.jpg)
Gpa and Gma with big sister Dagny and her new brother - 17 day old - Blake Abraham Nelson.
===
A worthwhile watch, left click: www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=
===
My friend Khaled Toameh reports on Palestinian thinking. (See 1 below.)
===
Israel prepares for possible attack from Maylasian plane.
click on Breitbart: " http://www.breitbart.com/Big-
===
Finally a formal Republican response to Obamacare. (See 3 below)
===
Obama has imposed sanctions on Russia but at least he was decent enough to send a simultaneous signal to Putin that he should not take our actions personally.
Now that is what I call a decisive foreign policy move that should have Putin shaking in his boots.
Perhaps Obama has run out of red paint.
Every day that passes I simply shake my head in shame and bewilderment.
Even Hollywood could not make a movie depicting a bigger buffoon occupying the Oval Office. (See 4 below.)
===More jobs, fewer hours worked add up to less work and less pay but "what difference does it matter." Obama is going to raise the minimum wage. (See 5 below.)
===
Once Obama has left The White House, we will quickly be free to develop our natural gas and oil resources, lessen our dependence on foreign sources and be in a position to use our energy largess as a diplomatic weapon. (See 6 below.)
It is amazing how this president continues to hold this nation hostage because he has to kiss up to the greens whose arguments are largely beyond logical.
On the other hand Obama wants America to shrink its world footprint so his obeisance is understandable. (See 7 below.)
===
Dick
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1)
Palestinian People's Message to Kerry: Go Away!
The Palestinians feel that U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is not listening to what they have to say about his efforts to achieve peace in the middle East.
That Is why they have decided to express their views through a new song that is dedicated to Kerry personally.
A video of the song, by Qassem Najjar, was posted on YouTube and other social media outlets on the eve of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas's visit to Washington for talks with President Barack Obama on the peace process with Israel.
While heaping praise on Abbas, the singer mocks Kerry and accuses him of presenting a “Zionist plan” with the intention of eliminating the Palestinian cause.
Najjar decided to publish his new song after he and other Palestinians were left with the impression that Kerry is not accurately hearing their position regarding his ideas for a “framework agreement” with Israel.
The words of the song, which is entitled, “The Palestinian People's Message to Kerry,” express the negative attitude that many Palestinians and Arabs have toward his ideas.
But Najjar is also hoping that his song will send a warning to the Palestinian Authority leadership. “My message to the Palestinian Authority leadership is that as long as you are committed to the Palestinian rights, we are with you,” the singer said. “But if you make any concession, the people and I will take to the street to chant against you and demand that you go away.”
The Palestinian Authority has endorsed the anti-Kerry song by allowing many of its news websites to publish it. A senior Palestinian Authority official in Ramallah explained that the new song is “100% accurate and honestly sums up the whole Palestinian position toward peace.”
Najjar is hoping that the song's message will reach Kerry and Obama before they meet with Abbas in Washington. He wants Washington to understand that even if Abbas is forced — under U.S. pressure and threats — to make concessions, the Palestinians will not “relinquish their rights.”
The song also reflects growing Palestinian suspicion toward Kerry's motives and accuses him of seeking to deceive the Palestinians through his ideas. Addressing Kerry, the singer warns the top US diplomat, “Go tell Obama and America that my land is not a piece of cake for you to share.”
Referring to the explosive issue of Palestinian refugees, Najjar sends the following message to Kerry, “We will not compromise the right of return; my homeland flag will be high. Listen John Kerry.”
Noting that the Arabs will not allow Kerry's plan to pass, the singer goes on to warn Kerry, “in the name of the martyrs, prisoners, homeland and revolution, Jerusalem is our free capital and will always be.”
After repeating Palestinian accusations against Israel over settlements and the “Judaization” of Jerusalem, Najjar cautions Kerry that he must “stop playing games because all your games have been exposed by President Abbas.”
Echoing previous statements by some of Abbas's advisors, the singer denounces Kerry's proposed agreement as a “Zionist scheme designed to liquidate the Palestinian cause.”
He also denounces as “racist” the demand for recognizing Israel as a Jewish state. This too is the official position of the Palestinian Authority and Abbas is once again expected to voice his opposition to this demand during his meeting with Obama. Another theme of the song that also reflects the official stance of the Palestinian Authority is the refusal to accept any Israeli presence in the West Bank after the signing of a peace agreement. In the words of the singer, “We do not accept Jews within our borders.”
