open, there were significant delays and cancellations, he added.
Passengers were advised to check before leaving for the airport.
Treacherous conditions
On the roads, the southern section of the M25 has treacherous driving conditions between the M23 and the A3.
The A2 is shut into London at Lewisham Road in Blackheath because of snow with many other roads across London extremely slippery.
Scotland Yard said it had reports of a number of crashes in the early hours, though no-one was seriously hurt.
A commuter at a Tube stationMost Tube services have been severely disrupted
The Highways Agency said there have been too many minor accidents on the roads "to put a number on".
The agency recommended people should only take essential journeys.
A London Ambulance Service spokesman said it received more than 650 calls between midnight and Monday morning and stressed that it would only respond to"life-threatening calls" as it was under "severe pressure".
London NHS has advised patients, who have outpatient appointments or booked to undergo non-emergency surgeries, to call their local hospitals before travelling.
More than 260 schools across London have been closed with the boroughs of Haringey and Camden in north London, Westminster in central London, Hounslow andEaling in west London,
Bromley and Lambeth in south London and Barking and Dagenham in the east being the worst affected.
Eurostar services from London are currently operating but are subject to possible delays.
Night-time temperatures across London could drop to -3C as a blast of cold air sweeps in from the North Sea.
Are you prepared for the coming snow? Has the bad weather arrived with you already? Show us your snow by sending pictures in via the form below.
You can send pictures and video to: yourpics@bbc.co.uk or to send via MMS please dial +44 (0)7725 100 100.
Do not endanger yourself or others, take any unnecessary risks or infringe any laws.
A skier in Pimlico, central LondonPeople are finding innovative ways to travel in London
Thousands of people are unable to travel as London's transport network has been disrupted due to snow.
The majority of the bus network and three Underground lines - the Circle, Hammersmith & City and Waterloo & City lines - have been suspended.
London Mayor Boris Johnson has suspended the city's congestion charge for the day.
Both runways at Heathrow Airport closed although one has since reopened. London City Airport remains closed.
The snow caused a Cyprus Airways flight to slip off a taxiway at Heathrow and land in grass.
Passengers were unharmed in the incident which took place at about 0820 GMT, airport operator BAA said.
The authority added it was the last flight to land before the runways were closed.
British Airways said it has cancelled all its flights until 1700 GMT.
Earlier, all bus services in the city were suspended. A few are being reintroduced but most remain withdrawn.
London has seen the heaviest snowfall in 18 years, weather experts said.
Buses and Tube
Up to 10cm (4in) of snow has already fallen in some parts of Greater London, with 6cm (2in) of snow reported at Heathrow Airport.
The conditions led the Met Office to issue an extreme weather warning for London and the south east of England.
On the Underground, the Circle, Hammersmith & City and Waterloo & City lines are fully suspended. The Bakerloo, Jubilee, Piccadilly, Northern and Districtlines are partly suspended.
There are severe delays on the Central Line. Several Tube stations are also closed.
Impact of the snowfallMost London buses suspendedCircle, Hammersmith and City, Waterloo and City lines suspendedSoutheastern Trains and Gatwick Express cancelledReduced service on Southern and First Great WesternLondon City airport closedOne runway at Heathrow closedTreacherous driving conditionsMore than 260 schools closed
A spokesman for Transport for London (TfL) said: "Heavy snowfall across the London area last night has severely disrupted transport services and furthersnow is forecast throughout Monday.
"The biggest difficulty today is the road conditions which are extremely dangerous and drivers should take extreme care."
All services are currently suspended until further notice on Southeastern Trains and there is no service on Gatwick Express. Southern and First Great Westernare running reduced services.
Although Gatwick Airport was open, there were significant delays and cancellations, he added.
Passengers were advised to check before leaving for the airport.
Treacherous conditions
On the roads, the southern section of the M25 has treacherous driving conditions between the M23 and the A3.
The A2 is shut into London at Lewisham Road in Blackheath because of snow with many other roads across London extremely slippery.
Scotland Yard said it had reports of a number of crashes in the early hours, though no-one was seriously hurt.
A commuter at a Tube stationMost Tube services have been severely disrupted
The Highways Agency said there have been too many minor accidents on the roads "to put a number on".
The agency recommended people should only take essential journeys.
A London Ambulance Service spokesman said it received more than 650 calls between midnight and Monday morning and stressed that it would only respond to"life-threatening calls" as it was under "severe pressure".
