text:
Readers' comments
Reader comments are listed below. Comments are currently closed and new comments are no longer being accepted.
- Newest first
- Oldest first
- Readers' most recommended
Obama and Romney both pointed out in their presidential debates that Chinese and the US governments want the same things for their people, but China wants to take shortcuts.
Was surprised to read (in "Breakout Nations" by Ruchir Sharma)that polls show Chinese much less likely than any other nationality to believe that China is destined to be the No. 1 economy.
And that 52% of Americans identified China as the leading economy while only 32% cited USA's.
IHO democratic vs authoritarian sysems might not matter, but more the motivation and vision of its leaders...rise of family owned and patriarchal companies like Hyundai/Samsung lend effectiveness of the autocratic system.
A leader can't be leader if not given power.
Read the following, guess who said that:
If I read the temper of our people correctly, we now realize as we have never realized before our interdependence on each other; that we can not merely take but we must give as well; that if we are to go forward, we must move as a trained and loyal army willing to sacrifice for the good of a common discipline, because without such discipline no progress is made, no leadership becomes effective. We are, I know, ready and willing to submit our lives and property to such discipline, because it makes possible a leadership which aims at a larger good. This I propose to offer, pledging that the larger purposes will bind upon us all as a sacred obligation with a unity of duty hitherto evoked only in time of armed strife.
With this pledge taken, I assume unhesitatingly the leadership of this great army of our people dedicated to a disciplined attack upon our common problems.
Sun Tzu.
IMHO, the US badly needs restoration of leadership in Congress, politics for the country not the political constituency.
The worst fear of the Chinese government (present and future) is the continual appreciation of the Chinese currency. All other problems are not as pressing anjd can be tackled at leisure.
The most important task of the Chinese government is therefore to reverse the appreciating trend of the Chinese Yuan. In order to do that, it must take complete control of the exchange rate of its currency as it used to in the past. Once it has complete control over the exchange rate of its currency, it must them let it depreciate gradually until it reaches the same level as in 2005. The Chinese economy will then regain its vigour.
China must not fear that the US labels it a currency manipulator because first, the US is the greatest currency manipulator and it is used to calling other countries all sorts of names, which mean nothing.
China must not fear also that the US imposes prohibitive tariffs because these will be less damaging to the Chinese economy than an overvalued Yuan.
Let the western countries spend their time and energy in useless squabblings, on the merits and deficiencies of democracy and let them sprnd all their money on consumption until their economies are in shambles and their countries disintegrate as a result of their economies being in shambles.
China must not repeat the mistake made by Japan in the 1980s. It must not, like Japan, let its currency appreciates to the point that it becomes overvalued because an overvalued currency will stall the Chinese economy like the Japanese economy has been stalled since the early 1990s.
clap x 10 times
I can't help being impressed by the way in which China has managed it's increasing economic growth and mlitarypower accompanied by a lack of outward aggression.....compare that to George Bush
I don't think Japan, Vietnam, Taiwan, Philipine and S Korea would be as impressed as you are with the lack of China outward aggression! That's why these is an arm race now in Asia and most of the Asian countries are now leaning towards the US rather aligning with China!
I know I know, Team China will attack me saying that all these disputes are caused by other countries aggression and all those Islands are part of China and its all of the grand plan by the US!
China self promoted "lack of outward aggression" or "Peaceful Rise" is anything but!
I'm not going to attack you because that for one would be juvenile and immature for simply stating your OPINION. But I believe your opinion is slightly misinformed. Did you know that Japan also has land disputes with virtually all its neighbors? Have you actually looked at Vietnam's and The Philippines claims in the South China Sea? If you have you would understand that their claims are nearly if not equally absurd. China IS to blame but it takes two to tango and neither side is making concessions in their claims. But China's opponents (Vietnam, Philippines, South Korea, Singapore etc) are unable to compete militarily, so they must turn to an external power for help: the US. Hence the "pivot" in the US defense posture, to put 60% of the US navy into the South China Sea by 2020. It is a move out of desperation rather than choice. The situation a little more complex then China=Bad Guy ~ Everyone Else=Good Guy
Your opinion looks reasonable until one remembers that China, in the past year, has claimed the ENTIRE South China Sea. By entire I mean to within 12 miles of the coast of Brunei.
China's claim to the South China Sea (and all of it's islands, fish stocks, minerals and energy) are NEW. This claim did not exist 5 years ago, let alone last century.
Google 'nine-dash line' to see the extent of China's claim, and you will understand why every country in South East Asia is now allied with the US.
Well, I am glad that there are no more "juvenile and immature" attacks for posting China critical postings which I have experienced in the past from China cyber troopers!
Back to your point of me being misinformed, I would just like to remind Chinese reader that just 10 years ago, China was winning hearts and minds in many Asian countries, incl many countries which you have now listed as "China opponents"! USA was the devil then, especially after the Iraq war! As I remember it, China diplomats were doing a great job and the Chinese government then took conciliatory attitude towards all contagious issues, including disputed areas! Terms like "setting aside differences" and "joint development" were often advertised! However, the goodwill and trust has evaporated over the past 10 years! What do you think happened?
I think the next Chinese administration would do well to take an honest evaluation of what happened INTERNALLY rather than blame everything on its increasing new found enemies!
Right. The Tibetans will tell you just how much of a "lack of aggression" China has shown them.
It is absolutely absurd to expect that a nation that suppresses its citizens so brutally will treat outsiders in a better way. The only repressive nations that do that are the ones that don't have the military wherewithal to attack their neighbors.
But a country that is
A. Brutal to its own people
B. Militarily dominant
will show its true colors.
I'll grant your point if you can name us 3 nations in the last century that were brutal to their people and militarily very strong but remained peaceful and nice to their neighbors. I of course can name plenty of the other kind starting with Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia and Iraq. In today's day and time - North Korea.
If you expect what history has taught us to be the exception, if not impossible, you also probably expect to win the lottery every time you buy it.
Right. The Tibetans will tell you just how much of a "lack of aggression" China has shown them.
You are just a tool of "free" media and politicians if you think the issue in Tibet is about human right.(assume you are not a Tibetan.)
With resect you don't appear to be disputing my point but rather speculating whether this state of affairs will continue.
Fun, you need to educate yourself more. China claimed all those isles in the 1940's in the "LAST CENTURY" during the "Republic of China" period who are now in Taiwan, and Taiwan is also claiming the exact isles.
The 'New' China (PRC) only inherits what the ROC claimed in the first place.
There wasn't even an indepentent country Vietnam or Phillipines.
Could you please provide me with a link or some reference supporting your contention that "China claimed all those isles in the 1940's"
It's not that I don't believe you, it's just that I am a seeker after the truth, and find supporting evidence helps in that regard.
Regarding "There wasn't even an independent country Vietnam or Phillipines", I guess you mean that France was the colonial power in Vietnam in the 1940's as the US was in the Philippines.
I expect the 1981 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea might suggest that the exclusive economic zone that stretches 200 miles out from a country's coastline applies regardless of who happens to govern a territory at any particular moment.
By your logic, China's 200-mile EEZ still belongs to the Mongol Empire who invaded and ruled your country in the 13th century.
I'm well aware of the Nine-dash line and China's claims in the SCS. That is unless they decided to change it in the last month. My point was not to claim that China is right but rather to point out that no one is right. For instance, the Philippines and their claims run up to approximately 20-30KM short of the Malaysian coast to the South and similarly to the North in relation to Taiwan. Vietnam's claims are equal in area nearly 3 times the countries landmass and ends approximately 300 KM west of Manila. So why is it China that is being singled out? It can also be said that 5 years ago there was not nearly as much focus on China and territorial claims until the US decided to show interest in the disputed waters thus forcing China to assert its claims. The way I see it, China knows it cannot compete militarily with the US so is approaching the dispute the way a salesman would a customer. Come in high and the customer comes in low and you meet somewhere in the middle. I highly doubt China is willing to go into an all out war(that they would certainly lose)risking economic ruin. China is a changing story; it will take time to evolve and I believe economic interests will resolve these issues eventually.
It's always good to hear all opinions to have a broader perspective on an issue.
I would have to disagree with your point tho. Relations in Asia have always been tenuous. Even today feelings of resentment still reside within even the general population in China against Japan for atrocities committed during WWII. Also vice versa the Japanese fear retribution from the heinous acts inflicted upon the Chinese from an ever more powerful China. Same could be said about Vietnamese sentiment towards China quite literally from over a millennia of war with their neighbors up north. Diplomats speak for themselves not for the people but since when did we start trusting the words of a diplomat. There is still deep seeded resentment amongst Asian nations that are not as easily forgotten as one would like to think.
Your points are well made, and I agree that all contenders in the SCS need to consider their claims. These are the problematic aspects of China's behaviour as I see them:
1. At the recent ASEAN summit in Cambodia an attempt was made by the grouping to agree a protocol to govern the conduct of claimants in the SCS. China won't agree the protocol, and won't discuss the SCS with ASEAN members collectively, only bi-laterally. This looks like divide-and-rule (an old British specialty), and has raised suspicion in the region that China has no interest in a negotiated resolution to the issues.
2. In addition to claiming the area within the nine-dash line, which is way beyond China's 200-mile EEZ (even assuming China owns all island groups in the region, a big assumption), China also disputes that the international community has freedom of navigation within that area.
If this is the salesman's initial pitch (as you have suggested), it is quite extreme, and has resulted in the nations surrounding the SCS (with the exception of Laos and Cambodia) firming up military alliances with the US.
Unfortunately ASEAN concern is heightened by a history of conflict in the region, most notably the death of 70-odd Vietnamese sailors on the Paracel Islands during the China's battle to occupy them in 1974.
Fun, you are a big boy. You can google or visit Wiki, can't you? Why do you think Taiwan (Republic of China) is claiming exactly the same isles?? The Nine dots lines were drew by the then ROC minister in 1947 after the WW2.
The 200 mile EEZ is only true if there is no other sovereignty involved. By your logic, the US would own all the Caribean Islands as theirs. When other sovereignty is involved, the distance is divided into half between the two.
And no, the Mongol Empire would not claim the 200 mile EEZ because they don't have any coastlines.
And most historians believe the Yuen Dynasty was one of the CHINESE dynasties because they ruled China out of the capital of present day BEIJING. Inner Mongolia is still part of present day China and there are three times more Mongols in China than the Mongolia Repubic. Different ethnic background ruler doesn't mean it is not the same country.
Is the US part of Kenya then?
You must be reasonable Good Kop in this China team then. Whatever you argument about the long animosity between Asian countries, one can just feel the impatience of Chinese over the past few years to show its growing economy clout! I think the fox has shown its tail too early!
Obviously, u are getting personal with China. What have u done? Have u committed some horrible crimes in China and got deported?
Yap, huge grudges! I was detained, tortured, labeled counter-revolutionary and deported! My crime was that I was posting online too much lies and slanders on TE! Sigh ....
I love the part about "Come in high and the customer comes in low and you meet somewhere in the middle." Except that this is not a commercial negotiations! What we are talking about here is gunboat diplomacy! China is acting like a big schoolboy bully over the past 10 years: "This is mine, it belong to me. You don't like it, we have the navy to crush you!"
Finally, you asked why "China that is being singled out" now? Very simple:- the fox has just exposed its tail!
Interesting article with some fascinating details, my favourite being that Mr Xi senior wore a watch given to him by the Dalai Lama. Given the vitriol poured on the Tibetan leader by CCP supporters on these message boards, I guess China's next president is the son of a class enemy.
The world needs a strong and stable China, and I hope that's what we get in the next ten years. The increase in Cold War rhetoric in the past few years has been alarming. It is striking how many people, on Economist threads at least, believe that the the outside world, led by America, is plotting China's demise. The world has no interest in China failing.
My own belief is that the best way to stability is through rule of law, civil rights, separation of powers and a free economic playing field that doesn't favour one segment of the population over another. And no, the West is not perfect on this score!
For an example of the top being "out of control", I recommend everyone to read yesterday's New York Times report on the wealth accumulated by the family of Wen Jiabao.
