The British tax authorities have paid an informant for the bank details of scores of wealthy Britons. The records were stolen from one of the world’s most secretive tax havens.
HM Revenue & Customs paid £100,000 for data that it is using to launch investigations of up to 100 British citizens who have accounts at Liechtenstein’s biggest bank.
British authorities regard it as a coup to have penetrated accounts that have been beyond their reach for decades. “There will be many frightened people who thought Liechtenstein was secure,” said a City accountant.
Anyone found to have evaded tax faces fines of up to 100% of the money owed to the Revenue and, where deliberate deception is proved, a jail sentence of up to seven years.
The bank informant has already provoked a storm in Germany by selling data on 750 wealthy Germans’ accounts to the country’s intelligence service for £3.2m in January last year.
Homes and offices of dozens of suspected tax evaders in Germany have since been raided.
The suspected whistleblower, accused of stealing data from the bank, was sacked and convicted of fraud. He also offered data to tax authorities in America, Canada, Australia and France.
ONE of Germany’s biggest financial institutions is to sue UBS, the Swiss banking giant, claiming it was mis-sold hundreds of millions of pounds worth of sub-prime securities.
The action is expected to trigger a wave of similar lawsuits across world financial centres as institutions seek recompense for losses incurred from buying complex financial instruments that are now worth a fraction of their original price. It will also heap further pressure on Marcel Ospel, UBS’s embattled chairman, to resign.
Sources familiar with the situation say HSH Nordbank, which has assets of €207 billion (£155.8 billion) and is the world’s largest provider of shipping finance, is to take legal action against UBS to recover up to €500m that was lost in a vehicle, set up six years ago, called North Street 4.
At the time, this contained a basket of synthetic collateralised debt obligations, otherwise known as CDOs. Around 70% of the debt was corporate and the rest was exposed to the US sub-prime
CDOs became one of the hottest financial instruments of the last boom, and what started as a $157 billion (£79.8 billion) market in 2004 grew to more than $2 trillion at the start of last year.
UBS has also been one of the hardest hit from the fall-out from sub-prime. It has since been forced to write down $18.4 billion from its own exposure to these mortgages.
Now it faces action from banks it sold them to. UBS arranged at least nine North Street transactions with a combined value in excess of $15.6 billion.
When the German bank approached UBS earlier this decade, it was keen to diversify its investment portfolio. It had excess regulatory capital and wanted exposure to a safe international credit portfolio.
But now those close to HSH say it believes UBS sold an investment portfolio that contained substantially higher risk than was explained at the time.
It claims the CDOs were mis-sold and mismanaged because UBS substituted products that were put into NS4 without proper explanation to its clients.
Sources close to HSH say North Street 4 ended up with 70% of the vehicle being exposed to the American property market and only 30% was corporate debt. UBS declined to comment on the allegations.
It is thought HSH intends to mount the legal action in New York, although talks have been going on for several months with UBS in a bid to reach a settlement.
Lawyers expect a “litigation boom” in the wake of the sub-prime fall-out. Sue Miller, a financial litigator at City law firm Stephenson Harwood, said that misrepresentation of claims would almost inevitably include claims against individual traders.
Other legal experts say action against investment banks that sold these products will drag on for years, and up to $500 billion will have to be written off against the value of sub-prime mortgages.
So far the bulk of the pain has been felt on Wall Street, but other financial centres in places like Japan and Korea have yet to admit their losses.
Investing ethically doesn't mean you won't make a healthy profit too, says Kate Hughes
Saturday, 23 February 2008
Shocking predictions of rising sea levels and distressing reports of human exploitation for the sake of profit are finally starting to change the way we live, play and invest.
Research carried out by the Investment Management Association shows that ethical funds under management reached £5.9bn in the last quarter of 2007, up 18 per cent on the year before. Meanwhile, the Co-op has found that interest in ethical investment also increased by 18 per cent in the past year.
In theory, ethical investment is a great way to further both your financial future and the health of the planet. The widely held assumption is that a fund manager only puts your money into companies that promote a change for good environmentally and socially, while providing you with competitive returns.
But this is a sector that is riddled with misunderstanding about just what constitutes an ethical fund. Despite good intentions, it is all too easy to put money into "responsible" investments that are anything but, including those that fly the conscientious flag despite having airlines, oil companies, and arms manufacturers on their books.
How green is green?
The first hurdle is in the name. Environmental or climate funds deal with our effect on the planet. Ecological and socially oriented funds, commonly known as socially responsible investments (SRI) deal with both human and environmental welfare.
"Environmental funds themselves break down into three approaches," says Peter De Graaf, of environmental research organisation Trucost. "Firstly, clean technologies funds will only invest in companies that produce technologies promoting a cleaner environment. The second is the more traditional approach, when funds exclude certain companies or sectors that challenge the environment, such as oil and gas companies.
"Finally, some environmental funds will include companies that are most efficient when conducting their business, using the least resources or producing the least emissions."
This often includes so- called "climate change" funds, which, despite the name, may not invest in ecologically friendly companies at all. Virgin Money's new climate change fund is one of the latest to get in on the action. It can invest in companies from all sectors, including the most polluting types of industries, "but will only invest in those which have a lighter than average environmental footprint for their sector".
This means a company could be included simply because it is not quite as bad as the others. Some of the companies included in the Virgin portfolio include French car manufacturer Renault and UK energy producer BG Group. And many climate change funds invest in companies that will gain from climate change – even if they are not necessarily helping the environment themselves.
There are also engagement funds and strategies, offered by managers such as Aberdeen and F&C for example, which buy into companies on the condition that the company will commit to improving its ethical credentials.
If you add social responsibility into the mix, the options available follow the same pattern, says Adam Ognall, deputy chief executive of the UK Social Investment Forum (UKSIF). "Just like green funds, investors have a choice of screening options when it comes to SRI funds.
"For example, some SRI funds will employ strategies that screen out all arms producers or companies testing on animals, for example, known as negative screening. But others will include car manufacturers who occasionally produce armoured personnel carriers, or companies that use animals, but only for medical experiments."
And then there are the companies that may have a great environmental record, but a bad humanitarian one, or vice versa.
Picking an ethical fund
Because there is such a variety of SRI funds available, investors need to decide how strict they are or what their shade of green is, and then find the fund that matches it, says Alex Davies, head of socially responsible investment (SRI) at Hargreaves Lansdown.
"The darker green the fund claims to be, the stricter its ethical rules," he says. A dark green fund could focus on alternative energy producers or organ-isations promoting social welfare. But a light green fund could include an oil producer or a company with a sideline in armaments.
Principles and performance
Ethical investments have long laboured under the reputation of sacrificing returns for morality, but it appears that is becoming a myth. Hargreaves Lansdown's latest league table of the top 150 funds includes three ethical contenders – Jupiter Ecology, Aegon's Ethical Equity and F&C's Stewardship Income fund.