London NHS has advised patients, who have outpatient appointments or booked to undergo non-emergency surgeries, to call their local hospitals before travelling.
More than 260 schools across London have been closed with the boroughs of Haringey and Camden in north London, Westminster in central London, Hounslow andEaling in west London,
Bromley and Lambeth in south London and Barking and Dagenham in the east being the worst affected.
Eurostar services from London are currently operating but are subject to possible delays.
Night-time temperatures across London could drop to -3C as a blast of cold air sweeps in from the North Sea.
Are you prepared for the coming snow? Has the bad weather arrived with you already? Show us your snow by sending pictures in via the form below.
You can send pictures and video to: yourpics@bbc.co.uk or to send via MMS please dial +44 (0)7725 100 100.
Do not endanger yourself or others, take any unnecessary risks or infringe any laws.
Londra | 2 febbraio 2009 Tempesta di neve a Londra, niente autobus e scuole chiuse
Londra 2 febbraio 2009
Tempesta di neve a Londra, niente autobus e scuole chiuse
La City bloccataLa City bloccata
Una fortissima tempesta di neve ha praticamente paralizzato Londra ed altre zone della Gran Bretagna sud orientale. L'aeroporto di Gatwick e' stato completamentechiuso mentre ad Heatrow e' stata chiusa una delle piste, provocando ritardi e disagi ai passaggeri. Anche molte autostrade sono bloccate da automezzi pesantiche ostruiscono il passaggio.
E nella city la situazione non migliora: sono completamente fermi gli autobus pubblici, molte linee dalla famosa Tube, la metropolitana di Londra. E' stataordinata la chiusura delle scuole e moltissimi lavoratori non sono stati in grado di recarsi al lavoro.
Tempesta di neve a Londra, niente autobus e scuole chiuse
La City bloccataLa City bloccata
Una fortissima tempesta di neve ha praticamente paralizzato Londra ed altre zone della Gran Bretagna sud orientale. L'aeroporto di Gatwick e' stato completamentechiuso mentre ad Heatrow e' stata chiusa una delle piste, provocando ritardi e disagi ai passaggeri. Anche molte autostrade sono bloccate da automezzi pesantiche ostruiscono il passaggio.
E nella city la situazione non migliora: sono completamente fermi gli autobus pubblici, molte linee dalla famosa Tube, la metropolitana di Londra. E' stataordinata la chiusura delle scuole e moltissimi lavoratori non sono stati in grado di recarsi al lavoro.
Per fermare la crisi la Merkel vuole un'Onu dell'economia - Corriere della Sera
ere della Sera >
Economia >
Davos 2009 >
Per fermare la crisi la Merkel vuole un'Onu dell'economia
«non si pensi di potere vivere a lungo sopra le proprie possibilità»
Per fermare la crisi la Merkelvuole un'Onu dell'economia
Piano in cinque punti per un nuovo ordine mondiale. «Nella Costituzione l'obbligo di pareggio del bilancio»
World Economic Forum: sito ufficiale
Il premier tedesco Angela Merkel durante il suo intervento a Davos (Epa)DA UNO DEI NOSTRI INVIATI DAVOS (Svizzera) — Idee forti da Angela Merkel, ieri, a Davos. E potenti della terra in piedi ad applaudirla. In un discorso duratomeno di venti minuti, la cancelliera tedesca ha proposto al mondo una Carta per un nuovo ordine internazionale (contenuti compresi), un Consiglio di SicurezzaEconomico da istituire presso l'Onu, ha prospettato il modello sociale di mercato tedesco come punto di riferimento globale e ha indicato la via tedescaper uscire dalla crisi come la migliore e più efficiente. La leader che per settimane è stata attaccata perché troppo timida nella risposta alla recessioneè stata salutata dal World Economic Forum come unica leader capace di guidare l'Europa fuori dalla recessione. Sul breve periodo, Frau Merkel ha spiegatoche il pacchetto di stimolo varato dal governo di Berlino, 80 miliardi tra 2009 e 2010, è «senza precedenti» perché senza precedenti sono i tempi. Ha peròdetto che il mondo deve evitare di «ripetere questo schema» di indebitamento all'infinito. Quindi, assieme alle misure anti-crisi il governo di Berlinovuole un meccanismo di rientro certo dal debito una volta che l'economia sarà in ripresa e introdurrà l'obbligo di pareggiare i conti pubblici nella Costituzione.«E' importante — ha aggiunto — che anche a livello internazionale non si pensi di potere vivere a lungo sopra le proprie possibilità ». In effetti, ilpiano di stimolo e di rientro dal debito tedesco sta per certi versi diventando lo standard anche per altri Paesi: il presidente della Commissione europeaJosé Barroso ne è per esempio diventato un sostenitore.