My own belief is that the best way to stability is through rule of law, civil rights, separation of powers and a free economic playing field that doesn't favour one segment of the population over another.
No offense, none of those works, because most misery in this world is caused by poverty.
For example, in America, if a person fills being suppressed by some police, he has a choice of moving to another place.
But in developing countries, most people don't have such choices. Like mine accidents in China, people will still risk their lives after democracy.
The world needs a strong and stable China, and I hope that's what we get in the next ten years. The increase in Cold War rhetoric in the past few years has been alarming. It is striking how many people, on Economist threads at least, believe that the the outside world, led by America, is plotting China's demise. The world has no interest in China failing.
It is people like you believed all your beloved USA said.
All these military exercises with Japan and others were/are not threat to any Nation, including CHina! (What a joke!)
Listen to what one of the talker (Brain) said and you will know. Of course you will only listen to the talker from Heritage Foundation.
The US is not interested in a failing China, but also not interested in a rising strong China which US has to listen to China in the future.
True hurts, right.
Hey Wolfie,
You're exactly what I was talking about.
The absence of rule of law means vulnerability to chronic instability in the political and commercial realms.
Seems that has been the case with many different societies (feudal, mercantile, militaristic, industrial, authoritarian, decentralized, etc.)
If china is ruled by law, sure it will limit the abuse by government, but it will open the door to mafia, gangsters, tang, etc.
See in west, no effective way to stop crime. In China's history, powerful local gangsters were very very harmful.
I am telling the truth, that is why. And you are one of these trouble maker to China, and fear of China's dominant position in the future.
US claimed they welcome China's rise, but do exactly the opposite. Talking and doing is different. But you see no differernt on this because you see that is naturally so. :D
China's economic success shows Chinese style communism is the best form of governance.
Soviet communism failed.
Western democracy is a total failure.
Chinese economic success is primarily due to communism.
It just proves communism is the correct form of governance for humanity.
Western democracy is a failure since many western countries are bankrupt due to their failed political systems (Greece, Spain, America, Britain, Portugal, Italy).
China is the future of this world.
"It just proves communism is the correct form of governance for humanity"
It's certainly the best form of governance for Grandpa Wen's family.
The only resemblance between China's cutthroat capitalist dictatorship and communism is in the name of the party that rules the country. It's been quite some time since Chinese leaders last read Marx.
Communism is not synonymous to Karl Marx. Chinese communism is pragmatic whereas Karl Marx communism ia a utopia. Chinese communism succeeds where Karl Marx communism fails.
Just like the democratic form of government is the best for the 1%.
How sublime and forte is economic growth of china? is it ensuring the emancipation of toil of Chinese common people? The difference between human development and economic acceleration in China is so wide that the fragility and fathom of Chinese success could be realized well with a devastating china spring if there was no censor on media, freedom of speech.
If China is the future of the world, then the world is in very, very deep doo doo!
Until recently, Chinese economic success was primarily due to limited liberalization and access to western markets, notably the United States.
Hitler and Stalin once tried to depict Western democracy as a total failure in similar language, and were proven wrong by history. Just shallow 1930s propaganda of the extremist "isms"
The failure of 100% socialism doesn't mean that 100% capitalism is better than, say, 70% socialism + 30% capitalism.
Top 6 oil companies in US earn 150 billion dollars a year, how much do American people get? 20% ?
In China, people get all of them.
That, is the price you pay for your political rights.
Your response is quite strange. Especially since I didn't mention the failure of socialism nor did I discuss capitalism.
Then there are tangents about oil companies with random figures thrown out with no sources.
And then some references about "get all of them" and tying I guess energy revenues (or earnings since the word "earn" is used?) with political rights...
All very odd.
Guess that is some sort of stream-of-thought, ejaculations of off-topic non sequiturs?
Mantra of Chinese communism is just MONEY.
It has not changed over 3,000 years.
Very different from Marx.
Well said.
I agree that for China, communism was the best form of governance at the time she began it. Was there another method by which hundreds of millions would've been lifted out of poverty despite the many tragic repercussions along the way?
IMO Western democracy has not been a failure for much of the time -there is much to admire about some of their aims, not least that millions were lifted out of ignorance, poverty and given a widespread perception of self-empowerment for a long time.
The average American still lives comparatively luxuriously (because the Chinese government was unwise enough to lend them so much, which probably can't ever be paid back); it'll be the responsible low-waged Chinese worker financing such who will end up being screwed.
I really dont like what u are trying to promote here. Believe the last thing u want to do is to try to export the current Chinese system. We Chinese people need to focus on our own problems and work hard to make further progress. We may offer our helps around the world as to improve people's lives. When it comes to ideology and political system in other countries, we should let their own people to decide.
I really dont like what u are trying to promote here. Believe the last thing u want to do is to try to export the current Chinese system. We Chinese people need to focus on our own problems and work hard to make further progress. We may offer our helps around the world as to improve people's lives. When it comes to ideology and political system in other countries, we should let their own people to decide.
Nice try... But I still dont believe this is posted by a Chinese guy
The New York Times web sites have been blocked in China after reporting that Wen Jiabao's family "controlled assets worth at least $2.7bn (£1.7bn)":
So much for communism.
Isn`t it The New York Times that published a picture of Nepalese policemen taken in Nepal and claimed that they were Chinese policemen.
What makes u think the report is real? Are u so naive that u believe in whatever the New York Times tells u? Or, it's just u always wish bad for China?
I read the report and the journalist presents all his sources and references. Looks like good journalism to me.
Judge for yourself. Here is a link to the NYT report: http://nyti.ms/VK93G4
Surely wanting China to be successful, clean and stable means I wish the best for China, not the worst.
After all, I am not the subject of the NYT report....
Hmm, it sounds like the Economist wants Mr. Xi to become the Gorbachev of China. The same prescription did not work out very well for the Soviet Union, which promptly collapsed with astounding speed. Perhaps the Economist should have elaborated a bit as to why the same medicine would work better this time.
Can't be Luther and the Pope at the same time.
Protestant and Catholic are still arguing on Jesus's holy blood and bread. Forget the Pop, they are interested in Church-tax and boys only.
Gorbachev deliberately destroyed the USSR, and did it without a nuclear civil war! He deserves a Nobel Peace Prize for this astounding accomplishment.
It was so cheap to destroy USSR by just giving a Nobel Price. Bravo western world!
Stupid Gorbachev!
In addition to economic growth, China should return to its meritocratic and egalitarian roots by cracking down on crony capitalism and special interests and addressing the growing rift between the rich and poor (China's gini coefficient is higher than the U.S.'s, which is already an unequal society; so much for communism!)
At the same time, China should try its best to be a responsible international actor and push the U.S. to cooperate on climate change together. It should call for imposing only targeted sanctions on the likes of Iran and North Korea, where broad sanctions are hurting the people rather than the leadership, but remain committed to nuclear nonproliferation; it should cooperate with the U.S. on major foreign policy issues where interests such as stability and development align.
China will have a rocky road for the next decade. The entire world should be hoping for its success.
"China should try its best to be a responsible international actor and push the U.S. to cooperate on climate change together"
Yea China and India (and other poor countries) are probably not going to agree to any climate change deals anytime soon without counterbalancing subsidies from the rich world.
Frankly they are just too poor to voluntarily give up economic growth to curb global warming. This is why global warming really isn't talked about much in poor countries.
If anything the US under a Democratic president will be pushing China (and other poor countries) to accept a deal in the future.
I should add that while global warming has large long term economic costs (determent) to the world, it's human nature to focus on the short term.
Ie see executive compensation for corporations, and especially in the volatile finance industry.
it's human nature to focus on the short term.
You just name one fundamental flaw of democracy.
So are you implying that short term, myopic behaviors doesn't occur in other forms of governance, or societies, or spheres of civil society?
Thinking of power struggles, could see narrow mindedness and corruption crop up in all kinds of circumstances over the ages.
Think of the corruption that bloomed under the last years of the Qianlong emperor of the Qing dynasty, or the fratricidal behaviors of the Roman military generals during the second and third centuries.
Or the counterproductive purges of communists knocking off followers by the bushel load, say under Stalin or 1940s Yenan, or the cultural revolution for China overall.
In many of those cases, myopia, corruption and caprice was exacerbated by the lack of transparency or accountability or balance, leading to vastly worse problems, instability and violence.
China is like every other country. It knows the problems it has or is facing..... but will vested interests win out instead?
Xi Jinping has been understudying Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao for the past five years. His promotion to leader of the country is analogous to the promotion of the deputy CEO to CEO in a large corporation.
Deng Xiaoping pointed out that one should cross the river feeling the stones. Xi will find the stones under his feet will be very different from those felt by his predecessors and there is high expectation that he and his team would find new solutions to new challenges and problems confronting a nation of 1.3 billion people.
It is interesting to note that the US will elect a president on November 6. The latest polls indicate that the election could be very close. Should Romney win, he should thank Bush for fouling up the economy so badly that it was impossible for Obama to fix in four short years. This is the reality of the American system : the greater the screw up, the larger the chances of returning to power in four years' time. What a contrast with the Chinese system ! Makes you think doesn't it ?
"democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried" - Winston Churchill
The problem with autocracy is that if a bad person gains power (or a good leader turns bad) they cannot be removed.
Since "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" electorates must be empowered to change their leaders regularly.
In China leaders choose themselves behind closed doors: an opaque procedure that owes nothing to democracy.
As the Chinese people become richer they will demand the right to choose their leaders.
Whether the princelings have the courage and the wisdom to allow that is doubtful.
But one thing is certain: the emotions that led to Tiananmen Square have not gone away, and it is only a matter of time before the people of China win their freedom.
"democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried" - Winston Churchill
I am not sure what Churchill was referring to was the " 21st Liberal Democracy" we have today. When Churchill said of the Democracy, it was bascially for the elite white men. It wasn't until the post 1965 Civil Movement that univeral suffrage started to gradually happen. Minorities weren't allowed to vote before the 1950.
Liberal Democracy will eventually lead to collasped economies if they are not lucky enough to be blessed with hugh natual resources Greece and Portugal are couple examples.
I am not saying dictatorship is a better form of governance, but what Churchill said may not be true anymore in the 21st century. There will be better enhanced form of governance in the coming future. His "except all the other" was only up to the 1950s.
"what Churchill said may not be true anymore in the 21st century. There will be better enhanced form of governance in the coming future"
Can you give an example of what that 'enhanced' form of government might look like?
"Liberal Democracy will eventually lead to collasped economies if they are not lucky enough to be blessed with hugh natual resources Greece and Portugal are couple examples"
I cannot see the logic in that statement. Why will liberal democracy lead to collapsed economies, any more than totalitarian ones will? Russia in 1989 suggests the opposite is true, and I suspect China will shortly do the same.
The aphorism "power corrupts,and absolute power corrupts absolutely" appears to be true, given our human nature, and our experience of entrenched elites.
As yet, there is no better way of removing despots than enabling the people to vote them out: democracy.
Pre-requisites for democracy are freedom of speech and the media, an independent judiciary, trial by jury, right of assembly.
Democracy is very simple in concept, less simple to implement in practice, because of the mendacity of our species.
It wasn't until the post 1965 Civil Movement that univeral suffrage started to gradually happen.
That is when west started becoming society of "me, me, me" and government lost ability of planning scientifically. Scientific breakthrough gave you the prosperity in last 25 years.
I cannot see the logic in that statement. Why will liberal democracy lead to collapsed economies
It paralyzes government. last 25 years was saved by scientific breakthrough.
Democracy, simply speaking, is majority rule, minority must respect the decisions of majority. Human right means that minority don't have to be submissive to majority. They contradict to each other. So for them to coexist, there must be compromises, that is almost impossible unless the people are worry-free and government is rich. If there is no compromise, government will fail to "deliver".
