|
Thursday, July 29, 2010
China shows strong resolve to develop clean energy: ITER
Forbes: World's most valuable brands
BEIJING -- From top luxury brand Louis Vuitton to leading IT corporation Apple, Forbes.com unveiled a list of "50 world's most valuable brands."
Although some of these tycoons are now facing some troubles, such as massive global recall of Toyota and iPhone's antenna problems, they seem not to impair those brands to being the world's best.
Here're top 10 of them:
No. 1 Apple
 |
Brand value: 57.4 billion U.S. dollars
Country:: United States
Industry:: Computer hardware
No. 2 Microsoft
 |
Brand value: 56.6 billion U.S. dollars
Country:: United States
Industry:: Computer software
No. 3: Coca-Cola
 |
Brand value: 55.4 billion U.S. dollars
Country: United States
Industry: Beverages
No. 4 IBM
Brand value: 43 billion U.S. dollars |
Country: United States
Industry: Computer software and services
No. 5 Google
 |
Brand value: 39.7 billion U.S. dollars
Country: United States
Industry: Internet services
No. 6 McDonald's
 |
Brand value: 35.9 billion U.S. dollars
Country: United States
Industry: Restaurants
No. 7 General Electric
Brand value: 33.7 billion U.S. dollars |
Country: United States
Industry: Diversified
No. 8 Marlboro
Brand value: 29.1 billion U.S. dollars |
Parent company Altria/Philip Morris International
Country: United States
Industry: Tobacco
No. 9 Intel
Brand value: 28.6 billion U.S. dollars
Country: United States
Industry: Computer hardware
No. 10 Nokia
 |
Brand value: 27.4 billion U.S. dollars
Country: Finland
Industry: Telecom
India to become potential buyer of L.American, Caribbean products
SANTIAGO -- A research by the Inter-American Development Bank said on Tuesday that India could become a potential buyer of agricultural and mineral products of Latin America and the Caribbean, given New Delhi's rising buying power.
With a 1.1-billion population and facing a huge lack of raw materials, India is poised to become a big buyer of agricultural and mineral products, main export resources of Latin America, the research titled "India: Opportunities and challenges for Latin America" said.
Thus India could become a great consumer of Latin American and Caribbean raw materials, it said.
The region's trade with India represents only 0.8 percent of its foreign trade, it pointed out.
The research suggested both sides reduce their commercial taxes and trade barriers to enhance trade. Currently, the average tax India levied on Latin American agricultural products remain as high as 65 percent.
Another difficulty to enhance trade is a lack of direct shipping route between the two sides, it said.
With a 1.1-billion population and facing a huge lack of raw materials, India is poised to become a big buyer of agricultural and mineral products, main export resources of Latin America, the research titled "India: Opportunities and challenges for Latin America" said.
Thus India could become a great consumer of Latin American and Caribbean raw materials, it said.
The region's trade with India represents only 0.8 percent of its foreign trade, it pointed out.
The research suggested both sides reduce their commercial taxes and trade barriers to enhance trade. Currently, the average tax India levied on Latin American agricultural products remain as high as 65 percent.
Another difficulty to enhance trade is a lack of direct shipping route between the two sides, it said.
Yuan and absurdity of U.S. demand
BEIJING -- The conventional wisdom is that once the value of the yuan is increased, the US trade deficit with China would start falling. This rationale has prompted many Americans to push for further, faster revaluation of the yuan even after China changed its currency policy.
For those who endorse such logic, the yuan's value is a paramount factor behind China's - and their countries' - trade balances. But for John Ross, former deputy mayor of London in charge of economic and business policy, the trade gap between a country and China would widen instead of narrowing down, at least in the short term, if the yuan's values go up.
Ross, a visiting professor at Antai College of Economics and Management in Shanghai Jiaotong University, says that once the yuan's value rises the Americans would demand further revaluation, ultimately forcing the yuan to rise to a level that would not only disrupt China's trade and economy, but also pose a threat to the entire world economy.
Moreover, the number of jobs in the US would not increase unless the federal government changes its economic policy and raises investments, which is the real solution to its problem. Pressuring China to raise the yuan's value sharply will not help.
"Most people, particularly those abroad, don't know the real situation. The reason they want the yuan to be revaluated further is because they think it would reduce China's trade surplus. But let's say up to 18 months, this is not true."
From what happened between 2005 and 2008, when the yuan rose 21 percent against the dollar, it's clear that China's "trade surplus rose, too", Ross says. Any revaluation of the yuan raises the price of exports and reduces the price of imports, which means China's trade surplus would get bigger as its currency rises.