G20 AL POSTO DEL G8 - Sul medio-lungo periodo, la signora Merkel ha poi detto che la formula del G20 al posto del G8 è positiva. Al prossimo incontro delGruppo delle 20 maggiori economie, a Londra a inizio aprile, proporrà di iniziare a scrivere una Carta che detti le regole di un nuovo ordine economicomondiale. Su cinque linee di fondo. Primo, ribadire l'impegno al libero mercato, strumento di crescita. Secondo, affermare i modi per prevenire gli eccessisui mercati. A questo proposito, ha spiegato, «l'economia sociale di mercato (tedesca, ndr) ha funzionato bene: lo Stato è guardiano dell'economia, laconcorrenza va bene ma deve essere disciplinata». A questo scopo, servono «regole chiaramente definite» e un trasferimento di responsabilità e di poteridagli Stati nazionali a organismi internazionali per quanto riguarda i mercati finanziari: misura che (questo la cancelliera non l'ha detto) limiterebbeil potere unico di cui gli Stati Uniti e il dollari hanno goduto nei decenni scorsi. Terzo, serve un coordinamento economico internazionale. «Noi - haaffermato - siamo sospettosi sui sussidi al settore auto in America. Se portati avanti troppo a lungo, distorcono la concorrenza e, diciamolo chiaramente,diventano una forma di protezionismo ». Contro i rischi di protezionismo che crescono nel mondo ieri, sempre a Davos, si è espresso decisamente anche ilprimo ministro britannico Gordon Brown. La questione coordinamento diventa così decisiva per evitare politiche nazionaliste. Quarto, favorire l'uso dirisorse sostenibili e promuovere la protezione del clima. Quinto punto della Carta, combattere la povertà non solo come dovere ma come necessità dell'economia globale. L'anno prossimo, la cancelliera riunirà i vertici di Fondo monetario internazionale, Banca mondiale, Organizzazione internazionale delLavoro e altri organismi per cercare assieme a essi un nuovo approccio ai problemi del pianeta, anch'esso da inserire nella Carta per un nuovo ordine economicomondiale. «Perché questo deve avere anche le sue istituzioni», ha aggiunto. Al proposito, sarebbe utile pensare a «un Consiglio Economico delle NazioniUnite che abbia la funzione che ha avuto il Consiglio di Sicurezza in altri campi». Frau Merkel ha ricordato di essere cresciuta nella Germania Est e cheora è la cancelliera della Germania unita. «Niente è impossibile», ha quindi concluso. Scesa dal podio, se n'è andata subito. Mentre, tra gli applausi,il Forum faceva considerazioni sulla leadership in Europa.
Danilo Taino31 gennaio 2009
Economia >
Davos 2009 >
Per fermare la crisi la Merkel vuole un'Onu dell'economia
«non si pensi di potere vivere a lungo sopra le proprie possibilità»
Per fermare la crisi la Merkelvuole un'Onu dell'economia
Piano in cinque punti per un nuovo ordine mondiale. «Nella Costituzione l'obbligo di pareggio del bilancio»
World Economic Forum: sito ufficiale
Il premier tedesco Angela Merkel durante il suo intervento a Davos (Epa)DA UNO DEI NOSTRI INVIATI DAVOS (Svizzera) — Idee forti da Angela Merkel, ieri, a Davos. E potenti della terra in piedi ad applaudirla. In un discorso duratomeno di venti minuti, la cancelliera tedesca ha proposto al mondo una Carta per un nuovo ordine internazionale (contenuti compresi), un Consiglio di SicurezzaEconomico da istituire presso l'Onu, ha prospettato il modello sociale di mercato tedesco come punto di riferimento globale e ha indicato la via tedescaper uscire dalla crisi come la migliore e più efficiente. La leader che per settimane è stata attaccata perché troppo timida nella risposta alla recessioneè stata salutata dal World Economic Forum come unica leader capace di guidare l'Europa fuori dalla recessione. Sul breve periodo, Frau Merkel ha spiegatoche il pacchetto di stimolo varato dal governo di Berlino, 80 miliardi tra 2009 e 2010, è «senza precedenti» perché senza precedenti sono i tempi. Ha peròdetto che il mondo deve evitare di «ripetere questo schema» di indebitamento all'infinito. Quindi, assieme alle misure anti-crisi il governo di Berlinovuole un meccanismo di rientro certo dal debito una volta che l'economia sarà in ripresa e introdurrà l'obbligo di pareggiare i conti pubblici nella Costituzione.«E' importante — ha aggiunto — che anche a livello internazionale non si pensi di potere vivere a lungo sopra le proprie possibilità ». In effetti, ilpiano di stimolo e di rientro dal debito tedesco sta per certi versi diventando lo standard anche per altri Paesi: il presidente della Commissione europeaJosé Barroso ne è per esempio diventato un sostenitore.