So this paradox explain to phenomena : one, democracy usually carry out much better in developed countries than in developing country; two, democracy (and human right) doesn't deliver.
I believe Churchill said that quote in 1947, after WWII, when many states were on very shaky foundations (Czechslovak democracy would get overthrown by a communist coup the following year).
And after witnessing democracies getting undermined and/or overthrown on multiple fronts in the interwar period, with assaults coming from various extremist movements like fascism, communism, Nazism.
The types of challenges and outright disasters he witnessed far overshadow problems were are dealing with today, to put things into perspective.
Like two world wars and massive economic dislocation.
You really need to read more history. What has British democracy have to do with British democracy. Universal suffrage was already in place in the UK by 1928 (for women), regardless of race. Switzerland had male universal suffrage with no property requirements since 1848.
Single party dictatorships (or oligarchies) don't last long, at least not as long as democracies or monarchies. How long did triumvirate rule in Rome?
I was replying to Fun with Friut about Democracy in general term and I pointed out US democracy with the 'Civil right movement'.
Univerasl Suffrage wasn't real if the minorities were not included. As I said, It was for the white Men (women).
I didn't say one party dictatorship is better. I said political systems need to be improved and it is in progross. Better system will appear in the future. Liberal Democracy is not the "final" form.
Liberal Democracy has only be around for about half a century and it is already running into major problems, such as welfare states and hindering decision making at critical times.
In the scope of human history, democracy is surprising short.
If you take civilization to be 5,000 years old (it's arguable much longer), then true democracy has only been in effect for a short time, say less than 3% of that entire time.
Even in Athenian Democracy (the birth place of democracy), it wasn't even real democracy since at least 1/3 of all Athenians were slaves.
I'd say the vast majority of the world was non-democratic for most of their entire history.
Autocracy has survived for say thousands of years versus maybe 150 years of true democratic ideas (and liberal democracy much shorter)
I'd say democratic ideas weren't really even in fashion until the Anglos really felt heat from the Germans. When the British Empire has still hovering over the world, it didn't really care about other people's sovereignty but after WWII, when it seemed that the German might make the British taste their own medicine of being under someones else's rule (had the Germans won the war) did the British change their tone.
Greece and Portugal are semi-sovereign entities that do not control their own currencies. They are best compared to US States like California or Illinois, with an EU Federal Government that is much less functional than in the USA. Compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. One should never compare fully sovereign countries to a mere EU State.
"When the British Empire has still hovering over the world, it didn't really care about other people's sovereignty"
Generally speaking, I agree.
"When it seemed that the German might make the British taste their own medicine of being under someones else's rule (had the Germans won the war) did the British change their tone"
Universal enfanchisement came to Britain in 1928 when the Britiah empire was at it's greatest extent: Britain (and her allies) had recently won the first world war, and at that point there was no threat from Germany.
You might remember 'The Emergency' in Malaysia, in which British colonial troops successfully put down a 'communist' uprising (not sure if it was actually communist, or just communist in name). That was in the 1950's, way after Hitler had been defeated.
So your point does not stand up when applied to the Britain's own people, although I concede that the picture was different in the colonies.
Britain withdrawing from empire had to do with being broke after 1945 coupled with an understanding amongst British people that if they had lost 3 million dead defeating an evil regime, that the colonies should have their freedom too.
This is why Winston Churchill's conservative government was voted out of office in 1945 even though he had led the country to victory: it was the beginning of the post-war socialist period in Britain.
The fundamental flaw with unelected oligarchies is division of power, that is why they don't last long, not as long as democracy (in what ever form) and monarchies. When was the last time you heard of "great triumvirate". Its dangerous to lump oligarchies like the CPC with monarchies.
If the system of shared ruled among council of men, was so good, then why didn't the Chinese adopt it much early. They had a Emperor, and the bureaucracy was chosen to serve him. Because unelected oligarchies like the CPC, have a tendency in a short period of time collapse toward admist rivalry and division. When was the last time you say a company with multiple CEO's.
The problem is you look at the US, what about the UK. Minorities (Indians) were already MP in the last 1800s. Yes in Britain.
So if minorities couldn't vote, then how the hell could he have become MP? When did the West become a democracy, when minorities where allowed to vote, when when were allowed to vote, or universal male suffrage was implemented. Then by your definition, South Korea is not a democracy, because ethnic Chinese resident in Korea (even if they are born there) are not allowed to vote.
As for the United States, Black were allowed to vote, in the Northern states they had no problem in voting. In the South, after Reconstruction, they increasingly faced Jim Crow laws that made it almost impossible for them to vote. It was not race based, but they you had to pay polls taxes etc. But it also restricted the ability of poor whites to vote also.
I think liberal democracy really starts at about the time when they gave all men the right to vote regardless of income. It starts one group, men earned the right to vote, merely for a man. Which for most countries in Europe after the World War I. This is the period when universal entitlements start springing up.
The problem with the welfare state, is not as you think with giving money to the poor or handicap people, governments have been doing that for thousand of years. Welfare to single mother's, money to the poor, disability payments only make up a small portion of the burden of the welfare state. Sadly its the part that people attack.
What cripples the Welfare state are universal entitlements, like universal health insurance, government pensions, child benefits regardless of income etc. Universal health insurance is the one entitlement program that hogs the bulk of social spending in Western countries.
Secondly, in third world countries, including China and India, they have their own entitlement spending, they call them price subsidies. But no one talks about them. Indonesia spends 11% of its Government budget on fuel subsidies (or 1.5 of its GDP). India spends 11% of its GDP on subsidies. Malaysia spends 5% of its GDP on subsidies (food, gas etc). China about 1-2%. Iran 10% of its GDP on subsidies. In contrast, the US spends about 3-4% of its GDP on welfare spending (food stamps etc).
Again like entitlements in the West, it has the potential to cripple a country, even dictatorships. Suharto fell in 1998, because he did not have the political capital to reduce the fu8el subsidies. The IMF made it a condition that he reduce the fuel subsidies or no IMF funding, when he did there were demonstrations etc, and eventually his regime collapsed. Was the IMF being a dick, no, fuel subsidies benefit the middle class the most. Since Indonesia became a democracy, they have managed to reduce the fuel subsidies twice. The Indonesian government spends more on fuel subsidies than it does on health care. Suharto was no push over, he killed 1/2 million people to get into power.
I disagree with the adage that people bandied around that Dictatorships can make the tough choices and democracies can't, it really depends. I was in Germany during 2003-2005, it was a really tough time in Germany. The Economy was horrible, Government was cutting back etc. The Germans from 2002-2007 restructured their economy, unions were told to cut wages, they cut welfare spending etc.
Despite what many people think, Germany is not a worker's paradise. A worker in Germany in theory can make less someone in Shenzhen, is about $250. You know what the minimum wage is in Germany, they don't have a national minimum wage.
"democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried" - Winston Churchill"
It is a pity that Winston Churchill died too early to see the success of the Chinese form of government. This Government has managed to lift 500 million people out of poverty in 30 years which is unprecedented in human history. Despite this the Chinese Government still admits that its system is imperfect and continuous reform is necessary in tandem with a changing internal and external environment. In contrast, Western countries think their democratic form of government is perfect and must be imposed on other countries. They must realize that there is no political system that fits all and each country must choose their own unique system.
You say:
"Western countries think their democratic form of government is perfect and must be imposed on other countries"
Immediately after a famous quote from Winston Churchill in which he explicity says democracy isn't perfect.
Which makes nonsense of your entire post.
Please explain why Western countries particularly the US and Britain, impose their own system of government on so many countries after WWII. Also explain why US politicians insist that their founding fathers are so wise that their constitution requires no change.
Their action suggests that they don't agree with Churchill. Or are they hypocrites ?
Why is it a problem to look at the US? The US is five times bigger than Britian and considered to be the leader of the so-called "Western/Democratic world", isn't it? (please don't tell me India is bigger). Why would I want to use Britian as example, which is no.5, if that? You really believe an Indian had the same rights and opportunities as a white Brit before the 50's?
If the Poll Tax in the US was imposed to block adult citizens to vote, it is NOT univerial suffrage.
When I said Lib. Demo. will lead to welfare state, I was thinking more of the systematic side of it, not much on the personal entitlement or subsidies. Cuba as a third world country offer more benefits, relatively speaking to its citizens.
Lib. Demo. encourages favors to voters so that Politicans can win the elections. This would mean, gradually, more benefits and favors will be offered to voters in each election. Eventually it comes the point the tax revenue can no longer support the benefits. Since politicans will end their turns in ~4 years, they are not hesitate to borrow funding for the benefits. Someone else will pick up the tag later. Look at the PIIGS countries or even the US where there is not hugh surplus of natural resources, unlike Canada or Austrilia.
When it comes to decision making, Lib. Demo. partian politics hinder effective decisions. The opposition will try blocking polices that may improve the performance of the ruling party, quite often in the last year, so that the ruling party would not win the next election. Decisions are made as per party advantage instead of the good of the citizens.
The major problem with single party system is that there are no accountability to the general public, but this system offers training, long ones, on the job. Incompetent ones would not make it to the top positions.
I'll respond with the UK and the US seperately, because they are very different:
1. UK: did not (could not) impose anything on anybody after WW2. In the period between 1950 and 1970 Britain was divesting itself of empire as quickly as possible, because it could no longer afford to police the empire and it was no longer morally acceptable to do so.
The UK of 1950 was a very different country to that of 1850. The actions during the Malaya 'Emergency' 1959-69 and the Mao Mao Rebellion in Kenya were an attempt to stabilize those countries prior to independence (which came within 10 years in both cases)
In the pre-war period, yes, the British did impose their legal and civil systems on their colonies, but some suggest that these were a benefit after independence: the railway system in India and the judicial system in Singapore come to mind. I have personally spoken to Indians of a certain age who have told me that India's experience under the Raj was not wholly negative.
As an Indian, I do not seek to justify or excuse Britain's former empire, I believe most British people are embarrassed by it now, but the empire was 'of it's time', and Britain is now just a meduim-sized European country, and seems quite comfortable with that status.
2. US: Yes, the US has (and does) try to "make the world safe for democracy", because (until recently) they were the global hegemon and could afford to do so. Assasination attempts on Castro and invasions of Cuba, Grenada, Panama and Iraq come to mind.
And the US has been accused of supporting questionable regimes on the basis that "my enemy's enemy is my friend" (eg. Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia etc), and many liberals in the US find their county's foreign policy immoral.
But US hegemony is being actively contested in South and East Asia by a rising China, so it is possible that it is now China's turn to "impose their own system of government" on others (although historically China seems to prefer tributary rather than military dominance, Tibet and Senkaku notwithstanding).
The fact that all ASEAN countries (save Laos and Cambodia) are 'cozying up' to the US tells you who ASEAN prefer as the regional hegemon.
Democracy is of course good. However, there are many kind of 'democracies'. The current liberal 'democray' in the western is certainly not the best one. Go and ask the neo-cons in US. I'm sure they will give u a good lesson on this.
I agree the neo-cons do not like liberals. Liberals are almost always Democrat, and neo-cons Republican.
I also agree that the US is currently trying to find it's 'soul'...Obama and Romney have very different visions for America's future.
For the sake of world peace, I hope Obama wins.
There are always going to be restrictions on voting. Age limits, criminal record etc. To be Liberal Democracy as we know it today starts with the period after WWI, not in the 1960s. At least in the Europe, that is when the vast majority of social programmes came about just after WWI or WWII. NHS was instituted in late 1940s.
To be frank the talk of mechanism of liberal democracy is really nonsense. I know how it works. But I have seen dictatorships pumps money into price subsidies, that I really I am numb to the difference. Before Saudi Arabia, oil is cheaper than water. Egypt (dictatorship) had bread subsidies, even though it wa using hard currency to import wheat. What is the difference? Because if the mobs are not happy, you could lose your life or end up in jail. They are all buying support one way or the other.
