Tag Archives: european

Here’s Why Greece Is Having Such a Hard Time Getting European Agreement to Europe’s Own Proposal

by AthenaTurriff8 Posted on July 11, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The Greek austerity proposal has been approved by parliament, and since it’s essentially identical to the European demands of two weeks ago, everything should now be hunky dory, right? The Europeans will accept the Greek capitulation and move on.

Um, no. Emergency talks in Brussels are being held around the clock this weekend, and there are still a couple of big sticking points.

First: The new proposal is much bigger than the previous one. Back in June, Greece was asking for about €7 billion in loans that would cover its needs for a few months. Now it’s asking for €53 billion over three years, and European experts think even that number is too optimistic. Greece will really need about €74 billion—plus additional funds to recapitalize Greek banks, which have basically disbursed all their cash over the past couple of weeks. This raises several concerns:

The European proposal in June was meant to set conditions for releasing the final €7 billion in loans in Greece’s second round of bailouts. But the new Greek proposal essentially wants to use these same conditions as the basis for a third round of bailouts that would be bigger and longer-lasting. European finance ministers are skeptical, with many suggesting that the June proposal was never meant to cover a whole new round of bailouts. Something tougher is now required.
The fact that Greece estimates its needs at €53 billion and European technocrats estimate it at €74 suggests to many Europeans that Greece still can’t get its finances straight. This does little to boost confidence in the Syriza government.

Second: No one trusts Greece even slightly. The Europeans have never trusted the Greeks to implement the deals they agree to, and they still don’t. “What guarantees can Greece give they are actually going to implement what they propose?” Austrian finance minister Hans Jorg Schelling asked bluntly, echoing similar questions from the Dutch finance minister and others. Even Greek allies like France need to be convinced of Greek goodwill. “Confidence has been ruined by every Greek government over many years which have sometimes made promises without making good on them at all,” said French finance minister Michel Sapin.

After the events of the past two weeks, the issue of trust is even worse. Dutch state secretary Eric Wiebes notes that the commitment of the Greek government is a key concern. “That has been the weak point because, after all, we are discussing a proposal from the Greek government that was fiercely rejected a week ago.” And to make things worse, although the Greek parliament approved the latest proposal, it caused a serious schism in the Syriza party, with many members voting against it. “The parliamentary majority of the government now in Athens is being eroded,” Irish finance minister Michael Noonan said, “and they may not have the capacity to implement the measures they have agreed as time goes by.”

Things have now degraded to such a dire point that German finance minister Wolfgang Schauble has even floated the idea of a “temporary” five-year Greek exit from the euro. This is so batty that almost everyone else at today’s talks—including some of Greece’s strongest skeptics—thinks it’s both ridiculous and probably illegal too. But even though it’s not likely to be taken seriously, it does indicate just how frosty the Germans are toward any new bailout deal with Greece. It also gives ammunition to Greek critics who have maintained for weeks that Germany’s real goal is to kick Greece out of the euro.

So there you have it. The June proposal from the Europeans may have been OK two weeks ago, but it’s now past its sell-by date. Getting European buy-in to a new, third bailout for Greece continues to be a very delicate and knotty problem. Stay tuned.

Link to article:

Here’s Why Greece Is Having Such a Hard Time Getting European Agreement to Europe’s Own Proposal

Posted in alo, Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s Why Greece Is Having Such a Hard Time Getting European Agreement to Europe’s Own Proposal

Why Do Americans Love Tech Startups More Than Europeans?

by DamianMoulds Posted on July 10, 2015

Mother Jones

Jim Pethokoukis muses again today about the relative success of tech startups in America vs. Europe. He notes that apparently Europe is getting better in this regard, but still lags the US, and offers a few conventional reasons for the US advantage (plenty of capital, lots of talent, risk-loving culture, etc.) and then adds a few other possibilities from comments. This one in particular struck me:

Startups need customers. My experiences is American businesses are generally more likely to take a chance on a new company’s product if they think it will be advantageous, even if that company might not be exactly stable. I say generally, because it is certainly not universal. I was in the past deeply involved with another startup in the U.S. that generated most of its revenue from the UK for its first several years because for this particular market the major players in the UK were more change-seeking than their counterparts in the US. Ironically, this was largely because we addressed some pain points related to labor and energy that were not as painful for similar companies in the U.S.