G20 AL POSTO DEL G8 - Sul medio-lungo periodo, la signora Merkel ha poi detto che la formula del G20 al posto del G8 è positiva. Al prossimo incontro delGruppo delle 20 maggiori economie, a Londra a inizio aprile, proporrà di iniziare a scrivere una Carta che detti le regole di un nuovo ordine economicomondiale. Su cinque linee di fondo. Primo, ribadire l'impegno al libero mercato, strumento di crescita. Secondo, affermare i modi per prevenire gli eccessisui mercati. A questo proposito, ha spiegato, «l'economia sociale di mercato (tedesca, ndr) ha funzionato bene: lo Stato è guardiano dell'economia, laconcorrenza va bene ma deve essere disciplinata». A questo scopo, servono «regole chiaramente definite» e un trasferimento di responsabilità e di poteridagli Stati nazionali a organismi internazionali per quanto riguarda i mercati finanziari: misura che (questo la cancelliera non l'ha detto) limiterebbeil potere unico di cui gli Stati Uniti e il dollari hanno goduto nei decenni scorsi. Terzo, serve un coordinamento economico internazionale. «Noi - haaffermato - siamo sospettosi sui sussidi al settore auto in America. Se portati avanti troppo a lungo, distorcono la concorrenza e, diciamolo chiaramente,diventano una forma di protezionismo ». Contro i rischi di protezionismo che crescono nel mondo ieri, sempre a Davos, si è espresso decisamente anche ilprimo ministro britannico Gordon Brown. La questione coordinamento diventa così decisiva per evitare politiche nazionaliste. Quarto, favorire l'uso dirisorse sostenibili e promuovere la protezione del clima. Quinto punto della Carta, combattere la povertà non solo come dovere ma come necessità dell'economia globale. L'anno prossimo, la cancelliera riunirà i vertici di Fondo monetario internazionale, Banca mondiale, Organizzazione internazionale delLavoro e altri organismi per cercare assieme a essi un nuovo approccio ai problemi del pianeta, anch'esso da inserire nella Carta per un nuovo ordine economicomondiale. «Perché questo deve avere anche le sue istituzioni», ha aggiunto. Al proposito, sarebbe utile pensare a «un Consiglio Economico delle NazioniUnite che abbia la funzione che ha avuto il Consiglio di Sicurezza in altri campi». Frau Merkel ha ricordato di essere cresciuta nella Germania Est e cheora è la cancelliera della Germania unita. «Niente è impossibile», ha quindi concluso. Scesa dal podio, se n'è andata subito. Mentre, tra gli applausi,il Forum faceva considerazioni sulla leadership in Europa.
Danilo Taino31 gennaio 2009
Warren Harding, George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Whaat? from HNN
Warren Harding, George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Whaat? from HNN
2-02-09
Warren Harding, George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Whaat?
By Phillip Payne
Mr. Payne is the author of Dead Last: The Public Memory of Warren G. Harding's Scandalous Legacy (Ohio University Press, September, 2008). He is an AssociateProfessor of history at St. Bonaventure University.