Getting back to China, what is China government deficit, about 60-70% (including local government). Government's share of GDP is about 27-30%. It looks OK by Western standards. But how does it compare with Taiwan, a democracy. Taiwan's deficit is about 35% of GDP, Government share of GDP is about 18%. This is despite the fact that Taiwan's population is older than China's. Why haven't the Taiwanese voted for lavish welfare spending? That is truly a mystery.
China implements populist policies too, you just don't notice it. It too has prices subsidies, although not alot. Take for example, in 2004 they abolished the agricultural tax, hoping that it would win support of the farmers, and also based on the argument that it did not generate alot of revenue. The agricultural tax has been around for 2000 years in China. What happened after that? A very rapid increase in the number of land seizures, as local government tried to cover revenues through land sales. You could argue its the right thing, but to me its not good policy, and it smacks of being populist.
You still haven't made a convincing case that single one party dictatorships promote better people, because incompetent ones wouldn't make it to the top. Well I guess you didn't read about Vietnam
Incompetent ones, don't make it to top positions? How do you know? Have you ever worked in a government civil service in a one party dictatorship? I have. All the civil servants had to be members of the ruling party. I was a Consultant in the Department of Public Works in Indonesia in the early 1990s. It was one of the better Departments to work, because they actually did things. They got the graduates from the best universities in Indonesia. Under Suharto, most of his Cabinet ministers were technocrats - engineers, economist, agronomist etc. Actually its even more technocratic than China's was in the early 1990s. For example, Bo Xilai was Commerce Minister, even though he did not have a Economics/Finance background. Under Suharto, not a chance, Suharto would have picked an Economist/Finance person with a Masters/PhD.
I have seen way to many talent engineers with Masters/PhD during the time there, that got shifted to dead end jobs, because of having different religion, suspected political orientation, showing insufficient loyalty etc.
Unlike you I don't believe any bureaucracy in this day and age gets the smartest / best people, particularly in a country like China where there are alot of opportunities in the private sector (particularly working for Investment Banks etc). Being a government civil servant is secure, but also risky. There is no guarantee that you will get a good "dirty water" position from the start.
China's achieves high economic growth, because departments that focus on Economic growth (plus family planning) get the best people, not necessarily the cleanest. Furthermore, county Chiefs / township chiefs are measured largely on two criteria 1) Economist Growth 2) Family Planning. Most of the departments not dealing with this stuff have alot less prestige, particularly ones like record keeping. That is why none of China's leader trust any of the Government GDP figures, because those doing the work are dregs of China's bureaucracy. In Indonesia, its most likely more balanced (talent for good or bad is more spread out). In a way the Chinese bureaucracy use the same tactics they used in the Korean War, concentrate a whole bunch of resources onto something, leaving other areas exposed or weak.
I used to work on World Bank Projects, and read alot of reports on Local Government / Local Finances in various developing countries. Except for a concentration of resources, China's bureaucracy is not that much different than those found in say Thailand/Malaysia in terms of capability.
Are you saying the restrictions on voting based on Age or Crimial record is the same as race, gender, social status, or wealth? I wouldn't want a 10 yrs old to decide on my leaders, would you?
You are saying Liberal Democracy is the same as dictorship? Cuba gives more subsides to the citizens than most of its neighbours. But Haiti is a democracy. Again, giving benefits and subsides is not Lib. Democracy.
Taiwan just started Lib. Demo. in the 1990's. Just wait couple more decades.
Someone who has been on the job and worked his way up the ladder will definitely be more competent than a boxer who gets his job from winning a election, relatively speaking. This is just common sense.
"You are saying Liberal Democracy is the same as dictorship? Cuba gives more subsides to the citizens than most of its neighbours. But Haiti is a democracy. Again, giving benefits and subsides is not Lib. Democracy."
What I am saying is dictatorships can also spend alot of money to win support - subsidies, welfare etc. A country does not have to be a liberal democracy to do that.
"Taiwan just started Lib. Demo. in the 1990's. Just wait couple more decades."
If they want to have the level of welfare spending like a Liberal Democracy, just copy Beijing. The reason why Liberal democracies are having problems, is not because they are liberal democracies, is because people vote in programmes they can't afford. But China has those same social programmes in some of their major cities, without even voting for them. If you have a Beijing Hukuo, you get unemployment insurance, health insurance, pensions access to subsidize housing etc. The black market rate for a Beijing Hukuo is US$ 80,000. If everyone in China was to have even 50% of the benefits enjoyed by Beijingers, the state's role in the Chinese's economy would be as high as the US. China already has the rope to hang herself with, she does not need the West.
As for the boxer, it depends who the boxer is and how good he is. If its Vitali Klitschko, maybe.
There is a downside to people who have worked their way up in a bureaucracy, they have a narrow way of thinking, developing bad habits and lack a broader perspective. I can give examples, but since you don't really read them, I will stick to "commonsense" what ever that means. In government bureaucracy, commonsense if often oxymoron.
Take for example, Singapore, most of their Minister's enter politics in their late 30 to early 40s. They do a 1-2 terms as MP, if they are good they become Ministers. Many of them have no civil service experience, some of them are doctors, managers, military men (just like in Israel), accountants. Singapore has a good mix.
"When I said Lib. Demo. will lead to welfare state, I was thinking more of the systematic side of it, not much on the personal entitlement or subsidies. Cuba as a third world country offer more benefits, relatively speaking to its citizens.
Lib. Demo. encourages favors to voters so that Politicans can win the elections. This would mean, gradually, more benefits and favors will be offered to voters in each election. Eventually it comes the point the tax revenue can no longer support the benefits. Since politicans will end their turns in ~4 years, they are not hesitate to borrow funding for the benefits. Someone else will pick up the tag later. Look at the PIIGS countries or even the US where there is not hugh surplus of natural resources, unlike Canada or Austrilia."
The above is what I said earlier. But somehow you keep comparing benefits and subsides. I guess you didn't get the point. So give me an example where a dictorship is going bankrupt because it gave out too much benefits.
A dictorship do not have to give favors to win elections because they are already in power.
"is not because they are liberal democracies, is because people vote in programmes they can't afford"
Exactly, that is the problem with the system. Because the Majority rules, but is the Majority always right?, especially for personal benefits?
"But China has those same social programmes in some of their major cities, without even voting for them. If you have a Beijing Hukuo, you get unemployment insurance, health insurance, pensions access to subsidize housing etc. The black market rate for a Beijing Hukuo is US$ 80,000. If everyone in China was to have even 50% of the benefits enjoyed by Beijingers, the state's role in the Chinese's economy would be as high as the US."
Thankyou. This is exactly my point. China is a dictatorship, therefore the govenment can decide who to get these benefits and who don't. It gives what it can still afford and do not bankrupt.
Who do you think is more likely to be a better CEO of car company? a manager who has been with the company for years or someone who has been a boxer all his life?
May be Bismarck should take care of his fellow Indian's benefit instead of finger pointing CHinese. India is corrupting and bankrupting. :D
"The above is what I said earlier. But somehow you keep comparing benefits and subsides. I guess you didn't get the point. So give me an example where a dictorship is going bankrupt because it gave out too much benefits.
A dictorship do not have to give favors to win elections because they are already in power."
Here is a list
1) Egypt (they overthrew Mubarak)
2) Soviet Union (benefits galore)
3) Cuba (its bankrupt)
4) Saudi Arabia (look at absurd amount of subsidies)
5) Malaysia (still a one party state). Government deficit 7-85
7) Iran
8) North Korea (extreme cast, but is not massive military spending an entitlement to the army so they don't launch a coup)
Dictatorship make choice all the time, between repression and handing out goodies. Sometimes handing out goodies is alot easier than repression. The opportunity cost of not giving out the goodies is actually higher in a dictatorship than a democracy. Its like in Syria, if Assad had the money like the Gulf States he could have gave alot of goodies, but unfortunately he did not. So he resorts to oppression.
Sooner or later, migrants in those big cities are going to demand the same benefits as people with Hukuo. Its already happening.
Its a start, once they get that, they will demand more and more. and the CPC will eventually give in.
Governments are built on a narrative. Right wing dictatorships like Lee Kuan Yew have low government spending, because they tell the people to stuff it, the poor are poor, because they are lazy, have bad habit etc. Its very clear what government is supposed to do. The same with Pinochet.
In Communist and left wing dictatorships (like Assad in Syria), they don't say those things, they build up expectations. The CPC has never defined what it can't / won't do. The CPC ideology/philosophy is still Communist/socialist. Why should Beijingers get those benefit, and the migrants don't? There is a disconnect between reality and what the government is saying. It leads to disillusionment and cynicism.
If the CPC did not have to pacify the population as you say, it would remove all those benefits overnight. Why don't they do it? In fact its extending those programmes. Just because its a dictatorship does not mean you can do anything you want?
"Who do you think is more likely to be a better CEO of car company? a manager who has been with the company for years or someone who has been a boxer all his life?"
Who is more likely to better mayor of Shanghai, the CEO of a Car Company or government bureaucrat of 40 years. In a bureaucracy like China you don't really have a choice. Why can't the CEO of a car company be mayor of Shanghai? Its a pretty closed system. In America you have people like Bloomberg as Mayor of New York, Gary Johnson former Governor of New Mexico.
Even in most democracies, political parties select people who they think are good candidates, either through internal voting, selection etc. That is how it works in most parliamentary democracies. The boxer is not automatically dismissed, he can apply. So can a banker. That is how it works in Singapore too, on paper there are more similarities in how it selects its MP with the UK than how China does.
Most established democracies and even new ones like Indonesia its a pretty closed system. You have to join an established party. A boxer suddenly can't become President or even Mayor of a big city.
If China's model was so good, then why don't the Singaporeans copy it, and select all its ministers/MP from the civil service. What does a Doctor know about water resource, why not assign a civil servant?
Mr wolfgang21 aka PL123,
Why don't you go back to China, instead of staying in democratic Germany with all those benefits.
The Indian thing again. I am not bashing China, I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of most of the Chinese posters here, like you Canabana who actually don't live in China, going on about Liberal Democracy and the welfare state.
The fact is you people should be praising the like of Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore, but instead you people praise the Chinese society that resembles the West the most in terms of welfare spending. The fact is China is moving toward the western model of welfare spending, it already has it for some of it's people.
If you have an issue with free press and democracy, OK. But China actually is not much better than the West in terms of social spending, and spend alot more than Taiwan, Singapore or Hong Kong. And most likely it will get higher.
(Here is a list
1) Egypt (they overthrew Mubarak)
2) Soviet Union (benefits galore)
3) Cuba (its bankrupt)
4) Saudi Arabia (look at absurd amount of subsidies)
5) Malaysia (still a one party state). Government deficit 7-85
7) Iran
8) North Korea (extreme cast, but is not massive military spending an entitlement to the army so they don't launch a coup)
Sorry, the above list is NOT " where a dictatorship is going bankrupt because it gives out too much benefits" that they couldn't afford.
And Cuba is NOT bankrupted. I was just there few weeks ago. Malaysia is no where near bankrupt neither.
"Sooner or later, migrants in those big cities are going to demand the same benefits as people with Hukuo. Its already happening. Its a start, once they get that, they will demand more and more. and the CPC will eventually give in."
And the Chinese government is NOT allowing the benefits because they know they can't afford them just yet. CPC will give in when "they believe they can afford them". They don't need to offer the benefits to win the ruling because they are already in power. I am repeating myself again.
"Who is more likely to better mayor of Shanghai, the CEO of a Car Company or government bureaucrat of 40 years"
They both could be. One with long bureaucrat experience and one with cooperation management skill, they are definitely better than a boxer.
And they had Sarah Palin as Vice President.
I didn't say China's model is "So Good". I said the system allows on the job training from low to high, which has better chance of getting good experience leaders, the same as a manager working his way up the cooperation ladder.
"I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of most of the Chinese posters here, like you Canabana who actually don't live in China, going on about Liberal Democracy and the welfare state."
No point getting personal, Bismarck. You are not 10 yrs old, are you? The one who is going on about China, Lib. Democracy and welfare state is YOU. I only pointed out the fault of the system and you went googling and wiki for hours.


