Category: News

  • Chrysler to launch 16 all-new or refreshed products in 2010, including an electric crossover

    Chrysler Group LLC today announced its financial results for the first quarter of 2010. The Auburn Hills automaker posted a $143 million operating profit and showed positive cash flow for the period ending March 31, 2010.

    “This positive operating result in the first quarter is a concrete indication to our customers, dealers and suppliers that the 2010 targets we have set for ourselves are achievable,” said CEO Sergio Marchionne. “We are also generating cash to finance the investments being made in our product portfolio and brand repositioning,”

    Marchionne said that in 2010 alone, Chrysler will launch 16 all-new or refreshed products.

    “There has already been an uptick in customer traffic in our dealerships in Q1 and we are confident that Chrysler sales will continue to increase as we launch new products in the second quarter, beginning with the all-new 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee. Moreover, later this year, Chrysler will launch 16 all-new or refreshed products including the all-new Chrysler 300, Dodge Charger, E-CUV, the iconic Fiat 500, and the Sebring replacement.”

    We’re guessing E-CUV stands for an electric crossover utility vehicle – so stay tuned for more details on that.

    2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee:

    – By: Stephen Calogera


  • Bolivia’s Morales slams capitalist debt to global warming

    by Agence France-Presse

    Evo MoralesCOCHABAMBA, Bolivia—Bolivian President Evo Morales has rallied a “people’s conference” on climate change, calling for the death of careless capitalism so that the Earth can live.

    Environmental activists, indigenous leaders, and Hollywood celebrities are taking part in a three-day summit focusing on the world’s poorest, whom they say were largely ignored at official United Nations-sponsored climate talks in Copenhagen last December.

    “Either capitalism dies, or it will be Mother Earth,” leftist Morales warned a crowd of some 20,000 people. “We’re here because industrialized countries have not honored their promises.”

    The Copenhagen meeting was widely criticized for failing to produce a new treaty to limit greenhouse-gas emissions. Critics said the deal it produced would not avert a climate catastrophe.

    The “People’s World Conference on Climate Change and Mother Earth Rights” will draft new proposals for the next U.N. climate talks, to be held in Mexico at the end of the year.

    A U.N. representative in Bolivia struggled to make her voice heard over a chorus of booing on Tuesday. “We came with all respect to hear the people, you invited us to be here. If you don’t want us to be here, we can leave,” said Alicia Barcena, executive secretary of the U.N. Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC). U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon sought dialogue, inclusion, and transparency in the world climate debate, according to a message distributed by Barcena.

    The colorful assembly, dotted with Andean flags and ponchos, met in a small stadium surrounded by mountains in Tiquipaya, in the suburbs of Cochabamba.

    “We have a choice between two paths: one is a path of life, one is the path of destruction,” said participant Faith Gemmill, an ethnic Gwich’in of the Alaska inter-tribal council. She said indigenous people, who live on the land and close to the land, are disproportionately hard hit by climate change. “We are like the canaries in the mines, that the miners used to carry, so that if when they died the miners would be warned of the presence of toxic gas, and could rush out of the mine,” Gemmill said.

    Morales, of Aymara descent, said that the lifestyle of indigenous peoples, including their harmonious relationship with nature, should be “the only true alternative.”

    Morales sought to refine proposals he had presented in Copenhagen, including the creation of a world tribunal for climate issues and a global referendum on environmental choices.

    Developing nations have resisted a legally binding climate treaty, arguing that wealthy nations must bear the primary responsibility for climate change.

    This week’s gathering was expected to give a megaphone to a left-leaning bloc of Latin American leaders, including presidents Rafael Correa of Ecuador, Fernando Lugo of Paraguay, Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua, and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela.

    Nearly 130 countries, including many of the world’s poorest, were to be represented in Cochabamba.

    Anti-globalization activists Naomi Klein of Canada and Jose Bove of France were also on the guest list, while James Cameron, director of the blockbuster film “Avatar,” and U.S. actor Danny Glover were notable by their absence on Tuesday.

    The conference followed a preparatory meeting between representatives from the world’s leading economies in Washington ahead of the December U.N. summit in Cancun. The U.S.-led Major Economies Forum comprises 17 countries responsible for the bulk of global emissions and excludes smaller nations such as Sudan whose firebrand negotiators held up sessions at December’s Copenhagen summit.

    Related Links:

    Brazil awards dam contract despite environmental protests

    Each party has a clean-energy plan in U.K. election

    U.S. military shrinking its carbon ‘boot print’






  • Believe it: Verizon Droid Incredible slips into a few disbelieving hands

    Sure enough, the Verizon Droid Incredible (you might have seen a story or two about it here), by some strange act of fate, is being shipped early to a few disbelieving customers who pre-ordered on Monday. That said, as great as it is that dude above shot video of his Droid Incredible, we’re taking away points ’cause he couldn’t go the whole 2 minutes without making an "it’s Incredible!" pun. [Android Forums via Engadget]

  • Fantasy Spin: The Ben Roethlisberger suspension

    http://a323.yahoofs.com/ymg/ept_sports_fantasy_experts__26/ept_sports_fantasy_experts-743478372-1271718018.jpg?ymCSnADDl0M2SHsG

    Ben Roethlisberger(notes) was fantastic last season, statistically speaking. He threw 26 touchdown passes and established career highs in both yards (4328) and completions (337). Roethlisberger finished third among all quarterbacks in per-game fantasy scoring, passing for multiple TDs in eight of his 15 games. Late in the season, during the fantasy playoffs, he put up 503 yards and three scores against Green Bay.

    It was, all things considered, a ridiculously productive year. But everything he accomplished on the field in 2009 has since been overshadowed by his disastrous off-season.

    On Wednesday, Roethlisberger reportedly will be suspended by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell for four to six games for violating the league’s personal conduct policy. Apparently the suspension can be limited to only four games if Roethlisberger meets certain conditions. (That is, if he manages not to do anything monumentally stupid). 

    By offering a fantasy spin, we don’t mean to trivialize the events that led to the suspension. It’s an ugly story. And then there’s the other ugly story. Prosecutors in Georgia have not filed charges, yet the NFL obviously determined that — in Goodell’s words — Roethlisberger has engaged in "a pattern of behavior and bad judgments." Presumably we can all agree that he’s guilty of at least that much.

    In fantasy, you eventually learn to disassociate players from their stats, and that’s what we’ll try to do here. We’re interested only in the set of numbers that will accompany Roethlisberger in 2010, not the allegations and persistent questions. His absence for at least a quarter of the regular season clearly affects his fantasy value, although it isn’t the only factor in the equation.

    In case you hadn’t noticed, he’s a complicated player.

    Let’s begin with what we can assume will be a four-week ban. Fantasy owners often overstate the impact of an early season suspension on a player’s worth — it’s not as if Roethlisberger will serve his league-imposed punishment during your fantasy championship, after all. But he won’t be available to assist your team in the opening four weeks, and that’s not exactly meaningless. Toss in Pittsburgh’s bye and suddenly — in the best-case scenario — Roethlisberger can only contribute in eight weeks of a 13-game fantasy regular season. On the basis of this fact alone, you can’t draft him as a fantasy starter in a league of standard size. 