I/51Nfi-nYYAL._AA240_In the movieGabriel Over the White House(1933) an ineffective, philandering, president is transformed by a near-tragic accident from a party hack into an activist president who tackles the nation’sseemingly insurmountable problems. In this Depression-era film, fictional President Judson C. Hammond is transformed from Warren G. Harding to FranklinD. Roosevelt. The idea of the presidency transforming the man is a common theme in presidential literature and movies. While these sorts of transformationsmay make for good fiction, they are a historical rarity. As George W. Bush exits the national stage and Barack Obama steps onto the presidential stage,we are watching this process play out before us as we hope to move from Harding to Roosevelt. In some ways, inaugurations, as much as the movies, are aboutthe importance of image to our understanding of the presidency.
George W. Bush and his allies have launched a legacy campaign. In a series of interviews and articles, President Bush and those associated with his administrationhave argued that despite current low poll numbers they will be redeemed in history. Their argument boils down to two basic points. One, they enumeratea variety of policy successes. Two, they argue that some policies (chiefly related to Iraq) that currently seem like unpopular failures, over the long-term,will prove to be successful. The end result will be the redemption of the Bush legacy. They might be right. There are a few instances of historians,the public, or both changing their minds about a past president. There does seem to be a certain willingness on the public’s part to let bygones be bygonesfor former presidents as long as they stay out of the political arena.
However, as of this writing, the central legacy debate playing out in the media is of whether Bush is the worst president of all time; is the better comparisonwith Herbert Hoover or Warren Harding? A Washington Post/ABC poll finds Bush with a 33 percent public approval rating, noting that in the post-World WarII period only Richard Nixon and Harry Truman have had lower numbers. Similarly, the pollster reportsthat the public’s mood on the direction of the country and the state of the economy are “the most negative assessment in more than 23 years of Post-ABCpolling.”
In contrast Barack Obama enters the presidency evoking Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt, two men of different parties who are regularly ranked asgreat presidents. The Washington Post reports enormous crowds waiting to see Obama as he retraces Lincoln’s route to the White House while traveling ina Depression-era railcar. Again history seems to be a force of nature as the Post reports: “On the final leg of a two-year road trip,Barack Obamarode into Washington on Saturday in an antique caboose with the contented look of a man convinced he was arriving at his rightful destination.”
No president enters the White House expecting to fail. Neither Harding nor Hoover entered the White House planning on going down in history as failures. After his death in office Harding was compared with Lincoln for his ability to bring people together. Hoover spent years defending his record as president. The irony is that Bush, like Obama, realizes that history, in the omnipresent third person, often rewards the activist president, the president who, asBush likes to phrase it, did not play “small ball.” As he transitions into his post-presidential years, Bush is announcing the creation of a “FreedomInstitute” in Dallas that will be a combination library, museum, and public-policy think tank. Margaret Spellings, the outgoing Secretary of Education,says that center will focus on “game-changing” policies and decisions.
Obama, of course, is just starting to make decisions as president. The incoming Obama administration has brought into the public light a debate over theeffectiveness of the New Deal, but at this moment in time, he embodies our hope for transformation. While movie makers, film makers and writers oftenuse the deus ex machina to explain when the man becomes the president, the prosaic transition from Bush to Obama is one of the more important changes tothe country and the democratic process. It remains to be seen if Bush will be able to refurbish his reputation and whether Obama will be the next Lincoln.
2-02-09
Warren Harding, George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Whaat?
By Phillip Payne
Mr. Payne is the author of Dead Last: The Public Memory of Warren G. Harding's Scandalous Legacy (Ohio University Press, September, 2008). He is an AssociateProfessor of history at St. Bonaventure University.
I/51Nfi-nYYAL._AA240_In the movieGabriel Over the White House(1933) an ineffective, philandering, president is transformed by a near-tragic accident from a party hack into an activist president who tackles the nation’sseemingly insurmountable problems. In this Depression-era film, fictional President Judson C. Hammond is transformed from Warren G. Harding to FranklinD. Roosevelt. The idea of the presidency transforming the man is a common theme in presidential literature and movies. While these sorts of transformationsmay make for good fiction, they are a historical rarity. As George W. Bush exits the national stage and Barack Obama steps onto the presidential stage,we are watching this process play out before us as we hope to move from Harding to Roosevelt. In some ways, inaugurations, as much as the movies, are aboutthe importance of image to our understanding of the presidency.
