Tuesday, April 21, 2009

White House Signals Movement On Pending Trade Agreements, by Leroy Baker, Tax-News.com, New York

Last updated 8 hours ago Tuesday, April 21, 2009

www. tax-news.com
The Obama administration has indicated that it wants to progress long-stalled free trade agreements with Colombia and Panama.
Following meetings with Latin American government leaders at the Summit of the Americas in Trinidad and Tobago last weekend, US Trade Representative Ron Kirk revealed that the US government is keen to begin negotiations with key lawmakers in a bid to secure Congressional approval for the trade agreements.
Both agreements were signed during the last term of the George W. Bush administration, but Congress needs to pass the relevant enabling law to allow the texts to be fully ratified.
However, senior House and Senate Democrats, who want stronger labor rights written into the agreements, have been able to block their progress. But with the administration and Congress now singing from the same hymn sheet, Kirk is optimistic that the agreements can be ratified sooner rather than later.
This will depend, of course, on Colombia and Panama, which have been criticised for stifling trade union activism, also agreeing to any changes to the agreements, but, after his return from the Caribbean, Kirk told reporters that both his meeting with Colombian representatives and the summit in general had been "very productive" for the US. He went on to add that the administration would consult with Congress "early and often" on the agreements.
The US National Foreign Trade Council, which represents a broad base of American multinationals, welcomed the administration's announcement, describing Columbia as a "critically important" economic partner for the US.
"We applaud the administration for sending a positive signal that a dialogue between the United States and Colombia is already underway," said NFTC President Bill Reinsch. "Colombia has long been an important friend to and ally of the United States. With both countries working together toward a resolution of remaining concerns that stand in the way of approval of the FTA, we believe that progress can be made toward the ratification of the agreement."
"Colombia has already proven its commitment to and diligence in working to prevent and stop crimes against trade unionists and all other members of Colombian society," added NFTC Vice President for Regional Trade Initiatives Chuck Dittrich.
"The Colombian Government has worked tirelessly to reduce the overall level of violence in the country, and has made significant strides in strengthening democratic institutions to restore and maintain the rule of law in a country once described as a failed state."
Under the US/Colombia trade agreement, first signed in November 2006, over 80% of US exports of consumer and industrial products to Colombia would become duty-free immediately, with remaining tariffs phased out over 10 years.
Key US exports would gain immediate duty-free access to Colombia. Colombia has also agreed to allow trade in remanufactured goods, and will join the WTO Information Technology Agreement.
The US/Panama agreement, signed in December 2006, will eliminate nearly 90% of Panama’s tariffs on industrial goods immediately, with remaining tariffs phased out over 10 years.
On April 20, Senators Max Baucus and Chuck Grassley, Chairman and Ranking Member respectively of the Senate Finance Committee, urged President Obama to resolve outstanding issues blocking the path towards Congressional approval of the other currently-stalled free trade agreement, that with South Korea.
"We have long supported a bilateral trade agreement with Korea, and we strongly believe an agreement would provide tremendous benefits to American workers, farmers, and ranchers.
Korea is already our seventh largest trading partner, our fifth largest agriculture export market, and our eighth largest market for goods exports," the Senators wrote in a letter to the President.
However, they warned that there is "further work to be done" if Congress is to support the agreement.
"In particular, Korea has yet to ensure US beef exporters full access to its market in accordance with international standards. Korea’s long history of non-tariff barriers to its autos sector also raises serious concerns with some regarding the agreement," the Senators wrote.
"Postponing addressing such issues will not make them easier to resolve," they added.

Free Trade Returns to the Table



The Obama administration and trade advocates in Congress are trying to put a series of long-delayed trade pacts back on the front burner, despite widespread skepticism on Capitol Hill about the benefits of expanded international commerce.
On the heels of the Summit of the Americas in Trinidad and Tobago, U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk said Monday that a delegation from Panama will visit Washington this week to try to resolve disputes over the U.S.-Panama trade deal. Kirk added that President Obama hopes to clear remaining obstacles to a separate pact with Colombia.
Ultimately, Obama — who met with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe during the summit — believes that “a resolution of the Colombia trade agreement would be a good thing for both economies,” Kirk said.
Meanwhile, the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee — Max Baucus , D-Mont., and Charles E. Grassley , R-Iowa — wrote Obama on Monday asking him to “begin the hard work of winning broad approval” of a trade pact with South Korea, which is stalled due to resistance from U.S. automakers and concerns over restrictions on the Asian nation’s beef imports.
All three trade deals were negotiated by George W. Bush ’s administration but have faced opposition in the Democratic-controlled House and Senate over the past two years. During his Senate confirmation process this year, Kirk told senators wary of mounting job losses — and public opinion polls showing declining support for free trade — that his office would undertake a comprehensive review of each trade deal.
At the same time, the United States has faced pressure from abroad not to appear overly protectionist in the midst of a global economic downturn, a posture many economists fear could slow a recovery.
But hammering out adjustments or side agreements that would win majority support in the House for any of the deals would be difficult. Labor unions, environmental groups and consumer advocates oppose all three agreements for varying reasons, including the effect of trade on American workers. And perhaps even more significantly, it’s unclear what it would take to satisfy Democratic leaders in Congress.
Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch program, which is critical of recent trade agreements, argued that Kirk was trying to “create a sense of momentum on something that is highly contested and not decided . . . and has a huge political liability domestically.”
Trade critics contend that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) resulted in U.S. job losses and complain that the three pending pacts were written in the NAFTA mold. Kirk, however, said concerns about NAFTA “can be addressed without having to reopen the agreement.” Some labor groups have called for a renegotiation of the pact, a move Obama also suggested during his presidential campaign.
Most Likely to Succeed?
The Panama deal has the fewest political problems of the three, in part due to its small size in terms of overall trade flows. But Sander M. Levin , D-Mich., chairman of the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Trade, said in March that Panama has not yet met sufficient labor standards. He also raised concerns about the country’s reputation for banking secrecy and as a tax haven.
Kirk said he “will be working with the Panamanians to identify and resolve all of those issues.”
While declining to give a timeline, he said Panama’s own political situation may yield a “discrete” window to push the trade deal through — an apparent reference to the nation’s coming May presidential elections.
Concerns about violence against labor unions in Colombia have stymied movement on that deal, despite support from Democrats such as House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland.
In a conference call with reporters Monday, Kirk said that while progress has been made toward addressing those concerns, there are “a number of issues that need to be resolved.”
But the fact that the Obama administration is talking about moving forward on the Colombia deal was cause for optimism among trade advocates eager for any sign of progress on their agenda.
“We applaud the administration for sending a positive signal that a dialogue between the United States and Colombia is already underway,” Bill Reinsch, president of the National Foreign Trade Council, said in a statement. “With both countries working together toward a resolution of remaining concerns that stand in the way of approval of the FTA, we believe that progress can be made toward the ratification of the agreement.”
On the U.S.-South Korea deal, Grassley and Baucus cast their comments in the context of North Korea’s widely condemned missile launch on April 5, adding that the trade deal would “anchor our economic presence in Asia.”
Baucus and Grassley acknowledged disputes over the entry of U.S. beef into South Korea — a key issue for the Montana chairman — and the fact that the trade deal would give South Korean auto companies wide access to the U.S. market despite ongoing concerns that the Asian country restricts imports of American cars.
Nonetheless, the two senators pressed Obama to keep negotiations moving.
“The issues are complex, and they may not be easy to resolve,” Baucus and Grassley said. “Yet their very complexity, as well as their potential rewards, demands we begin our work without delay and persist as long as necessary.”
In a conference call with reporters Monday, Kirk said that while progress has been made toward addressing those concerns, there are “a number of issues that need to be resolved.”

But the fact that the Obama administration is talking about moving forward on the Colombia deal was cause for optimism among trade advocates eager for any sign of progress on their agenda.

“We applaud the administration for sending a positive signal that a dialogue between the United States and Colombia is already underway,” Bill Reinsch, president of the National Foreign Trade Council, said in a statement. “With both countries working together toward a resolution of remaining concerns that stand in the way of approval of the FTA, we believe that progress can be made toward the ratification of the agreement.”
On the U.S.-South Korea deal, Grassley and Baucus cast their comments in the context of North Korea’s widely condemned missile launch on April 5, adding that the trade deal would “anchor our economic presence in Asia.”
Baucus and Grassley acknowledged disputes over the entry of U.S. beef into South Korea — a key issue for the Montana chairman — and the fact that the trade deal would give South Korean auto companies wide access to the U.S. market despite ongoing concerns that the Asian country restricts imports of American cars.
Nonetheless, the two senators pressed Obama to keep negotiations moving.
“The issues are complex, and they may not be easy to resolve,” Baucus and Grassley said. “Yet their very complexity, as well as their potential rewards, demands we begin our work without delay and persist as long as necessary.”