    And that’s before we consider his injury potential. Roethlisberger has been the most frequently sacked quarterback in the NFL over the past three seasons, and no one else is particularly close. He tied for the league lead in sacks last year (50), and finished second in both 2008 and 2007 (46, 47). Pittsburgh will no doubt address the offensive line via the draft, perhaps with multiple picks, but Roethlisberger’s pathological willingness to sustain hits is another issue entirely. He’s been sacked 242 times through his age-27 season, and there’s at least some reason to believe that quarterbacks who endure that level of abuse in their early years tend to have short careers and abbreviated primes.

    But that’s more of a long-term concern. In the year ahead, while Roethlisberger takes his usual beating, Pittsburgh’s receiving corps will have one less weapon. Santonio Holmes(notes) led the Steelers in receiving yards last season (1248) and he’s caught 18 touchdown passes over the past three seasons (plus three more in the playoffs), yet he was dealt to the Jets earlier this month in exchange for a fifth round pick. Mike Wallace(notes) receives a bump in value after delivering outstanding numbers as a rookie (39-756-6), but Holmes will certainly be missed.

    The pre-draft buzz — which is often disinformation, but let’s imagine it’s accurate — suggests that Pittsburgh won’t target receivers in the early rounds. If true, then Wallace, Hines Ward(notes) and Heath Miller(notes) will be the primary targets; Antwaan Randle El(notes), Arnaz Battle(notes) and Limas Sweed(notes) will get the leftovers. (Sweed is basically the anti-Cris Carter: All he does is drop touchdowns). Thus it’s not a surprise that Art Rooney II himself has reportedly urged head coach Mike Tomlin to reshape the offense and "run the ball more consistently."

    That’s good news for Rashard Mendenhall(notes), if his line is up to the challenge. However, it’s not great news for Roethlisberger, a man who attempted a career-high 33.7 passes per game last season.

    If we were to draft a 2010 fantasy league today (a terrible idea), we’d have to account for all the red flags attached to Roethlisberger: His 10-12 game season, his susceptibility to on-field punishment, his weakened receiving corps, and his offense’s renewed commitment to the run. And we can’t ignore his history of bad judgment (Goodell’s words) in light of his team’s zero tolerance policy regarding off-field misconduct. And then there’s the very real possibility that Roethlisberger might be traded. And if he’s not dealt, then you have to consider Pittsburgh’s ostensibly brutal late-season schedule. In Weeks 13-15, the Steelers will face three defenses (BAL, CIN, NYJ) that ranked among the AFC’s top four last year.  

    So again, this is a complicated player. Good thing we’re not drafting today.

    Nonetheless, we took a quick survey of Yahoo!’s fantasy analysts in order to gauge Roethlisberger’s value, pre-NFL Draft. Here are the preliminary 2010 composite quarterback ranks:

    1. Drew Brees(notes)
    2. Aaron Rodgers(notes)
    3. Peyton Manning(notes)
    4. Philip Rivers(notes)
    5. Matt Schaub(notes)
    6. Tony Romo(notes)
    7. Tom Brady(notes)
    8. Brett Favre(notes)
    9. Eli Manning(notes)
    10. Kevin Kolb(notes)
    11. Donovan McNabb(notes)
    12. Matt Ryan(notes)
    13. Joe Flacco(notes)
    14. Jay Cutler(notes)
    15. Carson Palmer(notes)
    16. Ben Roethlisberger
    17. Matthew Stafford(notes)
    18. Chad Henne(notes)
    19. Vince Young(notes)
    20. David Garrard(notes)

    Roethlisberger’s stock is at a three-year low, following arguably the most impressive season of his career. The Steelers are expected to replace him with some combination of Dennis Dixon(notes) and Byron Leftwich(notes) during the opening weeks of 2010. Fantasy owners will obviously need to do better. 

    Photo via US Presswire 

    Click
    here to follow Roto Arcade on Facebook

  • Rational re-pricing suggests more upside

    By Paul Gardner

    Many believe that equity markets are unjustifiable at their present levels given unemployment at cyclical highs and the spectre of continuing economic weakness.

    Since March 2009 however we have seen a 70% equity rally and the corollary narrowing in corporate bond spreads as investors accept more risk.

    Is this irrational exuberance or rational re-pricing?

    We believe this is a rational repricing and that we could expect to see a further 10-15% increase in equity markets over the next 12 months. Investing in equities entails investing in companies first and the economy second.  Companies are impacted by the economy but also adapt and react to it.  

    Over the past 12 months many companies have beaten bearish expectations.  Indeed, surprisingly both margins and profits remain healthy relative to other economic cycles.  

    We believe the difference this time is that companies shed costs (i.e. jobs) quicker than ever before.  This resulted in a dramatic increase in unemployment in developed economies, which in turn caused economic growth to slow.  Company’s however maintained profitability due to timely inventory management and productivity gains.  The bearish prediction of corporate profitability falling into the abyss never occurred.  The S&P presently trades at 15x P/E, neither historically cheap nor expensive.  

    The bear’s next concern is that companies can only cut so much in fixed costs and that revenue is destined to decline.  Considering only developed economies one would expect this, however costs cut in developed markets are counter-balanced by job growth in developing markets.  

    An entrepreneurial middle class has emerged in developing markets with the resultant positive feedback loop between increased demand and job growth.  Although consumption in the developing world is not as established as it is here, it is nonetheless a positive and steeply sloping curve and should more than offset the absence of traditional consumers.  Most economic theory has historically been applied to a (Western) world with an economy of only a billion people.  Today we have a global economy of 4 billion (not including the 2.5 billion living at subsistence level).

    The bear argument continues that it is only a matter of time before inflation and interest rates rise aggressively.  Indeed central banks will hike overnight rates sooner than later, however the middle and long end of the yield curve will remain relatively unaffected.  We believe that deflation not inflation is the greater risk. The primary inflation inputs are wages and wage growth which are unlikely to rise given present unemployment and overcapacity.  

    The sovereign debt crisis is also being called the catalyst that will lead to the further monetization of debt.  Japan however increased money supply by 85% between 1997 and 2003 without a hint of inflation.  We expect money supply and the velocity of money to continue to drop as private lending remains curtailed and the U.S. consumer remains continues to save.   We further believe that governments will respond by cutting spending, hiking taxes and lowering pension entitlements.  These factors combined should make for a superb disinflationary cocktail.

    Where then are equities headed?  The global economy is healing and growing. Corporate balance sheets are well funded and profitability seems to be in place.  With ten year bond rates at around 3.5% we have a compelling reason to believe that the S&P should trade at 17x operating profit.  If we use consensus earnings of $80 for the S&P 500 in 2011 then an S&P 1360 is possible and we could expect to see a further 10-15% increase in equity markets over the next 12 months.

    Paul Gardner, CFA, is a partner and portfolio manager at Avenue Investment Management

  • State Budget Crisis: Oz Griebel Says He Would Cut Expenses Like In The Private Sector At BankBoston

    Republican candidate Oz Griebel says he would tackle the state’s budget crisis in the same way he did in the private sector – by cutting expenses and consolidating operations.