Back when I was in the tech biz, we introduced a new version of a product we’d been selling for several years. It was already reasonably successful in Europe, though still a bit of a tougher sell than in the US. But the new version was a problem. It worked well. It introduced new capabilities that were pretty useful. And it was basically just a plug-in to the original product. All of that was fine. The product itself was not the problem. Its name was the problem.

No, this is not a funny story about accidentally naming something “cow dung” in Croatian. It was all in English. The problem was this: our new product added the ability to support remote users via the internet, so we called it AC Internet Server (AC being the original product name). Our European distributors and sales force were aghast. They told us no one would buy it if it had “Internet” in the name.

We in marketing were nonplussed. This was 1999, not 1990. Everyone wanted internet versions of existing products. Hell, they wanted them even if internet connectivity didn’t make sense for a particular product. It was hot and new. When we were brainstorming names for the new product, we were willing to consider just about anything. The only rule was that “Internet” had to be in the name somewhere.

But in Europe—in 1999—they wanted no part of that. To them, the internet didn’t suggest hot and new. We were told in no uncertain terms that it suggested fragile and unreliable.

Now, in retrospect, you can certainly argue that Americans went overboard on all things internet in the late 90s. But even in retrospect, I’m still gobsmacked that a lot of large European companies were unwilling to get on the bandwagon at all. Not for anything mission critical, anyway. And this despite the fact that internet connections were roughly as good and as cheap in Europe at the time as they were in the US. This wasn’t a problem of outdated infrastructure.

But there you have it. European companies do seem to be less willing to roll the dice and try something new that might not be fully ready for prime time. Americans, for better or worse, seem almost gleeful about it. Sometimes that spells disaster. But over the long run, it means that (a) our startups do indeed have a bigger pool of potential buyers and (b) new technology gets a quick trial by fire and then gets adopted rapidly if it works. Even when this produces lots of epic failures like pets.com, it probably works out better for everyone in the long run.

Is this still true of European companies? Are they generally less willing to adopt new technologies? Are they generally less willing to buy products from startups with an uncertain future? I don’t know. This all happened 15 years ago and I have no experience since then. Feel free to chime in via comments if you have something to add.

This article is from: 

Why Do Americans Love Tech Startups More Than Europeans?

Posted in alo, Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why Do Americans Love Tech Startups More Than Europeans?

Alexis Tsipras’ Secret Plan for Bailing Out Greece Has Been Brilliant

by StaciAndersen Posted on July 10, 2015

Mother Jones

Some anonymous drone at Free Exchange notes the damage done by the Greek decision to call a referendum on the European austerity proposals:

A lamentable feature of the Greek crisis of the past few months is the extent to which it has restoked national antipathies, on the part of both the Greeks and the Germans….But it is not just political damage that the referendum has done to Greece’s cause. The decision to call it and the extraordinary uncertainty that generated at home as well as abroad inflicted a body blow to the economy by causing the banks to be closed now for two weeks as the ECB capped the emergency central-bank lending that was allowing cash to be withdrawn by anxious Greeks fearing a return to the drachma that would slash the value of their deposits. As a result Greece now needs more money and over a longer period — €53.5 billion ($60 billion) until 2018.

Such is the bad blood on both sides, particularly the Greeks and the Germans, that there is still scepticism about whether they can come together at this latest eleventh hour.

Hmmm. Here’s a Slatepitchy suggestion. Maybe it’s all going according to plan. Consider this. It’s late June and prime minister Alexis Tsipras is trying to negotiate an agreement with the Europeans. It doesn’t go well, but he knows he has no choice but to swallow hard and accept their terms. As galling as it is, it’s the only way to save Greece. But he knows that if he simply signs off on the agreement, his party will revolt and parliament will reject it. So he comes up with a cunning plan.

The plan is this: piss off the Germans beyond the bounds of reason. Step 1: denounce the European proposal and call a referendum. Step 2: Go home and campaign loudly for a No vote on the proposal. Step 3: The Germans, now so angry they’re practically shaking with rage, press the ECB to cut off Greek banks, causing economic chaos. Step 4: Tsipras wins the referendum, thus getting the backing of his people. Step 5: Tsipras cools his heels for a day or two to let the economic chaos really sink in. Step 6: Tsipras heads to Brussels. After making everyone wait a few more days just to show that he can’t be pushed around, he tables an austerity plan that essentially caves in completely to the European proposal that he knew he’d have to accept eventually. Step 7: Tsipras returns home to Athens, where economic chaos has become so severe that no one cares anymore what’s in the damn proposal he just agreed to. They just want the banks to open and the local pharmacies to have stocks of insulin. Step 8: He signs the proposal. Step 9: The ECB opens the spigots, life gets back to normal, and Tsipras is a hero.