George W. Bush and his allies have launched a legacy campaign. In a series of interviews and articles, President Bush and those associated with his administrationhave argued that despite current low poll numbers they will be redeemed in history. Their argument boils down to two basic points. One, they enumeratea variety of policy successes. Two, they argue that some policies (chiefly related to Iraq) that currently seem like unpopular failures, over the long-term,will prove to be successful. The end result will be the redemption of the Bush legacy. They might be right. There are a few instances of historians,the public, or both changing their minds about a past president. There does seem to be a certain willingness on the public’s part to let bygones be bygonesfor former presidents as long as they stay out of the political arena.
However, as of this writing, the central legacy debate playing out in the media is of whether Bush is the worst president of all time; is the better comparisonwith Herbert Hoover or Warren Harding? A Washington Post/ABC poll finds Bush with a 33 percent public approval rating, noting that in the post-World WarII period only Richard Nixon and Harry Truman have had lower numbers. Similarly, the pollster reportsthat the public’s mood on the direction of the country and the state of the economy are “the most negative assessment in more than 23 years of Post-ABCpolling.”
In contrast Barack Obama enters the presidency evoking Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt, two men of different parties who are regularly ranked asgreat presidents. The Washington Post reports enormous crowds waiting to see Obama as he retraces Lincoln’s route to the White House while traveling ina Depression-era railcar. Again history seems to be a force of nature as the Post reports: “On the final leg of a two-year road trip,Barack Obamarode into Washington on Saturday in an antique caboose with the contented look of a man convinced he was arriving at his rightful destination.”
No president enters the White House expecting to fail. Neither Harding nor Hoover entered the White House planning on going down in history as failures. After his death in office Harding was compared with Lincoln for his ability to bring people together. Hoover spent years defending his record as president. The irony is that Bush, like Obama, realizes that history, in the omnipresent third person, often rewards the activist president, the president who, asBush likes to phrase it, did not play “small ball.” As he transitions into his post-presidential years, Bush is announcing the creation of a “FreedomInstitute” in Dallas that will be a combination library, museum, and public-policy think tank. Margaret Spellings, the outgoing Secretary of Education,says that center will focus on “game-changing” policies and decisions.
Obama, of course, is just starting to make decisions as president. The incoming Obama administration has brought into the public light a debate over theeffectiveness of the New Deal, but at this moment in time, he embodies our hope for transformation. While movie makers, film makers and writers oftenuse the deus ex machina to explain when the man becomes the president, the prosaic transition from Bush to Obama is one of the more important changes tothe country and the democratic process. It remains to be seen if Bush will be able to refurbish his reputation and whether Obama will be the next Lincoln.
Sunday, 1 February 2009
Regenerative medicine receives the kiss of life | Can I serve you now? | The Economist
Regenerative medicine receives the kiss of life Can I serve you now? Science & Technology
Embryonic stem cells
Can I serve you now?
Jan 29th 2009From The Economist print edition
American attitudes to stem-cell therapies are changing fast
Illustration by Stephen Jeffrey
FOR the past eight years, America’s government has declined to fund new research into one of the world’s most promising medical technologies: the use ofhuman embryonic stem cells to repair or replace damaged tissue in the diseased and injured. Embryonic stem cells are special for two reasons, one scientificand one ethical. The scientific reason is that they are able to turn into any of the body’s myriad cell types, which is why they might be used in thisway. The ethical reason is that, at the moment, harvesting them usually involves killing human embryos. The embryos in question have no future anyway (theyare usually “spares” from in vitro fertilisation procedures). But it was this destruction of potential human life that disturbed George Bush and his supporters.
Barack Obama has promised to reverse the ban. When that happens, American academics will no longer have to watch enviously from the sidelines as their colleaguesin Australia, Britain, China, the Czech Republic, Israel, Singapore and South Korea push ahead. But though the legislative wheels have yet to start turning,the mood has already shifted.
One sign of this shift came on January 23rd when the country’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted permission for the first clinical trial of a therapybased on human embryonic stem cells to Geron, a firm based in Menlo Park, California. Geron was able to ask for permission, and the FDA was able to grantit, because the ban does not apply to privately financed research. America, it seems, is back in the stem-cell business.
Off we go
Geron’s trial is of a treatment for paralysis caused by damage to the spinal cord. Between eight and ten patients with severe spinal-cord injuries willbe recruited to test this treatment for safety. At the same time both the researchers and the patients will be looking for signs of improvement in thecondition. If the trial is successful, larger ones will follow.