text:
I have successfully sent one PM, but since then I cannot send any more. Both replies and new messages just sit in the Outbox and I can't find any way to complete the send operation.
Since I've already been approved to use PMs, I don't think this is related to anti-spam efforts but I'm not sure.
Thanks in advance for any advice!

subset: commoncrawl


text:
I want to share with you today, a fun game that my students are always thrilled to play. It helps them build up their understanding of place value and seeing numbers as groups of tens and ones.
I use a commercially produced game called 'Pop for Numbers' that is great for Numeral Identification. It has lots of gumball cards inside that each feature a numeral.
Students take a ball from the container, and collect the same number of ones.
Upon their next turn, they collect another set of ones. Once a group of ten can be formed with the ones they have collected, they can trade it in
And so the building begins...
if a 'pop' card is revealed, this player returns all their blocks to the tub and must turn their gum ball numbers over. The building then commences again.
Your students may also like to practice building specific numbers using a new file of mine called "Show Me the Number Fun Book".
You will tell them a number for each page, and they can use MAB equipment to build the number.
The pages of this file can be printed and made into books for your students.
You will direct the students to write a number on the "show me" card..
Students will then colour...
Trace ....
Draw .....
And create an interactive flap page...
to show their understanding of the numbers.
You can direct your students to show an understanding of numbers between 1 and 99!
Find it here in my TpT store!
Have fun with your tens and ones! Thanks for stopping by!