U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk reports progress on deals with Panama, Colombia

03:00 PM CDT on Monday, April 20, 2009

By TODD J. GILLMAN / The Dallas Morning News
tgillman@dallasnews.com

/national/stories/042109dnnatkirk.f418b574.html
WASHINGTON – U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk reported progress today on pending trade deals with Panama and Colombia.

The former Dallas mayor accompanied President Barack Obama to the Summit of the Americas this weekend in Trinidad and Tobago, where he met privately with Panama's president, Martin Torrijos, and Colombia's president, Álvaro Uribe, to discuss separate free-trade deals long stalled in Congress.
Both countries are eager to finalize the deals, and Kirk said he's working "in good faith" to do so.
"It was a very productive summit for the U.S., and and it was something that I personally enjoyed," Kirk told reporters today in a conference call before attending the first meeting of the Obama Cabinet.
On Panama, Kirk said he's focused mainly on beefing up labor rules, and to a lesser degree addressing concerns in Congress about Panama's tax laws. Panama holds a presidential election next month, and Kirk said that may provide a "window to move more forcefully."
As for Colombia, Kirk noted that Uribe puts a high priority on the deal. And, although some Republicans fear the Obama team isn't as eager to finalize the deal, Kirk indicated the administration is interested in finalizing the deal, too. Democrats and U.S. unions cite concerns about violence targeting labor activists in Colombia.
"It was a very, very good, productive meeting," Kirk said, "My own personal thought as a mayor and as a lawyer is that when you've got two willing partners, that's a pretty good recipe for getting a deal done."
Kirk was careful in describing discussions pertaining to the North American Free Trade Agreement.
During the campaign last year, Obama told Midwest voters he would renegotiate the deal that is widely blamed for job losses. As president, Obama has softened that stance, which angered Mexico and Canada, though he continues to call for new labor and environmental safeguards.
Kirk said all three NAFTA partners are seeking "opportunities to strengthen" the deal, but Obama's goals "can be addressed without having to reopen the agreement."
"At an appropriate time I will be meeting with our colleagues to try to put a little form to that," he said.
At the summit, Obama's interactions with two leaders who are most antagonistic toward the United States – Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez and Bolivian leader Evo Morales – were closely watched.
Kirk said he personally had only passing contact with those leaders, devoting much of his time getting to know trade ministers from Latin America with whom he'll work in coming years.
"I'd like to think I'm a reasonably pleasant fellow," Kirk joked, though "it was a good substantive dialogue as well."

Saturday, April 18, 2009

Obama Vows to Listen to US Neighbors

President Barack Obama speaks with Chile's President Michelle Bachelet during UNASUR countries meeting at Summit of the Americas, 18 Apr 2009
By VOA News
18 April 2009
President Barack Obama is vowing to listen and learn during a Summit of the Americas, where he hopes to forge new partnerships among Western Hemisphere nations.Mr. Obama made the comments Saturday, the second day of the three-day summit in Trinidad and Tobago.


Just before a separate meeting with South American leaders, Mr. Obama told reporters he looked forward to productive meetings to determine how the region can work together more effectively.Before cameras were ushered out of the room, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, an old U.S. adversary, walked over to President Obama, handed him a book and shook his hand.


Reporters in the room say the book was entitled "The Open Veins of Latin America," and is about Latin America's exploitation by foreign powers.On Friday, Mr. Chavez and Mr. Obama shook hands and Mr. Chavez is reported to have told the U.S. president "I want to be your friend.


"President Obama on Friday called for a new beginning in relations between the United States and Cuba - a country not represented at the summit. Cuban President Raul Castro has said Havana is prepared to discuss any issue with Washington.


The United States has lifted restrictions on travel and money transfers by Cuban-Americans to the island, but not the trade embargo. The head of the Organization of American States, Jose Miguel Insulza, says he will ask his group to re-admit Cuba at the next OAS General Assembly meeting this June in Honduras.


Cuba was suspended from the OAS in 1962 after the organization said Cuba's Communist government was incompatible with the OAS charter.


Besides Cuba, Mr. Obama announced a U.S. initiative to boost lending and spur economic growth and recovery in the Americas. He also proposed a hemispheric partnership to tackle energy and climate challenges.


Some information for this report was provided by AP.

Canadian Prime Minister Warns Protectionism Greatest Threat to Global Economy















Saturday, April 18, 2009

By Major Garrett

PORT-OF-SPAIN, Trinidad and Tobago — Protectionism is the biggest threat to the global economy, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper told FOX News on Friday, adding that the fifth Summit of the Americas should focus on free trade, not a potential thaw in relations between the United States and the communist island nation of Cuba.

Canada is "obviously worried about" moves to erect trade barriers worldwide, Harper told FOX News.

"The biggest threat to the economy right now is an increase in protectionism. Governments are doing all kinds of things to mitigate the effects," he said. Increased protectionism would mean "recession or worse for a very long time."
Canada, the top U.S. trading partner, recently implemented free trade pacts with Costa Rica and Chile and Harper-negotiated deals with Colombia and Peru are now before Parliament. In contrary moves, 17 of the G-20 nations have enacted dozens of protectionist measures since November.
The U.S. is trying to tamp down a trade war with Mexico, its third largest trading partner, sparked by a congressionally mandated ban on Mexican trucks moving goods into the the country. Mexico has slapped $2.4 billion in tariffs on U.S. goods in retaliation. The two nations could not end the impasse during President Obama's 20-hour summit in Mexico with President Felipe Calderon.
We think it is very important, very important for the health of the hemisphere that we continue to bolster moves towards liberalized market economies and we need trade to do that," Harper told FOX News in an exclusive interview hours before the Summit of the Americas began Friday.
"Obviously we're worried about regimes that preach against trade, that preach protectionism. We're worried about the growth of that in the hemisphere. And it is important that countries and the United States, that we get out there and support governments — some of the ones I've mentioned — that are prepared to work with us on a liberalized trade agenda."
Harper demurred when asked if the U.S. should use the summit as a platform to defend free trade and announce additional moves to approve a pending free trade deal with Colombia or a possible breakthrough in trade talks with Panama.
"I'm obviously not here to tell the Obama administration how to run the policy of the United States," Harper said, before launching into a stout defense of Colombia and its democratic progress.
"Colombia is a country that's made a great deal of progress on the democratic front, on the human rights front and on the economic front. And Colombia is a real friend to us in this hemisphere, and I think it's really essential that we support our friends that push forward economic relations with a friendly country in this neighborhood. I think if you don't support your friends you're going to find you don't have many friends."
The U.S. trade pact with Colombia was originally negotiated in 2006 and was re-negotiated in 2007 to address Democratic concerns in Congress about worker rights. Still, the trade pact languishes and there's been no signal from the Obama White House that it's a legislative or economic priority.
Dan Restrepo, a senior Obama adviser on Western Hemisphere affairs, said free trade with Panama and Columbia is "part of the matrix" of regional economic policies the president will outline here. He hinted at a deal with Panama may be in the offing, but the stalemate on Colombia continues.
"On Panama, we're engaged with the Panamanian government and working through some issues that remain and hope to make some progress quite soon," Restrepo told FOX News. "On Columbia, there are an outstanding set of issues. We're finding ways to engage with Colombia to work on those issues."
As for improved relations between the U.S. and Cuba, Harper said Obama had taken important steps to lift restrictions on family travel and remittances to the island and it was time for the Castro regime, led by Fidel Castro's brother, Raoul, to reciprocate. Harper said he knows leftist governments at the summit — namely Venezuela and Nicaragua — will try to push Cuba onto the summit agenda, but such moves ought to be resisted.
"I think it's important to hemispheric relations generally, but we certainly hope it doesn't dominate the summit," Harper said. "There are much more important issues to discuss than Cuban-American relations."