The trick that Geron’s researchers have learned is how to turn embryonic stem cells into cells called oligodendrocytes. These, in turn, generate a structurecalled the myelin sheath, which insulates nerves against leakage of the electrical signals that carry their messages around. Geron plans to inject itsoligodendrocytes into the damaged spines of patients between one and two weeks after their injury.
Tests in rats, using human cells, have shown that oligodendrocytes injected this way can indeed help repair myelin sheaths and restore the ability of nervecells to carry signals. The hope is that the same will happen in people. The nerve cells themselves will not be replaced, so even in principle such treatmentcould not help everyone with a spinal injury. Many observers do, however, see this research as a step along the road to reconnecting the brains and limbsof those with severed spinal cords, by growing new nerve cells to bridge the gap.
All new medical procedures need to be tested for safety, of course. With stem cells, the main risk is not the sort of chemical toxicity associated witha drug; rather it is of an unusual type of tumour called a teratoma. Teratomas are more or less normal bodily structures—eyes or teeth, for example—thatare growing in the wrong place. They are a special risk with stem cells precisely because such cells can turn into any other sort. If the wrong geneticswitch is flicked, the wrong sort of tissue results.
Another risk, though, is immune rejection. Introducing stem cells into a body is a bit like transplanting an organ: the recipient’s immune system mightthrow a wobbly and try to destroy the intruder. Geron’s patients will therefore have to spend two months taking anti-rejection drugs. Other people, though,think they may be able to get round this difficulty. The International Stem Cell Corporation (ISCo), in Oceanside, California, for one, reckons it cando so and, at the same time, deal with the ethical issue of embryo destruction.
ISCo has found a way of producing embryonic-like stem cells from unfertilised eggs. The egg is chemically stimulated to create a group of cells that forma non-viable (and unfertilised) “embryo”. This, explains Kenneth Aldrich, the firm’s boss, is something that could not be implanted into a woman’s womband produce a child. Nonetheless, the cells it contains have the same characteristics as stem cells.
Besides any ethical advantages this procedure may have, it could also have medical ones. Because lines of stem cells created in this way have only one parent,they are immunologically simpler than normal embryonic cells—in other words they have a smaller variety of the proteins that trigger rejection. That lackof variety, says Dr Aldrich, means it might be feasible to create a bank of stem-cell lines that could be matched to every immune type in the human population,rather as a blood bank carries blood of all the different groups (A, B, O and so on). Replacement stem cells might then be ordered off the shelf.
Nor are spinal-cord injuries the only condition lined up for treatment. Both ISCo and Advanced Cell Technology, of Los Angeles, are trying to create stemcells that could stop—and possibly reverse—a process called macular degeneration, which leads to blindness. ISCo says it hopes to start human trials laterthis year. Using embryonic stem cells in this way is regarded as a particularly promising route because a similar form of treatment that employs stem cellsrecovered from still-born children is already known to work.
Try, try, try again
The true potential of this approach is unknowable. It might yet prove too difficult to use as widely as its supporters hope. Stem-cell therapy has beensuggested as a way of dealing with arthritis, angina and Parkinson’s disease, as well as spinal-cord injury and blindness—a range of conditions that makesit look like a panacea. That risks disappointment and overreaction if things go wrong. But the only way to find out is to try.
Michael West, the founder of Geron and now head of BioTime, another biotechnology company, says the existing legislation has affected privately financedresearch as well as the public sort. Investors have been frightened off by the political debate. Once it is gone, the full brunt of America’s innovativeknow-how, academic and private, could transform the subject, as other countries may soon find out.The Economist
Embryonic stem cells
Can I serve you now?
Jan 29th 2009From The Economist print edition
American attitudes to stem-cell therapies are changing fast
Illustration by Stephen Jeffrey
FOR the past eight years, America’s government has declined to fund new research into one of the world’s most promising medical technologies: the use ofhuman embryonic stem cells to repair or replace damaged tissue in the diseased and injured. Embryonic stem cells are special for two reasons, one scientificand one ethical. The scientific reason is that they are able to turn into any of the body’s myriad cell types, which is why they might be used in thisway. The ethical reason is that, at the moment, harvesting them usually involves killing human embryos. The embryos in question have no future anyway (theyare usually “spares” from in vitro fertilisation procedures). But it was this destruction of potential human life that disturbed George Bush and his supporters.