Not likely, you say? Tsipras isn’t that smart? Probably so. Still, it’s quite likely that Tsipras isn’t as stupid as some people are making out. He knew perfectly well that defaulting would lead to economic chaos and an exit from the euro, but he also knew that Greeks didn’t really believe this in their guts. They needed a demonstration. So he gave them one. If his goal all along wasn’t Grexit, but (a) an agreement with Europe that (b) would be accepted by the Greek population, he did a pretty good job.

Very clever, Mr. Tsipras!

Original source:

Alexis Tsipras’ Secret Plan for Bailing Out Greece Has Been Brilliant

Posted in alo, Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Alexis Tsipras’ Secret Plan for Bailing Out Greece Has Been Brilliant

Greek Media Really, Really Wants Yes Vote On Euro-Bailout

by MerrillTerrell Posted on July 3, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Henry Chu of the LA Times reports on how the Greek media is presenting Sunday’s upcoming vote on the bailout:

Strong emotions are in abundant supply. But impartial reporting is not.

Along with Skai TV, nearly all the mainstream press and television stations in Greece have skewed their coverage or are openly in favor of the “yes” campaign, throwing in doubt just how fair Sunday’s election will be. The snap referendum has already come under criticism for being called with too little notice by the left-wing Greek government — which is urging a “no” vote — to allow for proper campaigning and educating of voters.

….In a widely circulated examination of how the six biggest TV networks treated the rival referendum rallies Monday and Tuesday, freelance journalist Markos Petropoulos found that the pro-government “no” demonstration got about 81/2 minutes of coverage, whereas the “yes” protest received more than five times that much.

In another newscast, one network devoted 18 minutes to warnings and statements from European leaders about the breakdown of bailout negotiations with Athens and the surprise referendum announcement that had precipitated it. The Greek government’s position got two minutes.

The bias toward the “yes” side reflects the fact that many of Greece’s biggest news outlets are owned by corporate titans and other “oligarchs” whose business interests would be directly threatened by a “no” victory and the potential abandonment of the euro in favor of the drachma, Nikolas Leontopoulos said.

I suppose it’s no surprise that Greece’s corporate class is deeply unthrilled by Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras’s leftist government, and would be happy to see him humiliated and tossed out of office. I assume that they also prefer the devil they know—grinding European-imposed austerity for years—to the devil they don’t—exiting the euro amid chaos and eventually rebuilding their economy with a devalued drachma. After all, they’ll stay rich either way, and sticking with their fellow European moguls probably seems the better bet by far.

Less than 48 hours to go now.

Continued:

Greek Media Really, Really Wants Yes Vote On Euro-Bailout

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Greek Media Really, Really Wants Yes Vote On Euro-Bailout

Here’s What We Know About the Terrorist Attacks That Hit Tunisia, France, and Kuwait

by KKMBrigette Posted on June 26, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Dozens of people were killed on Friday in Tunisia, France, and Kuwait in what authorities in all three countries are calling terrorist attacks. Here’s what we know so far.

Tunisia

The deadliest attack happened at a resort in Sousse, a Tunisian beach town popular with European tourists. Tunisian officials said 27 people were killed on the beach near the Imperial Marhaba hotel, some of them foreigners.

“One attacker opened fire with a Kalashnikov on tourists and Tunisians on the beach of the hotel,” a local worker told Reuters. “It was just one attacker. He was a young guy dressed in shorts like he was a tourist himself.”

John Yeoman, a tourist apparently staying at the Imperial Marhaba, tweeted descriptions of the attack and a photo of the barricade he constructed in his hotel room.

The shooting comes three months after another major terrorist attack at the Bardo Museum in Tunis, and it could devastate Tunisia’s vital tourist economy. “This could well be a dagger through the heart of Tunisian tourism, which would have very dark implications,” Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Mother Jones.

France

An apparent lone attacker drove a car through the gates of a factory in Saint-Quentin-Fallavier, a city near Lyon in southwestern France, killing one man and leaving his severed head on the front gate of the complex. Gartenstein-Ross said the decapitation suggested the attack may have been inspired by ISIS, whose execution videos have frequently shown the decapitation of Western hostages.