IDB Lends $500M To Support Panama's Banking Industry

DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
The Inter-American Development Bank, or IDB, Thursday said it approved a $500 million loan to strengthen the liquidity of Panama's banking system.
The loan will be channeled through Banco Nacional de Panama, a state-owned institution that also acts as a commercial and development bank, the Washington-based multilateral lender said in a press release.
"The funds are expected to partially offset a shortfall in dollar-denominated lending to the productive sector triggered by the current global financial crisis," the IDB said.
Banco Nacional de Panama will act as an intermediary to provide working capital and foreign-trade financing to the industrial sector, the IDB added.
The loan, which expires in five years and has a three-year grace period, will pay a spread of 4 percentage points over the 6-month London interbank offered rate.
The loan is part of a $6 billion program recently created by the IDB to help governments respond to the needs of commercial banks that may face difficulties in accessing foreign and inter-bank credit lines due to the global credit crunch.
The IDB noted that Panama has a solid economy that grew at an average 8.8% between 2004 and 2008, far outpacing the 5.5% regional average.
By Diana Delgado, Dow Jones Newswires; 571-6107044 ext 11320; diana.delgado@dowjones.com

Saturday, April 11, 2009

2009 Quality of Life Index

http://www.internationalliving.com/Internal-Components/Further-Resources/qofl2009

By the staff of International Living

For the fourth year running, France comes first in our annual Quality of Life Index.
In your IL magazine every month, we consider the countries around the world where you could live cheaper, pay less tax, enjoy better weather, take advantage of opportunities in emerging markets…places where you could start a new life, start a business, retire…
Then, once a year, every January, we take a different perspective. We consider not only those places that offer particular and timely opportunities for the would-be expatriate…but nearly every nation on earth. This year, our survey looks at 194 countries.
To produce this annual Index we consider, for each of these countries, nine categories: Cost of Living, Culture and Leisure, Economy, Environment, Freedom, Health, Infrastructure, Safety and Risk, and Climate. This involves a lot of number crunching from “official” sources, including government websites, the World Health Organization, and The Economist, to name but a few.
Once the data is collected, we also take into account what our editors from all over the world have to say about our findings. These correspondents and colleagues are working and living in these countries themselves and give us a more realistic view of our official findings.
This year, as with the past three years, all our number-crunching, rating, and ranking landed France at the top of our Index. France scores high marks across the board…from its health care (84 points) to its infrastructure (90 points) to its safety rating (100 points). But the main appeal of living in France is arguably its lifestyle (its scores 85 points in our Culture and Leisure category).
France’s sensual allure leaves nobody untouched. Spend even a few months here and you will never again regard life in quite the same way.
As our European editor, Steenie Harvey said of her first visit to this country: “It was love at first sight. I can’t get enough of its culture, fashion, stunning architecture, and intoxicating history. As for the food and wine—well, even thinking about it makes me salivate.”
The French believe that every day is a pleasure to be slowly savored—and lingering at the dinner table for three hours in conversation isn’t considered abnormal. Family, friends, and good food are all vitally important to the French—and so is having enough time to appreciate them all.
The unsurpassed quality of life the French enjoy doesn’t have to cost astronomical amounts. Even in Paris, you can enjoy tasty two-course lunches for around $10—if you know where to go.
Tourists rarely investigate supermarkets. So here are some prices from a common French supermarket—taken in September, 2008.

· A half pound of Camembert cheese: $2.45

· A half pound of garlic sausage: $1.60

· Around a quarter pound of paté de campagne: $0.87

· 12 croissants: $2.97

· Bottle of Grenache Gris rosé wine: $4.12

· Hubert de Claminger Champagne brut: $16.98
In this current economic climate, you’re probably worried about how far your dollars will stretch if you buy property here. You may be surprised to learn that there is plenty of French property that doesn’t come with a ridiculous price tag.
Whether you dream of a city pied-à-terre...or a rambling farmhouse among the sunflowers...or a village house wrapped in wisteria-hung memories of long ago, France is more than affordable. In fact, Americans are at an advantage with a favorable exchange rate. Today, a euro is worth $1.31. Six months ago, a 100,000-euro house for sale in France would have cost you $159,000.
Today, the same house would cost you $132,000. That’s a 17% drop in six months—which means now is a good time to buy.
There are many parts of the country where habitable homes in storybook settings cost less than $100,000. We recently found farmhouses in a famous French wine-growing region selling for just $53,000. We also came across a lovely town an hour from Paris—where a two-bedroom apartment costs just $145,000.
Today, France is a buyer’s market. Owners are often willing to negotiate. In some cases, they’re dropping prices before it even gets to negotiation stage.
It’s true, some second-home owners are over-stretched. But unlike the property markets in the U.S., it’s unlikely you’ll ever witness the same property crash in France. Unlike in the U.S.,
France has never experienced a housing bubble—the property prices increased gradually, over many decades.
Even so, this is a good time to position yourself to take advantage of the situation. It’s certainly not a fire sale, but here are some recent price cuts:
In the Poitou-Charentes region, a four-bedroom stone farmhouse with outbuildings and a large garden. Price reduced from $201,000 to $186,000.

In the Dordogne (long one of rural France’s most expensive pockets), an immaculate two-bedroom stone house with lots of character and a nice garden. Price slashed from $304,000 to $230,000.

A renovated gem of a stone cottage in the heart of a Brittany village popular with tourist vacationers—reduced from $131,500 to $117,000.
But overall, the keyword is stability. France doesn’t experience unrealistic booms followed by an all-too-realistic bust. On the whole, it’s a mature market, not some highly-speculative “hot new destination” for gamblers.
Take Paris. Property prices for the city as a whole rose a healthy 8.7% in 2007, attracting as many investors as romantic dreamers. As a long-term investment, Paris property is low risk and has always appreciated steadily.
The fact is, nobody does quality of life quite like the French. And then there’s Paris—the most bewitching and beautiful city on earth. Stack it all up, and if quality of life is important to you, you’ll understand why we think France is the world’s best place to live.
Switzerland takes silver
Switzerland always scores high in our Index, and for the second year running this country comes in second place. Boasting a stable economy (it scores top marks in this category) and infrastructure that is renowned for its reliability and efficiency, Switzerland is also a beautiful country.
Who isn’t charmed by the thought of a cozy alpine chalet or an elegant apartment overlooking a mirror-calm lake? In fact, Mercer’s 2008 “Quality of Living” survey names Zurich as the world’s best city with Geneva coming in third position (www.mercer.com). Generally, the standard of living in this country is high, the crime rates are low, and the currency is one of the world’s strongest.
As always, the north European counties feature prominently in our top 10: Luxembourg comes in fourth place, Belgium sixth, Germany eighth, and Denmark 10th.
These countries score high marks in all categories and all boast excellent health care and infrastructure, little poverty, strong economies, and high levels of freedom.
The good life Down Under
Coming in fifth position this year is Australia. With its year-round sunshine and great big outdoors, Australia offers an active lifestyle. Plus, as an American, you still get value for your greenback. As we go to press, $1 buys you $1.52 Australian dollars. The cost of living is relatively low (Australia scores 57 points out of 100 in our Index), and the country has great infrastructure and health care…and it’s safe.

Another antipode outpost, and coming ninth in our Index this year, is New Zealand.
New Zealand is a stunning country and a great place to live, but it has its drawbacks—it’s a 12-hour flight from the States and, unless you are young and qualified in certain trades, there are restrictions on foreign residency. For more information on the rules for establishing residency in New Zealand, contact Malcolm Pacific, website: www.malcolmpacific.com
Countries on our radar in 2009

Italy (7th): Last year, our roving Europe editor, Steenie Harvey found a 752-square-foot house in a hill town in southern Italy that was ready to move into for $51,650. “This wasn’t a one-off,” Steenie says. “Properties to restore here started at just $15,000.” Steenie regularly scouts this country for property bargains. Watch out for more of her coverage this year.

Brazil (42nd): Our real estate expert Ronan McMahon and our Latin America editor Lee Harrison have traveled to Brazil on a number of occasions in the past year to bring you coverage of the amazing property deals you can find here. Just last month (see your December issue), Lee found beachfront properties in Brazil’s eastern point for just $32,500. Here you can read about the property bargains he found in the colonial town of Sao Luiz and the bustling city of Fortaleza.
Costa Rica (44th): With road improvements on the Costanera Highway underway and scheduled for completion in two to three years, we believe that property development in southern Costa Rica is on the move and now is a good time to buy here. Read more on this area in these pages in 2009.
Ecuador (49th): One of the cheapest places in the world to live and with one of the best climates, Ecuador has been on our radar for many years…and will be for many more to come. Just two months ago (see your November issue) we profiled a couple who live in the perfect retirement spot two hours north of Quito for less than $600 a month, including rent.
This month we profile Gary and Merri Scott who live in the same beautiful Andean village—Cotacachi. In your February issue, Lee Harrison tells you about some of the best property deals in Coastal Ecuador.
Of course, we can’t ignore the fall of the U.S. economy in 2008 (in the economy category of our Index the U.S. fell from 89 points last year to 57 this year). We asked our investment experts to give us their analyses on the current economic crisis.

www.qualityoflife2009.com.

