Svet

[Redoran]

"Poklonili mi drugari zajednički za rođendan. Doviđenja i prijatno."

 

Retardirani degenerici i njihovi umobolni eksperimenti za koje su ubeđeni da su posledica inovativnog razmišljanja.

 

 

[eumeswil]

42 people hold same wealth as 3.7bn poorest

 

Ali direktor Marko™ i trka do dna. 

 

Quote

Mark Littlewood, director general at the Institute of Economic Affairs, said: “Oxfam is promoting a race to the bottom. Richer people are already highly taxed people – reducing their wealth beyond a certain point won’t lead to redistribution, it will destroy it to the benefit of no one. Higher minimum wages would also likely lead to disappearing jobs, harming the very people Oxfam intend to help.”

 

[Budja]

Branko Milanovic popizdeo.

 

http://glineq.blogspot.com/

 

Quote

They are loath to pay a living wage, but they will fund a philharmonic orchestra. They will ban unions, but they will organize a workshop on transparency in government.

So in a year, they will be back in Davos and perhaps a new record in dollar wealth per square foot will be achieved, but the topics, in the conference halls and on the margins, will be again the same. And it will go on like this…until it does not.

 

[Simon]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42786107

[Budja]

On 14/01/2018 at 7:56 AM, Takeshi said:

A World Bank economist apologized for unfair country rankings and will redo four years of results

 

 

bankari ne vole levičare, u šoku sam  

 

I tako...

 

Umesto istrage, desava se ovo.

 

I onda zasto raja ne veruje ekspertima.

 

Quote

Paul Romer Steps Down as World Bank Chief Economist After Rocky Stint

 

[hazard]

Dobar tekst:

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/economic-sanctions-north-korea-syria-hospital-supplies-a8168321.html

 

Quote

Voices
It’s time we saw economic sanctions for what they really are – war crimes
Saddam Hussein and his senior lieutenants were rightly executed for their crimes, but the foreign politicians and officials who were responsible for the sanctions regime that killed so many deserved to stand beside them in the dock

Patrick Cockburn @indyworld 6 days ago

 

The first pathetic pieces of wreckage from North Korean fishing boats known as “ghost ships” to be found this year are washing up on the coast of northern Japan. These are the storm-battered remains of fragile wooden boats with unreliable engines in which North Korean fishermen go far out to sea in the middle of winter in a desperate search for fish.

 

Often all that survives is the shattered wooden hull of the boat cast up on the shore, but in some cases the Japanese find the bodies of fishermen who died of hunger and thirst as they drifted across the Sea of Japan. Occasionally, a few famished survivors are alive and explain that their engine failed or they ran out of fuel or they were victims of some other fatal mishap.

 

The number of “ghost ships” is rising with no fewer than 104 found in 2017, which is more than in any previous year, though the real figure must be higher because many boats will have sunk without trace in the 600 miles of rough sea between North Korea and Japan.

 

The reason so many fishermen risk and lose their lives is hunger in North Korea where fish is the cheapest form of protein. The government imposes quotas for fishermen that force them to go far out to sea. Part of their catch is then sold on to China for cash, making fish one of the biggest of North Korea’s few export items.

 

The fact that North Korean fishermen took greater risks and died in greater numbers last year is evidence that international sanctions imposed on North Korea are, in a certain sense, a success: the country is clearly under severe economic pressure. But, as with sanctions elsewhere in the world past and present, the pressure is not on the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, who looks particularly plump and well-fed, but on the poor and the powerless.

 

The record of economic sanctions in forcing political change is dismal, but as a way of reducing a country to poverty and misery it is difficult to beat. UN sanctions were imposed against Iraq from 1990 until 2003. Supposedly, it was directed against Saddam Hussein and his regime, though it did nothing to dislodge or weaken them: on the contrary, the Baathist political elite took advantage of the scarcity of various items to enrich themselves by becoming the sole suppliers. Saddam’s odious elder son Uday made vast profits by controlling the import of cigarettes into Iraq. (zvuči poznato? I Irak je imao svog Marka sa gajbicama)

 

The bureaucrats in charge of UN sanctions in Iraq always pretended that they prevented Saddam rebuilding his military strength. This was always a hypocritical lie: the Iraqi army did not fight for him in 1991 at the beginning of sanctions any more than it did when they ended. It was absurd to imagine that dictators like Kim Jong-un or Saddam Hussein would be influenced by the sufferings of their people.

 

These are very real: I used to visit Iraqi hospitals in the 1990s where the oxygen had run out and there were no tyres for the ambulances. Once, I was pursued across a field in Diyala province north of Baghdad by local farmers holding up dusty X-rays of their children because they thought I might be a visiting foreign doctor.

 

Saddam Hussein and his senior lieutenants were rightly executed for their crimes, but the foreign politicians and officials who were responsible for the sanctions regime that killed so many deserved to stand beside them in the dock. It is time that the imposition of economic sanctions should be seen as a war crime, since it involves the collective punishment of millions of innocent civilians who die, sicken or are reduced to living off scraps from the garbage dumps.

 

There is nothing very new in this. Economic sanctions are like a medieval siege but with a modern PR apparatus attached to justify what is being done. A difference is that such sieges used to be directed at starving out a single town or city while now they are aimed at squeezing whole countries into submission.

 

An attraction for politicians is that sanctions can be sold to the public, though of course not to people at the receiving end, as more humane than military action. There is usually a pretence that foodstuffs and medical equipment are being allowed through freely and no mention is made of the financial and other regulatory obstacles making it impossible to deliver them.

 

An example of this is the draconian sanctions imposed on Syria by the US and EU which were meant to target President Bashar al-Assad and help remove him from power. They have wholly failed to do this, but a UN internal report leaked in 2016 shows all too convincingly the effect of the embargo in stopping the delivery of aid by international aid agencies. They cannot import the aid despite waivers because banks and commercial companies dare not risk being penalised for having anything to do with Syria. The report quotes a European doctor working in Syria as saying that “the indirect effect of sanctions … makes the import of the medical instruments and other medical supplies immensely difficult, near impossible.”

 

People should be just as outraged by the impact of this sort of thing as they are by the destruction of hospitals by bombing and artillery fire. But the picture of X-ray or kidney dialysis machines lacking essential spare parts is never going to compete for impact with film of dead and wounded on the front line. And those who die because medical equipment has been disabled by sanctions are likely to do so undramatically and out of sight.

 

Embargoes are dull and war is exciting. A few failed rocket strikes against Riyadh by the Houthi forces in Yemen was heavily publicised, though no Saudis were killed. Compare this to the scant coverage of the Saudi embargo on Houthi-held Yemen which has helped cause the largest man-made famine in recent history. In addition, there are over one million cholera cases suspected and 2,000 Yemenis have died from the illness according to the World Health Organisation.

 

PR gambits justifying sanctions are often the same regardless of circumstances. One is to claim that the economic damage caused prevents those who are targeted spending money on guns and terror. President Trump denounces the nuclear deal with Iran on the grounds that it frees up money to finance Iranian foreign ventures, though the cost of these is small and, in Iraq, Iranian activities probably make a profit.

 

Sanctions are just as much a collective punishment as area bombing in East Aleppo, Raqqa and Mosul. They may even kill more people than the bombs and shells because they go on for years and their effect is cumulative. The death of so many North Korean fishermen in their unseaworthy wooden craft is one side effect of sanctions but not atypical of their toxic impact. As usual, they are hitting the wrong target and they are not succeeding against Kim Jong-un any more than they did against Saddam Hussein.

 

[Anduril]

1 hour ago, hazard said:

Dobar tekst:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/economic-sanctions-north-korea-syria-hospital-supplies-a8168321.html

 

Tekst je dobar je ima poentu ali je i jednostran - sankcije prema odredjenim kompanijama ili ljudima (tajkunima, politicarima) su sasvim OK i nesto sasvim drugo od ovih kolektivnih kaznjavanja. 

[namenski]

On 12/21/2017 at 3:04 PM, Anduril said:

U slucaju SK nije u pitanju samo elita nego i dobar deo naroda koji ima politicku odgovornost, tj. onaj deo koji je sposoban da rukuje i nosi oruzje. 

Da ne nazovemo to kolektivnom odgovornoscu ali to jeste zajednicka odgovornost velikog broja ljudi a ne samo elite.

 

Sta bi sad sa politickom odgovornoscu?

Edited January 25, 2018 by namenski

[Anduril]

35 minutes ago, namenski said:

Sta bi sad sa politickom odgovornoscu?

 

Opet ti nesto nije jasno - kao da nikad nisi cuo za embargo na oruzje ili zabranu putovanja za drzavne sluzbenike i te vrste sankcija umesto ovih generalnih. 

[namenski]

1 hour ago, Anduril said:

 

Opet ti nesto nije jasno - kao da nikad nisi cuo za embargo na oruzje ili zabranu putovanja za drzavne sluzbenike i te vrste sankcija umesto ovih generalnih. 

Sada se vadis: jasno i glasno si prosirio pojam kolektivne odgovornosti i izmislio politicku odgovornost ne bi li uspeo da u kalup spakujes ostale, dobar deo naroda  , verovatno one koji su glasali^tm za nepodobnu opciju i to uvidom u biracke spiskove, ali 'ajde, navikli smo....

 

Usput, nesto da te naucim: embargo na oruzje je polumera, ima smisla samo tamo gde se vec ratuje, a i to najcesce ne bi li se umirila savest, od Spanije 30-ih, preko Bijafre, da ne nabrajam dalje, nema svrhe...

U takozvano mirno doba, pa i na primeru Severne Koreje, embargo (samo) na oruzje nema nikakvog smisla: em im oruzje ne treba, em je sve oruzje ili se u oruzje moze da pretvori, od uglja pa na dalje, em ce oruzje uvek da nadje put tamo gde je potrebno i kome je potrebno.

Zabrana putovanja za drzavne sluzbenike i ostale poimenicne kategorije je nesto jos grdje: sluzi samo za mahanje spiskovima po novinama, ne pogadja bitno nikoga jer oni kojima se zabranjuje sigurno nisu ugrozeni ni po kom egzistencijalnom osnovu, obaska sto ne resava ni jedan jedini problem zbog koga je uvedena.

 

Edited January 25, 2018 by namenski

[Anduril]

9 hours ago, namenski said:

Sada se vadis: jasno i glasno si prosirio pojam kolektivne odgovornosti i izmislio politicku odgovornost ne bi li uspeo da u kalup spakujes ostale, dobar deo naroda  , verovatno one koji su glasali^tm za nepodobnu opciju i to uvidom u biracke spiskove, ali 'ajde, navikli smo....

 

Usput, nesto da te naucim: embargo na oruzje je polumera, ima smisla samo tamo gde se vec ratuje, a i to najcesce ne bi li se umirila savest, od Spanije 30-ih, preko Bijafre, da ne nabrajam dalje, nema svrhe...

U takozvano mirno doba, pa i na primeru Severne Koreje, embargo (samo) na oruzje nema nikakvog smisla: em im oruzje ne treba, em je sve oruzje ili se u oruzje moze da pretvori, od uglja pa na dalje, em ce oruzje uvek da nadje put tamo gde je potrebno i kome je potrebno.

Zabrana putovanja za drzavne sluzbenike i ostale poimenicne kategorije je nesto jos grdje: sluzi samo za mahanje spiskovima po novinama, ne pogadja bitno nikoga jer oni kojima se zabranjuje sigurno nisu ugrozeni ni po kom egzistencijalnom osnovu, obaska sto ne resava ni jedan jedini problem zbog koga je uvedena.

 

Ne lupetaj - embargo na recimo slobodan uvoz delova za rakete ili druge komplikovanije sisteme koji se grade decenijama itekako ima smisla. Kad pocne rat, takve sisteme je malo teze nabrzaka proizvesti. 

[Takeshi]

poslednji neka ugasi svetlo.

 

The fastest shrinking countries on earth are in Eastern Europe

 

Quote

 

The top 10 countries with the fastest shrinking populations are all in Eastern Europe (with a few in Central and Northern Europe), according to UN projections. Bulgaria, Latvia, Moldova, Ukraine, Croatia, Lithuania, Romania, Serbia, Poland, Hungary, are estimated to see their population shrink by 15% or more by 2050.

...

“So whereas Western and southern European countries have attracted a lot of immigration which largely offset the effects of low fertility, the East is in a double bind, experiencing both out-migration and low birth rates,” 

 

 

[namenski]

On 1/26/2018 at 8:20 AM, Anduril said:

 

Ne lupetaj - embargo na recimo slobodan uvoz delova za rakete ili druge komplikovanije sisteme koji se grade decenijama itekako ima smisla. Kad pocne rat, takve sisteme je malo teze nabrzaka proizvesti. 

I kazes bas delovi za rakete i drugi komplikovaniji sistemi koje je tesko proizvesti na brzaka kad pocne rat, a?  

[Budja]

Putin pobediJo.

 

Quote

Czech election: Zeman beats Drahos to win second term

 

[Budja]

Guardian odlepio.

 

Quote

Czech Republic re-elects far-right president Miloš Zeman

Anti-immigrant and pro-Putin leader takes decisive victory over liberal opponent Jiří Drahoš

 

Od kad je i Zeman postao "far-right".