French authorities arrested the suspected attacker, whom French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said was possibly named Yassin Sahli (his name has been spelled differently in various media reports) and was previously known to French law enforcement. “This person was under investigation for radicalization but this investigation was not renewed in 2008,” the Guardian reported. “He had no police record.”

KUWAIT

ISIS, the Sunni jihadist group that controls parts of Iraq and Syria, claimed responsibility for a bomb that exploded at a Shiite mosque in Kuwait City. Media reports have given conflicting numbers of victims, but the Kuwait Watch Organization, a human rights group, told the Associated Press that 16 people were killed. The bombing is the largest terrorist attack in Kuwaiti history; while Kuwait is a majority Shiite country ruled by a Sunni royal family, such large-scale sectarian violence is rare.

Just three days ago, an ISIS spokesman called for the group’s followers to ramp up attacks during the holy month of Ramadan. “Muslims everywhere, we congratulate you over the arrival of the holy month,” said Abu Muhammad al-Adnani in an audio statement released on Tuesday. “Be keen to conquer in this holy month and to become exposed to martyrdom.”

Continued here:

Here’s What We Know About the Terrorist Attacks That Hit Tunisia, France, and Kuwait

Posted in Anchor, Casio, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s What We Know About the Terrorist Attacks That Hit Tunisia, France, and Kuwait

Greece Gives Europe What It Wants, Europe Says No Anyway

by Amado57Ehyyanr Posted on June 25, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

European leaders were in final, last-ditch, eleventh-hour, crisis talks with their Greek counterparts today, which by my count is at least the third time we’ve held final, last-ditch, eleventh-hour, crisis talks in the past two weeks. This leaves me a little unsure of when the real “world will explode” deadline is anymore. But soon, I’m sure.

In any case, as Paul Krugman notes, the Europeans are no longer merely demanding concessions of a certain size from the Greeks, they now want final say over the exact makeup of the concessions:

The creditors keep rejecting Greek proposals on the grounds that they rely too much on taxes and not enough on spending cuts. So we’re still in the business of dictating domestic policy.

The supposed reason for the rejection of a tax-based response is that it will hurt growth. The obvious response is, are you kidding us? The people who utterly failed to see the damage austerity would do — see the chart, which compares the projections in the 2010 standby agreement with reality — are now lecturing others on growth? Furthermore, the growth concerns are all supply-side, in an economy surely operating at least 20 percent below capacity.

Basically, the Europeans just can’t seem to say yes even when they get what they want. Besides, although tax increases probably will hurt Greek growth, so will spending cuts. There’s just no way around it. The Greek economy is completely moribund, and any kind of austerity is going to make it worse. But the Europeans want austerity anyway, and they have the whip hand, so now they’ve decided they also want to dictate the exact nature of the concrete life preservers they’re throwing to Greece.

The Greeks have little choice left, unless they’re willing to leave the euro, which would cause massive short-term pain at home. Maybe they will, but it would take a backbone of steel to do it. Voters would probably cheer raucously the first night, but be in a mood to vote the entire team out of office after about the second day, when their savings and pensions were converted into New Drachmas and suddenly slashed in half. There is no happy ending to this.

See the original article here: 

Greece Gives Europe What It Wants, Europe Says No Anyway

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Greece Gives Europe What It Wants, Europe Says No Anyway

Resentment and Outrage Are All That Matter in Europe Now

by DanaOFerrall Posted on June 20, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Larry Summers thinks it will be a catastrophe if Greece repudiates its debt and “financially separates from Europe.” Greece will become a failed state; Europe will face a refugee crisis; and both Europe and the IMF will face huge defaults on their loans. Oh, this might not cause financial contagion throughout all of Europe, but then again, that’s what everyone said about Long-Term Capital Management, subprime mortgages, and the fall of Lehman Brothers. And look what happened there.

So what does Summers think should happen? Here’s his prescription:

Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras needs to do what is necessary to make reaching an agreement politically feasible for his fellow Europeans….He needs to be clear that he will accept further value-added tax and pension reforms to achieve primary surplus targets this year and next, but that he expects a clear recognition that if Greece does its part, debt will be written off on a large scale.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel and European authorities must do what is necessary to make policy adjustments politically tenable in Greece. That means acknowledging that the vast majority of the financial support given to Greece has gone to pay back banks rather than to support the Greek budget. They must agree on debt relief and recognize the degree of adjustment in Greek spending that has taken place: with nearly 30 percent of government workers laid off. It also means announcing their intention to accelerate economic growth throughout Europe.