    Griebel is running among a group of Republicans who are currently behind in the latest Quinnipiac University and Rasmussen polls to Republican front-runner Tom Foley of Greenwich. In the latest Q poll, Foley had 30 percent of the vote, compared to 4 percent each for Lt. Gov. Michael Fedele and Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton.

    Some insiders believe that Foley, Fedele, and Boughton could end up in a three-way GOP primary on August 10. But before the primary, they will battle for the necessary 15 percent of the 1,465 delegates at the party’s nominating convention on Saturday, May 22 in Hartford. They will clearly be debating the best way to resolve the state’s budget crisis, including a projected deficit of more than $3 billion in the 2012 fiscal year.

    “Our current fiscal crisis looks eerily familiar,” Griebel said in a statement. “As the former CEO of BankBoston Connecticut and the Metro Hartford Alliance, I had to make tough budgetary decisions every day – even when they were unpopular.  Specifically, I had to bring our expenses into balance with our revenues and consolidate operations and activities when necessary.  The financial challenges that both organizations faced and decisions I had to make are not dissimilar to those confronting our state today.”

    “I knew then, like now, that turning things around would not be easy; yet by demonstrating leadership and fiscal responsibility, I was able to grow our customer and investor bases,” Griebel said. “By leveraging relationships in the field and speaking candidly with our people and stakeholders, I built key coalitions and teams – region by region and sector by sector – methodically making things right.  As governor, I will utilize my experience in turning around previous financial challenges and building teams of varying government and business leaders to re-establish Connecticut’s fiscal sanity, ultimately restoring confidence in and jobs to our state.”

    On the Democratic side, Greenwich cable TV entrepreneur Ned Lamont, former Stamford Mayor Dannel Malloy, Simsbury First Selectman Mary Glassman, Ridgefield First Selectman Rudy Marconi, and former state Rep. Juan Figueroa of Meriden are battling for the Democratic nomination.
     

  • Gluten-free pastry find

    einatThese almond macaroons are for sale at OU For U — a vegetarian Kosher restaurant in Dunwoody that I first discovered last December.

    Prepared by Einat’s Bakery, they contain just almonds, egg white and sugar and are labeled “gluten free.” They are fantastic — delicate, sheer and just the tiniest bit chewy in the center. They seem like they would be perfect with a cup of coffee or tea in the afternoon.

    I spoke briefly with the baker (Einat?), who works at the restaurant, to make sure they are prepared in a facility free of cross-contaminants. Though she didn’t speak much English, she seemed to understand the drift of my question and was very reassuring about the safety of these cookies for sufferers of celiac disease. She also said that she was planning to debut a line of gluten-free cakes later this week.

    A look at her website shows that Einat makes all kinds of Kosher cakes, cookies and pitas and is now conducting a “Passover mega sale.”

    Does anyone else have recommendations …

  • Forty years after it began Earth Day again at a crossroads

    By Shermakaye Bass
    Green Right Now

    Some of today’s younger greensters may not realize it, but on April 22, Earth Day is officially two generations old. That’s older than many who are organizing and promoting the holiday’s global events this year — events that are expected to draw more than one billion participants world-wide, including a mass gathering on the National Mall on Sunday, April 25.

    The purpose of the Washington, D.C. , demonstration, marking Earth Day’s 40th Anniversary, is to push Congress to pass a 21st century climate bill — which is bringing the holiday full circle, returning it with razor-sharp focus to what spawned the first celebration in 1970: a cry for long-term political change on American environmental policy.

    Sen. Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin, a founder of Earth Day

    Sen. Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin, a founder of Earth Day

    That first Earth Day started at the end of a violent and disjointed decade, with a call from progressive legislator Wisconsin Sen. Gaylord Nelson (1916 to 2005). Most people agree that Earth Day grew out of Nelson’s observation of an oil spill on the beaches of Santa  Barbara in the summer of ‘69.  As archival material from Nelson’s 25-year-plus political career puts it, the senator saw college students staging Vietnam-related teach-ins and thought: Why not do that with environmental issues? Why not create awareness and eco-education platforms, backed by a grassroots community?

    When the first Earth Day rolled around several months later, thousands of colleges and schools participated. In fact, an estimated 20 million Americans demonstrated in some form, whether among throngs of thousands in New York or Philadelphia or in some individual way, making it by many accounts the largest demonstration in U.S. history.

    As Nelson marveled after the fact, Earth Day “organized itself. …”  The senator, who twice served as Wisconsin’s governor, had the innate savvy to make the Earth Day contingent a big tent, encouraging people to acknowledge the fledgling holiday ”in any way they want.”

    That first Earth Day spawned a decade of ground-breaking policy change, including formation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in December, 1970; and passage of the Clean Air (1970) Clean Water Act (1972) and the Endangered Species Act (1973). (Yes, these were the  Nixon years, a period of environmental advancements.)

    Forty years later, activists and climate experts believe Americans are at a similar cross-roads. As pro-environment legislators and President Barack Obama strive to tighten environmental regulation and others try to thwart it, Earth Day organizers are promoting the holiday as a clarion call: a demand for policy change and political action.

    They want a strong 21st century climate/energy bill that reduces greenhouse gas emissions to slow climate change and reduce demand for energy. They want it soon, from Congress, where the U.S. Senate is considering a controversial climate bill that seems in danger of pleasing neither environmentalists or climate change opponents.

    Pushing for Climate Action…

    Sen. Nelson hired Denis Hayes to help organize the first Earth Day

    Sen. Nelson hired Denis Hayes to help organize the first Earth Day

    Passage of a strong bill that would seriously curb carbon emissions, remains the hope of environmentalists, youth groups and many others who want climate change addressed.  They see it is imperative that our country quit talking and sand-bagging and enact a comprehensive bill that will include ways to solve climate change, be that a cap-and-trade system, carbon taxing or other measures.

    Climate activists point to rising carbon in the air, which scientists say is triggering chain reactions that will bring catastrophic consequences — the floods, drought, desertification and damage to water systems and oceans we’ve all heard discussed.

    People like Earth Day co-founder and one-time national director Denis Hayes, along with many other veteran activists, believe that this particular president and Congress need to act now on climate change, despite a large degree of polarity in American society.

    They hope this Sunday’s demonstration on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., brings a groundswell for change that goes well beyond recent years’ commemorations of the revered secular holiday (the most celebrated, according to multiple sources, in the world).

    Traditionally, the event has been unifying and symbolic, an effective awareness campaign marked by local fairs and festivals. But this year’s intensity and intent are different.

    Earth Day, 2010 won’t be just a quick feel-good moment of turning off the porch lights, unplugging coffeepots or forgoing the lawn sprinkler for a day. It’s a full-on push for legislation, action, say organizers.

    As Hayes, director and CEO of the Seattle-based Bullitt Foundation , wrote on April 15 in a Yale University magazine, the environmental movement of the past few years (decades, even) has tiptoed around big-money interests and dirty-fuel purveyors, diluting the substantive non-partisan alliance that marked the movement in the early 1970’s.

    This year’s Earth Day, then, is pretty much like no other.

    Denis Hayes, still active in environmental issues

    Denis Hayes, still active in environmental issues

    As Hayes puts it in the Yale Environment 360, the 2010 holiday coincides with the most serious Congressional climate-bill debate in years. The debate involves several options, including Hayes’ preferred path, the Cantwell-Collins bill (introduced to the Senate in December, 2009), as well as the better-known Kerry-Lieberman-Graham bill, now before the Senate (more detail below).