US-Korea Free Trade Deal Sparks Controversy

By

http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/8380/

4-11-09, 11:31 am

In April 2007, South Korea and the US reached a controversial free trade arrangement after fourteen months of negotiations. Unions and other organizations representing South Korean workers and farmers, supported by the local social democrats, consider the deal a threat to South Korean jobs, and their industries as a whole. Similar hostility was expressed last year in the massive dispute over US beef imports, directly related to the South Korean government's desire to improve its trade standing with the US.
This particular agreement, the KORUS FTA, would be the first between the US and a major East Asian economy, and the largest overall since NAFTA was signed in 1992. This is by far South Korea's largest free trade deal. All that remains is for both countries to ratify the agreement.
South Korea's government has moved significantly to the right since April 2007, and is keen to implement KORUS FTA. But the parliament has had to postpone the ratification, fearing more large-scale anti‑government protests. Meanwhile, disputes in the US Congress initially delayed the ratification. With the onset of the global economic crisis and the election of Barack Obama, further delays were inevitable. Still, a report to Congress early in March stated that the government would no longer delay the ratification of FTAs with Korea, Panama, and Colombia.
But the future of the agreement is uncertain. Ron Kirk, the U.S. trade representative‑designate, told the U.S. Senate Finance Committee that the present agreement with Seoul "simply isn't fair, and if we don't get that right we'll be prepared to step away from that." The Obama administration has already begun taking steps, however limited, to "protect American jobs."
This FTA is likely perceived as a potential threat to those policies. Even Obama himself has said the deal is flawed. Naturally, Kirk's statements have worried the leaders of South Korea.
The first reaction from the presidential office here was that Kirk simply couldn't represent the official position of the U.S. government. The phrasing of that announcement indicates a great deal of hurt, as though saying, "We have been great friends for so long! How could you do this to us!?" Supporters of the FTA claim that the deal shouldn't be abandoned "just because a new administration has stepped in". That is a weak argument. What is the point of a new administration if it does not reevaluate widely despised policies of the preceding one?
The biggest concern seems to be the auto industry. Instead of talking about defending American jobs in hard times, KORUS FTA supporters talk only about how U.S. auto producers are "losing their competitive edge" against "better" Korean manufacturers. In other words, jobs do not matter, only profitability. If the companies aren't doing well, they say close up shop. A Chosun Ilbo newspaper editorial also argued that a renegotiation could spark more large protests akin to the beef import demonstrations last year. And so it should! The "delicate" balance achieved in trade negotiations does not change the fact that it's still a raw deal for South Koreans.
The Korea Herald reported recently that Kirk offered more "positive" statements regarding the FTA. South Korean analysts claim that his earlier comments were a mere "formality" to show his loyalty to Obama. The FTA, they say, is in principle a good thing for the economy, but with a few "problems" to be worked out in dialogue. But where are the voices of the workers and farmers, the ones who will feel the impact of the deal? It is one thing for a newspaper or a member of parliament to say that certain groups in society strongly oppose the deal, but another to actually hear from these people.
Acting in the interests of big money, the South Korean government does not care that public opinion is largely against them, even if half a million people take to the streets in protest; that's what the police force is for.

Obama Calls on Nations to Unite to Tackle Global Challenges

By Kim Chipman

April 11 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama urged global cooperation to combat threats including the economic crisis and terrorism, saying U.S. leadership alone can’t solve worldwide dilemmas.
“These are challenges that no single nation, no matter how powerful, can confront alone,” Obama said today in his weekly address on the radio and Internet. “The U.S. must lead the way, but our best chance to solve these unprecedented problems comes from acting in concert with other nations.”
Obama, speaking after an eight-day trip to Europe, Turkey and Iraq, said progress made at last week’s Group of 20 summit in London and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization meeting in France is an example of how countries can work together. He said it’s crucial for nations to move beyond old conflicts and unite to face common challenges.
“Make no mistake: We live in a dangerous world, and we must be strong and vigilant in the face of these threats,” Obama said. “Let us not allow whatever differences we have with other nations to stop us from coming together around those solutions that are essential to our survival and success.”
Obama praised the G-20 nations, the world’s largest economies, for taking joint steps to “stimulate” growth and protect against future financial crises from happening again. He also lauded NATO allies’ support for the U.S. plan to root out terrorist safe havens in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Nuclear Weapons
“It is only by working together that we will finally defeat 21st century security threats like al Qaeda,” he said.
Obama, 47, drew attention to his call last week to work with Russia to stop the spread of nuclear weapons. He also reminded listeners about his April 6 comments in Turkey to rise above “the barriers of race, region and religion”
The Democratic president’s comments come amid the Jewish holiday of Passover and one day before the Christian observance of Easter.
“It seems fitting that we mark them both during the same week,” Obama said. “They are both moments of reflection and renewal. They are both occasions to think more deeply about the obligations we have to ourselves and the obligations we have to one another, no matter who we are, where we come from, or what faith we practice.”
Meanwhile, Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, in today’s weekly Republican address, criticized the Democrat-controlled Congress’s budget plan, arguing that it would create “mountains of new debt” and doesn’t provide adequate tax relief for middle-class workers and small businesses.
Republican Response
“The federal government should keep a lid on taxes, control government spending and borrow less,” Pawlenty, 48, said. “‘I urge President Obama and the Democrat-led Congress to let hardworking American families keep more of what they earn by cutting taxes and reining in spending. It’s just common sense.”
Lawmakers on Capitol Hill last week approved drafts of Obama’s 2010 budget that largely adhere to the administration’s priorities.
Obama has proposed a $3.6 trillion budget blueprint for the fiscal year starting Oct. 1 that calls for revamping the country’s health-care system, education policies and energy economy.
The president has said his plan would bring tax relief for most working Americans and reduce the deficit while also making the long-term investments critical to the country’s future prosperity.
The House approved a $3.55 trillion plan on April 2. The vote was 233-196 with every Republican who voted opposing the plan. The Senate passed its draft, 55-43, with no Republicans voting in favor and two Democrats, Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Evan Bayh of Indiana, in opposition.
Lawmakers will try to work out their differences later this month after returning from a two-week break that began April 6.
To contact the reporter on this story: Kim Chipman in Washington at kchipman@bloomberg.net. Last Updated: April 11, 2009 06:00 EDT

Friday, April 10, 2009

Panama, Belgium signed investment protection agreement

www.chinaview.cn 2009-03-27 09:51:59

PANAMA CITY, March 26 (Xinhua) -- Panamanian President Martin Torrijos and Belgium Prince Philippe met here on Thursday to negotiate an agreement on investment protection.
The agreement was signed on Thursday by Panamanian temporary Foreign Minister Ricardo Duran and Belgian Business Minister Vincent Van Quickenborne.
Van Quickenborne hailed the importance of commercial protection approaches between the two countries as the commercial cooperation and the European investors' interest in the Panama Canal deepened.
The agreement would guarantee the juridical security of investment made in both countries, said Severo Sousa, Panamanian Vice Minister of Foreign Trade.
It would also spur those who wanted to invest in the two countries, said him.

Remarks With Panamanian Foreign Minister Samuel Lewis Navarro Before Their Meeting















http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2009a/04/121501.htm

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Treaty Room
Washington, DC
April 8, 2009

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, good afternoon. Today, I’m very privileged to be meeting with First Vice President of Panama Sam Lewis, and I want to express how pleased we are to have you here and have this opportunity to discuss a range of important issues that not only matter to our two countries, but to the broader region.

FOREIGN MINISTER NAVARRO: Thank you very much. I want to thank the Secretary of State, Secretary Clinton, for this opportunity. As you’ve mentioned, we’ll discuss both bilateral and hemispheric issues, especially in light of the upcoming Summit of the Americas. Panama and the United States have enjoyed a very special relationship, historically, which has helped us tackle very – many issues in the past. And we are sure that that is what will continue to happen.
Thank you very much.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you. Thank you so much.
FOREIGN MINISTER NAVARRO: Thank you.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you.
QUESTION: Madame Secretary, why is now the time to invite Iran to engage in direct relations?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, the – you’re referring to the P-5+1 meeting. And as we speak, Under Secretary Bill Burns is now participating in the P-5+1 as a full participant, not just as an observer. And obviously, we believe that, you know, pursuing very careful engagement on a range of issues that affect our interests and the interests of the world with Iran makes sense, and there’s nothing more important than trying to convince Iran to cease its efforts to obtain a nuclear weapon.

Brodosplit delivers new tanker to Cypriot client





Split's Brodosplit Shipyard delivered a new tanker, named the Arctic Flounder, to Cypriot client Salute Shipping Company Limited yesterday (Thurs).

The new Panamax-type tanker is 228.5 metres long and 32.24 metres wide, has a capacity of 74,925 tonnes and will have a maximum speed of 16 knots.

The new P-MAX-type tanker will transport of oil and oil products.