text:
|Photo courtesy Ronald Ruhoff, train conductor. The Georgetown Loop Railroad,
located 50 miles west of Denver on I-70, operates from Memorial Day to Oct 1st
each year; the photo was taken on Memorial Day weekend, 2002, on opening day.
Check the railroad website at www.georgetownlooprr.com for information and more
photographs. For more information, call 1-888-4-LOOP-RR (1-888-456-6777).
The older Java version of this picture puzzle is available if needed.
|Click for Puzzle Instructions


text: Friday, March 22, 2013 RACs to Conduct Manual Medical Review of Claims Subject to Therapy Cap CMS announced last evening that as of April 1, recovery audit contractors (RACs) will conduct manual medical review (MMR) of outpatient therapy services, including physical therapy, for outpatient therapy claims that exceed $3,700. In the additional guidance on MMR released last night, CMS said that RACS will complete 2 types of review for claims processed on or after April 1, 2013—prepayment review for states within the Recovery Audit Prepayment Review Demonstration, and immediate postpayment review for the remaining states. APTA is gathering additional information regarding this MMR policy to further inform members. In addition, APTA will meet with CMS officials and Congress to address concerns about the challenges this process will present for both providers and patients. For continued updates on this and other changes to Medicare policy occurring this year, visit APTA's 2013 Medicare Changes website.


text:
This was published 7 years ago
Thirst for pre-drinks linked to violent nightlife
A CULTURE of downing alcohol before going out is significantly contributing to violence and harm in pubs and clubs, Australia's largest study into alcohol-related nightlife crime has found.
And the most effective way to deal with it is to increase the price of alcohol by introducing a levy on packaged drinks, Peter Miller, a Deakin University researcher and author of the study, says.
"We spent a lot of time trying to think of other ways to deal with pre-drinking and simply couldn't," Associate Professor Miller, from the School of Psychology, said.
"There are many people drinking immediately before approaching the door of venues, either around the corner from the pub, in their cars or in their homes, and it is so difficult for venues to detect that unless someone is very obviously intoxicated when they arrive."
Professor Miller said interviews with more than 4000 patrons revealed those who drank before going out more frequently reported also being involved in alcohol-related violence and harm.
"The relationship was strong,'' he said.
"We didn't differentiate between those who initiated the violence and those who were victims of it, but we often found that it took two to tango."
People who drank between one and five standard drinks before going to a venue were 1.5 times as likely to experience harm than those who didn't drink beforehand, while those who drank six to 10 drinks were twice as likely. For those who drank 25 or more standard drinks prior to going out, their risk increased by 4.5 times.
The other measure the study found to be most effective in reducing alcohol-related violence was restricting trading hours across all venues rather than imposing lockouts.
The study, titled Dealing with Alcohol-related Harm and the Night-time Economy, compared the effectiveness of alcohol-related crime prevention measures put in place between 2005 and 2010 through licensing regulation in Newcastle and voluntary programs run in Geelong.
Interventions analysed included locking patrons out of clubs after 1.30am; closing clubs by 3.30am; banning alcohol shots after 10pm; limiting the number of drinks being served (as mandated by licence conditions in Newcastle) and the introduction of ID scanners; improved communication between venues and police and education campaigns (voluntary in Geelong).
Researchers also did a comprehensive review of police and hospital data.
"We found that the number of assaults in Newcastle dropped significantly during the study period while the interventions in Geelong had no impact," Professor Miller said.
"The measures implemented in Geelong were voluntary and were not focused on alcohol consumption, they were more focused on reducing violent crime after people were already drunk which is far too late."
Precincts plagued by drunken violence, such as Sydney's Kings Cross, could learn important lessons from the survey, Professor Miller said.
"They should not rely on lockouts, which substantially affected the smaller bars by making them close earlier, but they are the venues we want to be flourishing.
"Lockouts benefit bigger venues because you're forcing patrons to choose a bar that stays open until 5am and stay there drinking all night, getting more and more drunk.
"Instead we need mandatory closing hours that apply to all venues across the board."
It was now up to governments to resist alcohol industry influence and implement those strategies proven by the survey to work, he said.
"I'm not confident they will do that, but I'm hopeful," he said.
"We managed to beat the tobacco industry, even if that took about 40 years."


text:
When you purchase the Five Ten Freerider EPS Shoes Black/Brown from Leisure Lakes Bikes we are giving you 8 WEEKS FREE bike insurance to keep you covered in the first few weeks of you enjoying your bike.
Find out more about Free insurance
When you purchase the Five Ten Freerider EPS Shoes Black/Brown from Leisure Lakes Bikes you will be eligible for a free bike check from one of our 11 UK stores at a time that's convenient for you! don't worry we'll remind you 2 weeks before!
Find a store near you
Check the stock location Find a store near you
Interest Free Finance available on orders over £250. T&C's apply. Learn more
Split your monthly payments easily with 0% Finance when you spend over £275! You can apply online or in any of our stores and it doesn't just have to be a bike you're buying to apply for finance!
Finance is available on almost every item online and in-store — even if it's below £275. If you're buying several smaller items and the total of your order meets our minimum value, then you're able to checkout using finance.
Continue Shopping
Season : Sale
Code : G26476-51020
Weight : 0KG
The Five Ten Freerider EPS Shoes feature insulation and weather protection to keep your feet warm and dry in cold, wet conditions.
The Five Ten Freerider EPS Shoes feature insulation and weather protection to keep your feet warm and dry in cold, wet conditions. An insulated toe box and tongue add critical warmth. The weather-resistant upper sheds moisture.
Insulation from the instep forward, including the tongue, keeping feet warm and dry.
Stealth® S1 is Five Ten's most versatile compound. This durable material is found throughout their entire footwear line, Stealth® S1 grips surfaces with ease whether they are wet or dry. Ideal for all weather conditions, this compound displays unparalleled durability, high friction and versatility. All whilst keeping you comfortable with it's excellent cushioning.
Our Five Ten sizing guide is a general guide line for all Men's Five Ten shoes. To find the best fit ensure that you accurately measure your feet, for the most reliable results take CM measurement in bare feet.
We offer FREE UK Delivery on everything over £25 online, including bikes! Want it in a hurry? Select premium delivery option and get it delivered anywhere in the world!
View our full delivery information
With Pre-Order, you can purchase the latest items added to our store in advance of them arriving with us.
You Pre-Order is prioritised (at no additional charge); meaning that, as soon as the product arrives with us, we can wrap it straight back up and get it sent out to you - it often never even hits the stock room shelves!
With Pre-Launch, the date when we expect to receive the product ourselves is still a little too hazy to be confident in accepting Pre-Orders.
So, instead, you can submit your email address against the item you are interested in and we will email you as soon as stock arrives on the system.
Estimated Delivery Dates are given on Pre-Order and Pre-Launch products. They are for indication purposes only and can change at any time without notice.
The dates we provide are based on indications given by our suppliers. Whenever we get updated information from our suppliers we will endeavour to update the Estimated Delivery Dates provided on product pages.
Thanks for choosing this item ...
Would you like to see the special offer we have for you?
No thanks, I'll check out now
My message Close


text:
LiQuid wrote:Every single time a movie that I like from the 80s or 90s has been given a modern update it has been an unequivocal disaster. How the fuck can you possibly be hyped for this?
Mr_eX.....LiQuid wrote:Every single time a movie that I like from the 80s or 90s has been given a modern update it has been an unequivocal disaster. How the fuck can you possibly be hyped for this?
George Miller has put the modern action film to shame. Simply put, this is the best action movie I've seen so far this decade.
An invigorating jolt of demented originality, it makes the other Mad Max films seem like demo reels for the kinetic rush of this chase epic.
... a stone-cold action master class, beautiful and brainy and startling in the ways it throws off the current definition of the blockbuster.
Fury Road not only captures the same Molotov-cocktail craziness of Miller's masterpiece, 1981's The Road Warrior-it's also a surprisingly hypercaffeinated film for a director in his fifth decade behind the camera.
[F]aster, bigger, badder, & better than anything else you'll see on screen in 2015. An awe-inspiring display of action storytelling... [and] insanely uncompromising brilliance...
The kind of superlative action filmmaking that rips away at our collective acceptance of mediocrity. The bar has been raised.
This isn't just one of the best action movies of the year -- it may eventually go down as one of the best action movies ever made.
DarthEnder wrote:Great, now you tricked me into giving a click to some scumbag.
What is donotlink?
Linking to dubious websites
You've all heard there's no such thing as bad publicity. On the internet this is doubly true. When you link to a website — regardless of the reason — this strengthens its position in search engines. This means that a bad review of a website makes it more popular.
When you are discussing or alerting others to a website that promotes a fraud, scam, cult or other questionable business and you link to that site, search engines will (after a while) improve the offending site's rank.
Therefore, more people will find these shady websites, and will be exposed to their content without getting the proper context.
That's where donotlink comes in.
With donotlink.com, you can link to sites without giving them "Google juice".
Donotlink uses three different ways to block search engines from crawling a link. So you can post the link on forums, message boards, facebook, twitter, reddit, and other public places without giving shady websites any undue credibility.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


text:
DECstation is the name for a MIPS-based workstation series manufactured by DEC during the 90s. The major models have been the DECstation 2100/3100, the DECstation 5000/1xx, the DECstation 5000/2xx and the Personal DECstation 5000/xx series. They are supported to a varying degree by Linux/MIPS. The major Linux distribution that supports them is the Debian/mipsel port.
Processor Options
DECstations have been equipped with various CPU types ranging from the MIPS R2000 (in the models 2100 and 3100), MIPS R3000 (in the models 5000/20, /25, /33; 5000/120, /125, /133, 5000/200 and /240) over the MIPS R4000 (in the models 5000/50 and 5000/150) to the MIPS R4400 in the model 5000/260.
The models 2100 and 3100 can be equipped with up to 24MB of RAM, for the 5000/xx the limit is at 40MB, the 5000/1xx can take up to 128MB and the /2xx models can be brought to a maximum of 480MB.
Memory modules are DEC-specific:
- the 2100 and 3100 use small-sized 80-pin SIMMs with 2MB of RAM,
- the 5000/xx and /1xx use the same as the above or similar SIMMs with 8MB of RAM,
- the 5000/2xx use quite big daughtercards with either 8MB or 32MB of RAM per card; a battery-backed-up non-volatile module with 1MB of SRAM may be used in one of the slots instead
Graphics Options
The Personal DECstation 5000/xx has onboard graphics which can display 1024x768 pixels with 8-bit color. The DECstation 5000/1xx and /2xx series do not have onboard graphics but are normally equipped with a TurboChannel graphics adapter. The DECsystem 5000/1xx and /2xx are headless variants of the equivalent DECstation series, which can be "converted" to a DECstation by adding a graphics board.
Up to now, only a few graphics options are (at least partially) supported by Linux-MIPS:
- Personal DECstation onboard graphics: 8-bit color, 1024x768 pixels, dumb
- PMAG-A aka MX: monochrome frame buffer (MFB), 1280x1024 pixels, dumb
- PMAG-B aka CX: 8-bit color frame buffer (CFB), 1024x864 pixels, dumb
- PMAGB-B aka HX: 8-bit color smart frame buffer (SFB), variable resolution with 1280x1024 pixels by default, basic acceleration (acceleration features unsupported in Linux/MIPS)
- ZLX-E1 (PMAGD-A) aka HX+: 8-bit color smart frame buffer plus (SFB+), variable resolution with 1280x1024 pixels by default (using the TGA driver)
- ZLX-E2 (PMAGD-B) aka HX+: 24-bit color smart frame buffer plus (SFB+), variable resolution with 1280x1024 pixels by default, basic acceleration (using the TGA driver)
- ZLX-E2 (PMAGD-C) aka HX+: 24-bit color with Z-buffer smart frame buffer plus (SFB+), variable resolution with 1280x1024 pixels by default, basic acceleration (using the TGA driver)
Storage Options
SCSI controller (PMAZ-AA) is based on the NCR 53C94 (aka asc) or the Emulex ESP216 which are interchangeable.
Networking Options
- PMAD-AA: 10 Mbps Ethernet controller based on the AMD Am7990 (LANCE) chip, AUI -- supported with a patch
- DETRA-AA (PMAT-AA): DEC TRNcontroller 700, Token Ring controller -- unsupported
- DEFZA-AA (PMAF-AA): DEC FDDIcontroller 700, SAS/MMF -- support in progress
- DEFZA-CA (PMAF-CA?): DEC FDDIcontroller 700C, SAS/STP and /coax -- support in progress
- DEFTA-FA (PMAF-FA): DEC FDDIcontroller/TURBOchannel, SAS/MMF -- fully supported
- DEFTA-AA (PMAF-FS): DEC FDDIcontroller/TURBOchannel, SAS/MMF -- fully supported
- DEFTA-DA (PMAF-FD): DEC FDDIcontroller/TURBOchannel, DAS/MMF -- fully supported
- DEFTA-UA (PMAF-FU): DEC FDDIcontroller/TURBOchannel, SAS/UTP -- fully supported
- DGLTA-FA: DEC ATMworks 750 adapter, OC-3 SONET/SDH, MMF -- unsupported
- DSYT1-AA: DEC WANcontroller 720 dual synchronous serial adapter, T-1/E-1 -- unsupported
All DECstations can be network booted, with tftp or mop. Some PROM versions have bugs that make tftp boot hard.
tftp boot
To tftp boot you need to have a bootp and tftp server and the kernel ELF image, vmlinux, needs to be first converted to ECOFF. Then issue the tftp boot command to the prom:
On 2100/3100:
boot -f tftp() "console=ttyS3 single rw"
On 5000/1xx:
boot 3/tftp console=ttyS2 rw single
On 5000/200
boot 6/tftp console=ttyS3 rw single
On 5000/240 and 260:
boot 3/tftp console=ttyS2 rw single
Leave out the "console=ttyS2" setting if you have a supported framebuffer.
mop boot
To to use mop for boot you need a mop server on your network. Get a working server from here, it has support for serving out ELF kernels so you don't need to convert the vmlinux image to ECOFF like for tftp boot. Debian has this mopd server all patched up and ready to go. Refer to the mop packge for information on how to set it up. (Put a file named: yourdecsmac.SYS in /tftpboot/mop/ and start mopd: mopd -a).
Then tell the prom to boot using mop:
On 5000/1xx:
boot 3/mop console=ttyS2
hd/cdrom boot
Use delo to boot from hd.
Hardware documentation
- DECstation 3100
- DECstation 5000/200
- PMAG-BA framebuffer
- PMAD-AA ethernet
- PMAZ-AA scsi
- Maxine manual
- Turbo Channel firmware specifications
- Turbo Channel system parameters
- Turbo Channel interface ASIC spec


text:
This obituary is protected by copyright by Dooley Colonial Funeral Home. Proudly Serving the Communities of Westfield, Garwood, Mountainside, Scotch Plains, Fanwood, Clark, Winfield Park, Cranford, Kenilworth, Summit, North Plainfield, Berkeley Heights, Watchung, Rahway, Linden, and Plainfield. Dooley Colonial Funeral Home is located in the state of New Jersey, United States.
All rights reserved.
This obituary is also archived at obittree.com
Dooley Colonial Funeral Home


text:
SKF at ANUGA FoodTec: improving performance through a new approach to asset management
2015 March 18, 15:00 CEST
At ANUGA, SKF will demonstrate its expertise in asset management – and explain how this helped Nestlé to make improvements at one of its plants
Gothenburg, Sweden, 18 March 2015: SKF will demonstrate its wide-ranging capabilities at the ANUGA FoodTec, including a detailed presentation of how its approach in asset management helped Nestlé to make improvements. SKF will also conduct discussions about the future of asset management and how to improve current asset management practices in order to impact line performance and reach business goals.
"In many cases, taking a new approach to existing asset management practices – with just small adjustments in the way maintenance is managed – can have a huge effect on results," says Egon Doyer, Global Business Manager for Asset Reliability Consulting at SKF.
Doyer will present these ideas in depth at a special Speakers' Corner presentation on Thursday 26 March at 10:30-11:00. In the presentation, he will explore the future of asset management through a range of topics, including:
- Trends SKF can foresee impacting the future of asset management versus trends seen 10 years ago
- How can industry players change current practices to be ready? A reference case from Nestlé
- Digital business solutions to support asset management efficiency
Furthermore, at the show SKF will showcase industry specific sealing solutions, such as standard seals (radial and axial shaft seals, fluid seals) as well as application-optimised seals, made of FDA approved materials. One example is the blue ECOPUR 95A-blFG sealing compound that meets the strict requirements of Regulation (EC) 1935/2004.
Egon Doyer's presentation on the future of asset management and the specific sealing solutions are just a few of many capabilities showcased by SKF at this year's ANUGA FoodTec fair (March 24th – 27th). More information can be found in hall 05.1, booth B-040.
Aktiebolaget SKF
For further information, please contact:
Press Relations: Nia Kihlström, +46 31-337 2897; +46 706 67 28 97; firstname.lastname@example.com
SKF is a leading global supplier of bearings, seals, mechatronics, lubrication systems, and services which include technical support, maintenance and reliability services, engineering consulting and training. SKF is represented in more than 130 countries and has around 15,000 distributor locations worldwide. Annual sales in 2014 were SEK 70 975 million and the number of employees was 48 593. www.skf.com
® SKF is a registered trademark of the SKF Group.
™ BeyondZero is a trademark of the SKF Group.
Download press kit
- SKF_Food and Beverage (1.0 MB) preview


text:
- Power Share Tools >
- Shop All Power Share Products >
- 20V Power Share 2.0 Ah Battery and Charger
About WORX
WORX users look forward to the next project. That's because WORX tools are designed to easily tackle every task for your home, your yard, and your workshop.
WORX tools are built on a platform of innovation, power and performance. They're engineered with superior technology and value built into every contemporary design, so you can perform with precision. WORX makes it easier to get the toughest jobs done faster. Shop string trimmers, blowers, chainsaws, mowers, DIY tools and more.
Do it yourself. Do it better. Do it with WORX.
In the press View All Press >
Toolshed Blog View All Toolshed Articles >
Subscribe today to save 10%
Call Us855-279-0505
Service & Support
News & Press
© 2019 WORX | All Rights Reserved