In case that wasn’t clear, here’s a translation: the leaders of Europe are idiots. Everyone with a room temperature IQ has known for years that something like this is the deal that needs to be made. It’s been discussed endlessly in meeting rooms, op-eds, scholarly papers, and conferences. Not only is it not a secret—or rocket science—it’s been the obvious solution forever. But Europe vs. Greece is now like the Hatfields vs. the McCoys. Nobody cares anymore how it started, whose fault any of it was, or what the catastrophic results of continued obstinacy will be. They don’t even care much about inflicting pain on their own people as long they also inflict pain on the other side.

They are idiots. Not stupid, mind you, but idiots all the same. They know what needs to be done. They’re just too committed to their own resentment and outrage to do it.

Continue at source – 

Resentment and Outrage Are All That Matter in Europe Now

Posted in alo, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Resentment and Outrage Are All That Matter in Europe Now

We Have Some Bad News For You About the Pope’s Big Climate Push

by FlorentDuckett Posted on June 18, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
giulio napolitano/Shutterstock

The story was originally published by Grist and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Liberals love nothing better than a religious figure who takes their side, and the media loves nothing more than the man-bites-dog story of a conservative force or figure staking out a progressive position. Consider all the hype given to pro-social justice evangelical Christians like Jim Wallis, or the statistically nonexistent “Creation Care” movement of green evangelicals.

So the Monday leak of Pope Francis’ forthcoming encyclical on climate change naturally triggered triumphant statements from green groups. In the draft, Francis says that climate change is mostly human-made, and that a failure to mitigate it would be an abrogation of our responsibility to protect God’s creation and have “grave consequences for all of us.”

He’s right, of course. But will it matter to the conservative political movements that stand in the way of taking climate action?

Some greens certainly think so. 350.org declared that it will “add momentum and moral weight” to the fossil-fuel divestment campaign. Rev. Fletcher Harper, executive director of GreenFaith, an interfaith environmental group, said in the same statement, “The pope’s encyclical will be a powerful game-changer.” Leading Senate climate hawk Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) told Grist, “I think it’ll have a really profound impact…Not only does it have the clout of an encyclical, but I think this very, very charismatic pope intends to drive the message.”

Unfortunately, there is little reason to believe that the pope’s position paper will alter the politics of the biggest, most problematic climate-polluting nations. None of the top four climate polluters–China, the US, India, and Russia–are majority Roman Catholic. Russia, India, and Japan have all sent worrying signals about their approach to the climate negotiations in Paris this fall. There is no reason to think the pope’s views matter to them at all. The European Union nations are heavily Catholic, but they are already committed to reducing emissions. The second-biggest emitter, the US, would therefore seem to be the most fertile ground for the pope to make inroads on the issue. The US is 24 percent Catholic, and Catholic voters are an important swing constituency for both major political parties.

But Democratic Catholics, like most Democrats, are already on-board to address climate change–just look at House minority leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) or Secretary of State John Kerry. The problem is the Republicans, regardless of their religion. Will the Pope’s words make any difference to them?

No. Pope John Paul II strongly opposed the Iraq invasion, and every pope in recent memory has favored more spending on social programs for the needy. But Republicans, despite their efforts for the last half-century to win over Catholic voters, remained steadfast in their support of starting foreign wars and in their opposition to housing the homeless, caring for the sick, or feeding the hungry. As liberal Catholic pundit Bill Press notes, “In their encyclicals, popes have always talked about controversial issues of the day…perhaps most famously, Leo XIII in Rerum Novarum (1891) affirmed the right of workers to form labor unions and receive a living wage.” One hundred and twenty-four years later, Catholic Republicans remain opposed to labor unions or raising the minimum wage. The Catholic Church is clear in its condemnation of the death penalty, but Catholic GOP presidential contenders Rick Santorum, Jeb Bush, Bobby Jindal, and Chris Christie all support it. Why should climate change be any different?

Even before the encyclical was leaked, Republicans—both Catholic and Protestant—were dismissing it. The Guardian‘s Suzanne Goldenberg reported on Saturday:

“The pope ought to stay with his job, and we’ll stay with ours,” James Inhofe, the granddaddy of climate change deniers in the US Congress and chairman of the Senate environment and public works committee, said last week, after picking up an award at a climate sceptics’ conference.

