Sunday, October 31, 2010

Non Confidentialityagreement

compared

Here's a cute little cartoon on Huxley and Orwell, it is yours to click to read properly. (Well no: click here to view the format most suitable)

The design is creative, delicious and the text put into perspective brilliant thoughts of the two authors.

Both Aldous Huxley, George Orwell described in novels famous for having shaped the history of totalitarian worlds. But the mechanisms of these worlds differ substantially and it is the merit of this comic highlight it so beautifully.

That said, I did not really like 1984. Orwell's satire I prefer the excellent anti Animal Farm.

Why is it that 1984 leaves me cold? Because somehow anticipated by totalitarianism Orwell was made in the USSR. But it is remarkable that this regime has collapsed from the inside specifically to internal causes, spontaneously. Exit therefore the possibility of an end of history as great minds omnipresent dictatorship.

The cartoon also seems to hold accordingly.

The text is by Neil Postman in "Amusing Ourselves to Death", drawing by Stuart McMillen. I shot the image of this last blog I here.




Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Pattycake's Model Real Name

The reversal of hysteria in the U.S. The

remember above all that in a bipartisan system, the objective ally of the ruling party an edge is the party Challenges on the other side. I'm not coming here on the various illustrations of this rule.

Two years ago I wrote an article explaining how the right beat left .

To summarize my article at the time, I explained that Presidents Bush and Sarkozy drew a picture of each party governing rightist though in fact the center-right, so what good hysteresis their opposition and divide between moderates and excited. So they based their power.

Remarkably United States today is that this mechanism has turned against the right: tea parties, a movement on horseback between libertarianism and populism, are reinforced with a speech very hostile to Obama, but mostly at the expense of Republicans in my opinion.

So a few years ago the Left was divided between intransigent anti-bush liberal and moderate criticism of Bush, they fear extremism of those. Today the line is divided between the same uncompromising anti-establishment anti-obama and moderate criticism of Obama, they fear the same extremism of those.

Hysteria has changed sides. The reversal was done in two stages.

First he had to unite the left. How to re-link between left Michael Moore and that of the establishment? Answer: by presenting a candidate who embodies the progressive ideals. So it's no coincidence that the bid was played between a woman and a black. Such a candidate neutralized the destructive capacity of leftists, who could only yield to the fear of being on the wrong side of history and block the forward march of progress. Fiat Obama, a man who could embody a leftist dream while being a staunch centrist. Perfect combination.

Then the Republican camp was divided. The Republicans promise eternally late big government but never really give a result in power, that they now criticized by the tea parties.

There is also the downfall of the neocons, associated with the establishment Republican, held accountable for the Iraq war which is perceived badly the foundation and utility. The tea parties, more libertarian, and therefore oppose the war in Iraq benefit.

Finally it is a general rejection of the elites and the authorities, even a conspiracy movement, who knows illegitimate and does not wish to comment as such. He needs to be grafted to another speech and found this expression vector in tea parties - which I condemn Notice the movement forward.

So Republicans are unable to capitalize on errors and Obama will lose in fine tea party movement. The rule set out in the lead article is the test may be even earlier than I had expected because it appears that Republicans could not win the legislative end of the year when he was still expected there is little they are the big winners.

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Contemporary Drapery Rods -traverse

-on-me-me-not-the-fact not in battle against the banks

"I do it makes me not! We flew it robs us! "The

-on-me-me-not-the-fact not an entire program. They do not really know what they are talking but ... but ... we they do not! "All rotten! "

You do not agree with them? "Naive! Useful idiot! "Already

Paul Valéry noted that the void of themselves as kings dethroned: blame the system that considers not only the fair value!

Societe Generale loses five billion? Our friends feel robbed. The same

wins its case? This proves that the system is rotten.

The tax refund to the bank taxes it paid on profits vanished? "Stop thief! "

Ah, if given power, they will cut a few heads and will restore the republic, virtue and justice ... Because for monmlfp policy comes down to fight against the Gentiles upset pourrivendus necessarily allies. They are also always on the windward side, supporting a proposal and then another, usually incapable of understanding that may well contradict the well and the art of politics is a lesser evil.

Thus there is no doubt that our friends who revile the court needed to win the general interests of society would be the first to call for judicial independence while being the first cons screaming as the practical consequences of this decision.

And monmlfp will, of letters from readers in forums everywhere groaning, still jeering, spread their ignorance and stupidity.

If we can rejoice at the misfortunes of the trader, how to be sad at the reaction of the hoi polloi in this case?

So where does one find the best concentrations monmlfp? Answer: In letters to the editor and especially among lemonde.fr, which has a section dedicated to the reactions (I do not even speak the National Socialist press). Ah, if there were only heading to read newspapers, I would take the letters from readers. Obviously a lot of people feel there is finally to exist a little small stating his opinion needy. (Well that's true for any internet) What a wonderful

sottisier: we learn that the decision against Kerviel to repair the entire damage of the Societe Generale is a righteous religious orders or so of power, that c 'is a perpetual conviction that the community that pays so.

But this is an illusion that provides Internet: we believe that we are only intelligent when it is others who are idiots. Let us be modest

and rationally refute some of the most common charges. Explain.

No, the 4.9 billion is not a sentence. This is compensation for the damage caused by the trader at Societe Generale. The court charged the full responsibility for the damage to the trader and sentenced to repair it. Thus

Societe Generale is bleached. Even though she might have committed any negligence, the trader has committed intentional offenses causing the injury. And because it is intentional crimes, the possible negligence of the bank are not in the calculation.

Here the decisive decision. For the court, "Whereas it is nevertheless clear discussions and pleadings that Societe Generale was the victim of deliberate act of Jerome Kerviel, constituting the offenses of embezzlement, forgery and using false and introducing fraudulent data into a system of automated data processing, he was guilty, that the negligence attributable to the plaintiff can not be taken into account in determining the extent of his rights to compensation resulting from the commission of willful violations, in fact, Jerome Kerviel was the sole designer, founder and director of the fraud scheme that caused damage to the plaintiff, it follows that Societe Generale is in right to obtain full compensation for financial loss resulting therefrom, "

The ruling also has the merit of showing another failure of the strategy of rupture. Play the card of public opinion turns ultimately an admission of weakness. We can see this article to learn about strategies Bursting .

Counsel for Jérôme Kerviel seems to be more involved in the break by saying that the bank would have earned 1.7 billion of Treasury, that monmlfp immediately understood as an offering to the temple of the state when speculative is only the refund of taxes which the cause of the payment has disappeared: the benefits disappear and thus even the corresponding taxes. Only the best good demagogic sophistry can say that money is paying the French finance mistakes.

Too complicated for monmlfp? There is no doubt about that. And even more difficult: the inability to enter unpleasant conclusion in a small system with small squares; even inability to enter into a new conclusion or conclusions coincide with the assumptions and the arguments are only rationalizations for ugly stereotypes and the setting charge of usual suspects.

For the culpability of banks is not only the result of reasoning monmlfp is still the starting point.

And no matter the reasoning, their truth is that finance steals the brave citizens, that the bank knew that its trader always did, and then a court is too complicated to read, and then the system is sold. And what good arguments for them ... we do not.