Saturday, December 26, 2015

2016: The Year For Barack Obama's Revolution From The Top

2016: The Year For Barack Obama's Revolution From The Top



Barack Obama’s autobiography Dreams From My Father is full of little references to what Nelson Mandela in his autobiography called “a thousand little indignities.” But one was talking mostly about America, the other about apartheid South Africa. Can one black man’s ascension to the top make up for racist snarls at the highest levels of government like in the US Senate?

It is time we faced the fact the United Nations is not a world government. It is time to call a spade a spade. It is time to see this institution designed by the World War II victors no longer works. This is not a world government by the far stretches of the imagination. Often when we talk of civil rights movements, we think in terms of ordinary people marching out in the streets. But now is the time for a civil rights movement in which the heads of state march.

What we have is essentially apartheid. The leading country remains fundamentally racist, nowhere more evident than in the country’s criminal justice system. There is no world government. There is a need for one. The thorniest global problems, the loftiest trade deals are worked on outside the UN framework.

America itself needs to be reimagined if it is to fulfill its original mission of a total spread of democracy. It needs to become a country where African immigrants are as at home as European immigrants. White is black is white.

In a democracy you get to vote because you are a human being, not because you are literate or rich. But in the community of nations, there are countries that are rich and have guns, and most have neither. The entire continent of Africa stands disenfranchised. This landmass that is the most central of all, from where we all originated, is still in the clutches of a contemporary incarnation of colonization, slavery and apartheid. We don’t have a name for it yet, but the affliction is very real. Its poverty and disease stem from that disempowerment, not the other way round. And so, any voice that seeks to address its poverty and disease without taking stock of its disenfranchisement is shedding crocodile tears.

What is Barack Obama going to do? Leave the White House and do paid speeches? Write books? Launch a foundation? Raise money for AIDS? Share a stage or two with Bono and George Clooney? The guy is still young. This guy who has cleared up half century old cobwebs every year he has been in office is best suited to lead this revolution from the top. And this is not a cry for Africa, although Africa could use some empowerment. This is a cry for the world. Right now we are a species looking down a sinkhole of uncontrolled weather patterns that just might wipe out life and civilization as we know it. We still have immense poverty and disease that Bill Gates says “only a world government can solve,” and Gates is a guy who has thrown the kitchen sink at the problem, one of the leading entrepreneurs of the era in whose wake many billionaires have given money to fight basic poverty. We face security threats that no one government can solve. Globalization continues to move at breakneck speeds speeding up as the Internet takes deeper roots everywhere, but we have not done the task of institution building that that globalization requires.

Let’s open our eyes and take a look at the elephant in the room. Yes, what we need is a world government, and there is no person better than Barack Obama to take the lead on it. We are lucky we have a George Washington precisely when we need one. And lucky us that the guy is almost done with his current job where he has been stellar every year. Heads of state across the world should join in this chorus and shape this revolution from the top. Lucky us that our thorniest global problems have solutions in political concepts we have already designed, like one person one vote taken to its logical, global conclusion.

There is always inertia. Every monumental political change that in hindsight looks so obviously positive has faced inertia. And this likely will be no different. But the blueprint has to be made, and it has to be presented to ordinary peoples on all continents, so a groundswell of support can build around it.

We want to live in a world where human beings can feel equal everywhere. We want to live in a world with abundant clean energy. We want to live in a world with abundant water, and food and green space. We want clean air. We want to create the industries of tomorrow. We seek unprecedented rises in productivity, as well equitable distribution. We want people to be happy.

It is time the heads of state across the world came together and created the world’s first world government in the leadership of Barack Obama. In his birth as well as personality and outlook, he bridges the world. In his person the world has a chance to come together to reach new heights. This century can not only be the best ever, it can also be one where we have gone past our existential worries, where we have created a truly global civilization, one grand village where everyone can feel a sense of belonging everywhere, where people can take pride in their heritage and claim the common future at the same time, without hassle.

This is in essence a political struggle, where all you start with is a voice. Ordinary people have done it many times before. Heads of state can do it this one time.

It is still about Hope. It is still about Change.

We need a world government because it is time we established rule of law between nations. That is the civilized way.



राजेंद्र महतो लाई ICU पुर्याउने सरकार राजीनामा दे, काठमाण्डु छोड़, देश छोड़, ये धरती हमारी, ये मुल्क हमारा
E for Education, E for Entrepreneurship, E for Energy
Barack Obama: George Washington
आर्थिक क्रांतिका पाँच पाण्डव: सुशासन, शिक्षा, स्वास्थ्य, संरचना, (उद्योगव्यापार) सुलभता
Barack Obama Is Biologically Superior
An Open Letter To Barack Obama

बुश का बघदाद (२)

बुश का बघदाद

अमरिका पर बिन लादेन ने बाद में हमला किया। उससे पहले हमला बोला बुश ने। Record Surplus को Record Deficit बना दिया। इतना बड़ा टैक्स कट किया कि देश सीधे मुह के बल जा के गिर पड़ी।

जनता मुर्ख। उसने वैसा ही मैंडेट माँगा था। जनता ने दे दिया। अमेरिका के गरीब जनता को social issues पर इस तरह डिवाइड कर दिए हैं ये नियमित अपने अहित में वोट देते रहते हैं।