Rick Santorum, a devout Catholic and a long-shot contender for the Republican nomination, told a Philadelphia radio station: “The church has gotten it wrong a few times on science, and I think we probably are better off leaving science to the scientists and focusing on what we’re good at, which is theology and morality.”

Goldenberg argues that being on the wrong side of the Catholic Church will cause tension within the GOP: “It also puts conservatives in an uncomfortable spot—not unlike the Reagan era of the 1980s when bishops came out against nuclear weapons.” That example, though, seems to prove the opposite point: The church’s anti-nuke stance didn’t slow Reagan’s vast nuclear buildup in the least, and the GOP remains less supportive of nuclear disarmament to this day. In April, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) announced its support for President Obama’s negotiations with Iran to avert it from developing nuclear weapons, something conservative congressional Catholic leaders such as Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) opposed.

And the USCCB isn’t as liberal as it was in the 1980s. As the New York Times reported on Saturday, most American Catholic bishops are skeptical of the pope’s embrace of action to reduce climate change:

Some bishops said they were wary about getting the church enmeshed in the debate over climate change, a contentious issue in the United States. They also expressed concern about allying with environmentalists, some of whom promote population control as a remedy, since the church sees abortion and contraception as great evils.

Some bishops said they had received hate mail from Catholics skeptical of climate change. Their wariness is one of many signs of the challenges Pope Francis faces with American Catholic leaders, who are more cautious and politically conservative than he seems to be on certain issues. Most in this current generation of bishops were appointed and shaped by Francis’ more conservative predecessors, Popes Benedict XVI and John Paul II.

Liberals ought to think twice before wishing that American Catholics would take their political cues from the pope’s playbook. Lots of Democratic Catholics disagree with their church’s doctrine on abortion and gay rights. Catholics have demonstrated that they hold diverse opinions and that they don’t take political marching orders from the Vatican. Catholic American politicians and voters pick and choose which Catholic teachings they apply to politics. The majority of American Catholics disagree with their church’s opposition to gay rights and contraception, and about half support abortion rights. Catholic Republicans oppose welfare and support warfare, in defiance of Church doctrine. Now we can add climate change to the list.

This actually ought to make enviros hopeful. Francis’s encyclical may help move American public opinion at the margins. (Imagine, for example, how much more widely available abortion might be if the Catholic Church did not oppose it.) But the more fundamental good news is that the politics of climate change aren’t subject to the whims of foreign clergy. Americans will make up their own minds about the issue—and the responsibility for convincing them rests on each of us, as it should.

Original source: 

We Have Some Bad News For You About the Pope’s Big Climate Push

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on We Have Some Bad News For You About the Pope’s Big Climate Push

Hillary Clinton Officially Launches Campaign for White House

by SoonLdmxzi Posted on June 13, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

There was the first, inevitable video announcement. Then, the media-phobic “Scooby” van tour through early primary states. Now, speaking today in front of a bright New York skyline, on an island in the middle of one of the most polluted waterways in America, Clinton officially launched her campaign for presidency.

The former Secretary of State hit every major talking point of her highly publicized campaign so far. Seriously, nothing was left out of this 45-minute populist, progressive speech outlining her campaign’s policies: mass incarceration reform, LGBT equality, climate change and alternative energy, income inequality, a constitutional amendment to overhaul Citizens United, paid family leave, immigration, universal pre-K… even broadband.

“You brought our country back, now it’s time, your time, to secure the gains and move ahead—and you know what? America can’t succeed unless you succeed. That is why I am running for president of the United States.”

The speech on Roosevelt Island, opposite the UN building, would have been difficult to give in the heat; once the clouds cleared, the stage would have certainly felt hotter than 81 degrees—maybe that’s one reason the crowd appeared at times somewhat muted. The luckiest supporters crowded under the European Littleleaf Linden trees along the waterfront, which park staff assured us were low allergenic. Nonetheless, the biggest applause lines came when Clinton spoke about marriage equality and women’s rights. While the “overflow” area—where a large screen had been set up seemingly in the hopes of bigger crowds—remained nearly empty, the live TV footage would have looked pretty great: billowing American flags, and soaring in the distance, One World Trade, once known as the Freedom Tower.