    Not to dismiss the many global events occurring on April 22, but Sunday’s gathering on the National Mall is epic in its implications and its power to effect change.

    Hayes and others who founded the movement say this election year, this era, is a game-changer — not just for the country at large, but for its elected officials.

    “…The only way that Congress will act intelligently and boldly on this issue is if we give it no choice,” Hayes writes. “A large block of Americans must make the climate disruption issue an initial voting screen. If a candidate is okay on climate, then we will look at the rest of her record. To move this issue forward, our voices must be as loud as those hollering for the right to carry a Colt into Starbucks or for saving Granny from death panels. …”

    ….Effective Climate Action

    Along with others who support genuine (as opposed to token) reform and no-holds-barred legislation, Hayes believes the best path is the Cantwell-Collins plan.

    “Most experts I know agree, in private, that the Cantwell-Collins bill in the Senate is the best climate legislation that has yet been proposed. In fact, it is the only option under consideration that would make a meaningful dent in greenhouse gas emissions in the near term. It places an absolute cap on carbon where it enters the economy; auctions 100 percent of carbon permits; and returns the revenues to the public on a pro rata basis. Moreover, it’s just 40 pages long, while the competing bills contain another thousand pages of loopholes, special interest exceptions, and bad baggage.

    “But the so-called eco-pragmatists have one powerful argument against it. They say it can’t be passed. A prominent green leader told me, ‘To pass any climate bill at all, we have to appease coal-state Democrats, shovel as much money as necessary to pro-nuclear Republicans, and buy off the electric utilities.’ That is an apt description of the Kerry-Lieberman-Graham bill now making the rounds in the Senate.”

    Continues Hayes in the 360 article:

    “This sentiment has been broadly, if reluctantly, embraced by most of the large, mainstream national environmental groups working on climate as well as by the Obama Administration. … But it appalls virtually every environmentalist who lives outside the Beltway. The environmental movement has spent more than a billion dollars trying to pass a cap-and-trade bill, and it is feeling some desperation. The people who contributed all that money expect some results. The pressure to pass something — almost anything — that arguably puts some sort of cap on carbon is intense.”

    Hayes concludes that many in the environmental movement are tired of spending money, hope, faith and energy on broken promises, and watered-down legislation that tries to make everyone happy — but ends up disenfranchising almost everybody.

    “. … Every draft of the climate bill is weaker than its predecessor,” he writes. “Every draft does a poorer job of putting a reasonable price on carbon. Every draft is larded with more taxpayers dollars for socialized, centralized nuclear power and for “clean coal.” Every draft carries more sweeteners for the utility industry, the automobile industry, the coal and oil industries, and the industrial farmers and foresters.. Politicians who try to ignore climate disruption — and that’s a whole lot of them — need to start losing their jobs next November,” Hayes declares in the opinion piece. “Instead of weakening the bill, we need to change the politics,” he says.

    Like his mentor Sen. Nelson probably would have, Hayes (who became Earth Day’s national director in 1990 and took the holiday to global proportions) sees that Earth Day 2010 represents a completely different socio-political environment than existed during that first one in 1970.

    Why Earth Day Circa 1970 Worked

    Back then, Earth Day was able to unite political opposites and reconcile ideological polarities in the face of one, singular issue: cleaning up the mess that humans had made and passing legislation that would safeguard the environment, and people, for generations to come. Believe it or not, in 1970, members of conservative and liberal camps, rural lifelong naturalists and ivory-tower activists, union movements and corporate CEO’s, Native Americans and bonafide cowboys, if you will, all rallied behind Earth Day.

    As Bill Christofferson Nelson’s biographer writes in the progressive Uppity Wisconsin blog’s fascinating history of Earth Day: “That was the genius of Earth Day – tapping the wellspring of environmental concern that was bubbling just below the surface of the national consciousness.”

    “When it happened, “It was truly an astonishing grassroots explosion,” Nelson later said. “The people cared and Earth Day became the first opportunity they ever had to … send a big message to the politicians – a message to tell them to wake up and do something. It worked because of the spontaneous, enthusiastic reception at the grassroots. Nothing like it had ever happened before. While our organizing on college campuses was very well done, the thousands of events in our schools and communities were self-generated at the local level.”

    “…Earth Day worked because of the spontaneous response at the grassroots level. We had neither the time nor the resources to organize twenty million demonstrators and the thousands of schools and local communities that participated. That was the remarkable thing about Earth Day. It organized itself,” Nelson said

    Eventually Nelson achieved the highest honor an American civilian can receive. In 1995, he was awarded in the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Bill Clinton. Among  his many legislative achievements during an18-year tenure as U.S. Senator from Wisconsin, Mr. Nelson helped pass the following:

    • The 2,000-mile Appalachian Trail Preserve
    • Stronger government regulations and controls of mining, including strip mining.
    • Fuel-efficiency standards for American automobiles
    • Bans on the use of the poison DDT and the defoliant 245T, a.k.a. Agent Orange.

    Granted, Sen. Nelson’s accomplishments took place over more than a decade, but the major federal bills he helped push through – – The Clean Air, Clean Water and Endangered Species Acts — were passed over three short years.

    Earth Day organizers remind us that Nelson’s legacy is not just an indication of what can be done in relatively short order; it is proof positive that comprehensive change can happen quickly. Given that most international scientists now agree our globe is undergoing dramatic climate change (as Hayes describes it in his Yale Opinion, “we’re cooking the planet”), Earth Day’s 40th anniversary, and the mass demonstration planned for Sunday, April 25, can’t come a moment too soon.

    We know from the past that such grassroots movements can be their own tipping point, pushing change far beyond anyone’s crystal ball could conjure. We also know that, 40 years after the first Earth Day, the world is facing an urgent issue that wasn’t even on the radar back then.

    The lesson? Change is possible.

    • More information about The Climate Rally this Sunday, April 25, at the National Mall can be found on our site and at the Earth Day Network website.

    Copyright © 2010 Green Right Now | Distributed by GRN Network

  • Perpetuating the myth that climate policy is all cost

    by David Roberts

    A portfolio approach to climate change—a price on carbon coupled with a suite of complementary policies—can serve as a net economic boost. Put more simply: tackling climate change can help the economy. As I lamented yesterday, however, this fact tends to be obscured by the political establishment’s excess focus on carbon pricing alone.

    Part of the blame for this state of affairs lies with mainstream economics. You see, carbon pricing is relatively easy to model. A portfolio approach is not. So economists just … don’t. Nine times out of ten, when economists talk about the economic effects of climate policy, they’re just talking about the effects of carbon pricing. Problem is, carbon pricing without those complementary policies produces a hit to GDP growth, so economists end up providing ammunition for those who want to block climate legislation altogether.

    This week provided a crystal clear example of the dynamic at work. As The Hill reports, Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) recently asked the Congressional Budget Office—the definitive authority on these matters—to estimate the year-to-year household impacts of the Waxman-Markey (ACES) climate/energy bill. passed by the House last summer. It’s pretty obvious what Smith is after: he wants a number he can use to bash climate legislation during the upcoming midterm elections.