९/११ हुवा। तो अफ़ग़ानिस्तान पर वार करो। कि पर्ल हार्बर पर अटैक किया जापान ने और तुम ने अटैक कर दिया इंडोनेशिया? Looking Tokyo Going London? अभी भी ४०% अमेरिकी कहते हैं ९/११ किया सद्दाम ने। ४०% वो वही हैं जो नक़्शे पर प्रशांत महासागर नहीं ढूँढ सकते। २०-३०% अमरीकी कहते हैं ओबामा मुसलमान है।

कितने लोग मरे वो भी हिसाब करो लेकिन ओ अलग करो। इस ब्लॉग पोस्ट में सिर्फ पैसा की बात करते हैं। एक से १० लाख के बीच लोग मरे सब मिला के। युद्ध के कारण जो सिविल वॉर हो गया उसके मृतक भी तो गिनोगे। जितने अमरिकी ९/११ में मरे उससे जयादा इराक में।

युद्ध का बिल बुश का तीन ट्रिलियन डॉलर। वो इतना ज्यादा पैसा है लोग सोंचना ही छोड़ देते हैं। कहीं १०० डॉलर पॉकेटमारी होती है तो पुलिस बुलाओ। एक लाख डॉलर का फ्रॉड होता है तो पुलिस बुलाओ केस करो। मिलियन डॉलर करप्शन को लफड़ा हो जाता है। लेकिन तीन ट्रिलियन। उसको तो छोड़ दो।

ट्रिलियन से नीचे का तो गप्प ही नहीं है बुश काल में। पहले तो एक ट्रिलियन सबसे धनाढ्य लोगो को बाँट दिया। बाँट ही दिया। लो, मुफ्त का पैसा। मेरे बाप की कमाई। तीन ट्रिलियन युद्ध में खर्च। MasterCard swipe करो। खर्चा कौन भरेगा? चीन किस कामके? वॉल स्ट्रीट पर ट्रिलियन डॉलर का फ्रॉड। तो अर्थतंत्र जब तास के घर के माफिक गिरा ........ बिन लादेन ने तो सिर्फ वर्ल्ड ट्रेड सेंटर गिराया। बुश ने पुरे अर्थतंत्र को ही गिरा दिया। अर्थतंत्र कोलॅप्स हुवा तो १३ ट्रिलियन डॉलर ऐसे गायब हुवा जैसे पीसी सरकार ने आ के गायब कर दिया हो। सफाचट। Wiped out, gone forever.

यार, किसी की भी ब्रेकिंग पॉइंट होती है। अमेरिकी अर्थतंत्र का भी था, वैज्ञानिक बुश ने पता लगा के छोड़ा।

अमेरिकी सरकार का एक साल का बजेट होता है तीन ट्रिलियन। यानि कि बहुत बड़ा अमाउंट है जिसकी मैं बात कर रहा।
अभी कहानी ख़त्म नहीं हुवी। तो स्टिमुलस कह के ७०० बिलियन खर्चे करने पड़े। करना चाहिए तीन ट्रिलियन लेकिन बुश के पार्टी ने होने नहीं दिया। तो देशको monetary स्टिमुलस के रास्ते जाने पड़े। उसका मतलब प्रिंटिंग प्रेस चालु करो और पैसा छापो। Basically पैसा छापो और बड़े बड़े बैंक को मुफ्त में दे दो। जीरो इंटरेस्ट रेट पर। सब तरफ बुश के दोस्त ही दोस्त।

Quantitative Easing
Quantitative easing is distinguished from standard central banking monetary policies, which are usually enacted by buying or selling government bonds on the open market to reach a desired target for the interbank interest rate. However, if a recession or depression continues even when a central bank has lowered interest rates to nearly zero, the central bank can no longer lower interest rates. The central bank may then implement a set of tactics known as quantitative easing. This policy is often considered a last resort to stimulate the economy. ...... A central bank enacts quantitative easing by purchasing—without reference to the interest rate—a set quantity of bonds or other financial assets on financial markets from private financial institutions...... Quantitative easing, and monetary policy in general, can only be carried out if the central bank controls the currency used in the country. The central banks of countries in the Eurozone, for example, cannot unilaterally expand their money supply and thus cannot employ quantitative easing. They must instead rely on the European Central Bank (ECB) to enact monetary policy.
How the Great Recession Was Brought to an End
The U.S. government’s response to the financial crisis and ensuing Great Recession included some of the most aggressive fiscal and monetary policies in history. The response was multifaceted and bipartisan, involving the Federal Reserve, Congress, and two administrations. Yet almost every one of these policy initiatives remain controversial to this day, with critics calling them misguided, ineffective or both. The debate over these policies is crucial because, with the economy still weak, more government support may be needed, as seen recently in both the extension of unemployment benefits and the Fed’s consideration of further easing. ....... without the government’s response, GDP in 2010 would be about 11.5% lower, payroll employment would be less by some 8½ million jobs, and the nation would now be experiencing deflation. ...... When we divide these effects into two components—one attributable to the fiscal stimulus and the other attributable to financial-market policies such as the TARP, the bank stress tests and the Fed’s quantitative easing—we estimate that the latter was substantially more powerful than the former.