text:
When the House of Representatives found Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress Thursday, the afternoon was brimming with drama.
The leaders of the House Government Oversight Committee traded barbed comments on the House floor. Republicans passionately argued that their quest was about providing closure to the family of US border agent Brian Terry, whose murder was linked to weapons from a "gunwalking" operation in Arizona known as Fast and Furious. It was that operation that prompted Congress's investigation into the Justice Department and Mr. Holder.
Democrats, lead by civil rights hero Rep. John Lewis (D) of Georgia arm-in-arm with House minority leader Nancy Pelosi (D) of California, walked off the House floor during the contempt votes. They marched en masse to the lawn outside the Capitol to protest what they called a Republican "kangaroo court" aimed not at investigating why guns were allowed to pass into the hands of Mexican drug cartels but, instead, at claiming Holder's political scalp.
But one dramatic turn that didn't come to pass? The House sending the sergeant-at-arms to arrest the attorney general and imprison him in the Capitol until it gets its way. That's a move well within congressional rights with a contempt resolution, albeit one that hasn't been tried in about a century.
Had the House tried to do so, it may have risked a showdown with executive branch police who protect Holder, according to Josh Chafetz, a law professor at Cornell University.
And it's not as if Congress has been terribly effective at jailing those it has held in contempt, according to Senate Historian Donald Ritchie's book, "Press Gallery," and research by Mr. Chafetz, who is writing a book on congressional power.
In fact, it appears Holder might have had more fun being "jailed" in Congress than facing House Government Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (R) of California.
The penultimate congressional jailing came in in 1848, when the Senate imprisoned New York Herald reporter John Nugent for publishing the then-secret Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, which ended the Mexican War. But the Herald kept publishing letters from Mr. Nugent during his weeks of incarceration, with the dateline "Custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms" and doubled Nugent's salary while he was locked down in Congress.
Weary of leaving Nugent to berate them from the relative comfort of his new digs in a Capitol Hill committee room – and embarrassed by his paper's publication of a long list of senators who had leaked secret documents to the media – the Senate released Nugent with the face-saving claim of looking out for his health.
In 1871, the Senate put two reporters from The New York Tribune into the congressional stockade, after they paid $500 to purchase the secret Treaty of Washington, settling America's Civil War claims with Great Britain.
"We know the spirit that prevails through the profession to which these young gentlemen belong," said Sen. Oliver Morton, according to Mr. Ritchie's book. "Their honor, their reputation, their pride, their word, have all been pledged that they will not make this disclosure, and they will go up to this disconsolate, gloomy dungeon and stay there before they will do it."
Unfortunately, there was no "gloomy dungeon," as Mr. Ritchie points out – the reporters were housed in the Pacific Railroad Committee Room, were allowed to eat in the Senate dining room, and were frequently visited by their family, friends, and supporters. Both reporters were eventually released without offering a confession.
The House also moved against two members of the executive branch but didn't jail either one. In 1879, the House arrested but did not imprison the US minister to China, George Seward, over claims that he had misappropriated funds while he was consul general to Shanghai. In 1915, the House arrested a district attorney in New York but likewise didn't imprison him on Capitol Hill.
Last week, Democratic leader Pelosi told reporters that, as speaker of the House in 2007, she could have jailed White House adviser Karl Rove, but declined. "There's a prison here in the Capitol," she said. "If we had spotted him in the Capitol, we could have arrested him."
The Bush White House refused to let Mr. Rove testify before a House panel investigating the firing of several US attorneys, citing executive privilege.
Had then-majority House Democrats moved on a contempt vote, Rove would probably have commanded a well-appointed committee room, at least.


text:
Tarot of Prague limited edition tarot pouch in Judgement print.
Short description
We have made some Limited Edition Tarot of Prague bags especially for our 2016 edition. These bags fit the standard-sized deck.
Please see more details under the "full description" tab.
Full description
- Light padding for a little extra protection.
- Side "Bababarock limited edition" tag in gold and red for a touch of added cachet.
- With a print from the back of the Tarot of Prague on the back of the bag. Please note that the final colour of this back print may not be exactly as shown.
- Fully lined in pure silk gold dupion fabric for a little extra touch of luxury.
- Pure silk gold dupion top.
- Chunky Czech glass bead finials on the double-drawstring cords.
- Metallic decorative stitching on the bag top.
- Printed individually — by us. The print is absolutely fast and won't fade, run or otherwise deteriorate in normal use, so you will be able to enjoy it for years.
- At approx 5.5 inches by almost 8 inches these are a really useful size — and if you want to store tarot in them they are large enough to use for even the most over-sized cards.
- The bag can be used for your tarot, oracle or playing cards, as a jewellery holder, a cosmetics and "odd and ends" bag, or simply hung up for display. It also makes a stunning present when filled with your choice of small gifts.


text:
GRAMMY Career Day Sings Out
By Steve Baltin
Let's face it, if you're in high school and you hear the title "career day," the first word that might come to mind is boring. It just sounds like one of those things counselors make you do. I felt that way, but then my high school career days never found the producers behind Lady Gaga and "Glee" sharing a stage with iconic GRAMMY-winning producer Jimmy Jam while top-selling European R&B artist Mohombi serenaded a group of high school students in an auditorium.
Welcome to GRAMMY Career Day 2011. Hosted by the GRAMMY Foundation at University of Southern California in Los Angeles, and perhaps fittingly, with "Glee" music producer Adam Anders in the house, this year's installment was arguably the most musical career day ever. It seemed like there was a song bursting out in every panel, either led by the students or the panelists themselves. The students had plenty of reasons to sing, being given a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to get up on stage in front of Anders, Gaga's producer RedOne, Jam, Mohombi, and Kelly Price, who rocked the New Music Label panel with a stunning rendition of the "The Star-Spangled Banner." The performance prompted one student to suggest Price sing the song at the next Super Bowl. Fellow panelist, JoiStarr, a former backup singer for Kanye West, got the whole room clapping in rhythm to Journey's "Don't Stop Believin'."
GRAMMY Career Day is always a blast, but this year it felt special. Maybe it was the extra-exuberant students — exemplified by a few shouting marriage proposals to surprise guest artist Jordin Sparks, who came on stage before the GRAMMY Jazz Ensembles showed their skills during the day's concert finale. Or maybe it was the guest artists, all of whom were happy to be there and share their collective knowledge and wisdom with the students.
"I think it's something that's really close to my heart because I was that kid," said Anders. "I was the music geek that didn't do other stuff because I was locked in my room playing music and people went, 'Who is that weirdo?' It's important for me to tell them, 'Look, if this is your passion and this is what you're good at, keep at it.'"
And current GRAMMY nominee RedOne, who was so excited to be asked to speak to students after 20 years of his own hard work, couldn't wait to share. "I want to give the new generation everything I know to make their life easier," he said.
That sentiment is exactly what Recording Academy and GRAMMY Foundation President/CEO Neil Portnow wants to hear. "I think it's symbolic that we begin the week, which will end recognizing the great music of the year and some of the great musicians of all time, to start thinking about the next generation — the future," said Portnow.
Educational, inspiring, and musical, GRAMMY Career Day turned out to be quite a party to kick off a week of celebration.
(To view more photos from the premiere of GRAMMY Career Day and additional GRAMMY Week events, click here.)


text:
wsitruewebresult necesitaba un nuevo diseño de página web y lanzó un concurso de diseño en 99designs.
Un ganador ha sido elegido entre 45 diseños de 16 diseñadores freelance.
Guarantee Winner, if you been in any of my past contest, I'm great to work with and always pay out. This is for a Futuristic Broadcasting program called Beyond Reason (http://www.beyondreason.com) Please be as creative as you like and to put this design together I strongly advise you listen to this program all the way though, it will give you a good direction on the tone, the look of the site. Metaphysical and paranormal topics such as UFOs, near death experiences, life after death, earth changes and more. http://www.sitemason.com/files/iMJv…021306.mp3
After you listen to the show please read my full details about the site, my client pays a lot of attention to detail.
Beyond Reason, Inc.
Beyond Reason For those who dare to think…..
Desired Color Scheme:
black, silver, dark blues, whites
Desired Style:
" Think Univese"
Accepted File Formats:
Vector Formats (.eps, .pdf or .ai); Layered Formats (.psd or .tiff)
For this website the TV Show is the Hero!!!!
It airs LIVE in Nashville on 1510 WLAC Sundays at 11P.M, then we also rerun in Chicago 100.3 Love FM.
Beyond Reason is a talk show focusing on spirituality, the metaphysical and the paranormal, interviewing best selling authors and researchers in areas of new thought, remote viewing, psychic research, near death experiences, life after life, UFOs, ESP, angels, past lives and other topics of the unknown. Hosted by Teddy Bart and Karlen Evins, Beyond Reason originated in Nashville, TN as a radio talk show in 1987. The show is now available as a webcast and podcast and is working its way toward national syndication.This is a high concept and high graphic site needed.
The goals of this site are.Would be to get visitors to listen to the live show.
- Would be to get visitors to listen to the live show.
- Is to get visitors to go the show page and pay for the download of the whole show or buy a CD of the show.
- Would be to get them to buy books from the books store online
- Would get them to sign up for the email
- Would get them to go to the blog and see the topics we have
- We would like a membership group of listen to get all the podcast each week for a small membership fee.These goal all have to be meet on the website most like by creating creative banner on the site. Example of one banner should say "Now "Live†on Sunday Nightd 11pm CST 1510 AM WLAC. (Click here to steam live on Sunday Nights)†I have already created the Chicago show banner and I'll upload it with the logo.
The Navigation is Home, Host, Past Shows, Blog, Bookstore, Press, Contact UsThe footer should read
Copyright © 2007 & Beyond Reason by Teddy Bart and Karlen Evins. All rights reserved. Privacy PolicySite created and maintained by WSI.
Links to pictures of the talk show host
Chicago banner ad I created