New Global Era – Peace, Democracy, Social and Economic Progress

October 10, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The overwhelming majority having experienced a catastrophic twentieth century with death, destruction, genocide and carnage while the powerful minority reaping all the benefits,

There was tremendous hope for a better world at the dawn of the new millennium.

The general expectation was a paradigm shift in the political systems paving way for economic and social progress.

Among the six billion population – the industrialized nation like the United States has around 45 million children living in hunger and poverty. It is disproportionately higher at the global level.

Despite the staggeringly lower literacy rate in the developing nations,

The children are not attending school and gaining knowledge by exploring the wonders of science and technology, learning music and arts and importantly playing sports, essentially living a normal life.

Instead, they are either exploited in the sweat shops or trained to use firearms for recruitment in civil wars and by terror networks.

The prolific arms race by the powerful nations have facilitated the African civil wars, Latin American coups, political unrest in Central Asia, widespread terrorism in Pakistan and Somalia, Sudan and Yemen secession movement…

Corporations’ heavy influence in conjunction with the military aid and foreign intelligence contributing to political upheavals in Latin America, Middle East, Africa and lately Afghanistan are well known.

As stated earlier, the status quo is attributed to politics.

Whether it is Africa, Latin America, Middle East, or Central Asia and Pakistan in the Indian sub-continent – the political oppression and turmoil from continuous warfare are predominantly responsible for the lack of development leading to public frustration.

In contemporary politics, election is viewed as a formality due to external infiltration from corporations, religious groups and powerful organizations not excluding the judiciary viz. the U.S. elections in 2000.

Alternatively, when a particular individual of a political party is in power for several decades and succeeded by the progeny as seen in some parts of the world, it is a dynasty not democracy.

Any opposition in such elections is showmanship for the domestic and international audience.

The heinous crimes under these political representations ranging from massive corruption to political assassinations are masqueraded through false propaganda in their state owned media and entertainment outlets.

Usually, the political set up thrives on cronyism and fake euphoria in the successful mass deception.

The dissenters are portrayed in bad light as villains and their image distorted for egotistical and economic gains defining hypocrisy at a new level.

In the same context, there are those who rise to stardom by remaining oblivious to the ventures financed by undesirable elements known to have ruined many lives even before it had a chance, yet these entities have maintained cordial relation with their investors for individual motives.

Today, they are on the podium casting stones at the humanitarians utterly dedicated to speaking the truth and shed light on the ill choices being made so that the world could be a better place for all and not just the privileged ones.

The irony being, these individuals believe they hold the right to attack others which is subdued as a remark and the victims’ response to their narcissism mischaracterized befitting the self-persona.

Therefore the ideal place for them to begin is the self and,

Often soul searching would help them clear misconceptions about those striving hard for greater good and perhaps invoke genuine compassion within.

It’s worth remembering that mutual respect and understanding fortifies human character.

Since the New World Order is vigorously promoted by the members i.e. the prominent world leaders and affiliates,

It’s imperative to review the secret society role beginning with the former President Ronald Reagan’s administration to date.

Moreover, it’s necessary to highlight the former President Ronald Reagan and the successors’ extensive involvement until now in strengthening the secret society concept increasingly becoming more secretive.

History is testimony to the political events all over the world – Panama, Chile, Nicaragua, Argentina Columbia, El Salvador, Costa Rica…and recently (2009) Honduras in Latin America – the military coups are guaranteed to prevail against the republic protest and sacrifice.

Caribbean nations like Cuba, Haiti and West Indies population are struggling from severe economic conditions due to a variety of detrimental factors like economic sanctions, political interference and abandonment by the powerful nations.

Middle East – Iran, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and now Iraq to list a few in the region subjected to theocracy, monarchy or puppet governments… anything but democracy.

Israel the only democratic nation is also tied to a coalition backed by religious orthodox faction forging the controversial Jewish settlements and derailing the peace process.