By examining historical data, Ross has found that China's exports and imports grew simultaneously after 2005 in terms of volume, but the prices of exports rose more relative to import thanks to the revaluation of the yuan. "That's why its trade surplus with the US is bigger today."
There's a big debate among economists over what would happen in the long term if the yuan rose further, he says. Some people think China's trade surplus would increase, while others think it would fall in the long run. "But there's no difference (in what they say) would happen in the short term."
Seen from the history of US trade, its overall trade deficit rose at nearly $70 billion a month until 2006, he says. Then it stabilized before rising again after the passage of the worst period of the global financial crisis. "That's why (American) people are getting agitated because it has worsened But it is not rising because of China, for - I'm using US figures, not Chinese figures - the trade surplus of China with the US is rather stable, slightly under $20 billion a month."
In other words, claiming that the trade deficit of the US is rising because of China is simply not true, he says. "It's because its (America's) trade deficit with the rest of the world is rising, too."
The US has a trade deficit with about 90 countries. "If you reduce its trade deficit with China, all that would happen is that its trade deficit with some other country would increase."
US hawks, however, have always targeted China and pressured it to dance to the tune of their demand. Even if China has pledged to make the yuan more flexible by reforming its exchange rate mechanism further and peg it to a basket of currencies to better reflect the demand of the market, some US politicians and industrial leaders say it's "too little too late" and demand the Chinese currency be revaluated by up to 40 percent.
Forcing the value of the yuan to rise would cause further uncertainties in the world economy, which today faces other big challenges such as the European Union debt crisis. "We are not (living) in a normal stable economic environment; we are just about recovering from a very bad financial crisis and what happens in the next six to 18 months is very important and would have a very big effect," he says. "The last thing the world needs at present is a short-term increase in China's trade surplus because of an increase in the value of the yuan."
As the yuan's value rises, the US would demand more revaluations, thus making it unaffordable for the Chinese and world economies. "The point is that the US has not given it a really serious thought."
Ross says economic history shows that the only way for the US to increase exports and jobs is to raise its level of investment. The Americans are famous for their low savings rate while China, Japan and some other countries boast high savings that can be used for investment.
The US suffered job losses because of the global financial crisis and because the savings rate in America was (and still is) very low. "It's very easy to explain the financial crisis in the US: The investment level of the US has not gone up in the past 150 years," he says. "The only way the US could increase its growth rate, which can create more jobs, is to raise the level of investment in its domestic market."
Ross accuses the US of trying to slow down growth of other countries by pressing them to raise the exchange of their currencies and lower their rate of investment. "The two effective means of slowing down an economy are to increase the exchange rate of its currencies sharply and force it to reduce its level of investment," Ross says. "This is what the US did for Japan in the 1970s and in later decades."
"What are the two demands the US places on China? One is to raise the exchange rate of the yuan. The second is to increase the share of consumption," he says. "But the increase in the share of consumption means reducing the share of investment and if China does these two things simultaneously, then its economy would slow down a lot."
Will that benefit China or, more importantly, the world economy?
(Source: China Daily)Saturday, July 24, 2010
US Banks Criticized For Paying Lavish Compensation
The US official tasked with overseeing pay practices at the country's large financial institutions has criticized 17 banks for over compensating their executives during the financial crisis in late 2008 and early 2009. But the banks say there are reasons why they paid employees big bonuses.
Kenneth Feinberg, charged with reviewing the pay practices of large U.S. financial institutions, found that 17 banks made a total of $1.6 billion in payments to their top executives after receiving emergency loans from the government.
Feinberg, the Obama Administration's special master for executive compensation, looked at more than 400 banks. "At the time these payments were made they were ill advised - bad judgment on the part of these companies, but they didn't violate any statute. They didn't violate any regulation at the time," he said.
But many Americans say they are outraged that executives were getting big bonuses while taxpayer dollars were keeping the firms alive. "The taxpayer has the right to be outraged," said Feinberg. "Who wouldn't be?"
Damon Silvers represents the US labor federation, the AFL-CIO. "When a firm is in trouble especially a financial firm, cash is the whole deal. Paying out lots of cash, unless you really have to, is not in the interest of the firm and is not in the interest of the public," he said.
Scott Talbott is spokesman for Financial Services Round Table. The organization represents 100 of the largest financial services firms in the U.S. "You have to provide incentives for employees to work hard. And yes, the pay structure for Wall Street vs. the rest of America looks a bit out of wack. But this is a select group of people that can handle or process or engage in these types of activity," he said.