    Now CBO chief Doug Elmendorf has written Smith back [PDF]. Using the CBO’s standard modeling, the agency determined that ACES will cost the average household $90 worth of purchasing power in 2012. By 2030, that figure rises to $550 a year, and by 2050, $930.

    Now, relative to the enormous growth in GDP and average household incomes these models assume, that amount of money is peanuts. (The program would shave 0.8 percent off GDP growth by 2050—by contrast, the recent financial crisis knocked off something like 5 percent in one fell swoop.) But still, Smith and the Republicans have gotten their ammo. “During the recession, with Americans hurting, the Democrats want to pass a bill that will hit every family squarely in the pocketbook, starting with $90 and rising every year!”

    Dems’ only response will be, “Hey, $90 isn’t that much!” That’s not exactly a political winner.

    But here’s the thing: the CBO is only modeling the cap-and-trade program in ACES—i.e., the carbon pricing system. What about the other two-thirds of the bill? There’s a whole efficiency title, which is quite strong (much stronger than the craptastic provisions in the Senate bill). There are electric car provisions, grid provisions, renewable energy provisions. These complementary policies serve to reduce per-capita energy use and stimulate innovation in clean industries; that is to say, they serve to drive down the cost of compliance with the cap.

    What would happen if these policies were integrated into the economic modeling used by the CBO? I suspect that the outcome would be much more favorable.

    Now, of course there’s a reason CBO doesn’t model the portfolio approach. It’s difficult to model how multiple policies interact. Economists are uncomfortable with that kind of uncertainty; they like statistical precision; they don’t like putting their professional credibility behind what amounts to a series of educated guesses. If you asked, Elmendorf would probably say that he is being up-front about what the CBO is doing and it’s up to policy makers what use they make of it.

    But I don’t buy that. The CBO is perpetuating the myth that climate policy is all cost—a myth that makes decent climate policy less likely. It’s contributing to the surreal atmosphere in which the entire media and political elite act like nothing but carbon pricing exists. Somebody’s got to take responsibility for that sorry state of affairs. Somebody’s got to change it. It’s not going to help to have climate campaigners (and DFH bloggers) protesting it. Nobody in the Village takes them seriously. Economists need to step up.

    Related Links:

    U.S. military shrinking its carbon ‘boot print’

    Raiding rainforest funds in climate legislation will turn cost projections into fantasy

    Good news for Earth Day: We can reduce climate pollution and boost the economy, all at once






  • 4 Things Obama Will Say in His Wall St Reform Speech

    Financial reform is complicated. Understanding why we need it is not.

    When President Obama makes his pitch for banking regulation Thursday in New York, he’ll have more than enough ammunition. Everybody felt the credit crunch’s tsunami, and everybody knows that the wave began on Wall Street. But whereas the motivation for reform is simple to understand, reform itself is infinitely complicated. Indeed Washington is seeking to regulate an industry whose very opaqueness was the cause of the recession. If Wall Street doesn’t understand Wall Street, how will Americans understand Wall Street reform?

    The key is to keep things simple. In his weekly address last weekend, Obama broke down the case for financial reform into four pieces: (1) creating new consumer protections; (2) shining a harsh on shadow banking; (3) installing measures to end “too big to fail” and (4) giving more power to shareholders. If that address was a template for his Thursday address, here are four themes we can expect for this landmark address.

    1. We have to fight for consumers.
    The clearest case for reform is the consumers’ case, because we are an audience of consumers. Our sense of appropriate leverage ratios might be murky, but our sense of indignation is bottomless. Obama will say that Americans were repeatedly duped into the same devious schemes that eventually wiped out our savings. Even before 8 million workers were victims of the recession, millions more were victims of predatory lending practices, baffling financial products, devious interest rate policies lurking in fine print, and worse. This is the easy case to make. Today we have too many agencies with consumer protection as their fourth priority. What we need is one strong defender whose sole purpose is to make sane disclosure rules so that Americans understand what we’re paying for.

    2. We have to drag the banks out of the shadows.
    The power of light doesn’t end with consumer protection. We also need to make shadow banking more transparent. Summing up the origins of the recession, Obama will explain that the crisis began in the shadows, with complex financial instruments sloshing between banks and hedge funds who did not understand the risks they were taking. It’s said that what you don’t know can’t hurt you. But what Wall Street didn’t know hurt all of us. The implosion of the shadow banking industry brought down the worldwide financial system and sent our unemployment soaring more than 10 percent.

    It’s easy to argue that we can’t prevent the next crisis without addressing the roots of the last crisis. But it’s hard to frame shadow banking reform in a way that won’t make Americans change the channel. We could hear something about “turning back the clock, returning to a simpler time,” and calling for banks to put a hard wall between their commercial operations and their proprietary trading desks. We could hear vague allusions an “open, free and thriving market,” which would mean posting complex financial instruments called derivatives on an exchange and trading them through a central clearinghouse to protect counterparties. The details here get very confusing very fast, so expect Obama to talk more about the need for shadow banking reform rather than the shape it will take.

    3. Big is bad…
    This is where Obama gets to break out the stick and whip bankers for “recklessness and irresponsibility.” Bankers gambled with Americans’ money. When they lost, they wound up with … well, Americans’ money. Not only does this story pique our natural sense of injustice, but also there’s bad policy at its heart. The implicit government support of large firms gives them unfair advantages in the market. There are two ways to fix this: end the implicit support, or make the firms smaller.

    To the first solution, Obama might defend an “orderly liquidation fund,” which would help the government wind down failed banks in an orderly manner so that their implosion doesn’t create a black hole that swallows the financial sector with them. Last week Republicans attacked this fund for supporting permanent bail outs and the measure has lost some steam. If Obama goes to bat for it, expect something explicit like: “Let me make this clear, there will be no more
    taxpayer bailouts.” Indeed, this “resolution” fund wouldn’t bail out the firm. It would stop the chaos.

    To the second solution, Obama will likely announce capital requirements or “leverage ratios” that will force banks to either have more cash on hand or make safer bets with their capital. A “safe” leverage ratio is considered about 15:1 (that means for every one dollar of capital you have on hand, you’ve borrowed 14 more). When Bear Sterns went under, its leverage ratio was 36:1. Lehman’s was probably even higher. If we want to make banking less risky, one commonsense solution is to limit risk.

    4. … but banks are not.
    You can feel this one coming. It’s not in Obama’s DNA to attack his enemies with a steady stream of venomous invective. His style is more like what a pick-up artist would call “negging” and an investment banker would call hedging: a shrewd balance of criticism, compliments and to-be-sure concessions. (How many times have we heard something like: “The media is vapid, salacious and petty, but essential to the democratic spirit…?”) One should expect the same tone from Thursday’s speech. Look out for a penultimate graph along the lines of:

    “The time has come for us to reform Wall Street, not because we seek to destroy it, but we seek to save it. Credit is the lifeblood of the economy. It helps businesses grow. It puts students through college. It puts food on our tables and keeps a roof over our heads. We need our banks. But just as urgently, we need to reform them.”