It is no coincidence that the song was released on the eve of Abbas's visit to Washington. Abbas will use it to show Obama and Kerry why he can not make concessions to Israel. He will also use it to scare the Americans and show them how much Palestinians despise Obama and Kerry.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2)ISRAEL PREPARES FOR POSSIBLE ATTACK BY HIJACKED MALAYSIAN PLANE
As the possibility--however remote--grows that Malaysia Airlines flight 370 may have been hijacked and taken to a hidden location, Israeli authorities are preparing for the possibility that the hijackers might attempt to use the Boeing 777 to mount an attack.
According to the Times of Israel, Israel's Channel 2 has revealed that Israeli air defenses have been boosted, and approaching civilian aircraft will be asked to identify themselves far earlier.
Though the flight was presumed at first to have crashed, whole or in pieces, into the ocean, passive satellite transmissions from the aircraft suggest that it made a deliberate course change and may have headed north into central Asia.
Pakistan has already said that the flight never registered on its radar, but at least one expert has suggested the flight could have landed in Bangladesh, whose air defenses presumably would be weaker.
Though the possibility that the Boeing 777 could be used in a terror attack is mere speculation, it is evidently being taken seriously by Israel. A plane filled with nuclear material would not need to be in Israeli airspace long to do catastrophic damage, even if shot down.
There are no reports yet that the U.S. is taking similar measures, and U.S. officials have suggested recently that the likeliest fate of flight 370 was a crash into the Indian Ocean.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4) Welcome to the 19th Century
'You just don't in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pretext," declared John Kerry on March 2 as Russia began its conquest of Ukraine's Crimean peninsula. Though he didn't intend it, the U.S. Secretary of State was summing up the difference between the current leaders of the West who inhabit a fantasy world of international rules and the hard men of the Kremlin who understand the language of power. The 19th-century men are winning.
Worldwide, demand for energy will go up 41 percent by 2035, primarily because of use in emerging economies, BP estimated.
During that time period, the U.S. share of global demand is expected to decline to 13 percent from the current 18 percent, and China's demand will go up to 27 percent from the current 22 percent.
Bob Dudley, BP Group CEO, is optimistic the world will not run out of energy. "The growth rate for global demand is slower than what we have seen in previous decades, largely as a result of increasing energy efficiency. New energy forms such as shale gas, tight oil and renewables will account for a significant share of the growth in global supply."
BP estimated global carbon dioxide emissions will grow by 29 percent by 2035, but emissions in the United States and Europe will actually decline.
Oil consumption is expected to post the slowest growth of any energy form until 2035 — even slower than coal thanks to Chinese and Indian demand — and natural gas is expected to grow the fastest. By 2035, North America will account for 71 percent of the world's shale gas production, BP predicted.
BP said there are multiple reasons why the United States will be energy self-sufficient by 2035, in addition to its increased production of both natural gas and oil.
The oil giant predicted U.S. energy production would rise by 24 percent, while consumption would expand by only 3 percent, in part because of advances in energy efficiency. In addition, it said, natural gas would replace oil as the leading U.S. fuel consumed by around 2027, renewables would jump from 2 percent to 8 percent of power generation and energy consumed for transportation would decline by 18 percent.
The U.S. oil industry is already ranked third among countries worldwide and that U.S. production should surpass Saudi Arabia by 2018, according to the International Energy Agency, The Motley Fool reported.
The Daily Caller reported government data show U.S. crude oil production for 2013 reached its highest levels since 1989, averaging 7.5 million billion barrels per day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4) Welcome to the 19th Century
Putin and the new Bonapartes see a weak and retreating West.
'You just don't in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pretext," declared John Kerry on March 2 as Russia began its conquest of Ukraine's Crimean peninsula. Though he didn't intend it, the U.S. Secretary of State was summing up the difference between the current leaders of the West who inhabit a fantasy world of international rules and the hard men of the Kremlin who understand the language of power. The 19th-century men are winning.
***
Vladimir Putin consolidated his hold on Crimea Sunday by forcing a referendum with only two choices. Residents of the Ukrainian region could vote either to join Russia immediately or to do so eventually. The result was a foregone conclusion, midwifed by Russian troops and anti-Ukraine propaganda. Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov dismissed Mr. Kerry's pleas for restraint on Friday in London, and Russia vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution denouncing the Crimean takeover a day later.
Next up for conquest may be eastern Ukraine. Russian troops are massed on the border, and on Saturday its soldiers and helicopter gunships crossed from Crimea and occupied a natural gas plant on the Ukrainian mainland. Scuffles and demonstrations in the eastern Ukrainian cities of Donetsk and Kharkiv, egged on by Russian agitators, could create another "trumped up pretext."
Opinion Video
Editorial page editor Paul Gigot on the Obama Administration's response to Vladimir Putin's annexation of Crimea. Photo credit: Getty Images.
