posted 04-08-2004 08:17 PM            

From: http://www.cecaust.com.au

Citizens Electoral Council of Australia

Craig Isherwood Craig Isherwood - National Secretary
PO Box 376, COBURG, VIC, 3058
Phone: 03-9354-0544 Fax: 03-9354-0166
Email: cec@cecaust.com.au
Website: http://www.cecaust.com.au/
Media Release 5 April 2004

World Financial System May Blow This Week

On April 3, U.S. Democratic Party Presidential pre-candidate Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. released a statement that opened as follows:

"On Friday, April 2nd, the pack of ghouls and goniffs otherwise known as President George W. Bush, Jr.'s campaign strategists, pulled one of the dumbest publicity stunts in modern history, with the way in which they, and Federal Reserve Chairman

Alan Greenspan, orchestrated the fraudulent reports intended to convince the world's dumbest suckers that there is an ongoing uptick in the already stumbling, bumbling, broken-down U.S. economy."

LaRouche was referring to the release of the clearly fraudulent announcement by the U.S. Labor Department that day, that the U.S. economy had created 308,000 new jobs during March. The announcement backfired with a sonic boom: it triggered a huge sell-off in the bond market, on the expectation, with this great "recovery" underway, that the U.S. Federal Reserve may raise interest rates before long. As bonds are dumped, their prices fall, and their yields rise. Since long-term bond yields are the basis for defining mortgage interest rates, mortgage rates started climbing sharply late Friday, just as stock prices of mortgage lenders, home builders and home improvement retailers fell sharply. The full impact of the bond market sell-off on the extremely precarious mortgage markets will only show up beginning today, Monday, April 5. Experts have estimated that even as little as a 1% rise in mortgage rates would be enough to pop the mortgage bubble, and the world financial system along with it.

Ever since the collapse of the Long Term Capital Management (LTCM) hedge fund in September-October 1998, which almost brought down the world monetary system, the policy of Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan and associated international financiers has been to throw "a wall of money" at LTCM and related liquidity problems. They have thus created the greatest speculative bubble in human history, as seen by the astronomical house prices in the U.K., U.S., and Australia for instance. This giant bubble is overdue for a collapse; the only question now is, what pin-prick will cause it to pop?

Whether Bush "pinned the tail on the donkey" on Friday or not, the present IMF-dominated "globalist" free trade system of usury and speculation is doomed in the immediate weeks or perhaps a handful of months ahead. The issue now, as LaRouche has repeatedly stated, is to put the bankrupt international financial system through bankruptcy procedures, and return to national banking and national sovereignty. We must return to the policies that U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt used to pull the U.S.—and the world—out of the Great Depression of the 1930s, with the emphasis on creating masses of new credit for physical production in infrastructure and other urgently-needed aspects of the physical economy. This is exactly the opposite of what Australia did at the time, under the threat of coups from the mass fascist militias of the Old Guard, the New Guard, and the League for National Security.

Today, we must make one of two choices: either return to national-banking centered sovereign nation-states, or suffer the greatest financial collapse since the 14th Century which would usher in global chaos, police states and wars far worse than those of the 1930s.

***

posted 04-08-2004 08:19 PM            

By Jeffrey Sparshott

From: http://washingtontimes.com/business/20040405-114534-8313r.htm

America's sunset industries are rising in the East. Literally.

Many steel and textiles mills that are no longer competitive in the United States are being packed up and shipped to China and other Asian nations, where lower costs of doing business give the machinery new life and foreign workers new jobs.

"There's been a lot of movement of equipment to China," said Carrie Casey, president of Pittsburgh-based Casey Equipment Corp., the country's biggest buyer and seller of used steel-mill equipment. Miss Casey estimates that in the last 18 months, the firm has sold used steel-mill equipment totaling more than $100 million, almost exclusively to buyers in China.

The liquidations follow company bankruptcies, which mean lost jobs — a hot campaign issue as the Bush administration and presumptive Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry both interpret the latest economic numbers and offer their own prescriptions for faster growth.

The textile industry has been especially hard-hit, and as more companies shed workers or go out of business, equipment sales to China also is a big business.

"There are two major players — southern Asia and the Far East. First China, and then coming back this way, Pakistan, India and Bangladesh," said Charlie Kimbrell, vice president of international sales at Republic Textile Equipment, a York, S.C.-based dealer of used textile machinery and equipment.

U.S. used textile- and apparel-equipment sales to China were $400 million last year, according to an analysis of government figures by economist Charles W. McMillion, occasional consultant to the textile industry. While the dollar figure has held steady the past three years, the volume of equipment is apparently rising as more becomes available and prices decline, he said.

The equipment itself is a combination of outdated and state-of-the-art. And the effect on the U.S. industrial base is mixed.

Clothing, fabric, steel and other manufacturers often howl about foreign competition, and textile production in the United States is declining. But the steel industry also complains of domestic overproduction and steel production is not lagging.

U.S. manufacturing companies have shed 3.5 million jobs since mid-1998, when employment reached 17.7 million, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. But rising productivity, often through new technology, has allowed manufacturing output as a share of total economic output to hold steady for the past half-century, according to a Congressional Budget Office analysis.

Many workers, especially in textiles and steel, have blamed Bush administration trade policy for costing some of those jobs. Foreign countries, they say, subsidize companies, manipulate currencies and allow workers to be underpaid or abused.

The administration has responded with some protectionist measures, such as temporary steel tariffs and caps on some clothing imports, but prefers to focus on opening foreign markets, rather than closing the U.S. market. The Bush administration has warned against "economic isolationism," while Mr. Kerry has clamored for "fair" trade.

The U.S. steel and textile mills are closing not just because of trade. Bankrupt Pillowtex, a Kannapolis, N.C., manufacturer of home textile products, folded under intense foreign competition and is on the auction bloc. On Thursday, vehicles and material-handling and shop equipment from Pillowtex's Kannapolis manufacturing and warehouse facility are scheduled to be sold off. Nine other auction dates at sites around the country run through July.

Industry sources speculated that much — but not all — of the Pillowtex equipment will go to China.
"That plant is so huge that there is no market that can absorb that much," Mr. Kimbrell said. Chinese steel producer Qingdao Iron & Steel is buying $40 million in equipment from idle Geneva Steel, a company founded in Utah during World War II. Geneva, with its odd location and insurmountable debt, was no longer competitive in the United States, but the equipment was attractive to Qingdao and a rival Chinese firm that bid up the price.

"The caster was just beautiful. It is state-of-the-art," Miss Casey said of the equipment that forms slab steel. Other components were dated, but also were sold to China. Miss Casey also identified other firms partly or entirely shipped to China, including equipment from Newport Steel of Newport, Ky.

"Newport Steel is being dismantled now. It's a Chinese customer in a northwest province," she said.
Charles Bradford, a steel-industry consultant, said equipment used today is little different than that of 15 or 20 years ago, aside from modern controls and computers — an easy upgrade for old machinery. But the integrated mills turning iron ore into steel are generally not competitive in the United States because of labor, legacy and raw material costs. "If you take the equipment anywhere else in the world, it will be lower cost," Mr. Bradford said.

Mr. Kimbrell said some textile firms folded because they were poorly run. U.S. manufacturers also face a variety of competitive challenges, according to industry groups. Wages in the United States are significantly higher than in developing countries, and costs from taxes, health and pension benefits, litigation, regulation and rising energy prices place a heavy burden on manufacturers, according to a National Association of Manufacturers study.

posted 04-08-2004 08:25 PM            

B y Jeremy Rifkin

From: http://solutions.synearth.net/2004/03/26

March 24, 2004

The average nationwide price of a gallon of gasoline in America reached a record high of $1.77 this month. The steady spike in prices has left analysts wondering if this is a harbinger of even more dramatic increases as motorists head into the spring and summer months. Get ready for what might become the economy's version of the perfect storm later this summer. The devastation could quickly spread to the UK and the rest of the world, with dire consequences for the global economy. The first hint of what might be in store came last month when OPEC announced its decision to withdraw 1m barrels of crude oil a day from the market. OPEC is worried about the weakening value of the dollar: it has lost one-third of its value in just under two years. Since OPEC sells oil for dollars, the oil-producing countries are losing precious revenue as the value of the dollar continues to erode. And because oil-producing countries then turn around and purchase much of their goods and services from the EU and must pay in euros, their purchasing power continues to deteriorate. (The euro is currently valued at $1.23.)

How will the weaker dollar affect oil prices? Philip K Verleger, the dean of US oil market analysts and a visiting fellow at the Institute for International Economics, suggests that "oil-exporting countries may decide to adjust their price band to reflect the falling value of the dollar". If the dollar continues to slide, he warns, we could see oil prices rising from the current $38.18 a barrel to a record high of $40 by midsummer.

There are other dark clouds on the horizon. US crude oil inventories are at the lowest point since the mid 70s, and the retail gasoline market is operating with little reserve margin as we move into the summer months, where more travel will increase demand. The dwindling oil reserves are made worse by the White House decision to replenish the strategic petroleum reserve, further reducing the amount of gasoline available.

Verleger says gasoline could climb as high as $3.50 a gallon before leveling off at $2 by the autumn. How high prices eventually soar could depend on still other factors, including potential oil disruptions in Venezuela and the Middle East. There is also the prospect that one or two major refineries might fail during peak demand this summer - not that unusual when increased consumer pressure forces refineries to produce at peak capacity without taking the time for proper maintenance.

Here is where events potentially begin to feed off each other, creating the conditions for the perfect storm for the economy. If the price of oil increases to $40 a barrel with an accompanying rise in gasoline prices, the already weak economic recovery could stall.

How then do we lower the price of a barrel of oil? We'd have to strengthen the value of the dollar so that OPEC would not be forced to raise prices to compensate for the deteriorating value of the currency. But the dollar's value is declining because of America's growing debt. The IMF is so concerned about US debt - the result of rising budget deficits and trade imbalance - that it issued a report warning that if steps weren't taken to reverse the trend, it could threaten the financial stability of the world economy.

An ever-weaker dollar makes foreign investors less interested in financing the mushrooming US debt. The US could raise interest rates, making it more attractive for foreign investors, but that would mean higher interest rates for US companies and consumers, which could dampen the already weak recovery and send us back into a recession in the US and around the world.

So we have all the conditions coming together to create the perfect economic storm: record oil prices triggering a restriction in US economic growth and an increase in the federal budget deficit, accompanied by further erosion in the value of the dollar - with increased budget deficits and the diminished value of the dollar leading in turn to higher interest rates to convince foreign investors to lend the US additional money, followed by a further retraction of the US economy as rising interest rates lead to a drop in domestic investment and consumption. The cascade of events touches off a tsunami that engulfs the rest of the global economy, submerging the world in deep recession.

As long as the US and global economy are increasingly dependent on an ever-dwindling supply of oil from the Middle East, the conditions for a perfect economic storm will continue to haunt us. The solution, in the long run, is to wean the world off its dependency on oil. That would require much tougher fuel efficiency standards, greater energy conservation measures, support of hybrid vehicles and a switch to renewable sources of energy. Short of that, expect the storm clouds to gather in intensity.

posted 04-08-2004 08:27 PM            

By Michael Meurer

From: http://www.truthout.org

t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Tuesday 02 March 2004

Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan's Feb. 25 testimony to the House Budget Committee provided an unintentionally candid look at the Bush administration's deliberate fiscal policy of bankrupting the federal government to justify a sweeping program of privatization.
During his February 25 testimony before the House Budget Committee, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan generated sensational national headlines by recommending that President Bush's $1.5 trillion in tax cuts be made permanent while Social Security and Medicare benefits be dramatically cut to achieve long term deficit reduction and a balanced budget.

In spite of the media furor and across the board condemnation by the remaining Democratic presidential candidates, there should be no reason for surprise at Greenspan's remarks. In his capacity as shill for the Bush administration, the Chairman's recommendations make perfect sense, as long as one is not foolish enough to believe the window dressing about a long term balanced budget. Mr. Greenspan is laying the groundwork for a second Bush administration, not a balanced budget. His remarks, and most of the economic policies of the Bush administration, can only be understood against the backdrop of the little remarked right wing agenda of deliberate federal bankruptcy.