It is about the largest tanker that can pass through the Panama Canal with a full load of cargo.The tanker, which complies with Panama Canal Authority requirements, is the third of four of that type built by Brodosplit for its client in Cyprus.

Tax aid proposed to boost La. ports

By ALLEN M. JOHNSON JR.
Advocate New Orleans bureau
Published: Apr 8, 2009 - Page: 1D

NEW ORLEANS — A $10 per ton tax credit for shipping Louisiana products would create 13,000 new jobs and millions of dollars in new tax revenue, the city’s top port official told a hearing Tuesday.

Gary LaGrange, president and CEO of the Port of New Orleans, said the proposed tax credit should win passage when the Legislature convenes later this month.

“We think it’s the greatest piece of apple-pie legislation,” LaGrange told the city-sponsored meeting, which explored how Louisiana could attract billions of dollars in new trade from the Panama Canal expansion in 2014.

LaGrange said the $10 per ton tax credit would apply to any Louisiana grown or manufactured products, both for import and for exports.

“Right now, about 58 percent of all Louisiana manufactured and grown products are being shipped out of other ports that are not in Louisiana,” he said.

The proposed tax credit — a break on Louisiana corporate income taxes — would offer shippers an incentive to use Louisiana ports, he said.

In 2008, 1.6 million tons of Louisiana products were generated for cargo shipments.
A similar bill failed in 2004, he said later.
“It didn’t pass because we didn’t do our homework, quite honestly. Since then, we have a new and improved tax credit bill … which provides a much better return for the state’s investment,” LaGrange said.
House Speaker Jim Tucker, R-Terrytown, will author the new bill, LaGrange said.
Meanwhile, the pro-business Baton Rouge Area Committee and GNO Inc. have jointly funded a new international trade study, GNO vice president Andrea St. Bland said. “The purpose of the study is to identify immediate, medium and long-term economic strategies for the state and the region.”
The study should be completed by June 15, she said.
City Councilman Arnie Fielkow said a “unified regional plan” for port improvements is needed or else the New Orleans area will fall further behind Mobile, Ala., Savannah, Ga., and other port cities. No such plan emerged Tuesday, however.
Signs of impatience did appear.
“Right now, we don’t have a vision for international trade in this state,” New Orleans shipping executive Gregory Rusovich, chairman of the influential New Orleans Business Council, said later.
Efforts to unite parishes behind a single plan have been frustrated by “parochialism” and competition for proposed port facilities, Rusovich said.
Once the BRAC/GNO study is completed, the governor’s help will be needed, he said.
“It’s very important, quite frankly, ultimately, for the Governor’s Office to be able to help develop this one singular vision for international trade,” Rusovich said.
State Sen. A.G. Crowe, R-Slidell, an administration ally, told the city hearing that Gov. Bobby Jindal has allocated $100 million to port improvements. “(Jindal) realizes one out of every four jobs in the state is port-related,” Crowe said.

Louisiana should position itself to reap the benefits of an expanded Panama Canal, panel says

by Jen DeGregorio, The Times-Picayune
Tuesday April 07, 2009, 4:58 PM

http://www.nola.com/business/index.ssf/2009/04/louisiana_should_position_itse.html

New Orleans City Council members heard from a panel of lawmakers and business leaders on Tuesday about ways Louisiana could benefit from an expansion of the Panama Canal.
With only five years to go before the expanded canal is set to open for business and flood the Gulf of Mexico with new shipping traffic, Councilman Arnie Fielkow said the council should support any plans that could make Louisiana ports stand out among their competitors.

"The greatest asset that we have in this community is the Mississippi River," said Fielkow, chair of the council's economic development committee, which hosted Tuesday's forum.

Panel members agreed about the need for a strategy to lure cargo from the canal, saying the initiative would create new jobs and tax dollars. But there was some contention about how best to accomplish the task. Sen. A.G. Crowe, R-Slidell, said the state's best bet would be to construct a megaport along Southwest Pass, near the mouth of the river.
The world's largest cargo ships are too deep for the river, he said, and a port closer to open water would be the only hope to draw their cargo into Louisiana. Such a facility could benefit the Port of New Orleans, he said, with smaller ships taking cargo from larger vessels to ferry upriver for distribution by rail or truck. "It's business we don't have right now," said Crowe, who drafted legislation last year to create the Louisiana International Deep Water Gulf Transfer Terminal Authority, a state body that would govern a megaport near the river's mouth.
The complex could be up and running in as soon as two years, according to Crowe, who said a company has already proposed spending as much as $2 billion to build a new port on state-owned land along Southwest Pass. Louisiana Economic Development is considering the idea, and a formal proposal should be made public next month, he said. "That's a very, very bullish thing to happen," Crowe said of the proposal. Gary LaGrange, president and CEO of the Port of New Orleans, said a larger port near the mouth of the river should not come at the expense of cargo docks in New Orleans.
LaGrange is lobbying for a $500 million expansion of the Napoleon Avenue Container Terminal, which he said would be needed to handle any new boxed cargo that may arise from Crowe's proposed transfer terminal.
"If you don't do that, you will lose your market edge .Â¥.Â¥. for when the Panama Canal does open," said LaGrange. At least one other plan for a major cargo facility has been discussed in recent months.
Sea Point, a transfer terminal proposed off the coast of Venice, would use an offshore platform to move containers from ships to barges that would then take the cargo up the Mississippi. Eugene Schreiber, managing director of the World Trade Center of New Orleans, a group that promotes trade with the city, described the fragmented plans as a downfall for the state.
The "lack of coordinated planning" has thwarted progress on any single effort to improve the state's port infrastructure, Schreiber said. Andrea St. Paul Bland, vice president of business development for the economic development group GNO Inc., hopes that her group will address that problem with a report that would suggest ways for Louisiana to leverage its port assets to compete with other states.
The study, which will assess world shipping trends as well as state port facilities, should be complete in June, St. Paul Bland said. Fielkow said he hoped that GNO would apprise the Legislature even sooner about any findings that could help lawmakers decide how best to address the Panama Canal expansion.
Although the city will play a supporting role by lobbying for the ports, state lawmakers will have to take the lead, Feilkow said. "We are a little behind the timeline," Councilwoman Cynthia Willard-Lewis, the only other council member at Tuesday's hearing, said of the state's efforts to capitalize on the canal expansion.
Jen DeGregorio can be reached at 504.826.3495 or jdegregorio@timespicayune.com.

Evergreen Upgrades its Far East- Panama Service (FPS)

Evergreen Line will adjust its weekly transit times on its Far East - Panama service (FPS), to improve the service it offers to its customers in Central America, the Caribbean and the West Coast of South America.

The company has reduced the transit time from its Taiwanese hub, Kaohsiung to the Mexican port of Lazaro Cardenas from 23 to just 16 days. The transit time from Shanghai to the Caribbean hub, Colon Container Terminal, is now only 25 days.

The FPS service port rotation is now:

Ningbao – Shanghai – Yangtian – Kaohsiung – Lazaro Cardenas – Colon Container Terminal - Ningbao

The first sailing operating with the revised schedule will be served by the 2,824 TEU ‘Irenes Remedy 0046-036’, which is due to start loading in Shanghai on 16 April 2009.

A company’s spokesperson stated:

“Evergreen is pleased that even in today’s challenging and competitive market in Latin America and the Caribbean we are able to find ways to develop our services and focus on our customers needs.”

Obama Sees ‘Glimmers of Hope’ of Improving Economy















April 10 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama said the U.S. economy is “starting to see progress” toward recovery even as it is “still under severe stress.”
“What we’re starting to see is glimmers of hope,” the president told reporters at the White House after getting an update on the economy from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, and Sheila Bair, chairwoman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

While Obama cited a 20 percent increase in government- backed loans to small businesses “over the last month alone,” he added that “right now we’re still seeing a lot of job losses, a lot of hardship.”
The talks centered on stimulating the economy, stabilizing banks, reducing strain in the credit markets, the rising jobless rate, mortgage refinancing and the health assessment of banks, including “stress tests” being conducted by the Fed.
“We have always been very cautious about prognosticating, and that’s not going to change,” Obama said. “The economy’s still under severe stress, and obviously during these holidays we have to keep in mind that whatever we do ultimately has to translate into economic growth, and jobs, and rising incomes for the American people.”
Helping Homeowners
Obama told reporters he and his experts discussed stabilization in the financial system and efforts to keep people in their homes as a result of government programs to modify loans, leading to a pickup in refinancing.
The average rate on a U.S. 30-year fixed mortgage dropped to 4.73 percent in the week ended April 3, the lowest since 1971. Fed policymakers last month kept the benchmark lending rate in a range of zero to 0.25 percent.