And what is to stop Mr. Putin? In the two weeks since Russian troops occupied Crimea, President Obama and Europe have done little but threaten "consequences" that Mr. Putin has little reason to take seriously.
The U.S. has refused Ukraine's request for urgent military aid, and it has merely sent a few NATO planes to the Baltic states and Poland. The Russian strongman might figure he's better off seizing more territory now and forcing the West to accept his facts on the ground. All the more so given that his domestic popularity is soaring as he seeks to revive the 19th-century Russian empire.
Left in shambles are the illusions of Mr. Obama and his fellow liberal internationalists. They arrived at the White House proclaiming that the days of U.S. leadership had to yield to a new collective security enforced by "the international community." The U.N. would be the vanguard of this new 21st-century order, and "international law" and arms-control treaties would define its rules.
Thus Mr. Obama's initial response to Mr. Putin's Crimean invasion was to declare, like Mr. Kerry, that it is "illegal" because it violates "the Ukrainian constitution and international law." As if Mr. Putin cares.
The 19th-century men understand that what defines international order is the cold logic of political will and military power. With American power in retreat, the revanchists have moved to fill the vacuum with a new world disorder.
Backed by Iran and Russia, Bashar Assad is advancing in Syria and may soon crush the opposition. Iran is arming the terrorist militias to the north and south of Israel. China is pressing its regional territorial claims and building its military. And Mr. Putin is blowing apart post-Cold War norms by carving up foreign countries when he feels he can.
The question now is whether Mr. Obama and his advisers will shed their 21st-century fantasies and push back against the new Bonapartes. Jimmy Carter finally awoke after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, but Mr. Obama hasn't shown the same awareness of what is happening on his watch.
We've written about the need for broad economic and financial sanctions against Russia and its elites. Skeptics reply that Europe will never go along. Even if that's true—and that would mean a failure of U.S. diplomacy—it shouldn't deter the U.S. from imposing its own banking and financial sanctions. The world's banks can be made to face a choice between doing business with Russia or doing business in America. We know from the Bush Administration's experience with North Korea that such sanctions bite.
European Pressphoto Agency
The West must also meet Mr. Putin's military aggression with a renewed military deterrent. This does not mean a strike on Russia or invading Crimea. It should mean offering military aid to Ukraine to raise the price of further Russian intervention. Above all it means reinforcing NATO to show Mr. Putin that invading a treaty ally would lead to war.
The U.S. and Europe should move quickly to forward deploy forces to Poland, the Baltic states and other front-line NATO nations. This should include troops in addition to planes and armor. Reviving an updated version of the Bush-era missile defense installation in Eastern Europe is also warranted, including advanced interceptors that could eventually be used against Russian ICBMs.
Russia's revanchism should also finally awaken Europeans to spend more on their own defense. The 19th-century men know that nationalism isn't dead as a mobilizing political force. Western Europe's leaders will have to relearn this reality or their dreams of European peace will be shattered. They need more modern arms of their own in addition to America's through NATO.
In response to the Crimean referendum Sunday, the White House issued a statement declaring that, "In this century, we are long past the days when the international community will stand quietly by while one country forcibly seizes the territory of another." We shall see, but Mr. Obama first needs to understand that America's adversaries reject his fanciful 21st-century rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5) The Hidden Rot in the Jobs Numbers
Hours worked are declining, resulting in the equivalent of a net loss of 100,000 jobs since September.
BBBy
Most commentators viewed the February jobs report released on March 7 as good news, indicating that the labor market is on a favorable growth path. A more careful reading shows that employment actually fell—as it has in four out of the past six months and in more than one-third of the months during the past two years.
Getty Images
Although it is often overlooked, a key statistic for understanding the labor market is the length of the average workweek. Small changes in the average workweek imply large changes in total hours worked. The average workweek in the U.S. has fallen to 34.2 hours in February from 34.5 hours in September 2013, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That decline, coupled with mediocre job creation, implies that the total hours of employment have decreased over the period.
Job creation rose from an initial 113,000 in January (later revised to 129,000) to 175,000 in February. The January number frightened many, while the February number was cheered—even though it was below the prior 12-month average of 189,000.
The labor market's strength and economic activity are better measured by the number of total hours worked than by the number of people employed. An employer who replaces 100 40-hour-per-week workers with 120 20-hour-per-week workers is contracting, not expanding operations. The same is true at the national level.
The total hours worked per week is obtained by multiplying the reported average workweek hours by the number of workers employed. The decline in the average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls by 3/10ths of an hour—offset partially by the increase in the number of people working—means that real labor usage on net, taking into account hours worked, fell by the equivalent of 100,000 jobs since September.