From the first months of the Bush administration, when their initial breathtaking tax cuts were presented to Congress, it has been obvious that the explicit goal of this administration is to bankrupt the federal government to justify a sweeping program of privatization. Pursuing federal bankruptcy is a deliberate policy.

This administration's pursuit of bankruptcy as deliberate policy had to be extraordinarily bold from day one because public programs such as Social Security were so extraordinarily solvent into the distant future, and the underlying strength and diversity of the U.S. economy was sufficient to keep them that way if spending priorities were not radically altered. The events of 9/11 provided the perfect cover for pursuing federal bankruptcy in the guise of an open ended war on terror.

We know that the constituency for the Bush economic program consists of the military-industrial complex and the wealthy. The Bush administration's policies of massive defense spending and unprecedented tax cuts for upper income brackets reward both constituencies, while the short term economic lift from more than $450 billion in defense spending (dubbed "Military Keynesianism" by Robert Pollin of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst and others) is part of a conscious election year strategy to give at least the appearance of economic recovery. But the longer term goal of these policies, cutting revenues while increasing spending into the indefinite future, is still federal insolvency.

A massive federal deficit, it is hoped, will justify to the public the wholesale privatization of social security, medicare, prisons, schools, water, the Federal Aviation Administration, Amtrak, welfare services, public power utilities, the federal postal service, etc., etc., etc. Visit the websites of any of the major right wing think tanks from which this administration has drawn its highest officials, and you will find entire sections of archived documents and books arguing the case for privatization of nearly the entire public sector.

From the American Enterprise Institute to the Heritage Foundation, from the Hoover Institution to the Cato Institute to the Reason Foundation, privatization has been a prime objective of the right for the past 25 years. The National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) even provides a handy list of potential targets for privatization.

There are plenty of examples of the Bush administration's attempts to push privatization, such as their effort to change federal funding rules for public water utilities, making such federal funding contingent upon proof that the utilities each have a privatization plan in place. Amtrak, Social Security and public schools are explicitly in their sights. Education factories such as Edison Schools are the preferred Republican solution to education.

The public, so far, is resistant to an explicit agenda of mass privatization. But if Bush and his corporate backers were to be given a second term, pursuit of this privatization agenda would be unfettered, with the bulging Social Security trust fund at the top of the list among prospective candidate programs. That is what Mr. Greenspan is really signaling with his Congressional testimony in favor of permanent tax cuts today. The pursuit of federal insolvency increases the financial pressure on all elements of the public sector, making the argument for privatization theoretically more compelling. Indeed, Bush and company would read their election to a second term as a tacit mandate for their privatization agenda, and the consequences for the commonweal would be devastating.

Only Rep. Dennis Kucinich and former Vermont Governor Howard Dean have talked explicitly about the Republican privatization agenda in this election year. Dean has noted that the Bush economic model for the U.S. is Argentina, although the sophistication of that analogy is lost on the average voter. Kucinich has talked about the dangers of privatizing water.

Privatization deserves to be front and center in this country's political debate, and privatization's history of miserable failure needs to be placed squarely on the table in plain language for the electorate to consider. The history of failed privatization schemes includes doomed water privatization projects in South America and the U.S. (Atlanta is the poster child), rail privatization in Britain, and school and prison privatization in the U.S.

The Bush administration's pursuit of federal bankruptcy on behalf of their largest corporate sponsors, who will be the primary beneficiaries of privatization, represents an all out assault on the idea that the federal government should represent the commonweal and act as a wise custodian of our collective resources. We see instead a vision of a global battlefield where scarce resources go to the strongest and to those who already have. Mr. Greenspan's comments today tell us that this world view extends to the domestic front and will continue and accelerate in a second Bush administration.

posted 04-09-2004 12:06 PM            

The Bankruptcy of The United States
United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993 Vol. 33, page H-1303

From: http://www.mayanmajix.com/art526.html

Speaker-Rep. James Traficant, Jr. (Ohio) addressing the House:

"Mr. Speaker, we are here now in chapter 11.. Members of Congress are official trustees presiding over the greatest reorganization of any Bankrupt entity in world history, the U.S. Government. We are setting forth hopefully, a blueprint for our future. There are some who say it is a coroner’s report that will lead to our demise.

It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 - Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.

The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers. With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the United States. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an established Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America. This act was instituted and established by transferring and/or placing the Office of the Secretary of Treasury to that of the Governor of the International Monetary Fund. Public Law 94-564, page 8, Section H.R. 13955 reads in part: "The U.S. Secretary of Treasury receives no compensation for representing the United States?’

Gold and silver were such a powerful money during the founding of the united states of America, that the founding fathers declared that only gold or silver coins can be "money" in America. Since gold and silver coinage were heavy and inconvenient for a lot of transactions, they were stored in banks and a claim check was issued as a money substitute. People traded their coupons as money, or "currency." Currency is not money, but a money substitute. Redeemable currency must promise to pay a dollar equivalent in gold or silver money. Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) make no such promises, and are not "money." A Federal Reserve Note is a debt obligation of the federal United States government, not "money?’ The federal United States government and the U.S. Congress were not and have never been authorized by the Constitution for the united states of America to issue currency of any kind, but only lawful money, -gold and silver coin.

It is essential that we comprehend the distinction between real money and paper money substitute. One cannot get rich by accumulating money substitutes, one can only get deeper into debt. We the People no longer have any "money." Most Americans have not been paid any "money" for a very long time, perhaps not in their entire life. Now do you comprehend why you feel broke? Now, do you understand why you are "bankrupt," along with the rest of the country?

Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) are unsigned checks written on a closed account. FRNs are an inflatable paper system designed to create debt through inflation (devaluation of currency). Whenever there is an increase of the supply of a money substitute in the economy without a corresponding increase in the gold and silver backing, inflation occurs.