Obama didn’t mention the status of the Fed’s tests being conducted to see how the 19 largest U.S. banks would hold up if the recession worsens. Results may be released later this month.
“We’ve still got a lot of work to do,” Obama said. He didn’t take reporters’ questions.
There are signs of economic improvement. Orders placed with factories rose 1.8 percent in February, the first gain since July. Purchases of existing homes rose 5.1 percent to an annual rate of 4.72 million in February amid lower prices.
To be sure, the recession that began in December 2007 lingers. The unemployment rate rose to 8.5 percent in March, the highest level since 1983, and employers have cut payrolls by 5.1 million workers since the start of the downturn, the worst performance in the postwar era.
The economy probably shrank at a 5 percent annual rate in the first quarter, according to the median estimate in a Bloomberg News survey earlier this month.
Top Advisers
Also attending today’s meeting were Mary Shapiro, chairwoman of the Securities and Exchange Commission; John Dugan, Comptroller of the Currency, an arm of the Treasury Department that regulates national banks; and Obama’s top economic advisers, Lawrence Summers, director of the National Economic Council, and Christina Romer, head of the White House Council of Economic Advisers.
Summers yesterday expressed confidence that the U.S. recession is nearing an end.
“We can be reasonably confident that is going to end within the next few months and you’ll no longer have that sense of free fall,” Summers told the Economic Club of Washington.
To contact the reporter on this story: Roger Runningen in Washington at rrunningen@bloomberg.net Last Updated: April 10, 2009 13:00 EDT

The Fall of the Constitution and Rise of a One World Economy



April 9, 2009


Bailouts, Stimulus Packages or Redistribution of Assets? Part One of Two


by Deanna Spingola
On February 17, 1950, James Paul Warburg appeared before the U.S. Senate and declared: "We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether world government will be achieved by conquest or consent."1 To establish a world government, it is necessary to incrementally eradicate the constitution, bring the U.S. to her knees economically, and shackle the taxpayers to perpetual debt through bailouts and stimulus packages funded by printing billions of dollars of interest and debt-bearing Federal Reserve Notes to drastically devalue the currency in circulation thus impoverishing the taxpayers.



The only benefactors are the extant banks, certain corporations and the individuals who concocted the financial disaster.


The colonists issued debt-free script in the 1700s commensurate to the demands of trade and industry. The citizens were self-sufficient and industrious. Incensed over the currency issue, England burdened the colonists with excess taxes to fund Britain's imperialistic wars. This precipitated the Revolutionary War. Alexander Hamilton, a Rothschild agent, convinced George Washington to allow the Rothschilds to finance the war. In 1791, with a big war debt to be paid, Hamilton set up a central bank, owned by the Rothschilds and other foreigners called the First Bank of the United States with a twenty-year charter.2


Congress rejected renewal of the charter and the bank was closed on March 4, 1811. Nathan Rothschild was outraged and asked the British Parliament to declare war to reinstate the bank. The Prime Minister refused and was assassinated on May 11, 1812. Parliament declared war on June 18, 1812. British troops burned the White House and other government buildings including the one that housed the ratification papers for the U.S. constitution. The war increased our national debt from $45 million to $127 million.3 President Madison proposed the establishment of a second central bank on December 5, 1815 for a twenty year period. It was created by Congress on January 7, 1817. Nicholas Biddle, a Rothschild protégé, became the bank's president in 1822. President Andrew Jackson refused to renew the charter in 1836, as promised during his presidential campaign.


In opposition to the international bankers, Abraham Lincoln issued debt-free, interest-free greenbacks through the Legal Tender Act of February 25, 1862. This currency funded the Civil War, a horrific, bloody battle that took the lives of over 600,000 souls and was devised to weaken and divide the country. The privately-owned Bank of England planned to impose a gold standard on the United States. Lincoln was soon assassinated by John Wilkes Booth, a Rothschild agent. No debt-free or interest-free money has been issued in America since then.



J. P. Morgan & Company was founded in New York City in 1871 as Drexel, Morgan & Company by J. Pierpont Morgan and Philadelphia banker Anthony Drexel, agents for Europeans investing in the United States. Ultimately, they were so well capitalized that they financed much of America's industrial expansion. By the 1890s, Morgan became an industry consolidator, reorganizing and restructuring the debts of financially troubled railroads - the Northern Pacific, the Erie, the Reading and many other railroads for a total of one-sixth of the track in the U.S. Morgan financed and merged smaller companies to create U.S. Steel, International Harvester and others. A decline in competition results in a concentration of control. In 1904, J. P. Morgan & Company loaned money to finance the Panama Canal, the largest real estate transaction in history. J. P. Morgan & Company became the world's most powerful investment bank.



J. P. Morgan loaned money to Thomas Edison for his incandescent light research and therefore directed Edison's power generation and distribution plants. Nikola Tesla (July 10, 1856 - January 7, 1943), a Serbian who later became a U.S. citizen, was fluent in seven languages. He patented the radio on March 20, 1900, a patent usurped and used by Marconi. Tesla needed the financing that the House of Morgan offered but wishing to retain independence, he resisted the accompanying control. He had witnessed the robber baron's 1891 aggressive takeover of the struggling Thomson-Houston Company and the Edison Company to form General Electric.4



Tesla had also witnessed how Morgan coveted and endangered the autonomy of Westinghouse. Morgan wanted Tesla to sign over his broad spectrum radio patents as security for the loans. Tesla had plans for a directed-energy weapon, not yet patented. Tesla proposed an end to all war. Tesla's alternating current induction motor could have provided free, world-wide electricity to every human. Undoubtedly, Morgan, making huge profits from energy, wished to conceal that possibility. German born George H. Scherff Sr. served as Tesla's accountant and assistant. When Tesla died, his vast collection of papers were seized and classified by the banker-obedient government.5


By the turn of the century, Americans paid very few taxes, had minimal debt and grew their businesses internally - without bank loans. However, by 1910, there were, throughout the country, a combination of over twenty thousand private banks and national banks, chartered by the federal government, all taking business away from the big New York City banks. Legally, banks were allowed to issue currency or bank notes. Since they operated on a fractional reserve system, they could lend out 90 percent of their deposits. This system is manageable unless demands for cash in the form of checks or depositor withdrawals are greater than their reserve cash. Many of those banks failed in orchestrated financial panics. Those remaining would be coerced to join the Federal Reserve System, soon to be established, where their reserves would be managed and controlled by a small, highly competitive, greedy group.


In the fall of 1910, six influential competitor bankers and one well-connected congressman, Republican Senator Nelson Aldrich, stealthily collaborated at Jekyll Island to plot the establishment of a shared monopoly, the Federal Reserve System. The bankers represented the interests of J. P. Morgan, Rothschild, Rockefeller, Warburg, and Kuhn, Loeb & Company. Consequently, legislation was passed to create the Federal Reserve System in 1913, the culmination of decades of plotting by the international bankers. Under the jurisdiction of a board of directors, the U.S. was divided into twelve Federal Reserve Districts. Americans were led to believe that the Fed would eliminate financial catastrophes and stabilize the economy. In reality, the Fed is a cartel that was designed to obliterate competition and increase profits through higher prices and deceptive policies enforced by the government.


J. P. Morgan arranged the financing and purchasing of American supplies for France and Britain during World War I. By the end of that war, J. P. Morgan Bank had handled $3 billion in commercial transactions, netting $3 million in fees, and had arranged over $1.5 billion in credits to become the world's most influential bank, moving it permanently into the political arena of foreign policy, serving as an extension of the federal government.6



In 1901, the U.S. national debt was less than $1 billion. After World War I, the national debt was $25 billion. Between World War I and II, it increased to $49 billion. In 1952, in the midst of the Korean War, under U.N. command, the debt stood at $72 billion. In 1962, the debt was $303 billion which increased to $383 billion by 1970 during the Vietnam War. By 1976, at the end of the Vietnam War, it was $631 billion. During the 1980s and the orchestrated Cold War military buildup, the debt increased substantially. The international bankers funded both the U.S. and the Soviet military buildup. However, all records evidencing congressional acquiescence to the massive banker-funded technological transfer from 1916 forward were classified by Eisenhower's executive order in 1953.7 By 1998, the debt was over $5.5 trillion. Now, the national debt is well over $10.8 trillion. This does not include personal indebtedness such as credit cards, car loans or mortgages.


By the 1920s, banks routinely offered low-interest credit to businesses that had previously relied on profits and patience for expansion. Soon, businesses, eager for additional profit accepted the deceptively low-interest loans offered by the banks. Once hooked, businesses became dependant on banks for growth. To maintain perceptions beneficial to their objectives, bankers have always entrenched like-minded minions into influential positions such as newspaper publishers, editors, columnists, university presidents, professors, textbook writers, labor union leaders, filmmakers, and radio and television commentators.