    Email this Article
    Add to digg
    Add to Reddit
    Add to Twitter
    Add to del.icio.us
    Add to StumbleUpon
    Add to Facebook



  • Worst Company In America Final Four: Bank Of America VS. Ticketmaster

    Two of last year’s WCIA Final Four return to square off as Bank of America, who thumped Time Warner Cable in the Elite 8, goes up against Ticketmaster, fresh off its victory over Anthem BCBS.

    Which of these companies has earned a spot in the finals?


    This is a post in our Worst Company In America 2010 series. The companies competing for this honor were chosen by you, the readers. Keep track of all the goings on at consumerist.com/tag/worst-company-in-america. Print the bracket, here.

  • 10 Must-Have Board Games for the iPad

    With the increased screen real estate of the iPad, it’s the perfect device for playing board games. If you haven’t had a chance to browse some of the great titles available on the App Store, here’s some of our favorite board games to get you started.

    Scrabble

    Such a classic, Scrabble is awesome on the iPad platform. Enjoy playing against friends (or a computer) on a gorgeous large game board. If you have an iPhone, download the free Scrabble Tile Rack and arrange your letters on your own device. When it’s your turn, simply flick them towards the game board and they’ll appear, ready for you to place and score big. Similar to the iPhone version, you can play against your friends locally or over a local network. Scrabble is $9.99.

    Words with Friends

    If there’s one app at the moment that’s popular across social networks and mobile devices, it’s Words with Friends. Similar to Scrabble, this game allows you to play, turn based, against friends who are playing on their iPads, iPhones or Facebook accounts. The app supports push notifications to let you know when it’s your turn, and you can chat in-game with your friends. At $2.99, this is definitely a fun board game for those who enjoy playing against friends and don’t want to take the leap to Scrabble.

    Game Table

    One of the first game apps on the iPad, Game Table provides a virtual game board for a variety of games, like checkers, chess, poker and other card games. It’s not a traditional game in the sense that you’ll have scoring or rules and stuff. Instead, it’s simply all the pieces to play games without all the fuss so you can play them any way you want. For 99 cents this app is a great value and the developers have promised that additional game pieces for Backgammon, Go and Reversi will be added soon.

    UNO HD

    While UNO technically is more of a card game than a board game, I decided to include it because it’s a very fun experience on the iPad. It features all of the traditional UNO rules and actions, like Draw 2, Reverse and Wild cards. It also supports multiplayer (sharing one device or multiple on a Wi-Fi network) and features challenges allowing users to unlock additional themes to give the game a fresher look. UNO HD is $4.99.

    Strategery

    Strategery is an engaging game originally designed for the iPhone that has been optimized for the iPad as well. This game of world domination features you as leader of a “country” (think Civilization style) and you battle against your neighbors to gain/lose territory. It supports pass-and-play style multiplayer (with up to five players) or online battles with push notifications. The iPad version allows for much larger maps and a much more engaging experience if played like a traditional board game (a group of players gathering around the iPad). At $1.99, this app is a definite must-have.

    Theme Checkers

    Of all board games, Checkers (or Chess) was probably the most expected to debut on the iPad. There are a variety of both available now, but my favorite is Theme Checkers HD. Just like a real game, the movement is very fluid and natural. This game supports one and two player modes and regularly updated themes for unique checkers experience. Users can even create and install their own custom themes as well. Theme Checkers HD is 99 cents, so give it a spin and see what you think.

    Board Box

    If you’re looking for a little more than just checkers or chess, you should check out Board Box. Similar to some of the others I’ve mentioned, it includes checkers and chess, but this app goes further by including Reversi, Tic Tac Toe, Go, Draughts and more. Not only does it include the regular version of these games, but it also includes some variants. This app doesn’t support an automated second player, so you’ll either need to suffer from having a split personality or have a friend to play against. If there’s nobody local, you can play against friends through email. The developers of Board Box have promised that there will be no in-app purchases for this app so as they continue to update and add additional game boards and variants, the updates will be free. At $3.99, Board Box is a great investment.

    Ludo

    If you’re a fan of Parcheesi, you should definitely check out Ludo ($3.99). Supporting up to four players (both human or computer), the game plays like real Parcheesi, except with a fresh modern interface and smooth animations and sound effects. Though there are a few other Parcheesi variants on the App Store, this one is definitely the best for the iPad. Additionally, your game state is saved so you can start and stop the game as you please.

    Moonlight Mahjong

    If you’re one who loves playing mahjong, check out Moonlight Mahjong for 99 cents. Putting a literal spin on the traditional idea of mahjong, this version is 3D, allowing you to use touch gestures to tilt and turn and zoom in and out. There’s over 90 built-in board layouts. When you get bored with those, you can create your own and share them with others. Plus, it offers for support of multiple players (even across Wi-Fi or against an automated opponent). If you’ve never given mahjong a shot, this is an excellent game to reduce stress and relax.

    Honey, That’s Mine!

    This is a “sweet” board game where players compete against each other to collect the most honey. If playing on the iPhone or iPod touch, the game supports pass-and-play for multiplayer, but if you’re on the iPad, the larger screen makes it easy to just place your iPad on a table and play against your friends. The idea of the game is rather simple, but the options for computer opponents and difficulty variations give this game additional replay value. Honey, That’s Mine is available on the App Store for $1.99.

    This is just a small sampling of some of the apps available for the iPad. If you’ve tried these or found others you like, share your thoughts in the comments below. Personally I’m thrilled to find replacements of my favorite board games on the iPad. Just imagine how many little pieces I don’t have to keep up with anymore!

  • GM investing $257M in Fairfax and Detroit plants to build next-gen Malibu

    Filed under: , , ,

    We first heard that General Motors might add production of the next-generation Chevrolet Malibu to its Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly plant back in December, and that news has been confirmed today. GM Chairman Ed Whitacre held a press conference this morning at which he announced the automaker had paid back the remaining $5.8 billion owed to the U.S. and Canadian governments a full five years ahead of schedule. He made the announcement at the company’s Fairfax plant in Kansas that currently builds the Chevrolet Malibu and Buick LaCrosse, a perfect venue to announce new plant investments for the next generation Malibu.

    GM will spend a total of $257 million to get both the Fairfax and Detroit-Hamtramck plants ready for the new Malibu. The Kansas City plant will receive a $136 million investment and be the new car’s primary production site, while $121 million will be spent tooling up the Detroit plant to build the 2012 Malibu alongside the Chevrolet Volt.

    The Detroit-HHamtramck plant currently builds the Cadillac DTS and Buick Lucerne, both of which are expected to end production some time in the next year. The Lucerne will likely be dropped from the lineup and the DTS will be replaced by the Cadillac XTS, which will likely be built in Oshawa.

    [Source: Automotive News, sub. req.]

    Continue reading GM investing $257M in Fairfax and Detroit plants to build next-gen Malibu

    GM investing $257M in Fairfax and Detroit plants to build next-gen Malibu originally appeared on Autoblog on Wed, 21 Apr 2010 11:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

    Permalink | Email this | Comments

  • Chevrolet apresenta Celta e Prisma 2011 com preço 5% menor

    A GM reduziu em 5% os preços do Celta e Prisma 2011, que não recebem nenhuma mudança visual ou de equipamento na nova linha.
    O Celta 2011 tem preços a partir de R$27.615 e recebe como novidade apenas uma nova cor preta no lugar do antigo preto Liszt, tal como o Prisma. 
    Já o Prisma 2011 tem a versão Joy apenas com motor 1.0 Flexpower e a Maxx somente com o 1.4 Econo.flex. O sedã da Chevrolet parte de R$30.500.  
  • Nine House Candidates Outraised Their Incumbent Opponents

    Whether they’re gearing up for a competitive primary, adding personal wealth to their campaign coffers or simply raising more in individual donations, nine House candidates have outraised the incumbents they’re challenging, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

    For three of the incumbents listed below, this is the second quarter in a row where their challengers beat them in total receipts: Dan Lungren (R-Calif.), Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.)  and Tim Bishop (D-N.Y.). And several incumbents who outraised their challengers through last quarter failed to do so through this second quarter (through March 31): Ron Klein (D-Fla.), John Hall (D-N.Y.), Larry Kissell (D-N.C.), Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), Betty Sutton (D-Pa.) and Jim Gerlach (R-Pa.).

    Two members who were outraised as of Jan. 31 have since turned things around: Florida Republican Bill Young and Washington Republican Dave Reichert. Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) was also outraised as of Jan. 31, but Murtha died in February.

    Our complete list of House challengers who outraised incumbents:

    Randy Altschuler (R-N.Y.): Democratic Rep. Tim Bishop raised a healthy $1.3 million through Mar. 31 and still found himself outraised overall by Altschuler. Altschuler, who is running against Bishop in New York’s 1st District, reported raising $2 million through Mar. 31. But Altschuler’s fundraising take isn’t indicative of donations — he loaned himself more than $1 million. Regardless of how he got the cash, Altschuler was also left with $200,000 more than Bishop after expenses. Republicans have long viewed Bishop as a potential target, due to GOP competitiveness in the district on the local and national levels. The party believes 2010 may be its time to strike because of the national climate and its well-funded challenger — and Altschuler plans to use Bishop’s support for the president’s health care reform plan against him.

    Ami Bera (D-Calif.): Republican Rep. Dan Lungren finds himself outraised by first-time candidate Bera yet again in California’s 3rd District, according to the most recent campaign finance totals. Bera, a physician, raised $1.25 million total through March 31, including a $21,000 personal loan, and Bera reported $977,000 remaining in his campaign account after expenses. Lungren, who is serving his eighth term in the House (which includes a stint in the 80’s before he became state attorney general) raised $976,000 total and reported only $650,000 on hand. The district, located in the Sacramento suburbs, supported Barack Obama for president in 2008 while Lungren won re-election with less than 50 percent of the vote. The GOP contends Lungren is favored for re-election, but Democrats have already targeted the race and Bera’s totals are only bolstering their efforts.

    Casey Clark (D-Md.): A $50,000 personal loan helped keep Clark ahead of Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.) in total funds raised for the second quarter in a row. Clark reported $152,500 raised through March for his campaign in Maryland’s 6th District, and Bartlett raised $120,000. But Bartlett remains miles ahead of Clark on available cash. Bartlett reported $379,000 on hand while Clark had only $70,000 remaining at the end of March. That cash on hand advantage is one of several reasons why few are watching this 2010 race.

    Tim D’Annunzio (R-N.C.): D’Annunzio has self-funded his way to the top in the race against Democratic Rep. Larry Kissell in North Carolina’s 8th District. After adding $850,000 in personal funds to his campaign, D’Annunzio reported $970,500 raised overall, placing him ahead of the other GOP candidates in the race as well as Kissell, who raised $676,000. A major bright spot for Kissell: D’Annunzio is spending virtually all the money in his account ahead of the competitive primary — D’Annunzio reported just $75,000 remaining at the end of March. Kissell reported $326,000 on hand. Republicans had been strongly recruiting for this race, and though they failed to secure their top-tier prospects, the district remains competitive.

    Tom Ganley (R-Ohio): Ganley gave himself a whopping $2 million loan this past quarter, which easily made him the strongest total fundraiser in Ohio’s 13th District race. Ganley’s $2 million-plus total put him ahead of Democratic Rep. Betty Sutton, who raised a total of $504,000 through March. Ganley was previously running for Ohio Senate, but dropped out in February to challenge Sutton. Though Ganley’s wealth may complicate things for Democrats, the party’s edge in the district continues to bodes well for Sutton.

    Nan Hayworth (R-N.Y.): Hayworth, an ophthalmologist, counts a $400,000 personal loan among her total receipts, which has put her ahead of incumbent Democratic Rep. John Hall in total campaign money raised for the New York 19th District race — $918,000 to $856,000. But it’s Hayworth, not Hall, who will need cash to endure a potentially difficult primary. Multiple Republicans are jockeying for the position, while incumbent Hall stands alone on the Democratic side. Hall reported $553,000 on hand and Hayworth reported $658,500 on hand.

    Rich Iott (R-Ohio):
    A $390,000 loan helped boost Iott’s campaign finance totals ahead of incumbent Democrat Marcy Kaptur in Ohio’s 9th District. Iott was able to report $399,000 raised through Mar. 31 while Kaptur reported $214,000 raised. But Kaptur saved an enormous amount of money from her last re-election bid. Kaptur boasts more than $1 million cash on hand and Iott reported just $179,000 remaining at the end of March. Republicans cast Kaptur, a 14-term incumbent, as vulnerable because of her support for health care reform, but she has a record of consistently winning past re-elections with ease.

    Doug Pike (D-Pa.): And the last major self-funder on this list is Pike, who gave himself more than $1 million for a total of $1.6 million raised through March. That total beats out Pennsylvania’s 6th District Rep. Jim Gerlach (R) who reported raising $891,000. Gerlach is not new to competitive re-election races. He is a perennial  target because of his split district (voters their supported Barack Obama for president in 2008 by 17 percentage points while simultaneously re-electing Gerlach). Gerlach has never won an election by more than 52.1 percent.

    Allen West (R-Fla.):
    At the beginning of the cycle, it was Republican state House Majority Leader Adam Hasner who most worried Rep. Ron Klein’s (D) campaign. When Hasner declined to run, that left Klein’s unsuccessful 2008 challenger, West, in the race. But this cycle, West’s fundraising totals are beginning to overshadow Klein’s and additionally, Republicans have been offering West a national platform for his campaign. West raised more than $2 million through March, while Klein raised $1.9 million. Klein still has an advantage in cash on hand, reporting $2.65 million remaining as of Mar. 31 while West reported just over $1 million remaining. West has been employing the campaign services of BaseConnect, which has drawn scrutiny for its high direct mail costs. But West and other clients have defended the group’s tactics, noting that in addition to fundraising support, BaseConnect has increased his campaign’s visibility and his access to the party.

    List of races originated from Center for Responsive Politics information. All fundraising totals were obtained from the Federal Election Commission.

    Julissa Treviño contributed to this story.

  • How Much Does Afghanistan Surge Cost You?

    This installment of “Taxpayer Calculator” will examine what it costs the military, and you, the taxpayer, to run two overseas wars.

    President Obama announced in late 2009 a plan to send 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan. The administration sent its request for funds to Congress in February, but the bill hasn’t been voted on yet — even though more than half of the troops are already in place now.

    Because the cost of the surge wasn’t factored in when lawmakers were hashing out the 2010 budget, President Obama had to ask for an additional $33 billion to fund the surge.

    You can find out how much of your salary goes to fund this war supplemental by using our Taxpayer Calculator.

    The bill is expected to pass, but the House has been slow in taking it up. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., says they plan bring it the floor before the Memorial Day recess.

    The additional war spending is on top of the Defense Department’s base budget for 2010 of $661 billion. Asking for the extra cash separately is a move many commanders-in-chief, including President Bush during the Iraq surge, have done in the past.

    A small fraction of that $33 billion supplemental request goes to projects in Iraq. The Iraqi Security Forces, for example, are set to receive $1 billion.

    The military plans to draw down to 50,000 troops in Iraq by the end of the summer. Lt. Gen. William Webster of the Third Army in Iraq told Pentagon reporters earlier this month that the cost of moving out of Iraq will cost tens of billions of dollars.

    At the rate we’re spending in Afghanistan in 2010, the Department of Defense is burning $4.5 billion a month.

    Since September 11th, 2001, the Pentagon has spent $837 billion on all war related activities, according to its own calculations. In Afghanistan alone the U.S. has spent $191 billion. Also, the total cost for Iraq since the invasion in March 2003 is $620 billion.

  • Android 2.1 is now available for Motorola Milestones on Telus

    Motorola Milestone

    OK, Canadian Motorola Milestone owners … Who’s ready for Android 2.1? It’s finally available, so you’re back to level ground with those of us with Motorola Droids down south in the U.S. (Yeah, you still have us beat on that health care thing.) Anyhoo, head to Motorola to snag what you need for the update (strangely, it’s not OTA), and here’s the official changelog (pdf). [via Mobilesyrup]

  • The British are navigating! The British are navigating!

    British Android users awoke this morning to find a slightly belated Easter egg from Google lying in their Google Maps. If you have Android 1.6 or 2.1 coupled with Google Maps 4.1.0 or 4.1.1 you should now be able to get your free turn-by-turn navigation on.

    Everyone in the aforementioned section of the Venn diagram gets the turn-by-turn navigation with voice directions, but it would appear that only the Nexus One owners get the added bonus of being able to use speech recognition in Maps to say “navigate to” and the like.

    So if you already have Maps installed you should just be able to pop it open and start zigging and zagging to the soothing tones of your Android navigator, if not get thee to the Market or hit the QR code above.

    Unfortunately due to the ash cloud none of the Android and Me staff were able to fly over there and verify the functioning of the update in Britain so sound off in comments if you notice anything wonky going on or if you just want to give a little hip hurray for free navigation that’s cool too.




    Google Navigation crosses the pond to Britain

    Related Posts

  • Court-Martial of Navy Seal Opens in Iraq

    An alleged terrorist accused in the grisly murders of four Americans appeared in court Wednesday in Iraq. But Ahmed Hashim Abed isn’t the one on trial. Instead, he was testifying against one of the Navy Seals who arrested him last September.

    Petty Officer First Class Julio Huertas of Blue Island, Illinois, is being tried at a military base on the western outskirts of Baghdad. Huertas and two other Navy Seals face charges in connection with Abed’s arrest, during which the prisoner claims he was punched and kicked by at least one of his captors.

    The case has prompted a huge outpouring of sympathy in the U.S., with thousands visiting websites in support of the Navy Seals. Many claim the four defendants should be hailed as heroes for capturing Abed instead of being court marshaled. At least 20 members of the U.S. Congress have urged Defense Secretary Robert Gates to drop all the charges.

    In court Tuesday, Abed described the surprise raid on his home last year. He say he was with his wife at the time. He says he was blindfolded and taken to an unknown location and questioned. He told the court there was no abuse during the first questioning or at a second location where he was later taken. At a third location, however, Abed claims he was hit on his shoulders and back, then punched in to the stomach, causing him to fall on his face. While on the floor, he says he heard yelling and swearing.

    The accused terrorist was handcuffed and blindfolded at the time and says he can’t identify anyone who might have hit him. He only remembers seeing someone wearing red shorts. Photos of Abed taken ten days after the alleged incident were also shown in court, but according to a Fox News representative inside the courtroom, the injuries did not look severe.

    Petty Officer 2nd Class Matthew McCabe of Perrysberg, Ohio, is the only Navy Seal actually charged with assault in the case. His attorney, Neal Puckett, says on his website, “These terrorists are trained to claim abuse despite no physical evidence of such.” McCabe goes on trial May 3rd in Norfolk, VA.

    Also in court in Baghdad, a Navy officer testified that he witnessed McCabe assaulting Abed. Petty Officer Third Class Kevin Demartino, who is not a Navy Seal, said he saw McCabe punch Abed in the stomach and saw blood coming from the prisoner’s mouth. Demartino was silent about the case at first, saying in court, “I wasn’t prepared to rat those guys out.” But after he learned there would be a formal investigation, he decided to cooperate with the prosecution.

    McCabe is charged with assault, dereliction of duty and making false statements. Huertas is charged with dereliction of duty and impeding an investigation. A third Navy Seal, Jonathan Keefe of Yorktown, Pennsylvania, is charged only with dereliction of duty. He faces trial later this week in Baghdad.

  • Miami Businessman Charged With Running $900 Million Ponzi Scheme

    It’s not exactly Bernie Madoff’s $65 billion, but the Securities And Exchange Commission has charged a Florida businessman with operating a $900 million Ponzi scheme, telling people they were investing — risk-free and at interest rates upward of 26% — in his grocery business, when in fact he was just using the money to fund his lavish lifestyle.

    According to the SEC filing, Nevin K. Shapiro, the founder and president of Capitol Investments USA, Inc., “lured investors by falsely touting Capitol’s securities as a risk-free investment with extraordinarily high returns… He used his prominence and prestige to gain investors’ trust in funding Capitol’s grocery diverting business, but behind their backs he diverted their money to enrich himself.”

    The SEC says that, in spite of the influx of investment money, Capitol began operating at a loss in 2004 and “had virtually no operations by 2005 when, in a classic Ponzi scheme manner, Shapiro began using funds from new investors to pay principal and interest to earlier investors.”

    Here are some of the SEC’s allegations against Shapiro:

    * He falsely told investors their funds would be used as short-term financing to purchase and resell groceries for Capitol’s business.

    * He falsely touted Capitol’s financial success as well as his own.

    * He falsely assured investors that their principal was secure because Capitol would not broker the sale of the goods without first obtaining a purchase order from a buyer.

    * He falsely told investors that Capitol would pay the principal and interest from the profits it received when it resold the goods.

    * He misappropriated at least $38 million of investor funds to enrich himself and finance outside business activities unrelated to the grocery business, including a sport representation business and real estate ventures.

    According to the filing, Shapiro owned a $5 million home in Miami Beach, a $1 million boat, luxury cars, expensive clothes, high-stakes gambling, and season tickets to premium sporting events.

    He has been charged with violating the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws. The complaint seeks a permanent injunction, sworn accounting, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, and financial penalties against Shapiro, who surrendered to authorities today.

    SEC Charges Prominent Miami Beach Businessman in $900 Million Ponzi Scheme[SEC.gov]