Inflation is an invisible form of taxation that irresponsible governments inflict on their citizens. The Federal Reserve Bank who controls the supply and movement of FRNs has everybody fooled. They have access to an unlimited supply of FRNs, paying only for the printing costs of what they need. FRNs are nothing more than promissory notes for U.S. Treasury securities (T-Bills) - a promise to pay the debt to the Federal Reserve Bank.

There is a fundamental difference between "paying" and "discharging" a debt. To pay a debt, you must pay with value or substance (i.e. gold, silver, barter or a commodity). With FRNs, you can only discharge a debt. You cannot pay a debt with a debt currency system. You cannot service a debt with a currency that has no backing in value or substance. No contract in Common law is valid unless it involves an exchange of "good & valuable consideration." Unpayable debt transfers power and control to the sovereign power structure that has no interest in money, law, equity or justice because they have so much wealth already.

Their lust is for power and control. Since the inception of central banking, they have controlled the fates of nations.

The Federal Reserve System is based on the Canon law and the principles of sovereignty protected in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. In fact, the international bankers used a "Canon Law Trust" as their model, adding stock and naming it a "Joint Stock Trust." The U.S. Congress had passed a law making it illegal for any legal "person" to duplicate a "Joint Stock Trust" in 1873. The Federal Reserve Act was legislated post-facto (to 1870), although post-facto laws are strictly forbidden by the Constitution. [1:9:3]

The Federal Reserve System is a sovereign power structure separate and distinct from the federal United States government. The Federal Reserve is a maritime lender, and/or maritime insurance underwriter to the federal United States operating exclusively under Admiralty/Maritime law. The lender or underwriter bears the risks, and the Maritime law compelling specific performance in paying the interest, or premiums are the same.

Assets of the debtor can also be hypothecated (to pledge something as a security without taking possession of it.) as security by the lender or underwriter. The Federal Reserve Act stipulated that the interest on the debt was to be paid in gold. There was no stipulation in the Federal Reserve Act for ever paying the principle.

Prior to 1913, most Americans owned clear, allodial title to property, free and clear of any liens or mortgages until the Federal Reserve Act (1913)

"Hypothecated" all property within the federal United States to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, -in which the Trustees (stockholders) held legal title. The U.S. citizen (tenant, franchisee) was registered as a "beneficiary" of the trust via his/her birth certificate. In 1933, the federal United States hypothecated all of the present and future properties, assets and labor of their "subjects," the 14th Amendment U.S. citizen, to the Federal Reserve System.

In return, the Federal Reserve System agreed to extend the federal United States corporation all the credit "money substitute" it needed. Like any other debtor, the federal United States government had to assign collateral and security to their creditors as a condition of the loan. Since the federal United States didn’t have any assets, they assigned the private property of their "economic slaves", the U.S. citizens as collateral against the unpayable federal debt. They also pledged the unincorporated federal territories, national parks forests, birth certificates, and nonprofit organizations, as collateral against the federal debt. All has already been transferred as payment to the international bankers.

Unwittingly, America has returned to its pre-American Revolution, feudal roots whereby all land is held by a sovereign and the common people had no rights to hold allodial title to property. Once again, We the People are the tenants and sharecroppers renting our own property from a Sovereign in the guise of the Federal Reserve Bank. We the people have exchanged one master for another.

This has been going on for over eighty years without the "informed knowledge" of the American people, without a voice protesting loud enough. Now it’s easy to grasp why America is fundamentally bankrupt.

Why don’t more people own their properties outright?

Why are 90% of Americans mortgaged to the hilt and have little or no assets after all debts and liabilities have been paid? Why does it feel like you are working harder and harder and getting less and less?

We are reaping what has been sown, and the results of our harvest is a painful bankruptcy, and a foreclosure on American property, precious liberties, and a way of life. Few of our elected representatives in Washington, D.C. have dared to tell the truth. The federal United States is bankrupt. Our children will inherit this unpayable debt, and the tyranny to enforce paying it.

America has become completely bankrupt in world leadership, financial credit and its reputation for courage, vision and human rights. This is an undeclared economic war, bankruptcy, and economic slavery of the most corrupt order! Wake up America! Take back your Country."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Image: United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993 Vol. 33, page H-1303

NOTE FROM WORLD NEWSSTAND:
We strongly feel that this speech before Congress marked James Traficant for the problems with the 'courts' he experiences today. Linda Kennedy, a friend of ours (you and us) and no friend of the American Bar, has taken on Traficant's case today. Because of this, she herself has been demonized by the BAR.

posted 04-09-2004 06:15 PM            

The ostrich approach doesn't work!

Face the facts!

1. FASB unveils proposal for stock options, tech companies intensify opposition

The Financial Accounting Standards Board last week released a much-anticipated draft proposal of a new rule that would require corporations to count stock options as an expense on their balance sheets. The rule, which is designed to take effect for 2005 financial statements, will be open for a 90-day comment period.

The announcement of the rule set off a flurry of criticism from members of the high-tech industry and their allies in Congress, who want to keep open a loophole that allows stock option grants to remain as the only kind of compensation not treated as an expense. The high-tech industry, which heavily uses stock options to compensate employees, has argued it would be hit hard if options were forced to be expensed.

That’s why the industry is lobbying fast and furious in Washington to line up co-sponsors for HR 3574, a bill that would block FASB from implementing its rule to expense options. The tech industry recently earned the support of House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

Opponents of expensing options argue that doing so would destroy jobs, hurt start-up companies, and be bad for the economy. “This issue cuts to the heart of job creation, economic growth, and competitiveness,” said Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.), a co-sponsor of HR 3574.

Yet, a report issued by the Congressional Budget Office last week indicates just the opposite: The report concluded that “recognizing the value of stock options is unlikely to have a significant effect on the economy.” Moreover, although the new rule would reduce earnings by tech companies by billions of dollars, the report argued that stock prices would not suffer. Meanwhile, the rule would help investors by giving them a clearer picture of corporate profits.

The report echoed what investors groups have been saying all along – that requiring companies to count stock options as an expense is essential for honest and transparent accounting. Indeed, many consider the deceptive accounting practices surrounding stock options as one of the key factors behind the recent wave of corporate scandals.