Talbott says special compensations to bank employees were all authorized by third-parties ahead of time. "They're all approved by the shareholders as well as the independent compensation committees in each one of the companies," he said.
Feinberg does not have the authority to force the banks to return any of the money. He says 11 of the 17 companies have already re-paid their government loans with interest. He is encouraging banks to adopt new rules to limit payments to top executives in future crises.
President Barack Obama says the lavish bonuses to bank executives show the need for the financial reforms he signed into law earlier this week.
He says the reforms will eliminate the need for future taxpayer bailouts of financial firms.
Kenneth Feinberg, charged with reviewing the pay practices of large U.S. financial institutions, found that 17 banks made a total of $1.6 billion in payments to their top executives after receiving emergency loans from the government.
Feinberg, the Obama Administration's special master for executive compensation, looked at more than 400 banks. "At the time these payments were made they were ill advised - bad judgment on the part of these companies, but they didn't violate any statute. They didn't violate any regulation at the time," he said.
But many Americans say they are outraged that executives were getting big bonuses while taxpayer dollars were keeping the firms alive. "The taxpayer has the right to be outraged," said Feinberg. "Who wouldn't be?"
Damon Silvers represents the US labor federation, the AFL-CIO. "When a firm is in trouble especially a financial firm, cash is the whole deal. Paying out lots of cash, unless you really have to, is not in the interest of the firm and is not in the interest of the public," he said.
Scott Talbott is spokesman for Financial Services Round Table. The organization represents 100 of the largest financial services firms in the U.S. "You have to provide incentives for employees to work hard. And yes, the pay structure for Wall Street vs. the rest of America looks a bit out of wack. But this is a select group of people that can handle or process or engage in these types of activity," he said.
Talbott says special compensations to bank employees were all authorized by third-parties ahead of time. "They're all approved by the shareholders as well as the independent compensation committees in each one of the companies," he said.
Feinberg does not have the authority to force the banks to return any of the money. He says 11 of the 17 companies have already re-paid their government loans with interest. He is encouraging banks to adopt new rules to limit payments to top executives in future crises.
President Barack Obama says the lavish bonuses to bank executives show the need for the financial reforms he signed into law earlier this week.
He says the reforms will eliminate the need for future taxpayer bailouts of financial firms.
India's Bollywood Film Industry Tries to Produce Crossover Movies
Photo: FilmKRAFT
Barbara Mori and Hrithik Roshan in a scene from 'Kites'
"It has to be a completely different film" - Mumbai movie critic Komal Nahata
The movie Kites, which released in May in more than 30 countries is an emotional love story of an Indian and a Mexican immigrant in the United States. Set in Las Vegas, it stars a popular Bollywood actor, Hrithik Roshan and Mexican actress Barbara Mori.
Its producer, Rakesh Roshan, called it "a truly Indian global film." Kites was the first big-budget effort by the Hindi film industry to make a movie which would appeal to mainstream audiences in India and in Western countries.
Not impressed
However, the film failed to impress people on either side. Indians said they could not identify with the mix of Hindi, English and Spanish dialogues. A shorter version, Kites: The Remix, released in countries like the United States, fared even worse. Edited by Hollywood director Brett Ratner, it was an attempt at a Hollywood-Bollywood crossover.
Mumbai-based film trade analyst and critic Komal Nahata says Bollywood film producers have long been enthusiastic about trying their hand at crossover cinema. But he says their efforts have not met with success, because audiences in India and Western countries are very different.
"I think it is this urge to tap newer markets, to tap newer audiences," says Nahata. "But our filmmakers don't realize is that what is lacking is cinema which they enjoy. You cant jut tweak Bollywood cinema and say that 'I made it for the crossover audience'. Their tastes are completely different, plus their sensibilities are different."
Successful attempt
Bollywood has a massive fan following, not only in India, but in many Asian countries such as Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Afghanistan. It is also a huge hit with Indians staying in Western countries. About seven percent of the revenues of the $2 billion industry come from overseas markets.
The desire to woo Western audiences got a boost after the runaway success of the Oscar-winning film Slumdog Millionaire. The film was a British production, which used Bollywood talent and was shot in the slums of Mumbai fueled the desire among Bollywood production houses to make a similar hit.
Of course, a typical Hindi movie is very different to Slumdog. It is usually a predictable, melodramatic story of boy-meets-girl and overcomes all odds to be together. These films are replete with glitzy song and dance numbers.
Reason for optimism
Many people are optimistic that Bollywood movies have the potential to make their presence felt beyond the traditional markets in India and Asia. Among them is Mumbai-based film critic Taran Adarsh.