Barack Obama has promised to reverse the ban. When that happens, American academics will no longer have to watch enviously from the sidelines as their colleaguesin Australia, Britain, China, the Czech Republic, Israel, Singapore and South Korea push ahead. But though the legislative wheels have yet to start turning,the mood has already shifted.
One sign of this shift came on January 23rd when the country’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted permission for the first clinical trial of a therapybased on human embryonic stem cells to Geron, a firm based in Menlo Park, California. Geron was able to ask for permission, and the FDA was able to grantit, because the ban does not apply to privately financed research. America, it seems, is back in the stem-cell business.
Off we go
Geron’s trial is of a treatment for paralysis caused by damage to the spinal cord. Between eight and ten patients with severe spinal-cord injuries willbe recruited to test this treatment for safety. At the same time both the researchers and the patients will be looking for signs of improvement in thecondition. If the trial is successful, larger ones will follow.
The trick that Geron’s researchers have learned is how to turn embryonic stem cells into cells called oligodendrocytes. These, in turn, generate a structurecalled the myelin sheath, which insulates nerves against leakage of the electrical signals that carry their messages around. Geron plans to inject itsoligodendrocytes into the damaged spines of patients between one and two weeks after their injury.
Tests in rats, using human cells, have shown that oligodendrocytes injected this way can indeed help repair myelin sheaths and restore the ability of nervecells to carry signals. The hope is that the same will happen in people. The nerve cells themselves will not be replaced, so even in principle such treatmentcould not help everyone with a spinal injury. Many observers do, however, see this research as a step along the road to reconnecting the brains and limbsof those with severed spinal cords, by growing new nerve cells to bridge the gap.
All new medical procedures need to be tested for safety, of course. With stem cells, the main risk is not the sort of chemical toxicity associated witha drug; rather it is of an unusual type of tumour called a teratoma. Teratomas are more or less normal bodily structures—eyes or teeth, for example—thatare growing in the wrong place. They are a special risk with stem cells precisely because such cells can turn into any other sort. If the wrong geneticswitch is flicked, the wrong sort of tissue results.
Another risk, though, is immune rejection. Introducing stem cells into a body is a bit like transplanting an organ: the recipient’s immune system mightthrow a wobbly and try to destroy the intruder. Geron’s patients will therefore have to spend two months taking anti-rejection drugs. Other people, though,think they may be able to get round this difficulty. The International Stem Cell Corporation (ISCo), in Oceanside, California, for one, reckons it cando so and, at the same time, deal with the ethical issue of embryo destruction.
ISCo has found a way of producing embryonic-like stem cells from unfertilised eggs. The egg is chemically stimulated to create a group of cells that forma non-viable (and unfertilised) “embryo”. This, explains Kenneth Aldrich, the firm’s boss, is something that could not be implanted into a woman’s womband produce a child. Nonetheless, the cells it contains have the same characteristics as stem cells.
Besides any ethical advantages this procedure may have, it could also have medical ones. Because lines of stem cells created in this way have only one parent,they are immunologically simpler than normal embryonic cells—in other words they have a smaller variety of the proteins that trigger rejection. That lackof variety, says Dr Aldrich, means it might be feasible to create a bank of stem-cell lines that could be matched to every immune type in the human population,rather as a blood bank carries blood of all the different groups (A, B, O and so on). Replacement stem cells might then be ordered off the shelf.
Nor are spinal-cord injuries the only condition lined up for treatment. Both ISCo and Advanced Cell Technology, of Los Angeles, are trying to create stemcells that could stop—and possibly reverse—a process called macular degeneration, which leads to blindness. ISCo says it hopes to start human trials laterthis year. Using embryonic stem cells in this way is regarded as a particularly promising route because a similar form of treatment that employs stem cellsrecovered from still-born children is already known to work.
Try, try, try again
The true potential of this approach is unknowable. It might yet prove too difficult to use as widely as its supporters hope. Stem-cell therapy has beensuggested as a way of dealing with arthritis, angina and Parkinson’s disease, as well as spinal-cord injury and blindness—a range of conditions that makesit look like a panacea. That risks disappointment and overreaction if things go wrong. But the only way to find out is to try.
Michael West, the founder of Geron and now head of BioTime, another biotechnology company, says the existing legislation has affected privately financedresearch as well as the public sort. Investors have been frightened off by the political debate. Once it is gone, the full brunt of America’s innovativeknow-how, academic and private, could transform the subject, as other countries may soon find out.The Economist
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)