“This is the day the investment community has been waiting for,” said Patrick McGurn, a senior vice president of Institutional Shareholders, of FASB’s proposal. “This is the beginning of accounting transparency.”

Hundreds of companies have already begun expensing options and have found it had no effect on their stock price. Meanwhile, Alan Greenspan, Paul Volcker, John Snow, William Donaldson, Arthur Levitt, John Biggs, Warren Buffet, the Investment Company Institute, the Council of Institutional Investors, AFL-CIO, the Consumer Federation, Citizen Works and other business leaders and national organizations have supported a rule that requires expensing.

The battle over options is shaping up as a repeat of a 1994 battle, when FASB’s initial attempt to require options to be expensed was forcefully beaten back by Congress, with the support of the tech industry. But this time around, there is much more support for counting options as expenses. Still, a vote in the House on the bill could come after Easter recess. A companion bill in the Senate (S. 1890) does not enjoy as much support, and lacks support from Banking Committee Chair Richard Shelby (R-Ala.). But it could get tacked on as an amendment.

For more, see:

“House Opposition to Expensing of Options Increases: Bill Would Block Accounting Oversight Board’s New Rule,” by Jackie Spinner of the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34526-2004Mar29.html

“Wages of Bad Accounting: Bosses Got Rich While Companies Borrowed,” By Floyd Norris of the New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/02/business/02norris.html

“CBO: Expensing Options Won’t Hurt Economy,” by Reuters: http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=businessNews&storyID=4740783

“Wall St. Discounts Option Rule Shift; Investors say a possible accounting change won’t discourage them from buying tech stocks,” by Tom Petruno of the Los Angeles Times: http://www.latimes.com/business/investing/la-fi-options31mar31,1,854611.story?coll=la-headlines-business-invest

4. SEC asks for more money, Congress asks for more new hires

Former SEC Chairman William Donaldson went before Congress last week to ask for a $913 million budget for next year -- $20 million more than the Bush administration’s proposal of $893 million. He was met by questions of why he still needed to fill 425 positions, despite a near doubling of the SEC’s budget over the last few years.

Donaldson said that he had filled 740 new staff positions since December 2002, bringing the total SEC staff to 3,400. But, he said, “we don’t just want to fill slots.” Though junior accountants at the SEC can earn $70,000 a year, private-sector accounting jobs continue to pay more.

Still, turnover at the SEC, a persistent problem in the 1990s, is dropping. Donaldson told Congress that the commission’s turnover rate had dropped from 8 percent in FY01 to 1.5 percent in FY03.

Donaldson also said that the new staff had helped. “With this staffing increase, the SEC has increased the frequency of examinations of funds and advisers posing the greatest compliance risks and is conducting more examinations targeting to areas of emerging compliance risk.”

For more, see: “Lawmakers query SEC boss about hires, budget,” by Robert Schmidt of Bloomberg News: http://www.detnews.com/2004/business/0404/01/b03-109342.htm

Tell Congress to stand up for honest accounting and protect small investors!

Now that the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) has issued its proposal for accounting for stock options, the high-tech industry is desperately trying to block the FASB from implementing a rule that would require options to be expensed.

Their strategy is to get a bill passed (HR 3574 in the House, S 1890 in the Senate) that would require the SEC to study the economic impact of expensing stock options for three years, effectively blocking the FASB from requiring options to be expensed. The bill strikes a crushing blow at the independence of FASB by letting a handful of tech-company lobbyists use their political influence to keep open a loophole that allows for dishonest and misleading accounting.

High-tech lobbyists have won the support of House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) as well as minority leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and HR 3574 is gaining momentum in the House. Though the Senate companion bill (S. 1890) is not gaining as much support, there is a good possibility it could get tacked onto a bill as an amendment. If both bills pass, we will have lost the battle for honest accounting.

These bills are moving forward because while members of Congress are being bombarded by high-tech industry lobbyists, they are not hearing from citizens and small investors who want them to stand up to corporate special interests and stand up for honest corporate accounting.

That is why it is essential that you contact your Senators and your Representative today and tell them to stand up against more Enron-style accounting. Tell them that you are counting on them to support FASB’s plan to require stock options to be expensed.

For a sample letter to your Representative on HR 3574: http://www.citizenworks.org/corp/options/congressletter3574.php

For a sample letter to your Senators or S 1890: http://www.citizenworks.org/corp/options/congressletter1890.php

For talking points, see: http://www.citizenworks.org/corp/options/s1890-talkingpts.php

For a complete resource on Stock Options: http://www.citizenworks.org/corp/options/options-main.php

MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD
White House Comment Line - (202) 456-1111

White House Fax Line - (202) 456-2461

President George W. Bush's e-mail - president@whitehouse.gov

Vice President Dick Cheney's e-mail - vice-president@whitehouse.gov

White House Address - 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, Washington, DC 20500

US Capitol Switchboard - (202) 224-3121

To contact your senators - http://www.senate.gov/contacting/index.cfm

To contact your representative - http://www.house.gov/writerep

To contact SEC Chairman William Donaldson: chairmanoffice@sec.gov

To contact FCC Chairman Michael Powell: mpowell@fcc.gov

To contact New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer: http://www.oag.state.ny.us/online_forms/email_ag.jsp

===================================

Transportation Bill Hid Billions in Tax Breaks

By Dan Morgan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, April 7, 2004; Page A04

House Republicans, under fire from the White House for writing a multi-year transportation bill that exceeded President Bush's spending limits, quietly tucked billons of dollars worth of new tax breaks for business into the same bill shortly before the House passed it overwhelmingly last week.

The tax provisions, which were added just before the bill went to the floor on Friday, provide relief to big companies from the alternative minimum tax (AMT). They increase from $25,000 to $100,000 the amount of capital improvements -- including investments in computer software -- that businesses can write off as annual expenses.

The corporate AMT, which was enacted as part of a broad 1986 tax reform, is intended to ensure that all corporations -- even those with extensive deductions -- pay some taxes. However, softening the impact of that law has been a top priority for some of the nation's biggest companies, including auto manufacturers and computer firms.

Among other things, the changes approved by the House would allow multinational companies with extensive offshore operations to fully use foreign tax credits to offset their tax liability.

Lobbyists for small-business groups had fought for the expanded write-off provisions, which would allow a company to deduct the costs of certain improvements and equipment in a single year rather than depreciate them over a number of years.

The combined five-year cost of the new tax breaks would be $12.8 billion, according to Congress's Joint Committee on Taxation.

But it was unclear whether many House members were aware they were voting on the business tax breaks when they approved the $275 billion, six-year transportation bill by a vote of 357 to 65. The tax breaks are unrelated to the transportation measure, which funds new highways, mass transit and safety programs.

The House Rules Committee, which reflects the policy of the House Republican leadership, ordered that the tax provisions be included in the overall bill and adopted without a separate vote.

"This continues a pattern of increasing spending and decreasing taxes," said Robert Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a nonpartisan group that advocates fiscal responsibility. "It was pretty astonishing. I was expecting irresponsibility [in the transportation bill] on the spending side, but I found it on the tax side as well."

Keith Ashdown, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan budget watchdog group, said the legislation could "push us further into deficit." The House version of the bill must now be reconciled with a $318 billion Senate bill containing at least $3.2 billion in new tax breaks, including repealing the surtax on "gas guzzler" cars, and other taxes on the fishing and retail liquor industries.

White House budget officials warned congressional leaders last week that they would urge the president to veto a final transportation package if it exceeded the president's spending limit of $256 billion.

The White House has expressed little concern, however, about the last-minute tax riders on the bill. A senior congressional budget official noted yesterday that the president's own budget proposed revisions in the expensing rules for small businesses that go well beyond those in the transportation legislation.

These would have gone into effect in 2006 and cost an estimated $33.8 billion through 2013, according to the official, who asked not to be identified by name because he does not normally serve as a spokesman.

To reduce the apparent costs, the House legislation envisions phasing out the expensing rules in 2008 after a tax savings to businesses worth $10.9 billion. The AMT reforms would be worth $1.9 billion through 2008. But under the legislation, they would continue and would net big companies about $6.7 billion over 10 years.

Asked to comment on the tax riders in the bill, deputy White House press secretary Trent Duffy said the White House and Treasury Department were reviewing the package. But he added: "It's safe to assume that the president will support the items that were in his budget."

Meanwhile, White House budget officials stuck to their criticism of the spending in the House transportation measure. They contended House leaders had understated the cost of the bill by about $9 billion, and had opened the door to increasing the spending in 2006.

The federal highway aid program would be halted in 2006 under terms of the bill unless Congress redressed grievances of 28 states that say they pay more in federal gasoline taxes than they get back in federal assistance for road building and mass transit.

The Concord Coalition's Bixby also charged that the House bill was full of "blatant gimmicks" that assume the future phasing out of tax breaks in order to produce bookkeeping "savings" and reduce the apparent cost of the legislation.
http://www.washingpost.com
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A55868-2004Apr6?language=printer

© 2004 The Washington Post Company

posted 04-09-2004 06:47 PM            

Our country (I mean the U.S.) and our economy have seen tough times--even TOUGHER times--before and it is capable of weathering the storm and coming out ahead. Every time that has happened there was SOMETHING that was new that made THAT recession or depression different than the ones before it and people were complaining that we wouldn't recover, that things were different, that the game had changed. And every time we pull out of it and continue to grow. There's no reason to believe this will be any different.

posted 04-09-2004 08:08 PM            

“Here is a list of CONFIRMED companies that are "Exporting America." They are U.S. companies sending American jobs overseas or choosing to employ cheap overseas labor, INSTEAD OF AMERICAN WORKERS!”

3Com
3M

A
Aalfs Manufacturing
Accenture
Adaptec
ADC
Adobe Systems
Advanced Energy Industries
Aetna
Affiliated Computer Services
AFS Technologies
A.G. Edwards
Agere Systems
Agilent Technologies
AIG
Alamo Rent A Car
Albertson's
Alcoa Fujikura
Allen Systems Group
Alliance Semiconductor
Allstate
Alpha Thought Global
Altria Group
Amazon.com
AMD
American Dawn
American Express
American Household
American Management Systems
American Standard
AMETEK
Amphenol Corporation
Analog Devices
Anchor Glass Container
ANDA Networks
Andrew Corporation
Anheuser-Busch
AOL
A.O. Smith
Apple
Applied Materials
Art Leather Manufacturing
ArvinMeritor
Ashland
Asyst Technologies
A.T. Cross Company
AT&T
AT&T Wireless
A.T. Kearney
Augusta Sportswear
Automatic Data Processing
Avanade
Avanex
Avaya
Avery Dennison
Axiohm Transaction Solutions

B
Bank of America
Bank of New York
Bank One
Bassett Furniture
Bassler Electric Company
BearingPoint
Bear Stearns
BEA Systems
Bechtel
Becton Dickinson
BellSouth
Bentley Systems
Berdon LLP
Best Buy
BISSELL
Black & Decker
Bose Corporation
BMC Software
Boeing
Braden Manufacturing
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Brocade
Bumble Bee
Burle Industries
Burlington House Home Fashions

C
Cadence Design Systems
Candle Corporation
Capital One
Cardinal Brands
Carrier
Carter's
Caterpillar
Celestica
Cendant
Cerner Corporation
Charles Schwab
ChevronTexaco
CIBER
Ciena
Cigna
Circuit City
Cisco Systems
Citigroup
Clorox
CNA
Coca-Cola
Cognizant Technology Solutions
Collins & Aikman
Columbia House
Comcast Holdings
Computer Associates
Computer Horizons
Computer Sciences Corporation
CompuServe
Continental Airlines
Convergys
Cooper Crouse-Hinds
Cooper Tire & Rubber
Cooper Tools
Corning
Corning Cable Systems
Countrywide Financial
COVAD Communications
Cross Creek Apparel
Crown Holdings
CSX
Cummins
Cypress Semiconductor

D
Dana Corporation
Daniel Woodhead
Daws Manufacturing
Dayton Superior
DeCrane Aircraft
Delco Remy
Dell Computer
DeLong Sportswear
Delphi
Delta Air Lines
Delta Apparel
Direct TV
Discover
Document Sciences Corporation
Donaldson Company
Dow Chemical
Dresser
Dun & Bradstreet
DuPont

E
Earthlink
Eastman Kodak
Eaton Corporation
Electroglas
Electronic Data Systems
Electronics for Imaging
Eli Lilly
Elmer's Products
E-Loan
EMC
Emerson Electric
En Pointe Technologies
Equifax
Ernst & Young
Ethan Allen
Evolving Systems
Expedia
Extrasport
ExxonMobil

F
Fairfield Manufacturing
Fair Isaac
FCI USA
Fedders Corporation
Federal Mogul
Federated Department Stores
Fellowes
Fender Musical Instruments
Fidelity Investments
Financial Techologies International
First American Title Insurance
First Data
First Index
Flowserve
Fluor
FMC Corporation
Ford Motor
Foster Wheeler
Franklin Mint
Franklin Templeton
Freeborders
Frito Lay
Fruit of the Loom

G
Gateway
GE Capital
GE Medical Systems
General Electric
General Motors
Georgia-Pacific
Gerber Childrenswear
GlobespanVirata
Goldman Sachs
Goodrich
Goodyear Tire & Rubber
Google
Greenpoint Mortgage
Greenwood Mills
Guardian Life Insurance
Guilford Mills

H
Haggar
Halliburton
Hamilton Beach/Procter-Silex
The Hartford Financial Services Group
Hasbro Manufacturing Services
Haworth
Headstrong
HealthAxis
Hedstrom
Helen of Troy
Hershey
Hewitt Associates
Hewlett-Packard
The Holmes Group
Home Depot
Honeywell
HSN
Hubbell Inc.
Humana
Hunter Sadler
HyperTech Solutions

I
IBM
iGate Corporation
Illinois Tool Works
IMI Cornelius
IndyMac Bancorp
Infogain
Ingersoll-Rand
Innodata Isogen
Innova Solutions
Intel
InterMetro Industries
International Paper
Intuit
Invacare
ITT Educational Services
ITT Industries

J
Jabil Circuit
Jacobs Engineering
Jacuzzi
JanSport
JDS Uniphase
Jockey International
John Deere
Johns Manville
Johnson Controls
Johnson & Johnson
JPMorgan Chase
J.R. Simplot
Juniper Networks
Justin Brands

K
KANA Software
Kaiser Permanente
Kanbay
Keane
Kellogg
Kellwood
KEMET
KEMET Electronics
Kenexa
Kentucky Apparel
KeyCorp
Kimberly-Clark
KLA-Tencor
Kraft Foods
Kulicke and Soffa Industries
Kwikset

L
Lander Company
Lands' End
Lawson Software
Lear Corporation
Lehman Brothers
Levi Strauss
Lexmark International
Lifescan
Lillian Vernon
Linksys
Lionbridge Technologies
Lionel
Littelfuse
LiveBridge
LNP Engineering Plastics
Lockheed Martin
Louisiana-Pacific Corporation
Lowe's
Lucent

M
Magma Design Automation
Magnequench
Magnetek
Maidenform
The Manitowoc Company
Manugistics
Marathon Oil
Maritz
Marshall Fields
Mattel
Master Lock
Maxim Integrated Products
Maytag
McDATA Corporation
McKinsey & Company
MeadWestvaco
Medtronic
Mellon Bank
Mentor Graphics Corp.
Merrill Corporation
Merrill Lynch
Metasolv
MetLife
Microsoft
Midcom Inc.
Milacron
Moen
Monsanto
Morgan Stanley
Motor Coach Industries International
Motorola

N
Nabco
Nabisco
NACCO Industries
National City Corporation
National Life
National Semiconductor
NCR Corporation
neoIT
NETGEAR
Network Associates
Newell Rubbermaid
New York Life Insurance
Nike
Nordstrom
Northrop Grumman
Northwest Airlines
Nu-kote International

O
Office Depot
Ohio Art
ON Semiconductor
Orbitz
Oracle
OshKosh B'Gosh
Otis Elevator
Outsource Partners International
Owens Corning
Oxford Automotive
Oxford Industries

P
Pacific Precision Metals
palmOne
Paramount Apparel
Parker-Hannifin
Parsons E&C
Pearson Digital Learning
PeopleSoft
PepsiCo
Pericom Semiconductor
PerkinElmer
Perot Systems
Pfizer
Pinnacle West Capital Corporation
Pitney Bowes
Plaid Clothing Company
Planar Systems
Plexus
PL Industries
Polaroid
Portal Software
Power One
Pratt & Whitney
Price Pfister
priceline.com
Primus Telecom
Procter & Gamble
ProQuest
Providian Financial
Prudential Insurance

Q
Quaker Oats
Quark
Qwest Communications

R
Radio Flyer
Radio Shack
Rainbow Technologies
Rawlings Sporting Goods
Raytheon Aircraft
RCG Information Technology
Red Kap
Regence Group
River Holding Corp.
Rockwell Automations
Rogers
Rohm & Haas
RR Donnelley & Sons
Rugged Sportswear
Russell Corporation

S
S1 Corporation
Sabre
Safeway
SAIC
Sallie Mae
Samsonite
Sanford
Sanmina-SCI
Sapient
Sara Lee
Saturn Electronics & Engineering
SBC Communications
Schumacher Electric
Scientific Atlanta
SEI Investments
Seton Company
Siebel Systems
Sierra Atlantic
Sikorsky
Silicon Graphics
SITEL
Skyworks Solutions
SMC Networks
SML Labels
SoftBrands
Sola Optical USA
Solectron
Sovereign Bancorp
Sprint
Sprint PCS
Square D
Stanley Furniture
Stanley Works
Starkist Seafood
State Farm Insurance
State Street
Steelcase
StorageTek
StrategicPoint Investment Advisors
Sun Microsystems
Sunrise Medical
SunTrust Banks
Supra Telecom
Sure Fit
SurePrep
The Sutherland Group
Sykes Enterprises
Symbol Technologies
Synopsys
Synygy

T
Target
Tecumseh
Telcordia
Teleflex
TeleTech
Telex Communications
Tellabs
Tenneco Automotive
Teradyne
Texas Instruments
Textron
Thomas & Betts
Thomasville Furniture
Thrivent Financial for Lutherans
Time Warner
The Timken Company
The Toro Company
Tower Automotive
Toys "R" Us
Trans Union
Travelocity
Trinity Industries
Triquint Semiconductor
TriVision Partners
Tropical Sportswear
TRW Automotive
Tumbleweed Communications
Tyco Electronics
Tyco International

U
Union Pacific Railroad
Unisys
United Airlines
UnitedHealth Group Inc.
United Online
United Technologies
USAA

V
Valence Technology
VA Software
Veritas
Verizon
VF Corporation
Viasystems
Vishay
Visteon
VITAL Sourcing

W
Wachovia Bank
Warnaco
Washington Group International
Washington Mutual
WellChoice
Werner Co.
West Corporation
Weyerhaeuser
Whirlpool
White Rodgers
Williamson-Dickie Manufacturing Company
Wolverine World Wide
Woodstock Wire Works
WorldCom
World Kitchen
Wyeth

X
Xerox
Xpitax

Y
Yahoo!
York International

posted 04-09-2004 08:45 PM            

quote:

---

KNOW-THIS: Fine, but don't mistake our concerns for paranoia. It's not as if these aren't legitimate worries. Our jobs are high tailing it out of here, there's no conspiracy. Pretending that the problem is non-existent just because it feels more comfortable to do so doesn't cut it. You have your approach, we have ours. If you want to make jokes, you know you're just looking for trouble. Don't try and downplay what a depression is until it's you that's actually waiting in a breadline. Then you can speak about it so casuallly if you want. The point is to not let it get that far. That's why people are fired up!

---

I'm a software engineer. My job is exactly the kind of job that is "leaving" for India and China lately. And things are slower this year than they were for me last year (although last year was much better for me than 2002). But that's life. We're going to have ups, we're going to have downs. But we're not going to make things better by retreating into protectionism. And I'll say that even if/when I'm unemployed for an extended period of time.

quote:

---

JBE: “Here is a list of CONFIRMED companies that are "Exporting America." They are U.S. companies sending American jobs overseas or choosing to employ cheap overseas labor, INSTEAD OF AMERICAN WORKERS!”

---

And how about a list of companies that are selling our products overseas? I'm sure it'd be just as large, probably larger. Granted, we have a trade imbalance but just furnishing a list of companies that are "exporting America" is far from the whole picture.

posted 04-09-2004 08:58 PM            

So ALL the wealth is in the hands of the powerful few! Consolidation! Down size!

Its so American! Aint NAFTA and "free trade" great.

Viva pan American Union.

Go New world Order

posted 04-09-2004 09:21 PM            

Beam me up, Mr. Speaker. I yield back the balance of my taxes.
one more
Mr. Speaker, the IRS does not tolerate mistakes. The IRS expects taxpayers to have every single receipt. But check this out. The GAO did an audit of the IRS, and guess what they found; the IRS cannot even tell the difference between income taxes and Social Security taxes . Also, the IRS cannot account for $3 billion of spending. Also, the IRS says taxpayers owe $130 billion in overdue taxes, but the GAO says they could find no proof of that.
Just think about it. If you could not account for massive spending, if your books were in a shambles, what would the IRS do to you, Mr. Speaker? You would be guilty, guilty, guilty. They would take you to court and you would have to prove yourself innocent.

Beam me up. No wonder the American people are taxed off. I think Congress should take the IRS, handcuff them to a chain-link fence, and flog them with their own damn Tax Code. That is what the Congress should do. Yield back the balance of the taxes.

posted 04-09-2004 10:52 PM            

Beam me up.

Wake up, Congress, and smell the espionage.

posted 04-10-2004 11:47 AM            

quote:

---

Mech: Yes...we must GLOBALIZE...and MERGE

---

Of course we must. There is truly no other alternative. We can either dive into it head-first with all our strength or resist it kicking and screaming as the world passes us by. By sticking our heads in the sand and resisting the global economy we might be able to live in our safe, comfortable little cocoon for another decade but when reality hits we will be looking at a major economic crisis.

quote:

---

So ALL the wealth is in the hands of the powerful few! Consolidation! Down size!

---

Actually, the wealth is now currently mostly in the hands of the United States. That's why we are so comfortable. Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on your point of view), the world economy is now causing competition between the U.S. and other countries such as China and India. Incomes in China and India will rise and incomes in the U.S. will fall, that's reality. But that doesn't mean our standard of living will fall. With more competition and fewer tarrifs, prices will be lower worldwide so while we might make $30,000 instead of $50,000, the new computer that we want may cost $300 instead of $500. And in the process we create viable markets of the nearly 3 billion people in India and China to whom we may sell our products.

quote:

---

Thanks for confirming what I aalready suspected about you Letxa

---

No problem, glad I could help.

quote:

---

Know-This: I just have a hard time accepting that anyone can be so indoctrinated with misconceptions.

---

Just because I don't agree with the fringe element of society on boards like this does not mean I was "indoctrinated." Heck, I went to American schools and got my degree in a Colorado university which included classes in economics--believe me, those idiotic liberal economics professors tried to teach me the exact opposite.

I firmly believe what I say and it's not just because I heard it on CNN or Fox or whatever. It's the result of hearing the BS I heard in university economics classes, hearing some conservative beliefs on economics, having thought about it myself, and having lived almost a decade in a third world country which gives me first-hand experience of seeing how another country works and also have a more international perspective.

The United States resisting the global economy makes no more sense than California resisiting the national U.S. economy. California isn't worse off because it has to compete with Florida or New York. The U.S. is stronger because all the states work together and have free trade. Likewise, the world will be stronger if we all work together and have free trade.