"People imagine that the restrictions on ethical funds hinder their performance," adds My-Linh Ngo, of SRI Research for Henderson Global Investors. "But investors should remember that most funds are restricted in some way, be that geographic regions or the size of the companies, for example. SRI is simply operating within parameters that exist across the investment world."
As the UK and the EU become more focused on social and environmental responsibility, new legislation could boost the attractiveness of SRI, she adds. "SRI investing is about focusing on promoting more environmentally sustainable, and socially responsible practices. Environmental regulation is a key driver for many of the companies we invest in, and those companies are better positioned to benefit from this trend than traditional companies."
To find out more about ethical investing, the UK Social Investment Forum runs an information website at www.investability.org, and the Ethical Investment Association, (www.ethicalinvestment.org.uk), provides lists of ethical financial advisers in the UK.
For more in-depth research information, Trucost, (www.trucost.com) and the Ethical Investment Research Services (www.eiris.org) provide independent research into the social, environmental and ethical performance of companies. The UK's first National Ethical Investment Week (www.neiw.org ) runs from 18 – 24 May.
· £3bn project would cut dependence on Gazprom · Follow your wallet, urges official
The Bush administration yesterday urged the EU to stop dithering over the building of a $6bn (£3bn) gas pipeline from the Caspian basin to central Europe and reduce its growing dependence on Russia's Gazprom.
"Follow your wallet," Matthew Bryza, US deputy assistant secretary of state, said, arguing that the troubled Nabucco project made sound commercial sense and would cut Europe's dependence on Gazprom by up to a quarter.
Bryza's outspoken comments came after talks with senior EU officials, including energy commissioner Andris Piebalgs, and took sideswipes at the "gigantic rents" [excessive prices] Gazprom is charging Europe for gas. They underline the growing geo-political importance of gas.
"Helping Europe diversify its gas supplies has become extremely urgent," said Bryza, adding that US backing for Nabucco was in the country's national interests even though no American companies are involved.
This week's controversy in Britain over the huge profits made by British Gas at a time when householders are having to spend an increasingly large proportion of their income on energy also highlight the sensitivity of the issue for politicians across Europe.
The 2,050-mile (3,300km) Nabucco pipeline, on which construction is due to start in 2009, is supported by six European companies, including new partner RWE of Germany, and is seeking a seventh, possibly France's Total or GDF. The European commission approved rules for its construction this month.
Nabucco would bring gas from US ally Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and possibly Kazakhstan via Turkey to Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Austria and perhaps Germany. It could supply 31bn cubic metres of gas a year from 2012-13. It could also supply gas from western Iraq, said Bryza. With a Turkey/Greece/Italy pipeline, it could provide up to 44bn cubic metres of cheap gas or a quarter of Gazprom's current 160bn cubic metres of supply to the EU. Gazprom supplies a quarter of all Europe's gas but this could rise to more than a half.
Bryza said Gazprom could purchase gas for as little as $100 for 1,000 cubic metres in Central Asia and sell it for $300 in Europe, with unsavoury, shadowy middle-men close to organised crime enriching themselves in the process.
"We want to help Gazprom to move from a monopoly towards more market-based behaviour," he said. "We want it to be reliable and produce more gas at home in a more competitive domestic market rather than buying up as much infrastructure here in Europe or the cheapest possible gas it can find in Central Asia."
Bryza said a Gazprom-sponsored alternative to Nabucco, called South Stream and bringing gas under the Black Sea through Serbia to Europe, would cost anything up to $30bn and be less efficient and costlier.
He claimed that the Azeris and the Iraqis, once they had approved a new hydrocarbons law, could fill the Nabucco pipepine despite analysts' fears that there will not be enough gas available. Eventually, with a change of policy towards nuclear enrichment, Iran, the world's second-largest gas producer, could also become a supplier.
"I can't believe the stories that are running around Europe that there's no gas and Nabucco will be too expensive. These are ridiculous arguments based on non-truths," he declared. "It will be built, I'm convinced, because it makes commercial sense and will be more efficient and cheaper than other alternatives."
Bryza insisted that US backing for Nabucco was in the country's national interests even though no American companies are involved. "Helping Europe diversify its gas supplies has become extremely urgent."
Censuró al secretario general del organismo, por justificar la no reaceptación de Cuba.
AFP Publicado: 23/02/2008 11:31
La Habana. Fidel Castro calificó a la Organización de Estados Americanos (OEA) de "basurero" y destacó que Cuba tomará "una decisión trascendente" el domingo, cuando será electo su sucesor, según un artículo publicado este sábado.
"Por casualidad me enteré de que la OEA existía (...) nadie se acordaba de ella", dice Castro en su artículo titulado "¿Quien quiere entrar en el basurero?", publicado un día antes de que se defina a su sucesor tras haber renunciado a la relección presidencial.
En su editorial, comenta que el argumento utilizado por el secretario general de la OEA, el chileno José Miguel Insulza, para justificar la no reaceptación de Cuba tiene "carácter antediluviano".
Insulza aseguró, tras enterarse de la renuncia de Castro, que el retorno de Cuba "es un tema sobre el cual debe existir un consenso entre los Estados miembros, y ese consenso no existe actualmente".
El funcionario también señaló que Cuba, separada en 1962 de ese organismo, debe atender las normas de la Carta Democrática Interamericana y la Convención de Derechos Humanos.
Castro, de 81 años de edad, y convaleciente hace 19 meses de una grave crisis intestinal, declinó el martes ser relecto como presidente del Consejo de Estado de Cuba, en comicios parlamentarios previstos para el domingo, en los cuales su hermano Raúl figura como favorito para reemplazarlo.
"Como pueden apreciar los lectores, he trabajado poco mientras espero la decisión trascendente del 24", dijo el líder en referencia a esa elección y anuncia que estará varios días sin usar la pluma".
En los últimos 11 meses, Castro publicó cerca de 80 artículos de prensa bajo el título "Reflexiones del Comandante en Jefe", pero desde el anuncio de su renuncia, cambió por una petición suya a "Reflexiones del compañero Fidel".
El viernes, descartó cambios en el sistema comunista de Cuba a pesar de su salida de la Presidencia y este sábado reproduce en su editorial partes de artículos de prensa que argumentan que en Cuba no va a haber una transición política.
Todo indica que Raúl, quien ha gobernado interinamente estos 19 meses, será ratificado como el sucesor definitivo el domingo cuando los 614 diputados se reúnan a partir de las 10:00 horas, tiempo local, para escoger a los 31 miembros del Consejo de Estado.
La elección del sustituto de Castro acapara la atención internacional, pero se realiza además en un ambiente de expectativas sin precedentes en la población por eventuales "cambios" prometidos por Raúl para aliviar las penurias de la vida diaria.
Viaja el cardenal Tarcisio Bertone a Villa Clara para oficiar hoy una misa
Ironiza con reacciones de precandidatos estadunidenses: 50 años de bloqueo les parecen pocos
Gerardo Arreola (Corresponsal)
La Habana, 22 de febrero. Fidel Castro rechazó hoy las demandas de líderes de Estados Unidos y Europa sobre cambios en el sistema político de Cuba, las que comparó con una política de “anexión”.
En su primer artículo bajo el rubro de “Reflexiones del compañero Fidel”, Castro replicó en esta forma al presidente George W. Bush: “Dijo que mi mensaje era el inicio del camino de la libertad de Cuba, es decir, la anexión decretada por su gobierno”.
El comentario del aún presidente repasa la tendencia de algunas de las reacciones surgidas esta semana, tras el anuncio del líder cubano de renunciar a presentarse a una nueva relección como jefe de Estado, y en consecuencia al rango de comandante en jefe de las fuerzas armadas.
Castro ironizó con las reacciones de los precandidatos presidenciales estadunidenses a su mensaje: “Medio siglo de bloqueo les parecía poco a los predilectos. ¡Cambio, cambio, cambio!, gritaban al unísono”.
“Hay que abrir fuego ideológico sobre ellos”, dice el artículo, centrado en el repudio a las posiciones de Estados Unidos y gobiernos europeos que reclaman cambios estructurales en Cuba, como secuela del retiro de Castro de dos de sus posiciones.
“Estoy de acuerdo”, continuó el líder cubano. “¡Cambio! Pero en Estados Unidos. Cuba cambió hace rato y seguirá su rumbo dialéctico. ¡No regresar jamás al pasado!, exclama nuestro pueblo”.
Agregó: “¡Anexión, anexión, anexión!, responde el adversario; es lo que en el fondo piensa cuando habla de cambio”.
Castro no elaboró sobre la anunciada reforma al sistema socialista y sólo hizo una pálida referencia a la sesión de la Asamblea Nacional del Poder Popular (Parlamento), que el domingo iniciará un mandato de cinco años con la elección de su propia directiva y un nuevo Consejo de Estado, que ya no presidirá el líder cubano.
“Estoy enfrascado ahora en el esfuerzo por hacer constar mi voto unido en favor de la presidencia de la Asamblea Nacional y del nuevo Consejo de Estado, y cómo hacerlo”, señaló.
Como diputado, Castro tiene derecho a votar en esa elección, que se realiza con lista única. El “voto unido” es una fórmula a la que recurre la dirigencia para pedir a los votantes, en este caso los parlamentarios, que apoyen por igual a todos los integrantes de la lista y no sólo a algunos de ellos.
Gira del enviado del Vaticano
En su segundo día en Cuba, el secretario de Estado del Vaticano, cardenal Tarsicio Bertone, viajó a la provincia de Villa Clara (centro), donde este sábado oficiará una misa al aire libre e inaugurará un monumento al papa Juan Pablo II, en el mismo sitio que visitó el pontífice hace 10 años.
Bertone se reunió aquí por la mañana con monjas y religiosos que trabajan en Cuba, a quienes refrendó el mensaje que trajo a los obispos el día anterior: el Vaticano conoce la situación de la Iglesia católica en la isla y está empeñado en mejorarla.
A las órdenes religiosas les dijo que la Iglesia sabe de sus “vicisitudes y desafíos”, así como de la “penuria de medios o las insuficientes infraestructuras”, pero que “no faltará la solicitud de la Sede Apostólica” para ampliar el número de sacerdotes y personas consagradas en este país.
Según fuentes eclesiásticas, en Cuba hay unas 670 monjas, 33 religiosos, 169 sacerdotes religiosos, 204 diocesanos y 61 diáconos. Más de la mitad de ese personal es extranjero, principalmente de España, México y Colombia.
Además del Seminario de San Carlos y San Ambrosio, que Bertone visitó el pasado jueves, hace dos años se inició la construcción de otro en el municipio de Guanabacoa, en el extremo oriental de La Habana, que según fuentes consultadas quedará concluido a finales de 2008.
En los últimos dos años el gobierno ha facilitado el ingreso fluido de sacerdotes y religiosos extranjeros, eliminando la abultada lista de espera que se acumuló en el pasado, pero los obispos consideran que sus necesidades son aún mayores.
La misa al aire libre del jueves anterior, en la Plaza de la Catedral, estuvo presidida por una bandera cubana y la figura de la Virgen de la Caridad del Cobre, dos imágenes que convergen en la tradición nacionalista de la isla, que suele convertirse en puente en el diálogo entre las autoridades y la jerarquía clerical.
Bertone tocó esa fibra sensible al recordar a Félix Varela y José Agustín Caballero, sacerdotes y educadores del siglo XVIII, reconocidos como precursores del pensamiento y la identidad nacional de la isla.
"El rechazo está minando nuestra capacidad para tener la cooperación de las compañías privadas, y eso mina nuestro esfuerzo por protegernos de los terroristas", afirmó George W. Bush.
Agencias / La Jornada On Line Publicado: 23/02/2008 14:37
Washington. El presidente de Estados Unidos, George W. Bush, urgió este sábado al Congreso, bajo control demócrata, a aprobar una ley que permite al gobierno espiar a presuntos terroristas sin orden judicial, con ayuda de compañías telefónicas.
Por segunda semana consecutiva, Bush utilizó su mensaje radial sabatino para arengar a los demócratas a que aprueben la ley de vigilancia electrónica, conocida como "Ley para Proteger a Estados Unidos", cuando el Congreso regrese de su receso este lunes.
"El rechazo está minando nuestra capacidad para tener la cooperación de las compañías privadas, y eso mina nuestro esfuerzo por protegernos de los terroristas", dijo Bush en su mensaje.
La ley daría a las compañías de telecomunicaciones como AT&T protección contra demandas privadas por ayudar al gobierno a grabar conversaciones telefónicas sin orden judicial.
La ley, ya aprobada en el Senado, tendría vigencia por seis años, y sucedería a una versión previa que expiró el pasado 16 de febrero.
El presidente Bush se negó a firmar una extensión de dos semanas de la norma caduca, mientras la Cámara de Representantes debatía el tema.
Los demócratas argumentan que la caducidad de la ley no impedirá vigilar a los presuntos terroristas con sede en el exterior u otros enemigos, debido a que la ley prevé que la inteligencia estadunidense pueda continuar con las escuchas telefónicas durante el resto del año.
En su mensaje, Bush acusó a los legisladores que se oponen a aprobar la ley de favorecer a los abogados para que demanden a las compañías por encima de la seguridad nacional.
"Los terroristas planean un nuevo ataque en Estados Unidos (.) Para proteger Estados Unidos de esos ataques, debemos proteger a nuestras compañías de demandas abusivas", señaló el mandatario.
La ley prevé vigilar a presuntos terroristas en el exterior en sus comunicaciones con personas que se encuentren en territorio estadunidense.
By Clifford Coonan in Shanghai Friday, 22 February 2008
The decision by America to fire a missile and destroy one of its satellites has been greeted with consternation in China, where memories are fresh of the international anger at Beijing's similar action last January.
Given the outraged response of the Bush administration then, and accusations that China was playing a dangerous game, Beijing's response was fairly tame. Was it really necessary? seems to be the public line.
"The Chinese side is continuing to closely follow the US action which may influence the security of outer space and may harm other countries," was how China's Foreign Ministry put it. Technological know-how is at the heart of the row. Beijing wants Washington to reveal how it shot down the satellite because it involves technology that all countries are trying to develop. If Washington has it, then the Chinese want it too.
The US Defence Secretary, Robert Gates, said the US was prepared to share with China some of the information it had gathered about the missile strike. He told reporters during a visit to Hawaii that the US is prepared to share whatever it can "appropriately" share.
The Defence Department said earlier that debris was being tracked over the Pacific and Atlantic oceans but appeared to be too small to cause damage on earth.
But this is also a chance for some payback against growing foreign influence. Chinese media, which is heavily state-influenced, gave a more indicative reading of the national mood and the overseas edition of the People's Daily ran a front-page commentary. "The US will not easily abandon its military advantage based on space technology, and it is striving to expand and fully exploit this," it said. Washington was "desperately trying to explain away" the incident, said the paper.
Weapons of mass destruction are banned from space, but Washington's plans have caused concerns about non-nuclear arms in space.
China's anti-satellite test was attacked as too risky. Its target was about 800km above earth and debris threatened satellites and orbiting space vehicles.
Victory for consumers as regulator launches inquiry into gas and electricity suppliers
By Martin Hickman, Consumer Affairs Correspondent Friday, 22 February 2008
The UK's energy companies could be fined billions of pounds after a wide-ranging inquiry was launched yesterday into claims that consumers are being ripped off.
Armed with sweeping powers under the Enterprise Act, investigators acting for the regulator Ofgem will have the right to raid offices and seize documents.
They will be looking for evidence that the inflation-busting price rises announced this year have been co-ordinated or that smaller rivals are being thwarted from competing by hidden transactions. Ofgem announced the inquiry after British Gas revealed a 500 per cent rise in profits to £571m, four weeks after increasing its prices.
The company and four others – EDF, E.On, nPower and ScottishPower – say that they have been forced to raise bills by about 15 per cent because of soaring wholesale prices affected by the booming oil price. But consumer groups complain the rises have been suspiciously similar and warn that low-income customers are being forced into having to choose between eating and heating. If any of the players in the £24bn-a-year industry is found guilty of colluding to fix prices or engaging in other forms of anti-competitive behaviour, Ofgem can impose a fine equal to 10 per cent of worldwide turnover.
As a result, Centrica, which owns British Gas and has a turnover of £19bn, would face a maximum fine of £1.9bn, while other companies such as EDF, owned by the French state operator, and the German power giant E.On, would face similar fines.
Ofgem, which revealed the new inquiry just seven hours after Centrica announced its profits to the Stock Exchange, stressed yesterday it had no evidence to suggest that any supplier had acted illegally.
As reported by The Independent yesterday, British Gas made unusually large profits in the first quarter of last year by keeping prices high while the wholesale price of gas went into freefall as a result of a mild weather and a new pipeline from the Continent.
Amid concern that companies were colluding to fix prices, Ofgem was called in to see the Chancellor, Alistair Darling. Afterwards its chief executive, Alistair Buchanan, "confirmed" the energy market was working properly and bills were being driven up by rising global energy costs, the cost of curbing climate change, increased investment in reliable energy supplies and a lack of market liberalisation in the rest of Europe.
But at 2pm, after complaints about British Gas's profits had dominated television and radio bulletins for hours, Ofgem performed a U-turn. Mr Buchanan said that although the regulator was maintaining its position, it was calling an inquiry because of public anxiety and concerns that the market was rigged.
"Customer confidence is vital for a well-functioning market," Mr Buchanan said. "So we shall replace our magnifying glass with a microscope and take a more detailed look at the retail market and the influence of global wholesale market developments."
The investigation will look at the relationship between retail and wholesale energy prices and how, with the help of the European Commission, European markets are affecting costs in Britain. It will assess suppliers' market shares, switching rates for different groups of customers, and the experience of companies trying to break into the energy market. The ability of consumers to move smoothly to rival companies will also come under scrutiny.
Amid concerns that those on low incomes are struggling to pay, Ofgem announced a fuel poverty summit would take place in April attended by Hilary Benn, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
Energywatch welcomed the high-profile, formal investigation as "a necessary response to the extreme level of consumer concern" about the energy market.
Ofgem insisted that its inquiry had not been called because of the British Gas announcement. The watchdog has previously described the notion of price-fixing in the industry as a "red herring". Instead, it said, the industry is uncompetitive because there are too few big players and that smaller rivals have difficulty gaining access to the market because of a lack of transparency in prices which, in turn, is down to the fact that the companies own the generation and the sale of power – a vertical integration it says acts against consumers.
British Energy, which sells electricity from its nuclear plants, has backed the complaint.
All but one of the big energy companies – Scottish & Southern Energy is holding prices until the end of March – have put up bills after npower began the latest round on 4 January.
Energywatch complained that the price rises were "depressingly similar", with only £13 a year difference for a household paying by direct debit for dual fuel.
MPs on the Commons Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Select Committee have launched their own inquiry into the possibility of anti-competitive behaviour.
British Gas, however, said that there was no need for Ofgem to investigate the industry. "We believe the market is competitive and working as it should," a spokesman said. "There have been 15 inquiries into the energy market in the past seven years and each of them has given the industry a clean bill of health. Only last month Ofgem issued a statement after a meeting with the Chancellor stating, 'today Ofgem chairman Sir John Mogg and chief executive Alistair Buchanan confirmed that Britain's competitive market in energy is working'."
Duncan Sedgwick, chief executive of the Energy Retail Association, said: "There have been a number of investigations into the energy retail market in recent years and all of these have shown that it is working successfully and in the best interest of consumers.
"Britain continues to have the most competitive energy market in Europe and we have no reason to believe that the Ofgem probe will find anything new."
Ofgem urged anyone with evidence of anti-competitive behaviour to come forward.
Two months of energy market turmoil
4 January
Npower raises price of gas by 17 per cent and electricity by 13 per cent.
15 January
EDF raises price of gas by 13 per cent and electricity by 8 per cent.
The Independent publishes figures showing that the industry makes 10 times more in extra charges to pre-payment customers, many on low incomes, than it hands back in help to those on low incomes.
Energywatch demands an inquiry by the Competition Commission.
16 January
Ofgem is called in to see the Chancellor, Alistair Darling. After the meeting, Ofgem insists there is no evidence of the market malfunctioning, saying: "Britain's competitive market in energy is working."
21 January
British Gas raises prices for gas and electricity by 15 per cent.
1 February
ScottishPower raises price for gas by 15 per cent and electricity by 14 per cent. Energywatch renews its call for an inquiry, saying: "Four, supposedly cut-throat, competitors have raised their prices by near identical amounts in days of each other."
5 February
Commons Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Select Committee announces an inquiry into the industry.
7 February
The Independent reports that at least 13 million customers are overpaying for their supply.
E.on raises price for gas by 15 per cent and electricity by 10 per cent. Scottish & Southern says it will honour its price promise until 30 March.
Thursday 21 February
British Gas reveals 500 per cent rise in profits, as predicted by this newspaper. Consumer groups express outrage.
Ofgem announces a formal inquiry into the industry.
After ruling Cuba for 49 years, Fidel Castro has stepped down as its president. Jon Lee Anderson, biographer of Che Guevara, reflects on his legacy and the future of the island he did so much to shape
In the early 90s, when I was living in Havana with my family, my eldest daughter, Bella, who was then about six years old, came home from school one afternoon in a state of excitement. She asked me, in Spanish: "Daddy, do you know what 'amor' means?" I feigned ignorance. Taking a deep breath, Bella recited: "Amor es lo que Fidel siente para el pueblo" - "Love is what Fidel feels for the people."
Careful not to show my dismay, I congratulated Bella on her feat of memorisation, and she beamed with pride. She was, understandably, very pleased with her educational achievement.
The Havana primary school that Bella attended was the Eliseo Reyes, named after one of the Cuban guerrilla fighters who accompanied Ernesto "Che" Guevara on his final expedition to Bolivia and who died with him there, fighting for the cause of Marxist revolution. Posted over the school's front door was a wooden sign that read Muerte a Traidores - Death to Traitors.
Bella's school primer had little symbols illustrating each letter of the alphabet. "F", for instance, symbolised "fusil" (rifle), and "T" stood for "tank". The book was sprinkled with Fidel's sayings on the importance of education, study and revolutionary duty. There were pictures too. One depicted a youthful Fidel riding into Havana on a tank. Another showed him in the heat of battle, commanding Cuban troops during the Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961. In the schoolbook, Fidel Castro was always referred to simply as "Fidel".
Inevitably, during the three years we lived in Cuba, Fidel became both a familiar figure and a totemic one to my children - half grandfather, half God. With his deeds and aphorisms the stuff of daily fare, and his face and voice omnipresent on nightly television, they came to understand that El Jefe Maximo was the ultimate guiding hand that controlled their lives and those of everyone around them. He represented the past and the present, and the future too. Fidel, somehow, was Cuba.
Now Fidel Castro is resigning. Illness and age have already forced him to step back from the public stage he occupied for nearly half a century, to fade away in an extended hermitage that has gone on since July 2006. Except for the mostly hushed manner of his prolonged farewell, it has seemed fitting that Fidel would take his leave in the same way he has lived his life, as a long, drawn-out epic. By not appearing in public, by disappearing and yet not disappearing, he remained, of course, the centre of attention in Cuba, as he always had been.
If survival were a virtue, then Castro would be very virtuous indeed, because he has been with us for an extremely long time. In 1957, when Fidel was in the Sierra Maestra fighting the Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista, Dwight D Eisenhower was the American president, and the United States still had only 48 states. During the two years that Fidel's guerrilla war lasted, the Soviets launched Sputnik into space, Detroit launched the Ford Edsel, and "Leave it to Beaver" premiered on American television.
Fidel seized power in January 1959; he went on to become the longest-serving political leader in the world, outlasting not only nine American presidents but his main ideological and financial sponsor, the Soviet Union, as well. Communism collapsed, but Fidel didn't.
Over the decades, Fidel has left his mark far beyond the shores of Cuba. From his early rupture with the United States, his embrace of socialism and his alliance with the Soviet Union - which led to the Bay of Pigs invasion and then to the Cuban missile crisis - to his long-term sponsorship of Marxist revolution in Latin America and Africa, Fidel's challenge to US hegemony abroad ultimately redefined the cold war.
Fidel's international political relevance may have dwindled since the days of superpower confrontation, but his very survival made him one of the world's elder statesmen, and also one of its most widely admired. The US trade embargo on Cuba - a bully-boy legacy of the cold war that is now 46 years old to the month and counting - has only added to Fidel's cheering section, as well as inspiring others to follow his "Mouse That Roared" example. Most prominent among them is Venezuela's president, Hugo Chavez, who has made it abundantly clear that he intends to emulate Fidel by vigorously defying US policies, in Venezuela and around the world.
At home in Cuba, meanwhile, Fidel's revolution has been a political, social and economic experiment that has arguably succeeded in some ways and failed disastrously in many others, guaranteeing that his domestic legacy will be both contentious and, perhaps, as long- lasting as his rule.
There are many Cubans who are genuinely devoted to Fidel and who dread the uncertainties his eventual death will bring. His younger brother, Raul, has quietly assumed his anointed role as Fidel's successor. This has already provided a sort of continuity, but Raul's age of 76 means that he will be only a transitional figure, and so Cuba's future remains an open question.
There are also many other Cubans who have dreamed for years of Fidel's demise, convinced that fate has dealt them a heavy hand by turning over their lives to this particularly obstinate, egocentric and durable man. Under Fidel, their lives have been spent in a kind of suffocating reality warp, a uniquely Cuban realm in which time simultaneously stands still and progresses, see-sawing among dramatic episodes linked inextricably to Fidel's whim and will. Because Fidel has always seen himself, his countrymen and Cuba itself as engaged in a heroic struggle - for socialism, against imperialism, in defence of national sovereignty and so on - it has been, somehow, so. Because of his constant exaltation of the Cuban humdrum as vital to the ongoing struggle for the survival of the revolution, there is a collective sense of significance to everyday life in Cuba.
In 2005, for instance, after Fidel launched a national energy-saving campaign, his government imported a huge quantity of Chinese pressure cookers and began to distribute them to Cubans at subsidised prices. Thereafter, Fidel gave speech after televised speech explaining Cuba's energy woes and arguing that the cookers' fuel efficiency made their purchase a virtual patriotic duty. It is hard to imagine anyone but Fidel being able to turn a kitchen appliance into an item of urgent national priority, but he managed it.
With similar degrees of passion dedicated by Fidel to everything from mosquito-eradication drives - "the battle against dengue" - to the battle to "preserve the conquests of socialism", daily existence came to feel at once portentous and, often, very desolate for Cubans, because skirmishes in the great revolution are endless and the perfect future never seems to arrive.
As Fidel has withdrawn, not only his loyalists miss him but, I suspect, his opponents too. With the eclipse of his era, so too passes the shared epic quality of their own lives, however much they have suffered. The next blow will be his death, and inevitably, the downsizing of history in Cuba and, perhaps, of Cuba itself. If for the last 49 years Fidel was Cuba, what will Cuba be without him?
Every Cuban understands that Fidel's resignation, even his death, will not necessarily end their nation's long stand-off with the United States and that, in one way or another, Cuba's future will be, as it has always been, shaped directly or indirectly by decisions made in Washington.
A couple of years ago, Caleb McCarry, the Bush administration's appointee to the post of "Cuba transition coordinator," told me that even if Raul Castro took steps to open up Cuba's economy, such as China has done, it wouldn't alter US policy toward Cuba. "Economic freedoms are important," said McCarry, "but there has to be political freedom too - multiparty democracy. Ultimately, that is what will help Cubans face the legacy of the dictatorship they've lived under and to define a future where reconciliation and freedom is possible. In other words, the solution is a genuine transition which returns sovereignty to the Cuban people, to allow them to decide who their leaders will be." In the absence of that, the administration would "continue to offer a real transition in Cuba, and we will remain firm with the regime".
Such open talk in Washington about promoting "regime change" strikes most of the Cubans I know, including Fidel's detractors, as gallingly interventionist. But this is nothing new; such talk is, in fact, as old as Cuba's nationhood, which was itself brought about by US intervention during the Spanish-American War. With Cuban independence came a mostly unbroken succession of pro-American regimes, some of them cravenly so.
Long before he became a socialist, Fidel was an ardent Cuban nationalist who conceived of his revolution as the restorative antidote to his country's history of Yankee midwifery. Later, he came to believe that he and his revolution had finally secured full Cuban national sovereignty - or, as he often referred to it, its "dignity" - by standing up to the United States and by surviving.
In a conversation we had in 2006, Ricardo Alarcon, the president of Cuba's National Assembly, suggested that Cuba's independence was the most important achievement of Fidel and his revolution. But Alarcon also appeared worried that in the future, after Fidel, Cuba's sovereignty might not be so secure.
He said: "We have a basic dilemma that is kind of unparalleled, and you know why? Because we will always be a small country, and the other one - yours [the US] - will always be a big one. Big. Independently of whatever problems you might have in Iraq, or with your economy, and all of that, the fact is that you are a great power and Cuba is a small country. These are two realities that you can't change: the great disproportion between the two nations, and their geographical proximity, which for us is everything.
"You know what our great problem is? That you look, and what you see is an unequal game; you don't have a way of ever really competing, so all you can do is bet on the idea that someday in the United States, there will be a government that is motivated by other ideas, other attitudes."
Time will tell. Each of the US presidential candidates responded to Castro's resignation with a chorus of calls for more freedom in Cuba. Barack Obama said the US should be ready to normalise relations if Havana "begins opening Cuba to meaningful democratic change". For now, though, after 50 years of revolution and 81 years of life, Fidel is almost gone, and Cuba and the United States remain where they have always been - separated by sea, 90 miles apart.
The closest his family came to religion was the Star of David on top of the Christmas tree, so what happened when AJ Jacobs decided to tell only the truth, wear no mixed fibres, stone adulterers and live the Bible to the letter?
¡Lo que nos faltaba! Eclipse Total de Luna. ¿Quién toma ahora el MANDO? ¿Acaso Coyolxauhqui ha sido decapitada? Tal vez y hasta se ha tornado roja de coraje por lo que observa en el antiguo IMPERIO MEXICA.
Tiempo, de temperamento caprichoso es Cronos. Si el siglo XX viajaba en forma relámpagueante, este siglo debe estarse trasladando a la velocidad de la LUZ.Mientras el ciudadano común y corriente del planeta Tierra, que se alimenta diariamente y tiene acceso a la información, parece no enterarse; el mundo a su alrededor ha sido radicalmente transformado por una semana de impactantes acontecimientos. La terca realidad ha DESNUDAdo al mito de la PIEDRA FILOSOFAL del neoliberalismo. Sin audaz comprador que quisiera adquirir uno de los mayores bancos del Reino Unido (Northern Rock es su razón social), EL ESTADO ha tenido que tomar el control de esta entidad financiera. En el léxico de los apóstoles del evangelio neoliberal, la nacionalización de facto de Northern Rock es sinónimo de Blasfemia en su máxima expresión. De ese tamaño es la grieta recién ABIERTA en el dique capitalista, comp@s, y les aseguro que sus derrames van a inundar sus partes bajas. Aquellos que realmente fueron iniciados en las artes de la seducción ni tardos ni perezosos toman las providencias necesarias.
En uno de los polvorines del planeta, los resultados electorales le son adversos al mandatario Pakistaní. Raudos, los oportunistas quienes piden su renuncia. El desenlace de este capítulo es de pronóstico reservado, y se lo cedo a mis maestros. En otro territorio de delicado equilibrio, Kosovo declara su independencia de Serbia y, cual si fuera elección presidencial Mexicana, algunos países ( los Europeos en la punta ), se apresuran a reconocer el estado 193 dentro de las Naciones Unidas, lo que mantiene un poco inquieto al Zar Vlad. En los atribulados Estados Unidos, el enrachado Obama se lleva la victoria en dos estados más. Los analistas no atinan a desentrañar el mensaje: ¿estará el establishment preparado para aceptar la victoria de los revoltosos ciudadanos gringos, o habra un final tipo Florida 2000 y Ohio 2004? Aguántame el corte.
Un viejo lobo de mar, que sabe leer EL TIEMPO favorable como pocos, decide atracar su navío después de una exitosa pero tormentosa travesía. Contrario a los pronósticos de tempestades, su tripulación no pierde la calma y está lista para aceptar al nuevo capitán. Estos marinos de a deveras saben que quien se haga cargo del timón ha sido entrenado por ese mito viviente, y seguirá fielmente sus consejos (mientras dure) en aguas un poco más tranquilas, ahora que los torpederos de Miami tengan ceder el poder en Noviembre próximo.
Antes de enterarme de todos estos cismas que sin duda alguna remodelarán al planeta, el sábado pasado nos invita nuestra cuata Coreanita a una fiestecilla a la poblana y a su servilleta. Ya klashé que mi "brainwashing" con la oriental va viento en popa: ahora compra en el supermercado de la cooperativa, consume lo orgiánico, perdón, orgánico, compra productos con etiqueta del Fair Trade (ahorita más "abajito" abordamos eso), resultó más purista que en cuestiones ambientales que el mismo M@rco. Yo andaba bien quitado de la pene, mercy, la pena, cuando se me acerca una de sus amiguillas Coreanas, y después de saludarme me pide que le haga el favor... de ayudarle con una tarea, cómo es de cochambrosa su mentecita. La dichosa tarea me dice esa tarde versa sobre teorías económicas y cambio climático. ¡Achís! Pero si yo soy científico, ustedes son los verdaderos expertos que me retroalimentan. De todas maneras como no sé decirle que no a nadie, mientras no sea andar aniquilando prójimos acepto echarle una mano limpia a la que se deje; acordamos entonces cenar el sabado siguiente. Sin embargo, yo creo que tengo una angelota de aquellas, porque ayer me avisa la Coreanita de mi pisito que tenemos cena de urgencia, pus cuando se le antoje, aquí me tiene más puesto que un calcetín, le digo. Como va a cocinar pa' miguelito, me pongo suavecito y cooperando. Después de un excelso festín oriental viene la hora de preguntas y respuestas. A ver que cuatro me quieren poner estas damiselas ahora. Suelta lo que traigas dentro, la reto. Me la muestra, la pregunta, comp@s, ya los ví lamiendose los bigotes. La dichosa pregunta que hay que responder, viene después de la quinta, y es la siguiente:
6. Does current cost-benefit analysis distort the true economics of climate change? Address this question critically. Make sure of your arguments to justify (or not) the decision of the Bush administration not to ratify the Kyoto Protocol.
Güeno, ustedes andan de suerte y además son mis consentidos, por lo que puedo ir en el orden que se me hinche y que además lleve el mínimo de sentido común, y no lo que se me viene a la chompa como con la Coreanita. Vamo’ a ver si mi cuata "la semita" no desperdició en vano su tiempo. ¿Qué les parece si le aplicamos la deconstrucción Derridiana a esta pregunta? ¿Vaaa?
_ Costo-Beneficio.
_ Distorsión de la economía en números reales.
_ Cambio Climático.
_ El Protocolo de Kyoto.
_ Argumentos de la administración Bush para no ratificar el protocolo.
De Cambio Climático a lo mejor ya saben más que yo, sólo les recuerdo que utilicen esa frase en lugar de referirse a los variaciones en las condiciones atmosféricas como calentamiento global, ¿vale? Del Protocolo de Kyoto probablemente sepan también ya un buen. Se los voy a "resumir" lo más que pueda: grosso modo, es un acuerdo multinacional para reducir las emisiones de los gases de invernadero que, según las teorías en boga, provocan entre otros indeseables efectos, el incremento en las temperaturas del planeta.
De los argumentos de la administración "Bush" (yo en lo personal la llamaría Cheney, pero no nos metamos en Honduras por ahora) para no firmar el protocolo son aceptables por arribita. Como ya lo platicamos, la principal hipótesis del cambio climático antropogénico (causados por el hombre, pues, es para los "eXternos" que me leen) es que: parte del calentamiento (los cambios no son sólo en temperatura como se cree, pero no le echemos cremita a los tacos) es producido por los gases que causan el efecto invernadero. Estos gases son en la mayor parte desechos de los procesos que utilizan combustibles fósiles. De tal manera que los países se han comprometido a reducir sus emisiones de los gases de invernadero en cierto período futuro. Visto desde este ángulo no se ve mucho problema. Sin embargo, el acuerdo implícitamente obliga a que las fábricas, los automóviles, y todos aquellos procesos que impliquen quema de combustibles fósiles sean reducidos. 'Tonz, el argumento de los neocons y su camarilla de cabilderos es que es prácticamente imposible para los EUA reducir sus emisiones porque eso frenaría su rampante crecimiento. ¿Es esto totalmente cierto? Planteado desde su perspectiva, así es, porque disminuye la producción industrial, sólo que hay un pequeño detalle: mucha de esta actividad económica es para mantener una sociedad de consumo (que en estos días ya no es solo la de nuestros primos y su "american way of life") que no es sustentable con los recursos naturales con los que cuenta nuestra casa, o sea, nuestro planeta. Y la otra historia que se mantiene oculta, es que varios de los que dirigen los destinos de nuestros vecinos al norte del Río Bravo tienen estrechitos vínculos con algunas de las grandes compañías petróleras. Empieza a embonar el artefacto, ¿edá? ¿EXXON-MOBIL? Me suena, me suena. ¡Ah, ya! La misma que quiere poner en cuatro, sorry, en jaque al gobierno rojillo de Sudámerica, ¿no?
A pesar de hacer circo, maroma y teatro para que entienda a mi comadre no le cae el veinte. ¿Cómo es que un país no quiere entrar al redil de LOS VERDES que intentan salvar al planeta? Mmm. ¿Cómo le hago pa' que me la agarre?
¡Ya! El contexto histórico. Mira nenita, antes de ese icono de mii generación que es la caída del muro de Berlín (), se disputaban el control del mundo (literalmente) dos sistemas. Uno fue momentáneamente derrotado y el otro, después de este hecho histórico, no tenía astro alguno que lo eclipsara. ¿Capizcas? Todo iba a toda máquina hasta que llegaron al poder ciertos párvulos de una dinastía guerrera. Sus planes también parecían que iban en automático, y por ende el mentado protocolo valía queque. Sin embargo, al comenzar la segunda versión de la guerra del golfo algo se les quedo atascado en el mero cogote; los demás competidores, que pacientemente esperaban comenzaron a notarlo. ¿Cómo se relaciona esto con la firma del protocolo?, me dice inquieta. Simple mi niña, Rusia y otros países por algún tiempo también aprendieron la estratagema de darle LARGAS a la firma del "ese" de Kyoto. El país que más contamina (per cápita, mucho ojo, per cápita) hizo intentos para "jalar" a otros cinco países para reventar el protocolo, es entonces que la Rusia del Vlad hace un inteligente movimiento y firma el protocolo. Hoy en día, EUA es virtualmente el único país del mundo que no lo ha firmado después de los acuerdos de Bali. No pasó mucho tiempo después de la derrota del gobierno conservador que el nuevo gobierno progresista Australiano decide firmar el protocolo. ¿Cómo la ves? ¿Distorsión del crecimiento económico? Does that make sense to you now, my dear?
Ya por último pa' que termines la tarea, veamos eso de los estudios de Costo-Beneficio. Mira, pa' responder esa no necesito ni ponerme las pilas. Al comenzar el doctorado asistía a una clase que tenía por nombre Global Warming (¡a hueso!), un día una de las vacas sagradas en el tema estaba platicando una de sus experiencias sobre un proyecto en Vietnam, si Doña M no me falla, era sobre producción sustentable de crustáceos en pequeños estanques. Uno de mis compas, se le ocurrió la puntada de preguntar si habían aplicado un análisis de costo-beneficio al proyecto para monitorear su factibilidad. Un poco con hastío el mayestro (es casi casi dogmático en cuanto a eso del Calentamiento Global) le contestó que era prácticamente imposible aplicar esas teorías cuando el factor humano estaba involucrado. ¡Moles, manita! Creo que con esto bastó para dejar toda bomba a mi comadre. Como a ella también le introducí todos los hechos recientes que tienen al mundo con las patas abiertas, perdón, patas pa' arriba. Antes de retirarse una de ellas me recomienda la lectura de uno de sus paisas (porque ellas si tienen un acendrado orgullo de su país) que estudia los mitos del neoliberalismo y el desarrollo. ¿Apoco sí? Como soy muy incrédulo, de mala gana hago la búsqueda esta mañana, antes de comenzar esto, porque consideraba que era sólo una pérdida de tiempo. Más, ¡oh, sorpresa! Pa' abrirles la boquilla. ahí les va:
The historical fact is that today's developed countries did not develop on the basis of the policies and the institutions that they now recommend to, or even force upon, the developing countries (Chang, 2002).
'Ora si me dejaron todo shockeado. Con el puro resumen ejecutivo me basta pa' producir una de mis legendarias "ideotas". Ya que hay tipos que proponen vivir literalmente de acuerdo a la biblia todo un añejo (yo preferiría un par como el gober precioso), a mi se me ocurre lanzar el reto FMI (ya ven que el reto PEPSI no pegó), que consistiría en que nos dejen de estar jodiendo, rediez, por un sexenio con los dictados del Consenso de Washington y al final del ciclo checamos la aplicación de nuestras políticas de desarrollos contra los índices de crecimiento económico (sin que les meta mano el INEGI como a la Zavaleta), y les demostramos que sí se puede. ¿Se hace?