Elsewhere, Afghanistan and Pakistan pose different challenges.

The Afghanistan political government is ceremoniously appointed by the elite society members against the population will.

Whereas in Pakistan, it is déjà vu with history repeating itself from time and time again.

The former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto exiled on embezzlement charges by the military General Pervez Musharraf, launched a political return from her exiled home – Dubai, UAE at the powerful society members’ behest.

Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto was subsequently assassinated during the political campaign in December 2007 extenuating the political circumstances in Pakistan.

Now the deposed military leader and ex-President General Pervez Musharraf echoed similar sentiments from his current exiled home – the democratic United Kingdom.

The delineation in the two former heads of state renewed political ambitions being,

If the deceased Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto in her political will bequeathed the position to her surviving heir, a minor at that time – accordingly the post is safeguarded by the political descendant’s guardian and parent – Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari,

The army General Pervez Musharraf on his part threatened the present Gilani administration with a possible military coup in an internationally televised press conference again not from an Afghanistan cave but U.K. capital, London.

General Pervez Musharraf seized power in a bloodless coup d’état and ruled Pakistan from 1999 to 2008 with high turnover of Prime Ministers, five at less intervals serving his administration.

The former President faced impeachment proceedings for iron-fist rule by disregarding the constitution in the Supreme Court Justice firing and other national issues, especially the indefinite postponement of the general election.

Another distinctive record in the General’s resumé is the armed Kargil conflict that brought Pakistan and India on the brink of nuclear confrontation.

General Pervez Musharraf reportedly claimed that the United States pressure on the ousted Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in 1999 led to the nuclear crisis. There were immense casualties on both sides.

The question arising from the global events overview is;

What did the New World Order powerful entities do to change or improve the political and economic plight across the globe during their term as the free world leaders?

Most decisions thus far has exacerbated the suffering and driven the twenty first century to heightened global security threats stemming from sheer violation of human rights, deteriorating economic standards and,

Social regression with rampant racial and gender discrimination, assault against gay community indicative of the relative cultural decline,

Last but not the least,

The worst scenario reverting to the medieval era with capital punishment consisting executions, stoning to death, live burials, public flogging…

All practiced in a business as usual manner.

Meanwhile, the people in the industrialized and newly developed nations are forced to deal with financial and economic crisis generated by excess greed, gross mismanagement and misplaced priorities centralized on warfare to dominate the world.

Besides, wars create a subliminal obedience from the people and their representatives towards the authorities imposing restrictions on dissidence when expressing legitimate concerns against the misguided purpose.

The routine resonance from the political sphere through communication media demanding complicity in all matter pertaining to humanity regardless, as a mark of respect to wartime President is not democratic in any standpoint considering,

War in the absence of definitive mission has become the preferred means to exercise power.

Peace prospects are ignored specifically –

In September 2010, the North Korean government explicit request through the former President Jimmy Carter for peace talks with the United States that included among pertinent issues the willful nuclear disarmament has been discarded without any due course of action.

Reference article “Special Acknowledgment – President Jimmy Carter North Korea visit,” published 09/20/2010 under International Politics category on this website.

The global reality in the political, economic, social and environmental realm confirms the superficial gains not realized by the average citizen thereby widening the gap between the haves and have-nots that is unfortunately overlooked to a large extent.

Any international summits like COP 15 – Copenhagen Climate Conference 2009, U.N. Disarmament Treaty September 24, 2010 – the quintessential targets to sustain life on planet are led to a failure in spite of the serious ramifications.

Likewise, the G-20 forum attracts worldwide dissent because,

First, they are exclusive and not inclusive in representation.

Next, the initiatives are not comprehensive and adopted measures seemingly favor the sectors responsible for the economic peril fomenting public anger and disappointment.

The military agenda and economic interests are protected conforming to the society’s framework.

Otherwise, the Afghan and Iraq war would have been long over with a viable political solution in both territories.

Upon observation the political quagmire in Afghanistan is replicated in Iraq with the approval of the undemocratic and unpopular governments – i.e. President Hamid Karzai and Prime Minister Nouri-Al-Maliki respectively.

Unwillingness in pursuing North Korea peace offer is intriguing; the inaction clarifies the peculiar aspect to the nuclear disarmament pledge.

From the economic stance, the incumbent administration had a Democrat majority in the House and the Senate until January 2010.

The health care reform could have been meaningful with a universal health care – Single Payer System.

That option was completely rejected even though the significant population as health care and insurance industry victims pleaded for Single Payer System.

As it turns out per the latest reports –

“About one million workers lose out on better coverage promised by health reform next year.

McDonald, Jack in the Box and other companies won a one year exemption from a new rule requiring them to raise the maximum amount of coverage they offer employees.

The Department of Health and Human Services spokeswoman Jessica Santillo said companies would again be able to apply for waivers next year.”

The companies have vowed to utilize the HHS generosity and “plan to seek additional waiver each year until 2014” – by when the mandatory law becomes effective.

Finance Reform Bill – there was a clear choice between the Democrat vote by Senator Russ Feingold requesting a robust reform to prevent the repeat errors and on the extreme the Republican Senator Scott Brown bargained for Wall Street and the Democrat administration accepts the latter with a huge concession even though the $19 billion could have been used for either addressing the drastic spending cuts or the rising national debt.

On the environmental front, the Democrat Senator Mary Landrieu from Louisiana is reported to have threatened to block the administration’s judicial appointees if the moratorium on offshore drilling is not lifted by the energy industry deadline.

One would think that these legislators can differentiate between right and wrong.

Furthermore they would remember the BP oil spills and the devastating impact on the environment and the economy.

But obviously their political career takes precedence over the present and future life on the planet.

With respect to political appointments, the current administration is more than adequately served by the secret society members denying opportunities to the mainstream talent.

Extending over to the international arena, the European Council President is a Bilderberg nominee.

If the New World Order is a world controlled by the elite group with the concentrated power that determines the existence or non-existence of life on the planet by holding secret meetings and defying logic,reasoning, democratic values as well as basic principles,

It is regrettable for it bears semblance to the pre-world war II characteristics deserving global condemnation and an end to the unethical decadent policies generating almost a Great Depression, relentless warfare, political and social unrest.

Notwithstanding a grave danger to the planet.

Habitat belongs to all and humanity thrives in the unanimous commitment to save and preserve life.

Peace and harmony is the best strategy to achieve the humanitarian goal benefiting all as opposed to a selective few in the society.

None have a permanent life contract on earth. Both ordinary and the extraordinary have to leave without exception.

We brought nothing into this world. Hence take nothing back. Whatever acquired in this lifetime is a gift to be shared and not hoarded.

Freedom is the basic human right. All are born to be free and that is the natural law espoused in the – New Global Era.

Peace on Earth and Save the Planet.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

War and Geo-Political Status 21st Century – The Ultimate Resolution

October 8, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

In the twenty first century, the war is interestingly waged in Islamic nations around the world.

Beginning with Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Palestinian Gaza, West Bank and East Jerusalem, Yemen, Chechnya, Somalia and Sudan with skirmishes in Central Asia as seen in the recent Kyrgyzstan with Uzbek Muslims largely massacred in ethnic violence –

Terrorism and insurgencies are the by-product of relentless warfare and foreign policies fostering political instability in turn exacerbating economic and social development.

The trend is prevalent to date.

Afghanistan – The former President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney started the war in 2001 declaring the terror mastermind Osama Bin Laden will be captured “dead or alive.”

Even the message resonated in the 2008 Presidential campaign with Senator John McCain as the Republican Presidential candidate pledging –

“I will follow Osama Bin Laden to the gates of hell.”

The Democratic Presidential candidate, the then Senator Barack Obama essentially repeated his predecessor’s rhetoric –

“Bush had earlier vowed to catch bin Laden “Dead or Alive,” and … “My preference obviously would be to capture or kill him. …”

We are in 2010 and the war is a decade old with tremendous loss of lives on all sides.

U.S and allies economy drained with the superfluous troops and financial investment, the troops’ low morale after continuous deployment and the public war fatigue at its peak,

Afghanistan today is still in the medieval age under the U.S. and NATO appointed Karzai administration that has been unanimously criticized for massive corruption and lack of direction in governance.

Meanwhile, Taliban leaders in Afghanistan are reportedly held hostage by the Pakistani military and ISI prohibiting them from initiating negotiations with the Afghan government to demonstrate Pakistani officials’ clout in the crisis.

Superseding these issues is the Al-Qaeda ring leader; Osama Bin Laden neither captured alive nor pronounced dead, a convenient situation to prolong the unsustainable war strategy.

If Osama Bin Laden is alive as it is claimed by the authorities, it raises the following questions:

Given the formidable U.S. and NATO forces in operation and the significant troops involvement since the war began in 2001, the severely incapacitated Osama Bin Laden remains at large according to the political and military high command.

Further, the White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel prior to his departure last week is quoted to have questioned the administration on this issue with a statement in sheer amazement.

“We are spending about $50 billion on intelligence and we still don’t know where Osama Bin Laden is?”

Despite CIA overt operation through para-military in Pakistan and the Pakistani intelligence provided with U.S. intelligence assistance, the mastermind Osama Bin Laden cannot be found in the all too familiar territories Afghanistan where the U.S. trained the Mujahedeen, prominently Osama Bin Laden who later created the terror network ‘Al-Qaeda,’ is;

Remarkably similar to the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq that could never be found because it did not exist.

Any re-creation or resurrection accentuates the flaws due to the unauthentic replay leading to the fact that the scenario is ‘weapons of mass deception’ in the public eye.

Besides the former President George W. Bush family’s close ties with Osama Bin Laden’s immediate family is common knowledge and such relation enabled the Bin Laden family departure from the United States when all flights were grounded soon after 9/11.

Another compelling factor being Osama Bin Laden was not apprehended in Tora Bora even though the armed personnel requested for the former President George W. Bush, the Supreme Commander- in- Chief’s order for action.

These events were legitimized by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the terror experts, the media reports and cited by Senator John McCain during his Presidential bid.

The strange predicament being Osama Bin Laden is wanted “dead or alive,” and when there were opportunities to capture the terror leader, the executive order was not delivered to the armed forces to attain the goal.

Terror warnings are being issued claiming that Osama Bin Laden is preparing to wreak havoc in Europe like he did in Mumbai that took place on November 26, 2008, even though this particular terror activity was directly linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba and acknowledged by the assassin;

“Ajmal Kasab, the only attacker who was captured alive, disclosed that the attackers were members of Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Pakistan-based militant organization. He said the attackers came from Pakistan, and their controllers were in Pakistan.”

Osama Bin Laden is continually used in the possible terror attacks and claimed as the primary target in the war on terror with no news regarding his whereabouts and sources except during the terror alerts surfacing upon Osama Bin Laden reference by the peace activists.

It’s crucial to resolve this issue once and for all considering the brave young men and women in uniform are deployed to supposedly eliminate Al-Qaeda and find Osama Bin Laden in the mission that began in 2001.

Many service men and women are serving for nearly a decade with some redeployed after having been in Iraq for four to five years. Most of these courageous frontline soldiers sacrificed in the on-going war are in the age group between 19 – 21 years old and have barely experienced life.

If a 29 year old private sergeant is killed in action after serving in Iraq and Afghanistan for twelve straight years and survived by his young pregnant spouse and a toddler and the war agenda is still a mystery then it becomes necessary to find out,

What exactly are we doing in these battle grounds?

