Bilderberg.org

[marektysis]

Dears Readers,
Since one month a debunkers campaign has began against the
complotists we are.
Bilderberg in short is a kind of happy few meeting in peace to quietly discuss about the state of the world.
We have known Thierry Meyssan with his friend from Bilderberg, the journalist Zachariah fareeh whom i posted the article recently and now a Swedish
professor. Curiously they all say the same: nothing to be feared from these discussions and the Club at the origin was against Communism.
If you believe so, then rest in peace.Comically they admit their role in the ' global challenges' thus validating our sayings.....
The article hereunder:
Marek Tysis
***************************************
While conspiracy theorists have long viewed the exclusive global network of elites known as the Bilderberg Group as a secretive global government, a new book by a Sweden-based academic argues the group's influence is often overstated, The Local's Peter Vinthagen Simpson explains.


•Sweden to open secret files on Cold War's end (16 Feb 11)
•Sweden's economy on display in Davos (28 Jan 11)
•Swedish labour model talks collapse (11 Mar 09)
For some, the Bilderberg Group conjures up images of powerful men hunkered down in a secluded compound, plotting moves that will ensure certain outcomes in the chess game of globalised business and politics.

While many participants are democratically elected leaders or accountable to shareholders in the companies they run, behind the closed doors of Bilderberg's annual gatherings they are free to discuss and decide without any concern of being held responsible, conspiracy theorists allege.

Critics on the left allege backroom deals struck among Bilderberg attendees are an attempt to ensure the world is dominated by profit-hungry capitalists, while those on the right charge the group is seeking to impose some sort of global government.

But according to Dr. Ian Richardson, a visiting professor at Stockholm University's School of Business and author of a forthcoming book on The Bilderberg Group, both sides are relying on faulty assumptions about the workings of global affairs.

“Conspiracy theorists have a black and white view of power and this power is extremely discreet," he tells The Local.

"To suggest that they are consciously coming together to agree on objectives to change the world is wrong."

The Bilderberg was formed in 1954 and first met at the Hotel de Bilderberg near Arnhem in the Netherlands. Since then its meetings, held annually either in Europe or North America, bring together representatives of power elites within business, the media and politics.

“The Bilderberg was a product of its time, with a significance in the Cold War and the emergence of NATO. Its members still share a common commitment to the Anglo-Saxon business and governance frameworks,” Richardson explains.

The Bilderberg is controlled by the steering committee, chaired by Étienne Davignon, the vice chairperson of engineering firm Suez-Tractebel and responsible for organising the annual meetings and selecting the exclusive group of 120-130 invited guests.

The meetings are held under tight security and the utmost secrecy. While members of the media sometimes attend, no interviews are given to the press and the group releases no statements.

“They meet in complete seclusion. Security is very strong. They meet in a private capacity, not as heads of state or whatever - self-interested and self-concerned,” Richardson says.

This secrecy has led to a wealth of speculation about the group and the internet is awash with conspiracy theories pertaining to their power and tentacles of influence, an assessment that Dr. Richardson rejects.

"They have been described as the modern day incarnation of the Illuminati," he says, referring to the Enlightenment-era secret society.

"My book dispels many of these theories and is the first serious attempt to grapple with this group - why do they go? What is the consensus that emanates from the group?”

Dr. Richardson did however confirm that the Bilderberg was influential both in the development of the EU and the talks leading up to the introduction of the euro, but underlined that nothing is actually decided at the meetings.

“They do change the world, but they often don't even know it themselves,” he says.

Those who defend the group argue that it is a merely a brainstorming meeting which helps power elites establish social cohesion and consensus.

Davignon has argued that the secrecy of the meetings enables participants to debate candidly, free of the concern that their comments might generate controversy, a point on which Richardson concurs.

“Without this secrecy Bilderberg would become just another talking shop. There is a myth that Davos is so open. There are journalists all over the place, but the discussions take place behind closed doors,” Richardson argues, referring to the Alpine location of the annual World Economic Forum summit.

The emergence of whistle-blower websites such as WikiLeaks has rendered these more discreet channels of diplomacy even more relevant, Dr. Richardson says.

"This back-room diplomacy continues to have enormous significance. You can’t find the common narratives if you are constantly being held to account. Without these groups how can we create the possibility for change?"

Sweden first hosted a meeting of the Bilderberg in 1962 in the exclusive Stockholm suburb of Saltsjöbaden, known for a 1938 agreement between business and union leaders which still forms the framework for Swedish industrial relations.

The suburb is also closely connected with the powerful Wallenberg family who own the Grand Hotel, the venue of both the Saltsjöbaden Agreement and the first three Bilderberg meetings held in Sweden (the fourth being held in Stenungsund in connection with the 2001 European Council summit in Gothenburg).

Jacob Wallenberg, chairperson of the family’s power base--holding company Investor, is on the Bilderberg steering committee.

He is the fourth Swede to have served on the committee, following his brother Marcus, former ABB head Percy Barnevik, former Ericsson president Björn Lundvall and former Saab-Scania head Sten Gustafsson.

Other famous Swedish attendees through the years have included King Carl XVI Gustaf, current foreign and prime ministers Carl Bildt and Fredrik Reinfeldt, former Social Democrat prime ministers Olof Palme and Tage Erlander, as well as a host of business leaders, such as SKF head Tom Johnstone and current BP chairperson Carl-Henric Svanberg.

“The Bilderberg has been pretty important for Sweden. In the context of countries (such as Sweden) who don’t wield a great deal of influence, this is an opportunity to exert far more personal influence - to transcend the limits of geo-political status,” Richardson says.

Former Social Democrat leader Mona Sahlin is one of only a relatively few female attendees and US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton was the first woman to have been bestowed the honour of greeting guests as they arrive, prompting rumours in some quarters that this meant she had the blessing of the Bilderberg in her run for the US presidency.

“The Bilderberg resembles an old boys network. Hardly surprising if you look at senior political posts and the boardroom. Then there is the social dimension - boys getting together and being boys,” Richardson says.

The Bilderberg was formed by leaders concerned with the growth of anti-Americanism in Western Europe and who aimed to encourage a renewed spirit of Atlanticism.

This remains its main mission almost 60 years after its foundation and has endured despite the massive changes in geo-politics and the world economy in the intervening period, with matters of economic and trade policy playing an increasingly important role in discussions.

And while conspiracy theorists will no doubt continue to criticise the group as an undemocratic and unaccountable force in world affairs, Richardson believes the Bilderberg will remain an important forum for addressing global challenges.

"It reflects the ongoing commitment to overcoming global problems by transcending the limitations of our office," he says.

Ian Richardson is a researcher at Stockholm University Business School and a Visiting Fellow at Cranfield University School of Management. His book, entitled “Bilderberg People: Elite Power and Consensus in World Affairs”, goes on wide release on May 15th 2011.

External link: The Bilderberg's official website »

Peter Vinthagen Simpson (news@thelocal.se/+46 8 656 6518
http://www.thelocal.se/33700/20110511/

[marektysis]

Michel Barnier, French Commissioner for the Internal Market and Services, suggested in a speech given on “Europe Day” (9 May of course..) that the offices of President of the European Council and President of the European Commission should be merged. He says this person should ultimately be elected.

This means the jobs currently held by José Manuel Barroso and Herman Van Rompuy would be done by one person. I wholeheartedly approve the idea as HVR doesn’t appear to do much, clutters the G20 summits with another European, and it would give the EU a genuine “Mr Europe”. Then Dr. Kissinger might know who to call..

This is the first time such a senior EU official – as opposed to some MEP or think tank – has suggested such a move. Interestingly, for the same person to occupy the two offices would require no treaty change, which means the chances of it happening are more than zero. Similarly, there is no legal obstacle to Center-Right and Socialists having actual Commission President candidates who campaign and win or lose based on the elections to the European Parliament.

EurActiv France and Germany both covered it and I wrote the English version for EurActiv.com. It gives a nice overview of the background and context, if I do say so myself. If you know any Balkan languages, you can also go crazy with the Bulgarian and Romanian translations.

While much of the European media have ignored the announcement, the New York Times got in early on the story, earlier in fact than EurActiv.com and the other specialized EU media! It summarizes well the broader content of the speech. EUobserver emphasized its more alarmist side. England Expects, unsurprisingly, was upset by it.

Barnier is one of the big French names of international politics, the others being Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Pascal Lamy and Jean-Claude Trichet (all perfect capitalists, incidentally..). As such his speech was rather better covered by the French press.

Les Échos sees a “small European revolution” in this as Barnier is openly aiming for what he calls a “Federation of Nation-States” (a neat way of squaring the national primacy vs. federalism circle). Laurent Marchand of Ouest-France waxes lyrical about the speech’s refreshing candor and personal tone (rare for the Commission), as well as the content: pro-democratization and frankly federalist.

Marchand also points out that Barnier even mentions a tax on financial transactions and limitations on bonuses for corporate leaders. The latter is, incidentally, an important issue in French politics at the moment. Here’s to hoping some personalized and democratic politics can makes it way into the Commission
http://euroletters.wordpress.com/2011/05/11/barnier-there-can-only-be-one-eu-president/

[marektysis]

EU has reached its 'lowest point in history' [fr]
Published: 10 May 2011 | Updated: 11 May 2011 Despite having achieved peace and prosperity, the European project has reached its "lowest point in history," according to policymakers gathered in Florence to celebrate the 61st anniversary of the Schuman Declaration.

Background
The Schuman Declaration of 9 May 1950 was a governmental proposal by then-French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman to create a new form of organisation of states in Europe and eliminate "the age-old opposition of France and Germany".


The supranational community that emerged from his proposal, the European Coal and Steel Community, laid the foundations for a united Europe and was the forerunner of today's European Union.

'Europe Day', held on 9 May, is the EU's annual celebration of Schuman's ground-breaking speech, and sees the European institutions open their doors to the public in Brussels and beyond in an effort to celebrate peace and unity in Europe and highlight the successes of European integration.

More on this topic
News:Europhiles lead 'economic governance' calls on Europe Day
News:'Wise men' warn EU of gradual decline into irrelevanceSpeaking at the Festival of Europe in Florence, Joseph Weiler, a professor who holds the Jean Monnet chair at New York University, sounded a warning note about a union that has reached its limits.

These limits, he said, were illustrated by the lack of solidarity shown during the eurozone crisis, the France and Italy's drive to change the Schengen Treaty establishing a border-free zone, and the rise of populism in many EU countries.

EU politicians complain loudly about the democratic deficit and the need to engage with European citizens, but there is a continuous decline in the EU's legitimacy and the mobilising force of the EU institutions, said Weiler.

To tackle urgent problems European countries have made important decisions in the past, the scholar explained, citing as examples the establishment of the single market, the euro and the Schengen area. But these results are linked to legitimacy of process and outcome, not democratic legitimacy, he noted, giving his reading of EU fatigue.

The EU's founding fathers, starting with Robert Schuman, forged a European project whose DNA flowed from with the European Commission and the member states, not with the European Parliament. Even the Schuman declaration of 1950 does not mention the word 'democracy' once, Weiler said.

Perversely, over the years the Union has tried to close the gap by giving progressively more power to the European assembly, but that did not increase voter turnout in European elections. On the contrary, since 1979 voters have increasingly snubbed the ballot box.

European citizens do not feel that the politicians they elect properly represent them, nor do they feel that they can be held accountable for their actions, said Weiler, describing Europe as "a government without a government".

"Whatever we do to give more powers to the European Parliament or to national parliaments cannot redress this political lacuna," he added.

Polls show that European citizens rate more highly what the EU can do and give lower grades to what it has done in the past, said Weiler, discrediting the belief that the European project is legitimised only by its successes.

The professor said it is high time for Europe to propose a new mission, or what political scientists call "messianic political legitimacy," putting forward a vision or a dream of a new project that citizens are likely to support.

"The Schuman Declaration was a plan for action for people that needed to achieve things — peace and prosperity," he said, noting that the mobilising force of Europe had fallen victim to Europe's success.

Jerzy Buzek, president of the European Parliament, concurs that the rise of populism and anti-European sentiment must be challenged.

"As politicians we are failing our citizens by not making the case for European integration," Buzek said, adding that even if the status of the project was not satisfactory it should not be discredited.

"Today we need more coordination, therefore we still need more Europe," Buzek underlined, calling for more political will to forge a stronger union.

Links
http://www.euractiv.com/en/future-eu/eu-reached-lowest-point-history-news-504666

[marektysis]

http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=324831&ticker=CS:FP&previousCapId=408612&previousTitle=RWE%20AG

[marektysis]

Brussels

President Bresso,

Honourable members,

Ladies and Gentlemen:

I wish to thank the Committee of the Regions, and in particular President Mercedes Bresso, for the kind invitation to talk about the reform of the State Aid Package on the Services of General Economic Interest.

This is a major policy initiative that will lead to the reform of the rules that we use to check if the government financing of public services is compatible with the internal market.

The Lisbon Treaty gives Member States a broad room for manoeuvre to provide services such as public transport, hospitals, and the post.

It also gives the European Commission the task to make sure that the resources they use to finance these services do not distort competition in the internal market.

Our control does not include all public services, but only the services that are economic in nature. I have to add that the distinction between economic and non-economic services is provided by the Court of Justice.

At present, we carry out this task using a package of measures called the Monti-Kroes package. The package needs to be reviewed before the end of the year and will be replaced by new instruments in December this year.

Last March, the Commission issued a Communication to prepare the reform; over the next few weeks, I will collect the views and suggestions that it prompts from our different stakeholders.

I intend to involve as many institutions and organisations as possible in this process; including the European Parliament, the Member States and – today – you, the representatives of Europe’s regional and local governments.

We have already studied the views of the associations, non-governmental organisations, and public authorities that responded to the public consultation we conducted last year as part of our review.

I regard my conversation with you today as a crucial stage of the process, because your level of government is closer to the reality on the ground.

You know first-hand what it means to design, finance and provide a public service and you have a better sense of our citizens’ needs and expectations.

Therefore, your views and suggestion are essential for us to understand how the new package can help public authorities and service providers to meet these needs.

Let me anticipate the broad objectives that I believe this reform should pursue.

First and foremost, I want to help you make the services more efficient, without straining your budgets, giving the citizens better value for money.

Second, I want to define rules which will be clearer and simpler, which means easier for you to apply.

Finally, I want to diversify our scrutiny and focus it on the public financing of the services that have a significant impact on the internal market.

I will soon put to you some concrete ideas to stimulate our debate; but first, I want to give you a measure of the importance I attach to the reform.

There are many reasons why I regard this reform as a major policy initiative, and one of them is that public services touch all European citizens directly and can have a decisive impact on their lives.

Think of education and training, for instance.

We demand the best from our systems of learning, because in the knowledge economy the quality of our training centres and universities is crucial for the future of the young generations and a key factor of growth for Europe’s economy.

Education illustrates another typical function of public services; that is, building a more equal Europe.

Public services can give underprivileged Europeans a chance to close their social and economic gaps.

This is an important function, because inequality has been rising in the majority of developed countries in Europe and elsewhere at least since the mid-1980s.

Public services are an economic resource alongside income – think of public housing, for instance – but have a more equal distribution than income. As a consequence, they can reduce inequality directly.

According to a recent OECD estimate, on average public services reduce income inequality by a fifth in developed countries.

In short, public services are an essential element of Europe’s model of society. They are an asset that we need to leverage to the full because they can help us meet the demand for a fairer and more just society that comes from our citizens.

But these are not only my ideas.

The Lisbon Treaty has given greater emphasis to public services; which is excellent news for Europe’s citizens.

Protocol 26 stresses the need for high-quality and affordable services for all, while Article 14 provides a new legal basis for the European Parliament and the Council to establish the principles and conditions required for Europe’s public services to fulfil their mission.

This reform is part and parcel of the broader policy of the European Commission to strengthen the internal market and is one of the initiatives of the Single Market Act that we adopted last April.

However, the reform is not based on Article 14 or protocol 26. It is based on Article 106 of the Treaty, which grants the Commission exclusive power to assess the compensation for the provision of public services, i.e. to deal with State aid.

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Let me now turn to these State aid rules.

As I said, at present we carry out our control according to the Monti-Kroes package, which was introduced in 2005 after the landmark Altmark decision.

In it, the Court specified a set of conditions which helped us to identify which compensations of public services were State aid and which were not.

What has been our experience in the implementation of these rules?

One thing we have noticed is that our scrutiny is too uniform across the spectrum, from large market players that operate on an international scale, to activities organised by small local authorities.

I think that the new rules should be matched to the size and nature of the services, because the sports and recreation activities of a small town have scarcely any impact on competition and the internal market.

In contrast, there is no doubt that the large companies that provide services such as waste management, energy and post are in competition with other companies in Europe.

But the best indications of how the current rules work in practice have come from the public consultation of 2010.

The consultation has revealed that the rules are not always well understood, including some of the core notions of our assessment, such as:

which activities constitute an economic activity subject to our scrutiny, and which do not.

the question of which public services should be regarded as services of general economic interest;

the notion of an effect on competition and trade between Member States; and

the conditions spelled out in the Altmark decision I referred to earlier.

Looking at our experience and at these findings, it seems obvious to me that the new package should be clearer and more flexible. Let us see how we can make it happen.

First, our rules should be clearer. This is a must, because if you and your providers find the rules too complicated it’s going to be hard to comply with them.

One challenge here is that each Member State has its own organisation of the various levels of government and therefore of how public services are designed and financed.

In addition, the services themselves are not uniform across the Union and reflect the different traditions.

As a consequence, it won’t be easy for us to clarify once and for all ­– say – whether a given activity constitutes an economic activity, because this changes across national boundaries.

Take education for example.

When organising this service, you also decide whether it will be economic or not. Basic education financed directly by the State and offered to all would normally not be regarded as economic. But the situation is of course very different for higher private education paid by students or their parents.

Another point that can be made clearer is the interaction between State aid and public procurement rules.

I know that it’s not easy for many of you to reconcile regimes that work in a different way and I think that we should try to bridge the gap.

Take the example of a mayor who organises a tender for a service according to the procurement rules.

Perhaps under our new rules the use of the tender procedure could automatically remove any competition concern.