Si algo le puedo críticar al compa rojillo es que después de hacer una impecable descripción de las causas que impiden a los países pobres a desarrollarse, mientras apliquen los dictados de la Santísima Trinidad: Banco Mundial (BM), Fondo Monetario Internacional (FMI) y Organización Mundial de Comercio (OMC); termina en lo que el maestro llamaría el catálogo de buenas intenciones que es exigirle al "enemigo histórico" que modifique la conducta que nos tiene todos jodidos. Igualito como la que aplicó el LEA pa' mantenernos a raya. 'Tonz, como en este espacio eso está prohibido porque soy discípulo con mucha iniciativa de nuestra pacifismo autogestionario readaptativo, van las actividades que en base a lo que me retroalimentan, les propongo.
Por buen comienzo tenemos que olvidarnos de todas esas mafias que están a punto de aprobar la Ley Gestapo, por ejemplo. Se acuerdan que le tengo tirria a los caudillismos, pero para ser justo tengo que aceptar que uno de los movimientos más inteligentes que he visto del que está siendo atacado por todos los costados posibles, es que cuando la primera maestra del país intento "negociar" con él, su posición fue un rotundo: "Yo no transo con las mafias"; y Don Tiempo os dió la razón, mi buen.
A los otros se les está acabando a los compas la creatividad, si es que contaban con alguna. Dudo mucho que el atentado en "La escuelita de las Américas" haya estado planeado así. En todo caso, sólo se destruyó uno de los caños (pipe en el lenguaje del Shakespeare) que transportan todas las aguas negras de ese amasiato entre narco y gobierno. Un expendable más. Tiene todo el sello de aquel que preparó el magnicidio de lomas taurinas, si un candidato presidencial es sacrificable, con más razón un narcomenudero de Tepito. Lo que me deja un poco esperanzado es que la Tania sobrevivió. Una de dos: o esta tipa tiene siete vidas como los gatos o solo era un escarmiento que les salió que ni pintado. Y ya ven que luego ni me pelan. ¿Acaso ya le dieron gas a alguno en Se-la-haya? Niet. Pues, con estos carteles no podemos contar, pongánle las siglas que gusten. Sin intentar ser reduccionista no es difícil concluir que sus intereses personales y de grupo prevalecen sobre el bien común de nuestro país; casi me atrevería a decir que temen perder sus privilegios porque son incapaces de luchar a brazo partido desde cero como todos nosotros. Sólo que algo les falla, el resto de la gente, esa que subsiste con alrededor de un dolar estadounidense diario. Estos comp@s no tienen puestos burocráticos que arriesgar para mantener una familia, y por ello, porque no tienen ya nada que perder, es que continuan resistiendo.
En el papel suena bien, ¿no?. Necesito de su ayuda, maestros. Mi memoria, que es bien necia, me dice que hace tiempo que leí que la economía Canadiense está basada en la microescala y no en lo macro. Las microempresas son pues las que están "jalándole" duro a la carreta del crecimiento económico. Olvídense de esos devaneos de las teorías changarreras. Y activar el mercado interno no está realmente en nuestras manos limpias, no contamoscon los "expertos" que han estudiado en las universidades gabachas. Así que, entre otras cosas nos queda la economía en Resistencia, la Economía Renegada, el comercio alternativo, pues. Y pa' entrarles eso, hay que estar chigonométricamente organizados. Estaría con mayes que contaramos con personas honestas que tuvieran a cargo cajas de ahorro, pa’ impulsar por ejemplo las actividades agropecuarias, como se los sugirió ese otro maestro. Me gustaría saber cuales fueron las experiencias y los resultados de los municipios autónomos zapatos, los caracoles, pues. Mientras logramos esos sueños guajiros, ¿les parece la sugerencia que nos reventemos un año sin neoliberalismo? Le podemos entrar al trueque como ya les dije. Ahí me avisan si se les cuadra el ojo la idea. Miren, ya está el tiro para ampliar el espectro de la inversión en la industria petrolera (por si les hacía falta una frasecilla a los que van a darla), y para ello ya merito aprueban La Ley Destapo, perdón, Gestapo. El sistema que los sustentaba feneció, pero no sus doctrinarios, sobre todos aquellos que se retiran en Noviembre. Por esa razón hay que dejar amarrado el negocito, y para ello tenemos a nuestra mano pachona en los pinoles. Nosotros sabiendo que sus consensos no dan pa' más (así vengan del Distrito de Columbia), tenemos que mantenernos bien paraditos, con el antídoto, que es organizar a casi 40 millones de paisas (eso fue en 2006, más los que se encuentran en gringolandia) en el movimiento que nos conviene y ahorcarle el cuello al guajolote, sorry, al capitalismo salvaje. Si nos aplicamos ni hay Ley Gestapo que nos dure ni PEMEX que se venda. AL TIEMPO.
M@rCapitalista;
Norwich, G(ran) B(oquete Financiero);
21/02/08
... Regla de Oro Neoliberal: Ganancias PRIVADAS, pérdidas PUBLICAS.
P.D. ALIJADORA. "...si yo te bajara LA LUNA / ¿Cómo DIABLOS la cargabas?..." - La interesada (Chava FLORES).
P.D. CAMPECHANEADA. "... I need you tonight / 'Cause I'm not sleeping / There's something about you … / That makes me sweat..." – Need you tonight (INXS).
La policía brasileña dijo que una información confidencial robada a la petrolera estatal Petrobras está relacionada con el reciente descubrimiento de un enorme yacimiento de gas.
La desaparición de cuatro computadoras portátiles y dos discos duros está siendo tratada como un caso de espionaje industrial.
El presidente de Brasil, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, se refirió al material robado como un "secreto de estado".
La investigación sobre el misterioso hurto de alto perfil, que se cometió el mes pasado, está en curso.
Las computadoras y los discos duros fueron robados cuando fueron transportados desde una plataforma marina a unas oficinas pertenecientes a Petrobras.
"Delito no común"
La policía ha descartado la posibilidad de que se trate de un robo común y agrega que está claro que los responsables estaban buscando información precisa.
Los detectives encargados del caso destacan el hecho de que los ladrones no se llevaron otros equipo de valor.
Agregan que hubo una falla de seguridad en la entrega del paquete y han estado intentando rastrear la ruta seguida por el contenedor para establecer dónde y cómo se efectuó el robo.
La policía ahora vincula el material sustraído con un importante descubrimiento de gas afuera de la costa brasileña, cerca de Río de Janeiro.
Petrobras reveló detalles del yacimiento de gas Júpiter en enero y, aunque la compañía no dio información precisa, en ese momento dijo que era tan grande que podría volver a Brasil auto suficiente en gas natural.