Even after the deliberate New York Panic of 1920-21, America was still industrially strong. Farms provided adequate and toxin-free, un-genetically modified food. Our infrastructure and transportation systems were then modern and efficient and we were technologically advanced compared to the rest of the world. In 1921, U.S. per capita income was $522. In 1925, Winston Churchill, Chancellor of the Exchequer, wanting England to return to world leadership, adjusted the British pound to $4.86 which limited the amount of British goods companies and individuals around the world could afford. Consequently, over the next two years, hundreds of millions of dollars of gold flowed to the U.S. from all over Europe.8


Montague Norman of the Bank of England, Charles Rist of the Bank of France, Hjalmer Scacht of the Reichsbank, Benjamin Strong of the Federal Reserve, all privately-owned central banks, and Andrew Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury convened in 1927 and agreed to lower U.S. interest rates and the Fed's discount rate. Additionally, in July, 1927, the directors of the Bank of England, the New York Federal Reserve Bank, and the German Reichsbank plotted to move the gold out of the U.S. Allegedly, this helped to generate the depression. By 1928, about $500 million in gold was transferred to Europe, especially Germany, most under the guise of post-war aid.


By 1928, U.S. per capita income grew to $628. Winston Churchill, Benjamin Strong, the New York Federal Reserve chief and the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, Andrew Mellon operated together to ensure that easy money for Wall Street speculation was readily available.


Newspaper and magazine articles promoted stock market speculation claiming that one could


make a veritable fortune in a short time for minimum monthly investments. However, there were "special" speculators who owned dozens of accounts in various names which could be traded in enormous blocks. Small investors, never in a position to manipulate the market, suffered the consequences and received the blame for the 1929 crash. Blame for every catastrophe is always placed elsewhere.


Since Woodrow Wilson, the Fed has installed and managed many U.S. presidents. On October 25, 1929, President Herbert Hoover claimed: "The fundamental business of the country is on a sound and prosperous basis." The crash of October 28-29, 1929 was devised. On November 8, 2002, current Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said: "Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again."9


In 1929-1930, the banks, purportedly because they were short on gold, would not give loans to U.S. industry and individuals. Yet, three banks, J. P. Morgan & Company, First National Bank of New York and First National Bank of Chicago, had sufficient money to send huge amounts out of the country to the Bank of International Settlements which ultimately built up Nazi Germany. The money supply was deliberately decreased, causing the Great Depression. People defaulted on their loans and the banks repossessed farms, homes and business properties. People lost their savings - everything. The banks benefited. It was an unethical, egregious redistribution of assets. The catastrophic crash was world-wide, creating joblessness, hunger, disintegration of production and national bankruptcies.


On March 7, 1930, Hoover said: "All the evidence indicates that the worst effects of the Crash upon unemployment will have passed during the next sixty days." He then signed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act against the advice of the thousand economists hired by Wall Street manipulators who were most concerned about repayment of their foreign loans. In September 1930, Bernard Baruch, after returning from a visit to Churchill in England, sent a cable affirming Churchill's views about British world supremacy. On December 11, 1930, New York's fourth largest bank, Bank of the United States, failed. Its 450,000 depositors had no recourse and no FDIC insurance. Another one thousand banks failed in 1930.10 Bank failures signal bank consolidation - extant banks consume them.


The entire national debt in 1932 was $19.5 billion. Roosevelt then initiated the New Deal in 1933 by introducing the practice of deficit spending, which was the brain-child of Britain's John Maynard Keynes, a member of the Illuminati. In 1910, Lenin said: "The surest way to overthrow an established social order is to debauch its currency." Nine years later, Keynes wrote: "Lenin was certainly right, there is no more positive, or subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency ... The process engages all of the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner that not one man in a million is able to diagnose."11


On March 9, 1933, Franklin Roosevelt issued Executive Orders 6073, 6102, 6111, and 6260 which declared that the U.S. was bankrupt. On April 5, 1933, Roosevelt declared a National Emergency and made it illegal for U.S. citizens to own gold. He ordered all gold coins, gold bullion, and gold certificates to be turned into the Federal Reserve banks by May 1 (the Illuminati was created on May 1, 1776). People would face imprisonment and fines if they refused to relinquish their gold. Further, on June 5, 1933, Congress enacted a joint resolution outlawing all gold clauses in contracts. The Federal Reserve System was not energized until 1933 when the U.S. went off the gold standard which allowed the expansion and devaluation of the money supply. The Federal Reserve collects usury on every bill printed. "Our currency has no value past the confidence of those who use it."12


Gold coinage was withdrawn from circulation, and kept in the form of bullion. The public and the Federal Reserve returned their stocks of gold to the government. The people were paid $20.67 an ounce in Federal Reserve money. The Federal Reserve received Gold Certificates. So the Federal Reserve, owned by some Illuminati families, had control of the country's gold and could control its price. The stability and responsibility of the government that issues a currency is the primary reason people accept that currency. Obviously, the collapse of that government would render the currency worthless.




Part Two of Two
Unconstrained, the bankers have financed all of the profit-producing, declared and undeclared wars. The U.S. government alleged that the Second World War was caused by obstacles to free trade, exacerbated by the financial events of 1929 manifested in Nazi fascism and responsible for the tensions that led to the Second World War. As a consequence of their questionable theory, the conditions of receiving American economic aid included the implementation of a free trade policy. Free trade policies, like central banks, only assist the bankers and the corporations who exploit cheap labor in third world countries.
World War II ended the depression. There was plenty of money. People had jobs. Women were encouraged to work - more money to service the interest payments to the Federal Reserve. Shuffling women into the workplace was really never about equal rights and opportunities, despite the rhetoric. Bankers serve on corporate boards and control corporate decisions. They depress or increase corporate stock by leveraging loans. When stock prices are depressed, bankers' agents purchase large blocks of the company's stock. The bank may then approve a multi-million dollar loan to the company which increases the stock which can be sold at a profit. Billions are accrued, enabling the purchase of additional stock. The Federal Reserve Board manipulates the market by increasing or decreasing their discount rates. Stocks soar or crash at their whim, sustained by economic experts who manipulate public opinion.
The Fed can also coerce corporations to borrow huge sums so that earnings can be siphoned off to pay the interest to the banks, reducing actual profits. Banks may collect billions in interest through corporate loans even with depressed stock prices. The bankers benefit while individual stockholders suffer. New money or credit carries debt, keeping most citizens in a never-ending cycle of debt. Dumping more money into the system, which bailouts and stimulus packages do, devalues the money already in circulation which escalates the prices of basic commodities, usually without comparable wage increases. Compound interest on mortgages and other items produces massive profits for the banks. Over the term of a mortgage, a house ultimately costs as much as three homes. With numerous taxes attached to products and services, plundered Americans are drowning in debt. If you think you are off the hook because you have paid off your mortgage, just fail to pay property taxes and see how fast the government seizes your house. We have been transformed from a debt-free nation into a debt-ridden nation.
Since 1935, the one dollar Federal Reserve Note has had the Illuminati all-seeing eye within the Great Seal. At the base of the pyramid is Roman numerals 1776, the year the Illuminati was founded. One dollar bills were printed as Federal Reserve Notes beginning in 1963. The phrase "In God We Trust" was added in 1957. Considering the enslaving amount of usury that we pay, totally eschewed by Jesus, the Fed's use of that statement on their notes appears to be an ironic hoax on the Christian citizens of this country. The Power Elite enjoy concealing their nefarious agenda in plain sight. Under the pyramid are the Latin words - "Novus Ordo Seclorum" which means "a new order of the ages" or "new order of the centuries." The words "Annuit Coeptis" are above the eye which means "he looks upon your endeavors favorably." Who would that be? Some suggest that it represents Osiris, Egypt's pagan god.1
In 1958, Chase Manhattan Bank introduced the Chase Manhattan Charge Plan, the first bank in the nation to offer customers a convenient, immediate gratification interest-bearing credit card. Consumer credit, encouraged by constant tantalizing media advertising, has sky-rocketed. Recently, big pharma started advertising their consistently inadequately tested, questionably-safe products. If your doctor fails to prescribe their latest miracle cure or vaccines for every minor malady, just ask for the product or injection and hope that the side effects don't permanently harm or kill you.
On June 4, 1963, President John F. Kennedy issued Executive Order 11110 which directed the U.S. Treasury to issue $4,292,893,815 in interest-free U.S. Notes. On October 2, 1963, he issued NSAM 263, an order for the immediate withdrawal of 1,000 U.S. military advisors from Vietnam and a timetable for the withdrawal of all CIA operatives and U.S. personnel. This would have ended the steady stream of profits to the banks. He was assassinated on November 22, 1963 in Dallas, Texas.
Government bailouts started in 1970 with the bailout of Penn Central which had 96,000 employees and had borrowed from most of the major banks. Additionally, those same banks held stock in the railroad and seats on their board of directors. They made many of the management decisions and were privy to insider financial information. The banks loaned the railroad more money - millions that were used to artificially inflate the stock market price and pay dividends. A month before the railroad failed and before the public was notified, Chase Manhattan's trust department dumped 262,000 shares. The bevy of bankers who held the loans had received dividends on the worthless stock, earned interest on the loans and unloaded a total of 1.8 million share of stock after they collected the dividends.2
Lockheed was near bankruptcy in 1970. Bank of America had loaned them $400 million. Lockheed's managers and employees approached congress with pleas - 31,000 jobs would be lost, national security would be at risk, sub contractors and suppliers would be hurt. Banks, due to Lockheed's dire financial straits, would not make any further loans. Allegedly, to protect the economy, Treasury Secretary John B. Connally finagled a bailout plan guaranteed by the government (taxpayer). Once the government stepped in, the banks freely loaned Lockheed money. Ultimately, the government awarded hundreds of no-bid contracts to Lockheed which has become one of the nation's biggest war contractors. Other similar companies who operated more efficiently lost contracts to Lockheed.3
Connally, a former big oil lawyer turned Texas governor, was riding in John F. Kennedy's limousine in the motorcade and witnessed the president's assassination. Connally encouraged Johnson to be aggressive in accelerating and executing the war in Vietnam. When Connally was Treasury Secretary under Nixon, he oversaw a $50 billion increase in the debt limit. Additionally, he endorsed a $40 billion budget deficit referred to as a "fiscal stimulus." At the time, five million Americans were unemployed. Secretary Connally announced Nixon's program to increase gold prices and officially devalue the dollar. During Nixon's administration, the U.S. was taken off the gold standard completely, a process started by Roosevelt.
Then there was the bailout of New York City, a city overflowing with corruption and a burgeoning bureaucracy. In 1975, New York, a huge welfare state, was unable to get additional credit. New York City employees, otherwise known as friends and relatives, were paid huge salaries for lower-paying comparable jobs in private industry. The city managed to get a loan from the Treasury for $2.3 billion, approved by Congress. It was enough to continue paying interest on their previous bank loans. The taxpayers suffered the consequences through massive inflation. But the banks collected their interest, a huge source of income. New York was supposed to make changes and reduce spending.
That didn't happen.4 Chicago, with their glut of relative and friend employees, is in similar circumstances. But Mayor Daley manages to stealthily sell public property. Recently, it was the city's parking meters. Now, in addition to inflation, citizens pay outrageous fees to park in the city which affects business. Before that, it was the famous Skyway.
Rod Blagojevich, the former Illinois governor was arrested December 9, 2008, the day after he publicly declared that the state of Illinois would suspend all business dealings with the Bank of America, the recipient of a $25 million bailout, until it restored a credit line to Republic Windows & Doors which, without credit, was forced to close and lay off their 240 employees. The governor apparently forgot who really runs everything. His indiscretions, attributable to every other professional politician, went unnoticed until he challenged the banks. Goldman Sachs, another bailout recipient, used $6.5 billion of our taxpayer dollars to give bonuses to their financial staff.
Banks create money with a computer keystroke. The money changers can print a $5 bill or a $100 bill for a few cents each. The Federal Reserve prints money to pay the obligations of the metastasizing government. Congress authorizes the Treasury Department to print U.S. bonds, held by the Federal Reserve which the government agrees to pay it back, plus interest, by plundering the labor of the taxpayers. The Fed now considers those bonds as assets, reserves to create more credit to lend to states, municipalities, individuals and businesses. Currently, banks give credit for home purchases, cars and other commodities that people used to save for. U.S. citizens depend on consumer and business credit. When that credit is arbitrarily withheld or withdrawn, industry and spending comes to a halt.
The Federal Reserve is the power behind the recently inaugurated, smooth-talking, charismatic Barack Obama who is overly-anxious to impose government control and dispense bailouts through the Stimulus Package. Through wealth transference and suppressive legislation designed to decrease liberty, each consecutive administration moves America closer to economic collapse and one world governance.
Bush coerced passage of the PATRIOT Act (written long before 9/11 and unread by Congress), facilitated the Department of Homeland Security, increased the number of FEMA detention centers, allowed unrestrained illegal invasion to drain state economies (especially California), and incited invasive economy-destroying war against two countries which do not have central banks with debt-based money under the control of the international bankers. Arabs do not believe in charging or paying usury (interest on loans). By the end of 2008, the U.S. had spent $3 trillion on the Iraq War, borrowed from the Fed with interest.
With Obama, citizens will likely be disarmed, in direct violation of the 2nd Amendment, created for citizens to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. We will finally get Hillary Clinton's universal health care. Big pharma, run in concert with big banks and insurance companies, the main benefactors. The government will make all health decisions - who lives, who dies, how many children one may bare, etc. Natural solutions for health care may be outlawed. Warfare will continue as demonstrated by the very recent deployment of 17,000 troops to Afghanistan. This, despite those campaign promises about reducing the troops. Warfare, a huge drain on our economy and a financial boon for the Fed, will continue. Troop numbers are being augmented by waiving criminal histories of those who enlist simply because they are unable to find work. The economy will ultimately bleed-out resulting in riots, food shortages and eventually martial law and perhaps mass detention.
The recent bailouts and the current stimulus package, disguised as assistance to the populace, is a huge transference of wealth - from the taxpayer's pockets into the banker's pockets. Any promised infrastructure enhancements may consist of such things as the completion of the unpublicized NAFTA super highway to connect Canada, the United States and Mexico. While in Denver signing the Stimulus Package, Obama said: "We will build on the work that's being done in places like Boulder, Colorado - a community that is on pace to be the world's first Smart Grid city."5
This appears to refer to an Agenda 21 program being initiated in Boulder by Xcel Energy.
Senators disregarded the taxpayer's pleas to reject the socialist Stimulus Package. The taxpayers, stuck with the tab, are outraged. Democratic senators, including the newly-installed Roland Burris, voted for the stimulus. Burris is now under criminal investigation for his duplicitous involvement with Rod Blagojevich's brother regarding questionable fundraising. This issue was concealed until after his guaranteed vote. Concealment of significant facts seems common with the incoming administration and its appointments. Apologies that follow embarrassing exposures somehow seem insincere.
The outrageous, squealing, pork-filled stimulus plan was designed to benefit the bankers and bleed America dry. The 1000+ page package was certainly written months ago. Pelosi, who recently claimed that America was losing 500 million jobs a month, lacks the intelligence to devise anything more that a one page yes-memo to the bankers that finance her repetitive campaigns.
Congress, with few exceptions, have not represented the voters for decades. They are agents for the banks and corporations while paying lip service to their constituents during election campaigns. They profess concern for the voter's essential needs and pass measures that appear to address those needs which in reality expand the coffers of big business and the banks. Meanwhile, members of congress collect generous salaries with regular self-approved pay increases, lobbyist perks, private health plans, and look forward to a life-long, non-Social-Security pension.
Ayn Rand (1905-1982) said in her book Atlas Shrugged: "When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion - when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing - when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors - when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you - when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice - you may know that your society is doomed."
Banks and corporations run a centralized, metastasizing entity, disguised as the federal government. Their objectives are promoting war while financing both sides, confiscating people's money and resources, and propagandizing the naïve masses to maintain and perpetuate their power. Our two main political parties are their servants, government departments are the spending agencies, and the Internal Revenue Service, a private offshore corporation is the collection agency.

Thomas Jefferson said: "I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
Endnotes
^ Pat Riott, The Greatest Story Never Told, Winston Churchill and the Crash of 1929, 1994, Nanoman Press, pg 28.
^ G. Edward Griffin, The Creature From Jekyll Island, American Media, 2002, pp. 41-48
^ Ibid
^ Ibid
^ Obama's Remarks at Stimulus Signing, New York Times, February 17, 2009, p. 2
About the Author
Deanna Spingola has been a quilt designer and is the author of two books. She has traveled
extensively teaching and lecturing on her unique methods. She has always been an avid reader of non-fiction works designed to educate rather than entertain. She is active in family history research and lectures on that topic. Currently she is the director of the local Family History Center. She has a great interest in politics and the direction of current government policies, particularly as they relate to the Constitution. Deanna's Web Site