Finally, we have been asked to clarify the notion of reasonable profit. The issue here is that this notion depends on who shoulders the commercial risk.

For example, the reasonable profit of a bus operator depends on who bears the risk of a rise in the price of fuel.

You, as regional and local authorities, may decide to share this risk with your contractors or to compensate all the company’s costs – in which case commercial risk would not be an issue.

In sum, although no benchmark can cover every case, what if we introduced a safe–harbour threshold below which the profit is always treated as reasonable?

This would make your life a bit easier, I guess. Suppose you are awarding a contract for waste management. With a safe-harbour provision, you would only have to check that the premium you are paying on top of costs stays within the limit.

The second task is finding the best ways to adapt our scrutiny to the nature and size of the services. This task can be broken down into two parts:

On the one hand, we need simpler and lighter rules for small-scale public services and for certain types of social services;

On the other, we need better instruments to assess the cases with clear potential implications for the internal market.

Let me start with the first part: what criteria should we use to determine when the simpler rules apply?

We could look at the size of the compensation, which is the criterion in use today. At present, you do not need to inform the Commission if you grant up to €30 million to providers with an annual turnover of €100 million or less.

As an alternative, we could look at the size of the local authorities, whose activities – such child-care services and cultural centres – have little or no impact on the internal market.

To this end, we could set a population threshold under which a public authority is deemed to be too small to raise concerns. But where do we draw the line? What level best balances your needs and our duty to check that the aid does not distort competition?

As to the idea of extending these simpler rules to other types of social services than the current ones – hospitals and social housing -, you are best placed to answer the questions it entails.

The first, obvious question is: What is a social service? This is not as straightforward as it seems. In some of your constituencies, for instance, care for the elderly is provided on a purely commercial basis.

And once we have made this distinction, we will still have to ensure that the profits from social services do not cross-subsidise other activities of the same company.

Finally, there is the issue of what exactly the simplified rules will look like. Let us explore a few ideas.

When you finance a public service, the current rules ask you to check for overcompensation every year, even when the contract is for a long period. What if you were asked to check only once at the end of the contract?

Another idea concerns the notification exemptions I have talked about earlier. At present, the thresholds are almost the same across the board.

What if we introduced different requirements for different types of service? This could save the providers of certain social services a lot of red tape.

I will now move to the opposite side of the spectrum; that is, how to refine our assessment of large-scale commercial services.

At present, the aid can cover all the costs incurred by the service provider plus a reasonable profit margin, regardless of how efficient the provider is.

In times of budget consolidation, this clashes with the growing need to make an efficient use of public spending. Once again, let me put you some questions

What if the contracts included incentives for the service provider to become more efficient?

The system is not new, for instance it is already used in certain transport services. And the efficiency gains could be shared between the provider and the public authority, an arrangement that could bring fresh revenues to your coffers.

Another possibility is to mandate the use of tenders or of benchmarks to calculate the amount of the support, provided they don’t obstruct the performance of the service.

The tender procedure is the best means I know to select the most efficient provider and to get the best value for money.

But I also know that tendering can be a burden for public authorities and that it would not work in all cases.

We need to look for a balanced solution. For example, what about comparing an in-house provider with an independent competitor? How can this comparison be done?

Similarly, we have to find a balanced solution to the issue of services provided jointly by different public authorities.

We see more and more municipalities pool their resources to organise certain services together, such as waste treatment.

I commend these forms of cooperation when they make your services more efficient. But we also have to make sure that they don’t make the playing field uneven for commercial operators.

Ladies and Gentlemen:

These are the questions I have for today’s debate. I am looking forward to your response because you know better than most what our citizens expect from their public services.

I believe that good and accessible public services are essential for our economy, our wellbeing, and in the social and civic domains.

A large majority of Europeans share this view; but public services require financing from government budgets, and not every demand can be afforded in these times of dire straits.

I want to have a balanced approach. It is a mistake to look only at the cost of public services, we also need to look at their benefits.

Think of public transport, which can improve the quality of life in our cities and cut harmful emissions of greenhouse gases. Think of personal care for the elderly, which is a growing need as our societies age.

In sum, public services bring us countless benefits and are an asset for our economy and society.

I hope that our reform will help you and other public authorities across the Union make public services more efficient and sustainable so that we can leave them to future generations of Europeans.

Thank you.
http://www.iewy.com/26085-joaquin-almunia-vice-president-of-the-european-commission-responsible-for-competition-policy-reform-of-eu-state-aid-rules-on-the-services-of-general-economic-interest-90th-plenary-session-of-the-commi.html
******************************
Notice that to make a perfect economic union, division of Europe in regions is necessary. This will make the force of the EU governement
more stronger than the work with States rendered difficult by the force of nationalism. This has always been an occult work behind the scene of European Construction. But such an Europe has 260 regions.
More easy to control than 27 countries.
For information use.
Marek Tysis

[marektysis]

Sweden - Carl Bildt to attend Council of Europe's Committee of Ministers meeting in Istanbul
Minister for Foreign Affairs Carl Bildt travels to Istanbul today, Tuesday 10 May, to attend the Council of Europe's Committee of Ministers meeting.

The agenda of the meeting includes the Council of Europe Neighbourhood Policy and a discussion of the organisation's future, based on the report 'Living together in 21st century Europe' by Joschka Fischer, Javier Solana, and others.

While in Istanbul, Mr Bildt will also sign the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence.

In connection with the meeting, the Turkish Chairmanship comes to an end and Ukraine, the incoming chairmanship holder, will present its work programme.

Mr Bildt will be available to the media. Please contact Anna Charlotta Johansson for details.

view original source
http://www.isria.com/pages/13_May_2011_136.php

[marektysis]

WHY IS PETER THIEL A FUNDER OF BILDERBERG: LOOK WELL AT FOLLOWING ARTICLE: EDUCATION IS A VALUE AS A STOCK OPTION
AND INTEREST FROM BILL GATES IS CERTAINLY NOT
A QUESTION OF PHILANTROPY BUT OF PURE MONEY.THAT IS WHY THIS QUESTION HAS TO BE CONSIDERED AS ESSENTIEL IN BILDERBERG NEXT DECISIONS !!!
please subscribe to Tony Gossling Pepis list to receive a regular flow of
occult Bilderberg news.Nobody has spoken up to now of mr Peter Thiel whom influence is essential in funding Bilderberg.
Marek tysis
*************************************************


Education: Still Worth the Price?
By Morgan Housel | More Articles
May 13, 2011
•Over the past few months, hundreds of newspapers, blogs, and commentators have asked whether college is the next bubble. Most come to the same answer: Maybe.

What school are you going to? Who's paying? What's your degree? How's the economy? For some, higher education is indeed a bubble, in the sense that the benefits will never exceed the costs. For others -- maybe most -- it's still a worthwhile investment.

Those with a college degree outearn those with only a high school diploma by a long shot. In 2009, the average wage of a college grad was about double those who only finished high school. Since the early 1990s, college grads have seen their real (inflation adjusted) incomes stay roughly flat, while the high-school-only group has seen a decline of about 10%. It pays to have a college education. No doubt about it.

However, the entry price for that education is exploding. Consider how fast the tuition has outstripped the income growth of college grads:

Since 1991, tuition -- measured by the Department of Labor's "tuition and school fees" component of the Consumer Price Index -- has increased more than threefold, while median wages for those with a college degree have increased just 70%. (Both measures are nominal, or not adjusted for inflation.) Importantly, the cost of obtaining a degree has grown faster than the cost of not having one.

As others have pointed out, tuition has grown faster than what many consider the most out-of-control strain on consumer finances: health-care costs. Tuition has actually increased at a comparable clip to last decade's bubble poster child, housing.

What's going on here? Hedge fund manager Peter Thiel offered his explanation earlier this year:

A true bubble is when something is overvalued and intensely believed. Education may be the only thing people still believe in in the United States. To question education is really dangerous. It is the absolute taboo. It's like telling the world there's no Santa Claus.
But is that really the whole explanation? Americans do intensely believe in education. Unfortunately, for some that belief is justified, yet for others it is not.

During the dot-com bubble, the intrinsic value of a company was the same, regardless of the investor. It didn't matter whether Warren Buffett overpaid for a worthless shell company, or if a donkey did. They both lost equally.

Education isn't like that. The value one person receives from it is vastly different from another, even when both pay the same price, or even attend the same school.

Here, Slate columnist Annie Lowrey makes a great point:

It could be that Thiel is right, that college students, en masse, are overpaying for their educations. But it seems more likely that some college students attending certain types of schools are overpaying. If you want to be an aerospace engineer and have the chops to get into Caltech, the quality of the education, contacts, and fellow students on offer might really be worth $200,000 to you. A diploma from the school practically guarantees a good salary. That is not true for many other institutions -- particularly not for online, for-profit schools, the worst of which egregiously overcharge for worthless degrees.
To extend that point, we have to talk about the type of jobs toward which the economy is shifting. Tomorrow's jobs aren't at General Motors (NYSE: GM ) . They're at Google (Nasdaq: GOOG ) . The latter requires, on average, more education. So as the job market shifts, more people have been enrolling in college.

The supply of colleges, however, has by and large not kept up with rising demand, with one notable exception: online, for-profit institutions, such as those offered by Apollo Group (Nasdaq: APOL ) and DeVry (NYSE: DV ) .

As Lowrey notes, these colleges are often woefully inadequate, particularly given the price. My favorite example: The Government Accountability Office highlighted a for-profit college that offered a massage therapy degree for $14,000, when a local community college offered the same program for $520. Paying tens of thousands of dollars for an education is still well worth it if you're receiving a degree that focuses on where tomorrow's jobs will be. Many degrees, however, do not -- yet they often cost the same price.

This is where Thiel's argument of intense belief comes in. If there is a bubble, it's in the idea that simply going to college is what matters -- not what degree you get, or how you'll apply it in the real world.

What do you think?

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2011/05/13/education-still-worth-the-price.aspx

[marektysis]

State Visit of the King and Queen of Spain to Switzerland

The Federal Council received King Juan Carlos I and Queen Sofía of Spain on a state visit to Switzerland. After their arrival in Switzerland in the presence of the President of the Swiss Confederation Micheline Calmy-Rey, a special train took the royal couple to Bern for military honours, official speeches in the Parliament and bilateral talks between the Swiss and Spanish delegations. Friday, the second day of the state visit, will be marked by a meeting with members of the Swiss business community in Bern and a cultural programme in the Canton of Vaud.

The royal family has close ties with Switzerland. As a child, the King of Spain lived for several years in Lausanne and Fribourg. In addition to his state visit in 1979, in recent years he has visited Switzerland several times, particularly international Geneva (ILO, CERN, Telecom, UN Human Rights Council). In 1993, he was awarded the title of Doctor Honoris Causa by the University of Fribourg in recognition of his political activity and, in 1996 in Lausanne, the Jean Monnet Prize for his commitment to an integrated Europe. His key role in Spain's democratic transition and in Spain's international profile has earned him great respect in Switzerland and around the world.The relationship that unites Switzerland and Spain is warm and intense, and has been marked for several years by regular high-level meetings. This state visit testifies to the friendship and mutual respect that characterise the relationship between the two countries. Switzerland and Spain share a common understanding of numerous international issues, particularly the need to strengthen multilateralism. A Joint Declaration signed in Cordoba in 2007 by the foreign ministers provides a solid basis for several political cooperation projects. The last state visit by the Spanish king to Switzerland was in 1979.

The talks were conducted by Mrs Micheline Calmy-Rey, President of the Swiss Confederation and Head of the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, and King Juan Carlos I. Ms Trinidad Jiménez, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation of the Kingdom of Spain, and the Federal Councillors Doris Leuthard, Didier Burkhalter and Johann Schneider-Ammann also participated in the talks.

At the bilateral level, the talks between the two delegations focused in particular on scientific and economic cooperation between the two countries. At the international level, the ministers discussed, among other things, European politics, the situation in North Africa, the Middle East and Latin America, and various issues relating to energy and the international financial architecture. Regarding relations between Switzerland and the European Union, Mrs Calmy-Rey explained Switzerland's willingness to pursue the bilateral path through a comprehensive and coordinated approach that will allow Switzerland to deepen its relations with the EU in various areas while maintaining sufficient independence in decisions relating to the adoption of the acquis communautaire.

Spain and Switzerland have very close relations at the economic, cultural and human levels, not to mention the tourist industry. There are 64,000 Spanish nationals in Switzerland – not counting dual nationals – and 23,000 Swiss residents in Spain. Cooperation between the two countries has been strengthened in recent years with the signing of a Re-admission Agreement concluded in 2003, and a 2006 protocol amending the Double Taxation Agreement, which was amended in 2010. The Swiss Embassy in Madrid set up a Business Hub in 2002. One high point of cultural relations was Switzerland’s participation in the Arco Art Fair in Madrid in 2003, which was the year a multiannual programme organised by Presence Switzerland in Spain was launched. In 2007, the spotlight was focused on Valencia, where Switzerland's Team Alinghi defended its title in the America's Cup yachting race. In 2008, Switzerland took part in the Expo Zaragoza.

Friday, the second day of the state visit, will begin with a breakfast attended by King Juan Carlos, Swiss business leaders and the President of the Swiss Confederation. Economic exchanges between Switzerland and Spain have more than doubled in the last decade, despite the crisis. In 2010, bilateral trade grew by 8.9% to CHF 11.3 billion (CHF 6.4 billion in exports and CHF 4.9 billion in imports). Spain is Switzerland's tenth-biggest export customer and eleventh-biggest supplier. At the end of 2009, Swiss investments in Spain totalled CHF 15.7 billion. Switzerland is the ninth largest foreign investor in Spain. There are some 250 Swiss companies in Spain, employing almost 55,000 people. Spain is the eleventh largest foreign investor in Switzerland.

The state visit will continue on Friday with a cultural programme at the Fondation de l'Hermitage museum in Lausanne, which is currently hosting an exhibition of Spanish painters entitled "El Modernismo, From Sorolla to Picasso, 1880-1918". This will be followed by a meeting in Lausanne with the Spanish community in Switzerland. After lunch in the Vaud countryside, the Spanish royal couple will return to Madrid from Geneva in the late afternoon on Friday.

view original source
http://www.isria.com/pages/13_May_2011_142.php

[marektysis]

President's greetings conveyed to Queen Beatrix

2011-05-13 21:51:12
WAM AMSTERDAM: UAE Ambassador to the Netherlands Ali Thani Al-Suwaidi last Wednesday conveyed greetings of President His Highness Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan to H.M Queen Beatrix during the annual meeting with ambassadors accredited to Amsterdam.

For her part, the Queen asked Al-Suwaidi to convey her greetings to President His Highness Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

The ambassador also conveyed greetings from His Highness Gen. Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi and Deputy Supreme Commander of the UAE Armed Forces to HRH Crown Prince Willem-Alexander.

Al-Suwaidi also conveyed greetings from H.H Sheikh Abdullah Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Minister of Foreign Affairs to the Dutch Foreign Minister Uri Rosenthal who expressed interest in furthering relations with the UAE to the best interests of the two countries.

WAM/MMYS
http://www.wam.ae/servlet/Satellite?c=WamLocEnews&cid=1289993505605&pagename=WAM%2FWAM_E_Layout&parent=Query&parentid=1135099399852

[marektysis]

International Monetary Fund chief arrested on sexual assault charges
By Alex Lantier
16 May 2011
International Monetary Fund (IMF) head Dominique Strauss-Kahn was arrested early Sunday morning on charges of criminal sex acts, attempted rape, and unlawful imprisonment, after an alleged encounter with a chambermaid at a Sofitel hotel in New York City.


Strauss-Kahn was due to travel to Berlin to discuss the Greek bailout and European financial crises with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. He was also scheduled to speak to officials of France’s Socialist Party (PS), France’s main bourgeois “left” party, of which he is a high-ranking member. Strauss-Kahn was until yesterday seen as the PS’s most likely candidate in the 2012 French presidential elections to challenge President Nicolas Sarkozy.


According to a 32-year-old Sofitel employee, however, Strauss-Kahn assaulted her at 1 p.m. on Saturday, after she entered his $3,000-a-night suite to clean it, not realizing he was still there. He allegedly emerged from the bathroom naked, chased her down a hallway, and sexually assaulted her after dragging her into a bedroom, though she was subsequently able to break free.

After the woman escaped, she notified other hotel staff, who called the New York Police Department (NYPD). According to US authorities, Strauss-Kahn then fled his hotel room, leaving his cell phone behind, but was detained by Port Authority of New York and New Jersey police officers in the first class cabin of Air France Flight 23 at 4:40 p.m., ten minutes before the flight left for Paris.


The Sofitel employee was taken to Manhattan’s Roosevelt Hospital to be treated for minor injuries. Jorge Tito, a manager at the Accor chain that owns Sofitel, issued a statement declaring, “We would like to point out that our employee worked at the Sofitel New York for three years and was completely satisfactory in terms of her work and behavior.”


Strauss-Kahn was taken to the NYPD’s Special Victims office and was arrested at 2:15 a.m. Sunday. Strauss-Kahn’s attorney, Benjamin Brafman, said his client denied all charges and would plead not guilty.


Anne Sinclair—a former TV journalist who is Strauss-Kahn’s third wife, and a multi-millionaire heiress to the fortune of art dealer Paul Rosenberg—released a brief statement saying that she had no doubt “that his innocence will be established.” According to a report in France-Soir, she plans to investigate the Sofitel employee.


An IMF spokeswoman acknowledged Strauss-Kahn’s arrest, adding that “the IMF remains fully functioning and operational.” The IMF named former JP Morgan and US Treasury executive John Lipsky, the IMF number two official under Strauss-Kahn, as acting managing director.


Strauss-Kahn has faced repeated allegations of sexual improprieties in recent years, from both right-wing and PS sources. In 2007, journalist Tristane Banon alleged that he had sexually assaulted her years before, though she did not press charges amid fears that it might end her career. In 2008 PS deputy Aurélie Filipetti said that, after a “very blunt and insistent” proposal from Strauss-Kahn, “I arranged never to find myself alone with him in a closed location.”


After Strauss-Kahn’s 2008 affair with IMF employee and Hungarian economist Piroska Nagy came to light, an IMF investigation concluded that the relationship “reflected a serious error of judgment.”


A minister in several Socialist Party governments, Strauss-Kahn personifies the organization’s reactionary politics—a party of the financial aristocracy profoundly hostile to socialism and to the struggles of the working class. It underscores the profoundly dishonest, reactionary role of various “left” groups in France—such as the New Anti-Capitalist Party (NPA) or Workers Struggle (LO)—who still present the PS as a socialist or “left” party.


Strauss-Kahn began in the 1970s as a member of the Union of Communist Students (UEC), the youth movement of the Stalinist French Communist Party (PCF), while a student of statistics, economics, and law. In 1976 he joined the Socialist Party (PS), then a newly-formed electoral vehicle for François Mitterrand.


This was part of a broad movement as student ex-radicals, who were politicized after the 1968 student protests and general strike, and were recruited to form what would become the bourgeoisie’s main political personnel in the 1980s, under Mitterrand’s presidency.


Numerous figures from pseudo-”left” organizations also joined the PS at this time, rising to leading positions. These included (from the Revolutionary Communist League [LCR], now the New Anti-Capitalist Party) Pierre Moscovici, Julien Dray, and Henri Weber; from the Internationalist Communist Organization (OCI), today the Independent Workers Party, came Jean-Christophe Cambadélis and, most famously, future Prime Minister Lionel Jospin.


A PS legislator and policy specialist in the 1980s under Mitterrand, Strauss-Kahn served as a minister, then became a corporate lobbyist in the 1990s. As finance minister in the 1997-2002 Jospin “Plural Left” government, Strauss-Kahn privatized several public firms—France Télécom, Crédit Lyonnais bank, and defense firm Thomson-CSF. After resigning as minister in 1999 in a bribery scandal, he remained a major figure inside the PS and corporate circles, taking the IMF post after being nominated by Sarkozy in 2007.


As IMF chief, he has overseen deep social cuts impoverishing workers in many indebted countries—Greece, Ireland, Latvia, Hungary, Romania, and Pakistan—in exchange for IMF loans. He recently oversaw financial negotiations with the military dictatorship in Egypt, as it tries to combat the resistance of the working class following the departure of Hosni Mubarak.


Until recently Strauss-Kahn led in polls for France’s 2012 presidential election, due to mass hostility to the right-wing policies of Sarkozy. He had already faced criticisms, however, in the media over his lavish lifestyle. There are reports that he bought a $30,000 suit in New York, and pictures of him appeared in the press stepping out of a Porsche reportedly owned by one of his top aides, Ramzi Khiroun.


French politicians expressed surprise and concern at the implications of the charges against Strauss-Kahn for the 2012 elections. The unpopular Sarkozy trails both Strauss-Kahn and neo-fascist candidate Marine Le Pen in polls. PS Chairwoman Martine Aubry described Strauss-Kahn’s arrest as a “thunderbolt.”


Long-time PS official Jacques Attali warned that Strauss-Kahn “won’t be able to be a candidate for the Socialist Party presidential primary.”


Strauss-Kahn’s potential competitors for the PS nomination made cautious statements. Ségolène Royal asked the public to “wait for the courts to decide,” adding: “No one can profit from [Strauss-Kahn’s] difficulties.” Former PS chairman François Hollande, who has declared his intention to run, also warned against drawing “premature conclusions.”


An anonymous Sarkozy advisor told Le Monde: “If this had taken place 15 days from the election, it would have been the theatrical scandal that would have kept him from going until the end. Now, however, we are in a troubled period. Everything is changing; each week brings new events, not just small ones but cataclysms.”
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/may2011/imfc-m16.shtml

**************
AMAZINGLY THESE GUYS ARE BELIEVING THEY MAY DO WHAT THEY WANT BECAUSE THEY BELONG TO THE ELITE.
Some of them, as Conrad Black have understood that certain decent
limits are existing, but it was then too late....
You may be certain that secretly they will try to get him out, but a second rape case is studied by the US Justice and in France a plaint has be
done by a member of his large family for a rape, a few years ago.
DSK was also with his wife, Anne Sinclair a member of the International Crisis Group...and his future was bright...but all is well finished now: no more Bilderberg and Bilderberg friends around him.
Yesterday was a rare good day for Humanity !

Marek tysis

Marek Tysis

[marektysis]

Bill Gates challenges world leaders to make vaccines a priority
May 17, 2011 at 10:34 AM by AHN · Leave a Comment

Ayinde O. Chase – AHN News Editor
Geneva, Switzerland (AHN) – Bill Gates is calling on world leaders to increase their investments in vaccines and thinks they should be held accountable for extending the benefits of vaccines to every child.

During a keynote address at the 64th World Health Assembly, an annual gathering of health ministers and global health leaders, Gates relayed to the attendees his vision. “Strong immunization systems will put an end to polio and help us reach all children with five to six new vaccines,” Gates said. “We can save 4 million lives by 2015, and 10 million lives by 2020.”

Gates is more optimistic than ever about the impact of vaccines. “Vaccines are inexpensive, they are easy to deliver, and they are proven to protect children from disease,” he declared.

Gates, co-chair of the foundation he founded with his wife, Melinda, said that starting in 2012 his organization would give an award to an individual or organization that has made a uniquely innovative contribution to the “decade of vaccines.” The innovation could be in the science, the delivery, or the financing of vaccines.

“The best immunization systems work because leaders hold themselves accountable for results,” he said. “Leaders diagnose weaknesses, innovate to address them, and spread the best ideas.”

During his address Gates noted how leaders in India and Nigeria were responsible for increasing immunization rates in their states, and acknowledged the success of the new meningitis A vaccine that was released in Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger last December, to stress the importance of commitments to immunization.

The Microsoft billionaire and philanthropist challenged pharmaceutical manufacturers to make sure vaccines are affordable for poor countries.

“I believe we have the opportunity to make a new future in which global health is the cornerstone of global prosperity,” he said.

Specifically, Gates called on:

• Donor countries to increase their investment in vaccines and immunization, even though they are coping with budget crises. He cited the GAVI Alliance pledging meeting in London on June 13 as an opportunity to show their support.

• Pharmaceutical companies to make sure vaccines are affordable for poor countries. Specifically, they must make a commitment to affordable pricing. Gates said he was confident that the combined price of the pentavalent, pneumococcus, and rotavirus vaccines can be cut in half by 2015.

• All 193 member states to make vaccines a central focus of their health systems. He said they must pledge to meet vaccine coverage targets of 90 percent at the country level .

Article © AHN – All Rights Reserved
[fOR LIMITED PUBLIC AND FAIR USE ]
http://gantdaily.com/2011/05/17/bill-gates-challenges-world-leaders-to-make-vaccines-a-priority/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have again to make a constatation: what give us guarantee that mr
philantropist is not playing or having stocks in medecinal ?
the reality shows the opposite. This man is investing in a field where profits are certain: vaccine and education. I don t consider vaccines as so good for the health, more the opposite.Education, yes, but which one?
a sort of subprime as the funder of Bilderberg, mr Thiel is considering it?
The use of philantropist should be only for those who give without hope to
get back with interests.

Marek Tysis

[marektysis]

(Reuters) - Deutsche Bank Chief Executive Josef Ackermann is being touted in Berlin as a potential successor to Dominique Strauss-Kahn as head of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), German daily Bild said on Tuesday.

A day after Germany signalled it wanted the fund's top job to stay in European hands, the mass-circulation tabloid said a second possible home-grown candidate was European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) president Thomas Mirow.

The newspaper cited no sources, and Deutsche Bank declined to comment while a spokesman for the EBRD played down any involvement from Mirow.

"The question is not currently being discussed," he said from Kazakhstan where the EBRD was meeting. "President Mirow is fully engaged in his work at the EBRD."

Strauss-Kahn, who has run the Washington-based IMF since 2007, was arrested on charges of attempted rape over the weekend.

If he leaves the fund, the debate on who succeeds him will pit U.S. and European policymakers -- who feel their respective regions have strong claims to the position -- against emerging powers China, India and Brazil, which are playing an ever greater role in both the IMF and the global economy.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Monday it would make sense for Europe to keep the top job in view of the fund's role in tackling the ongoing euro zone debt crisis.

That link might in turn prompt raised eyebrows if Ackermann -- not hitherto viewed as a leading candidate -- were appointed, given that Deutsche's net exposure to Greece amounted to 1.6 billion euros ($2.37 billion) as of the end of 2010.

Ackermann's contract as CEO of Deutsche Bank runs until 2013, and the bank has said it is still in the process of choosing a successor.

The IMF board met informally on Monday for an update on Frenchman Strauss-Kahn but made no decision on whether to remove him from his job steering the organisation's response to global economic challenges.

The IMF named the fund's deputy, John Lipsky, as acting managing director on Sunday, but he announced last week he was stepping down when his term expires in August, putting more pressure on the IMF to quickly resolve the leadership issue.

(Reporting by Marc Jones and Edward Taylor; Editing by John Stonestreet)

http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/05/17/idINIndia-57068720110517

[kevink]

Dear Marek,

This says that Christine Lagarde (2009) or Kemal Dervis (2006, 2007) are top candidates as alternatives to yet another white male, such as Ackermann. Whoever is selected we know they will most certainly be from Club de Bilderberg.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/19/world/europe/19iht-profile.html?_r=1

[marektysis]

Hello Kevin,

You 're right but we have to notice that Europe (through Bilderberger Barroso) is pushing the IMF to decide quickly for a European candidate.
But on the other side China or India ( and Brezil as well) were expecting to have the post due to the emergence of Far east countries in the
global plantation.
Lagarde is a good economist but a scandal is threathening her through a forced intervention from Sarkozy in favor of mr Bernard Tapie that she
favorized in an arbitral decision that might be illegal in the adidas affair
where the former ' Credit Lyonnais' was at the origin of the whole thing.
She is leaned by mrs Merkel too.
Kemal dervis is more clean and had UN organisation experience.He is a good candidate with the help of USA.
I believe he should be a good compromise between Europe, USA and Bilderberg. Naturally some european countries as france would not agree
as usual, but after the scandal DSK, France has already lost a part of her credit.

regards

[marektysis]

COUNTDOWN TO BILDERBERG



By Mark Anderson

As the economy tanks, AMERICAN FREE PRESS prepares to cover Bilderberg 2011 in St. Moritz, Switzerland June 9-12. The average American, the average European and countless others are much more affected than ever before by the painful policies that come from the very people who comprise the notorious Bilderberg group.

For too many years, the American press has been unforgivably silent on this global planning group, whose secret meetings about important matters—always behind sealed doors, ringed with heavily armed guards—were first brought to light by the late columnist Westbrook Pegler in the early days and then given grand exposure by AFP’s own Willis A. Carto and Jim Tucker ever since.

Tucker helped bring the European press into the fold. While the U.S. corporate media remain silent, readers of papers around the world now know about these conspirators.

Never before have there been fewer excuses for the continual U.S. press blackout on the annual Bilderberg meetings. Television reports in mid-May did focus heavily on one infamous Bilderberg member, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who headed the International Monetary Fund. The IMF has saddled several nations with impossible debt structures, resulting in major news stories. Yet, Strauss-Kahn made even bigger headlines than the IMF with his alleged sexual crime that landed him in a jail in New York. Still, his obvious Bilderberg pedigree escapes America’s reporters, editors and publishers.

Remember David Rockefeller’s oft-quoted words during a 1991 Bilderberg meeting in Baden-Baden, Germany exactly 20 years ago: “We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost 40 years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan . . . if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march toward a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”




The “national auto-determination” traditional to Switzerland is a major reason why a prominent Swiss legislator wrote a letter to a federal councilor in charge of police functions (see AFP’s May 23 issue, page 1), stressing that many Swiss do not want the likes of Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger and other undesirables breaking bread for global control within Swiss borders.

Bilderberg’s ongoing plan to make crude oil cost much more and strangle national economies with their debt schemes are finally being felt by everyone—up close and personal. That is why AFP, We Are Change/ Switzerland and others are sounding the alarm more loudly than ever.

As you read this, call your local media and national media and demand an accounting of Bilderberg. Feel free to send them this article.

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/countdown_to_bilderberg_270.html

Marek Tysis