Here's a fuller explanation. The job-equivalence number is computed simply by taking the total decline in hours and dividing by the average workweek. For example, if the average worker was employed for 34.4 hours and total hours worked declined by 344 hours, the 344 hours would be the equivalent of losing 10 workers' worth of labor. Thus, although the U.S. economy added about 900,000 jobs since September, the shortened workweek is equivalent to losing about one million jobs during this same period. The difference between the loss of the equivalent of one million jobs and the gain of 900,000 new jobs yields a net effect of the equivalent of 100,000 lost jobs.
The decline of 1/10th of an hour in the average workweek—say, to 34.2 from 34.3, as occurred between January and February—is like losing about 340,000 private nonfarm jobs, which is approximately 80% greater than the average monthly job gain during the past year. The reverse is also true. In months when the average workweek rises, the jobs numbers understate the amount of labor growth. That did occur earlier in the recovery, with a general upward trend in the average workweek between October 2009 and February 2012.
What accounts for the declining average workweek? In some instances—but not this one—a minor drop could be the result of a statistical fluke caused by rounding. Because the Bureau of Labor Statistics only reports hours to the nearest 1/10th, a small movement, say, to 34.449 hours from 34.450 hours, would be reported as a reduction in hours worked to 34.4 from 34.5, vastly overstating the loss in worked time. But the six-month decline in the workweek, to 34.2 from 34.5 hours, cannot be the consequence of a rounding error.
Was it the harsh winter in much of the United States? One problem with that explanation is that the numbers are already seasonally adjusted.
Imperfections in the adjustment method can result in weather effects, but the magnitude is far from clear, especially given that parts of the West, Midwest and South experienced milder-than-normal weather, with fewer business-reducing storms. Also, the shortening of the workweek began before the winter set in, with declines in hours from September to October.
Another possibility for the declining average workweek is the Affordable Care Act. That law induces businesses with fewer than 50 full-time employees—full-time defined as 30 hours per week—to keep the number of hours low to avoid having to provide health insurance. The jury is still out on this explanation, but research by Luis Garicano, Claire LeLarge and John Van Reenen (National Bureau of Economic Research, February 2013) has shown that laws that can be evaded by keeping firms small or hours low can have significant effects on employment.
The improvement in average weekly hours worked was reason for celebration after the recovery began. The recent decline is cause for concern. It gives us a more accurate but dismal picture of the past two quarters.
Mr. Lazear, who was chairman of the president's Council of Economic Advisers from 2006-09, is a professor at Stanford University's Graduate School of Business and a fellow at the Hoover Institution.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7) BP Forecast: US Is Destined to Be an Energy Giant Again
Domestic energy production is destined to outstrip consumption in coming years, led by natural gas and U.S. dominance as the world's biggest producer, so that the nation will stand totally energy independent by 2035, according to a long-range global study by oil giant BP.
Worldwide, demand for energy will go up 41 percent by 2035, primarily because of use in emerging economies, BP estimated.
During that time period, the U.S. share of global demand is expected to decline to 13 percent from the current 18 percent, and China's demand will go up to 27 percent from the current 22 percent.
Bob Dudley, BP Group CEO, is optimistic the world will not run out of energy. "The growth rate for global demand is slower than what we have seen in previous decades, largely as a result of increasing energy efficiency. New energy forms such as shale gas, tight oil and renewables will account for a significant share of the growth in global supply."
BP estimated global carbon dioxide emissions will grow by 29 percent by 2035, but emissions in the United States and Europe will actually decline.
Oil consumption is expected to post the slowest growth of any energy form until 2035 — even slower than coal thanks to Chinese and Indian demand — and natural gas is expected to grow the fastest. By 2035, North America will account for 71 percent of the world's shale gas production, BP predicted.
BP said there are multiple reasons why the United States will be energy self-sufficient by 2035, in addition to its increased production of both natural gas and oil.
The oil giant predicted U.S. energy production would rise by 24 percent, while consumption would expand by only 3 percent, in part because of advances in energy efficiency. In addition, it said, natural gas would replace oil as the leading U.S. fuel consumed by around 2027, renewables would jump from 2 percent to 8 percent of power generation and energy consumed for transportation would decline by 18 percent.
The U.S. oil industry is already ranked third among countries worldwide and that U.S. production should surpass Saudi Arabia by 2018, according to the International Energy Agency, The Motley Fool reported.
The Daily Caller reported government data show U.S. crude oil production for 2013 reached its highest levels since 1989, averaging 7.5 million billion barrels per day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment