Showing posts from March 30, 2014

Ukraine parliament passes austerity bill required by IMF

Click here to view the original article.
[That was fast. *RON*]
Russia Television, March 28, 2014

The Ukrainian parliament has adopted an anti-crisis bill proposed by the IMF to secure an international financial aid package. Ordinary Ukrainians will have to tighten their belts to help the coup-installed government keep the collapsing economy afloat.

It took two readings of the bill for 246 MPs out of 321 registered to approve the austerity measures outlined in the legislation dubbed “On prevention of financial catastrophe and creation of prerequisites for economic growth.”

Ahead of the vote, Ukrainian self-imposed Prime Minister Arseny Yatsenyuk told the Parliament that it had “no other choice but to accept the IMF offer,” as country fiscal gap in 2014 is projected to reach $26 billion. Ukraine's Finance Ministry says it needs $35 billion over the next two years to avoid default.

“The country is on the edge of economic and financial bankruptcy,” Yatsenyuk said. “This package of laws is …

Bankers Win Both Ways: Now They Can Take Both Taxpayer and Depositor Money

Click here to view the original article.
[Being bailed out by taxpayers might not be enough - better give bank account holders a haircut as well. *RON*]
 By Ellen Brown(about the author), OpEdNews, 3/30/2014

"As things stand, the banks are the permanent government of the country, whichever party is in power."
- Lord Skidelsky, House of Lords, UK Parliament, 31 March 2011)

On March 20, 2014, European Union officials reached an historic agreement to create a single agency to handle failing banks. Media attention has focused on the agreement involving the single resolution mechanism (SRM), a uniform system for closing failed banks. But the real story for taxpayers and depositors is the heightened threat to their pocketbooks of a deal that now authorizes both bailouts and "bail-ins" - the confiscation of depositor funds. The deal involves multiple concessions to different countries and may be illegal under the rules of the EU Parliament; but it is being rushed through to …

You'll Never Look At The 'Wealthiest 1%' The Same Way

Click here to view the original article.
[According to this analysis, it's all about the top 0.01% *RON*]
JOE WEISENTHAL, Business Insider, Mar. 29, 2014

In recent years, as income and wealth inequality have grown as matters of concern, the term "1%" has become a popular way to connote the rise of a super-elite that has separated itself economically from the rest of society.

We've all seen the charts showing, in various ways, how much the 1% have seen their wealth grow, while everyone else's has stagnated.

But talking about the 1% actually misses the real story.

New research from economists Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman (.pdf), via HouseOfDebt, shows that really it's only the 0.1% who've seen their share of the wealth surge.

Here's what happens if you decompose the % of total wealth held by the top 1% in the United States.

So basically, if you're a poor schmo whose wealth is in the top 1% but not above the top 0.5%, you haven't seen gains at all. …

Poilievre: No need to panic over election reform bill; won't commit to changes

Click here to view the original article.

[Poilievre's cheerleading for the Fair Elections Act is the sound of one hand clapping. *RON*]

By Murray Brewster, CP, on Huffington Post, 30 March 2014

OTTAWA - The minister responsible for democratic reform says he's listening to the growing tide of outrage about the Harper government's controversial new electoral reform bill, but Pierre Poilievre would not commit to making changes.

Doing the circuit of political television shows on Sunday, the junior minister continued to defend the overhaul and once again denied that he misquoted the author of a report the Conservatives have used to justify extraordinary measures in the legislation.

Poilievre, appearing on both CTV's Question Period and Global Television's The West Block, said a House of Commons committee is only four days into hearings over Bill C-23, known as the Fair Elections Act, and it's too early to determine whether there will be any amendments.