"That is what has attracted a lot of people from the Western world… our colors, our songs, our dances, the Bollywood masala," Adarsh says. "I have had a lot of people coming up to me and telling me that they love Bollywood films. They don't understand the language, but there is something about Bollywood films. They find it very interesting."
In their quest to win international audiences, Indian film producers are trying to break the mold and explore more contemporary themes.
Bridging the gap
Several movie critics say the success in several countries of a recent Hindi film, My Name is Khan, shows that Bollywood is starting to tap a wider audience. It is the story of an Indian in America who battles the double problems of fighting Asperger's syndrome (a form of autism) and being a Muslim in a post 9/11 world.
However, trade analyst Nahata points out that crossover audiences are still "miniscule." He feels the distance between a Bollywood and a Hollywood movie is too vast to be easily traversed.
"It has to be a completely different film, which risk the Indian filmmakers won't take because then they fear that the Indian audience and the traditional audiences will be lost to that kind of film, notes Nahata. "The amount of crossover audiences which view our films is so small it hardly matters."
Some Bollywood producers are scaling down their ambitions for crossover projects. But others are not giving up. In September, one of India's best known filmmakers, Vidhu Vinod Chopra, will start shooting in the United States for an English language film called Broken Horses, also aimed at global audiences. Like him, many others hope that some day Bollywood -- which produces the most movies in the world -- will manage to make a mark internationally.
Friday, July 23, 2010
Obama: 'Enormous' Progress With Financial Reform, Other Actions
Photo: AP
President Barack Obama delivers remarks on the economy in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, 23 July 2010
The most significant legislative accomplishment for the president and majority Democrats since the historic health care overhaul achieved earlier this year, is the financial regulatory reform bill Mr. Obama signed on Thursday.
It is the outcome of almost two years of intense debate on Capitol Hill concerning the best ways to respond to excesses on Wall Street, protect consumers, and avoid another financial system collapse.
Speaking in the White House Roosevelt Room, the president said the new law will protect consumers and the economy from recklessness and irresponsibility that led to the worst financial breakdown since the Great Depression.
"It's a reform that will help us put a stop to the abusive practices of mortgage lenders and credit card companies and ensure that people get the straight, unvarnished information that they need before they take out a loan or open a credit card," he said. "It will bring the shadowy deals that caused the financial crisis into the light of day, and it will end taxpayer bailouts of Wall Street firms and give shareholders a say on executive compensation."
To underscore his points, the president referred to a new report by Ken Feinberg, who Mr. Obama appointed to oversee compensation issues. The report said 17 banks gave top executives $1.6 billion in bonuses while they were receiving billions of dollars in government bailout funds.
The president pointed to two other achievements - a six-month extension of emergency government benefits for people out of work, and an initiative to reduce waste in government.
Mr. Obama pressed for Senate action on another piece of legislation; tax incentives and lending for small businesses. And he sounded a theme he will use as he campaigns for Democratic candidates before the November mid-term congressional elections.
"The folks who I have met with across this country, they cannot afford any more political games," he said. "They need us to do what they sent us here to do. They didn't send us here to wage a never-ending campaign; they didn't send us here to do what is best for our political party. They sent us here to do what is best for the United States of America and all our citizens, whether Democrats or Republicans or Independents. In other words, they sent us here to govern."
As the president spotlights achievements, Republicans continue to criticize him on virtually every one of his policies. Indiana Republican Mike Pence asserted that President Obama's policies and those of Democrats will lead to huge tax increases.
"As we have done on their failed stimulus policy, as we have did on their national energy tax, as we did on their government take over of health care, House Republicans will stand in the gap to protect taxpayers from the largest tax increase in American history," he said.
Democratic leaders meanwhile cited Republican opposition as they acknowledged they had given up on passing comprehensive clean energy/climate change legislation before the August recess.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said "Unfortunately this time we don't have a single Republican to work with in achieving this goal," Reid said. "For me, it is terribly disappointing."
"We will continue to work with the senators to craft important, comprehensive legislation," said Carol Browner, Director of the White House Office on Energy and Climate Change Policy.
Having accomplished the bulk of the pre-congressional recess agenda, the president will increasingly focus on the November congressional elections, campaigning for Democrats and pressing his messages about economic recovery.
The White House announced he will travel to New Jersey next week, a state that remains strongly Democratic. The unemployment rate there is about 9.6 percent, slightly more than the national level.
Also announced, presidential visits next week and in early August to Chrysler, General Motors and Ford automobile plants in Michigan and Chicago, Illinois. The White House says these will highlight a U.S. auto industry that is strengthening as a result of the president's actions to save it.
Related Articles
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)