Danny Jestakom (L) and Philip Fry. James West

The diversity of the supporters here today represents the Obama coalition that Clinton surely hopes to recapture. Valerie Wakin, 29, from Brooklyn, liked that Clinton was focusing on pay equality as a campaign issue, and also felt that Clinton had broad appeal: “I don’t think she just supports African American rights, she supports everyone,” she said. Ahmad Nelson, 28, from Pittsburgh admitted that while “she does have some baggage” from a long life in the public eye, he will vote for Clinton to help raise the minimum wage across the country.

Valerie Wakin, 29, from Brooklyn. James West

Noticeable in the crowd was a large cohort wearing the rainbow flag version of Hillary’s much-derided logo. Danny Jestakom, 26 and Philip Fry, 24, who have been a couple for about a year, said Clinton’s embrace marriage equality appealed to then, as did her attempts to to let voters learn more about her personal story—evident in today’s speech, which drew heavily on her biography. “She seems like a real woman, a real person,” Fry said.

“I may not be the youngest candidate in this race,” Hillary joked, “but I’ll be the youngest woman president in the history of the United States.”

Read More – 

Hillary Clinton Officially Launches Campaign for White House

Posted in alo, alternative energy, Anchor, Citizen, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Hillary Clinton Officially Launches Campaign for White House

Big Oil tries to rebrand itself as Big Gas

by SusanaPvzbtr Posted on June 3, 2015

Big Oil tries to rebrand itself as Big Gas

By on 3 Jun 2015 2:42 pmcommentsShare

As the world moves toward a climate change deal this December, the oil industry has dived into an all-out campaign to rebrand itself as the climate-friendly natural gas industry.

On Monday, six of Europe’s largest oil and gas companies wrote to the U.N., saying they stand ready to accept a price on carbon. This kind of market mechanism, they noted, could encourage “the use of natural gas in place of coal.” And if that were to happen, well, they wouldn’t complain.

In fact, most major oil companies have been focusing more on natural gas in recent years in anticipation of a global response to climate change — and they want us to know. “Total is gas, and gas is good,” the CEO of the French oil company said Monday. And on Tuesday, Shell’s CFO argued for leaving coal in the ground but not oil and gas. Both companies produce more gas than oil.

Meanwhile, ExxonMobil and Chevron, two American companies that didn’t sign on to the European companies’ letter calling for a price on carbon, are also pushing gas as the future fossil fuel in Europe and Asia as well as the U.S.

But there’s a big problem with this rebranding effort: Many scientists and economists have found that a switch to natural gas won’t necessarily decrease our carbon footprint. It may, in fact, make it bigger. There are two reasons for this: the methane leaks that come hand-in-hand with natural gas drilling and transportation, and economics.

First, the methane leaks. The gas is 84 times more damaging to the climate than carbon dioxide over a 20-year time frame, but data on how much of it is leaking into the atmosphere from gas drilling operations remains sketchy. In the U.S., the EPA estimated in 2012 that 30 million metric tons were seeping out of pipelines and pumps annually. That accounts for a full 9 percent of the U.S.’s total climate change–causing emissions.

And even if the industry were to completely deal with its methane-leakage problem, a number of studies — some looking at the U.S., some looking at the entire world — have found that the economics of natural gas make it unlikely that the fuel would help the world cut emissions. Natural gas is cheap right now. As oil companies are eagerly pointing out, it’s often even cheaper (and always much cleaner) than coal, which currently accounts for 40 percent of the world’s energy. But natural gas is so cheap that it would also likely undercut the cleanest options, renewables. The low price would also encourage people to use more energy. We would essentially shift from burning coal and oil to burning natural gas — and investment in natural gas infrastructure would displace investment in clean energy and efficiency.

Meanwhile, world population will continue to grow and developing countries will continue to hook more of their citizens up to the grid. Energy production will balloon. And we’d be relying on a fuel that is, yes, cleaner than coal and oil, but that still generates a significant amount of CO2. In the end, many studies show, our carbon footprint wouldn’t be much different than if we just stuck with the less-than-great track we’re on.

So if these oil companies truly “stand ready to play [their] part” in stopping climate change, as they stated in their letter to the U.N., pushing natural gas is not the way to go about it. If they just want to knock their coal industry competitors out of the energy market — well, that’s something a bit different from addressing the climate crisis.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Get Grist in your inbox

Read more: 

Big Oil tries to rebrand itself as Big Gas

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Big Oil tries to rebrand itself as Big Gas