As per the latest CIA report, along the Pakistan-Afghan border – Waziristan, there are fewer than one hundred Al-Qaeda members and negligible Taliban forces compared to U.S representation around 120,000 troops with NATO alliance.

Regardless the world’s most powerful by far the sophisticated U.S. and NATO contingency with all the imaginable resources at their disposal are experiencing difficulty over nine years in seizing the fractional terror members with inferior ammunition is astonishing for it defies logic.

Therefore, if the military commanders in the best interest of the troops, the nation and the international community could unequivocally clarify on the precise mission in Afghanistan and particularly, present the facts on Osama Bin Laden it would be enormously helpful in the decisions related to ongoing wars and defense spending during legislation and election.

Above all, the Afghan population deserves the truth for they are severely dispensed with their family generations wiped out in the ceaseless conflict.

If the Al-Qaeda leader is alive, it shouldn’t be harder to locate with the intelligence dragnet across the globe perhaps within twenty four to forty eight hours and brought to justice.

Alternatively, it would be honorable to declassify the classified public information and submit the verifiable facts on the Al-Qaeda leaders’ death.

As for all issues concerning the military operation, the President of the United States being the Supreme Commander-in-Chief bears complete responsibility.

The defense and the national security team are accountable to the President – responsible for the troop level authorization, withdrawal timeline and final approval on war strategies.

In the Afghan war, the information on the ultimate authority in the decision-making process is not clear.

While it is being maintained that there is disconnect and discord between the military and the civilian exchange on operational matter and that the President is not briefed on vital military positions such as the actual troop numbers by the top security adviser and military command,

It is suggested that any dissatisfaction in the Afghan war status quo should be attributed to the military command and not the civilian authority, the President of the United States who is also incidentally, the Commander-in-Chief.

This is contradictory to the latest occurrence that involved the military’s top ranking official
Gen. Stanley McChrystal, removed by the President of the United States for ‘off-the’ record comment about the administration,revealing the authority in control.

Now in the expansive military role especially in Afghanistan and Pakistan taking horrendous toll on human lives and economic costs, the ambiguity in management as to,

“Who is calling the shots,” is rather disturbing and,

Require clarification to the armed forces and their families including the taxpayers footing the expense for the extravagant and uncertain adventure.

In that context, the exclusive secret meetings held for the selective members belonging to nexus organization apparently to discuss global economic health and the general humanitarian issues with the press and public debarred from participation is unsettling based on the discussions being related to the world population and not any private individual matter.

In fact, the nature of such gathering by the privileged members – selective heads of the state, corporate leaders and military command, a majority representing democratic societies alienating the voice of democracy – the communication media and the public is undemocratic not to mention the forum failing to meet transparency and accountability.

These meetings where the Presidential candidates as the future leader of the ‘free world’ prior to being approved by the electorate are summoned inconspicuously defying the press and denying access to the democratic process in itself is a serious credibility factor and beckons legitimate reasons on the definitive purpose.

It’s imperative to highlight the security measures taken during these sessions reflecting the twentieth century pre-world war II characteristics in the twenty first century causing frustration among the members in the society from various discipline gravely concerned about the abnormal clandestine consortium.

The public opinion upon revelation on the political, economic, corporate media and military institutional assembly behind closed doors to map out global direction is;

If it is conducted to benefit humanity then it is commendable and praiseworthy.

But then, why not hold them in public view and elaborate on the objectives to the republics’ complete satisfaction eliminating any doubts on the validity of the futuristic aspirations.

In conclusion, the fulcrum power has two immediate priorities to stabilize the deteriorating global environment predominantly due to incessant warfare and undemocratic principles adopted in the universal policies targeting humanity.

Disclosure on Osama Bin Laden and dismantling secret organizations – the deafening silence thus far proved detrimental to human progress in every frontier.

Any reluctance to conform or evasion through false propaganda and negative attacks would categorically confirm the “Who is Who” and the intrinsic aspects of –

‘The New World Order’ inevitably setting itself for a disastrous end.

Humanity thrives with consolidated contributions benefiting all and not a ‘specific society’ in the globalization concept.

Peace and perseverance to make this world a better place for all inhabitants is the natural path to prosperity.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant


October 16, 2008

By Padmini Arhant

The twenty first century paved way to a new era in trade and commerce.

In the economic sector, the twentieth century policies such as NAFTA, CAFTA, and MFN… implemented to benefit the trading nations.

The economic model carried out on trial and error basis with deficiencies within yielded the net outcome.

The long-term strategy was to promote mutual economic growth and development.

There are different views and opinions on these trade policies.


Source: – Thank you.

The Pros and Cons of NAFTA

By Katrina C. Arabe -Thank you.

Here are both sides of this raging debate:

Supporters say:

? The accord has stimulated democratic reform and opened markets in Mexico.

? According to the Bush administration, the agreement has been “improving lives and reducing poverty in Mexico.”

? The administration also claims that NAFTA has led to income gains and tax cuts amounting to about $930 each year for the average U.S. household of four.

? Many of the 20 million new jobs the U.S. generated from 1993 to 2000 can be attributed to the free-trade bloc that NAFTA created, the administration continues.

And negatives such as the escalating U.S. trade deficit and three years of dwindling factory jobs should be pinned on feeble demand abroad and the U.S. recession, certainly not on NAFTA, the administration contends.

? NAFTA brought in a flood of foreign investment and contributed to a 24% rise in Mexico’s per capita income. “NAFTA gave us a big push,” Vicente Fox, President of Mexico, tells Business Week. “It gave us jobs. It gave us knowledge, experience, technological transfer.”

Detractors contend:

? The agreement has taken a toll on both U.S. and Mexican jobs, according to the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS). While real wages for Mexican manufacturing workers declined 13.5%, more than half a million U.S. employees have entered government retraining programs after their companies moved production south or north of the border, says IPS.

? NAFTA has wiped out Canadian social programs, purports IPS.

? The pact has also destroyed Mexico’s small farmers, says IPS, bringing in an influx of subsidized U.S. food imports. In fact, about 1.3 million farm jobs have been lost since 1993, indicates a recent report by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “NAFTA has been a disaster for us,” remarks pig farmer Julian Aguilera to Business Week.

? The Carnegie report also concluded that the pact has generated few new jobs in Mexico and might only be credited for a “very small net gain” in jobs in the U.S.

? The new study also found that NAFTA has been ineffective in stemming the tide of illegal Mexican immigrants entering the U.S. to find jobs. In fact, according to most estimates, the number of Mexicans working illegally in the U.S. surged to 4.8 million in 2000, more than twice the 1990 total.

What’s the Verdict?

So is NAFTA a success or a failure? While its backers and bashers continue to take impassioned positions, many choose the middle ground. In a recent Business Week article, Jeffrey Garten writes,

“When it came to job generation vs. destruction in the U.S., NAFTA’s impact has been pretty much a wash.” And the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace comes to the same conclusion, calling the pact “neither the disaster its opponents predicted nor the savior hailed by supporters.”


The Pros and Cons of CAFTA –

Thank you.

By Cantor, Martin – Thank you.

Publication: Long Island Business News

Now that the Central American Free Trade Agreement-Dominican Republic is law, the question that lingers is whether it benefits Long Islanders.

For certain, CAFTA benefited President George W. Bush and congressional Republicans, who are trying make the GOP the place for the growing and politically influential Hispanic community. This strategy has helped Bush with the regional Hispanic population, who believe that great economic and job growth will result from CAFTA.

There is no doubt that eliminating tariffs and removing trade barriers makes commerce efficient, less costly and more profitable while also bringing hope that the profits would result in better working conditions and higher worker wages. CAFTA will succeed for global businesses, many of which call Long Island home.

But it may not live up to the hype of creating jobs and safer workplaces.

For Hispanics, who are Long Island’s fastest growing minority group, the hope was that the savings generated from eliminating trade barriers would be reinvested in plant and equipment in their countries of birth. The belief was that this reinvestment would expand manufacturing capacity and create a demand for jobs, thus improving living standards for the families and friends left behind.

Supporters of CAFTA say jobs and higher wages would reduce the flow of the undocumented workers because there would be little reason to come to this region in search of better salaries. Additionally, since many of these individuals work on Long Island to send money back home, some of the wages earned on Long Island could now remain here and help the local economy.

However, the reality is that there’s skilled labor at lower costs in the Far East. All of those locations present stiff competition.

With Long Island’s growing Hispanic community becoming an important regional economic segment that desires goods from Central America, one benefit may be that regional Hispanic entrepreneurs can use free trade to import lower cost goods for this expanding consumer market.

This may be the lasting legacy of CAFTA. That the United States, Canada, Central America, Mexico and the Dominican Republic have united in a trading bloc offering Long Island and its Hispanic entrepreneurs an opportunity for new economic growth.

Source: – Vladimir N. Pregelj, Economics Division. –

CRS – Issue Brief – Thank you.

Most-Favored-Nation Status of the People’s Republic of China.

On May 31, 1996, President Clinton issued his determination to extend China’s waiver and most-favored-nation (MFN) status for another year; and, on June 21, 1996, he issued a determination renewing the trade agreement with China for another 3-year term (through January 31, 1998).

On June 27, 1996, the House failed to pass H.J.Res. 182, which would have disapproved the extension of China’s waiver and MFN status, thus allowing both to remain in force through July 2, 1997. The House did, however, adopt a resolution (H.Res. 461) calling on various committees to hold hearings and report out appropriate legislation to deal with China on a variety of issues, including trade, weapons proliferation, human rights, and military policy.

Effects of Withdrawing China’s MFN Status —

Termination of China’s MFN status would result in duty increases on about 95% of U.S. imports from China. The cost effect of the increases would vary among the various product groups, but would on the whole be substantial.


Source: – Thank you.

Pro and Cons of Outsourcing

Outsourcing has many advantages but at the same time it has some disadvantages that cannot be ignored. So let us look at some outsourcing pros and cons.

Pros of Outsourcing

Outsourcing as a trend has come into major scrutiny by the workers and media alike in the developed countries.

But most economists are sure that this condition is just a temporary one and will die down as conditions develop and people start taking a mature outlook towards outsourcing.

The Outsourcing advantage lies in the fact that it helps companies cut costs and stay ahead in the competition.

Outsourcing also benefits the citizens in developed counties as it provides high quality products at a cheaper rate also with better customer service.

Advantages of Outsourcing

• Companies can save up on operational costs. In fact most companies can cut their operating costs to half by outsourcing

• Get access to cheaper and more efficient labor

• Cut up on labor training cost

• Get access to better technologies at a cheaper cost

• Increase productivity

• Concentrate on core competencies

Companies today want to make use of the outsourcing advantage in order to progress and stay abreast of the competition.

This is the reason why more and more companies irrespective of certain failures are entering the race of outsourcing.

Cons of Outsourcing

Outsourcing is seen by companies in developed countries and workers in developing countries as a boon. But is the situation really that green? Let us look at some disadvantage of outsourcing.

Disadvantages of Outsourcing

• The company that outsourcers can get into serious trouble if the service provider refuses to provide business due to bankruptcy, lack of funds, labor etc

• Outsourcing requires the control of the process being outsourced by transferred to the service provider. Thus the company may loose control over its process

• The service provider in developing countries generally services many companies. So there are many chances of partiality owing to more payment by other parties

• The current employees in the company that outsourcers may feel threat due to outsourcing and may not work properly

• The attitude of people in the developed countries against companies that outsource is generally bad

These disadvantages are the reasons why companies should think twice before outsourcing.
Companies should adopt a planned approach towards outsourcing taking into account the interests of employees and customers alike and come up with a balanced advance.

Outsourcing services simply to beat competition or to follow your competitors can lead to problems in the future.



Samuel Adams – Thank you.

Journal of Policy Modeling, 2008, vol. 30, issue 5, pages 725-735

Abstract: This paper examines the impact of globalization on income inequality for a cross-section of 62 developing countries over a period of 17 years (1985-2001).

The results of the study indicate that globalization explains only 15% of the variance in income inequality.

More specifically, the results show that (1) strengthening intellectual property rights and openness are positively correlated with income inequality; (2) foreign direct investment is negative and significantly correlated with income inequality but this is not robust to different model specifications; (3) the institutional infrastructure is negatively correlated with income inequality.

The study’s findings and the review of the literature suggest that globalization has both costs and benefits and that the opportunity for economic gains can be best realized within an environment that supports and promotes sound and credible government institutions, education and technological development.

Review and Analysis: By Padmini Arhant

The current unemployment rate in the United States is 6.1 percent.

All of the above factors combined with the serious financial crises contribute to the decline in the job market.

The current Stock Market volatility is a reaction to the multifaceted problems surrounding the economic infrastructure.

With the interventional policies by the governments and the monetary authorities worldwide, the U.S. and global markets should stabilize slowly but steadily.

Meanwhile, the equity and liquidity markets with cash and lending instruments should facilitate the required rebound in the market.

It was determined that the credit markets’ resistance is from the weak sales projection by the Retail industry, which is related to reduced consumer spending resulting from high unemployment rate.

It is imperative for the business groups to focus on the employment situation now, hurting their operation and survival in the global economy. The depletion of capital resources and credit crunch is one of the factors for the massive layoffs at present.

Restoration of American jobs is paramount to the revival of the U.S economy.

The stabilizing of the U.S. economy will boost market confidence and the performance level.

This would also contribute to the strengthening of the U.S. dollar much required to offset Trade deficits.

The Corporations and the governments must coordinate their efforts to review,

1. Policies like NAFTA, CAFTA, MFN, Outsourcing … with fundamental flaws and reestablish a renewed structure to benefit the American workforce and the international competitive labor.

2. Renegotiate treaties and agreements with WTO members and other agencies…ILO at home and overseas to redesign models with fair trade policies, employment practices and environment laws.

3. Prioritize and protect American jobs and labor laws over shareholders interests and corporate profits. By doing so, the increased productivity would yield the desired stock value for the Corporations.

4. International labor force is equally important in the equation. Appropriate measures … required to curb the exploitation of cheap labor in poorer and under developed nations by the multinational corporations.

5. The developing nations currently benefiting from U.S corporate investments through outsourcing should reciprocate with return investments on U.S. goods and services. The general options are to purchase high-end products and engage U.S. companies for infrastructure projects.

The concern for the loss of American jobs is legitimate. Any frustration and anxiety by the American work force is also normal.

Since, U.S. economy is the foundation of the global economy; idle American work force is counter-productive for Corporations shipping jobs overseas in pursuit of market share of the emerging economies.

The sluggish U.S. economy will not serve well for the global economies dependent on U.S. trade.

On another serious note, the print press and media have an ethical and moral responsibility to portray the global economic environment and the activities in a fair and responsible manner.

Any rhetoric diminishing the economic progress/status and professional talent of other nations such as the one recently cited by the researcher specializing in globalization in San Jose Mercury News article, will hinder the new world order effort — aimed at providing prosperity for all.

Ironically, both the news organization and the consultants fail to identify the real beneficiary i.e. the Corporations in the outsourcing deals and other trade policies.

It would be more appropriate for these individuals to be part of the solutions rather than a problem.

Inevitably, U.S. prosperity is vital for global progress.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant