China: Tem mais Cristão do que Comunista

O governo chinês considera o Natal como "poluição espiritual ocidental". O departamento de educação baniu qualquer celebração cristã. A perseguição aos cristãos só tem piorado nos últimos anos.

Mas o cristianismo vai vencendo na China e o número de cristãos já supera o número de filiados do maior partido ateu do mundo, o Partido Comunista Chinês. China será, se já não é, o maior país cristão do mundo.

Vejam o texto do Dr. Thomas Williams publicado no site americano Breibart.

CHRISTIANS NOW OUTNUMBER COMMUNISTS IN CHINA

by THOMAS D. WILLIAMS, PH.D.29 Dec 2014

Though the Chinese Communist Party is the largest explicitly atheist organization in the world, with 85 million official members, it is now overshadowed by an estimated 100 million Christians in China. It is no wonder Beijing is nervous and authorities are cracking down on Christian groups.

Christianity is growing so fast in China that some predict that it will be the most Christian nation in the world in only another 15 years. By far, the greatest growth is coming outside the official state-sanctioned churches, which are rightly considered subservient to the Communist Party. Numbers are increasing, rather, in unofficial Protestant “house churches” and in the underground Catholic church.

“By my calculations China is destined to become the largest Christian country in the world very soon,” said Fenggang Yang, a professor of sociology at Purdue University and author of Religion in China: Survival and Revival under Communist Rule.

Although at least on paper the People’s Republic of China recognizes freedom of religion since 1978, party members are explicitly forbidden to believe in any religion. In 2011, Zhu Weiqun, executive vice minister of the United Front Work Department, wrote, “Party members shall not believe in religion, which is a principle to be unswervingly adhered to.”

According to the annual report of the human rights group China Aid, persecution of Christians worsened dramatically in 2013, in line with a constant trend of deteriorating religious freedom over the past eight years. Most recently, the oppression of Christians has especially targeted Protestant groups, leaving most Catholics alone, which many feel reflects Beijing’s strategic goal of reestablishing diplomatic relations with the Vatican. According to reports, hundreds of Protestant churches in the eastern province of Zhejiang have been targeted for demolition in the past year.

Unrecognized Christian groups have been subject to crackdowns for years, but observers say the atmosphere is getting worse as their numbers increase and the governing Communist Party takes a more nationalist tone under President Xi Jinping.

Particularly hard hit has been a Beijing Christian group called Shouwang. “Things have got worse this year because the police started to detain us. I was detained for a week,” said Zhao Sheng, 54, musical organizer for the group’s Christmas service.

“But Christmas is still a happy time. No matter what happens, God is with us,” he added with a smile.

Follow Thomas D. Williams on Twitter @tdwilliamsrome.

Wall Street Journal: A Liberdade do Cristianismo.

Todo ano, desde 1949 , o Wall Street Journal publica o mesmo editorial no dia 24 de dezembro. Isto mesmo, o Wall Street Journal publica o mesmo editorial neste dia 24 há 65 anos. É de autoria do jornalista Vermon Royster, que foi editor do jornal de 1958 a 1971.

O jornal Wall Street Journal é apenas para assinantes, mas pode-se achar o editorial de anos anteriores.

Aqui vai o belo texto que se chama In Hoc Anno Domini (Neste Ano de Nosso Senhor), que trata da liberdade que nos trouxe Jesus Cristo, ressaltando a ação de São Paulo. Muitos ateus atacam Cristo, mas ressaltam aquilo que receberam Dele.

In Hoc Anno Domini

When Saul of Tarsus set out on his journey to Damascus the whole of the known world lay in bondage. There was one state, and it was Rome. There was one master for it all, and he was Tiberius Caesar.

Everywhere there was civil order, for the arm of the Roman law was long. Everywhere there was stability, in government and in society, for the centurions saw that it was so.

But everywhere there was something else, too. There was oppression—for those who were not the friends of Tiberius Caesar. There was the tax gatherer to take the grain from the fields and the flax from the spindle to feed the legions or to fill the hungry treasury from which divine Caesar gave largess to the people. There was the impressor to find recruits for the circuses. There were executioners to quiet those whom the Emperor proscribed. What was a man for but to serve Caesar?

There was the persecution of men who dared think differently, who heard strange voices or read strange manuscripts. There was enslavement of men whose tribes came not from Rome, disdain for those who did not have the familiar visage. And most of all, there was everywhere a contempt for human life. What, to the strong, was one man more or less in a crowded world?

Then, of a sudden, there was a light in the world, and a man from Galilee saying, Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's.

And the voice from Galilee, which would defy Caesar, offered a new Kingdom in which each man could walk upright and bow to none but his God. Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. And he sent this gospel of the Kingdom of Man into the uttermost ends of the earth.

So the light came into the world and the men who lived in darkness were afraid, and they tried to lower a curtain so that man would still believe salvation lay with the leaders.

But it came to pass for a while in divers places that the truth did set man free, although the men of darkness were offended and they tried to put out the light. The voice said, Haste ye. Walk while you have the light, lest darkness come upon you, for he that walketh in darkness knoweth not whither he goeth.

Along the road to Damascus the light shone brightly. But afterward Paul of Tarsus, too, was sore afraid. He feared that other Caesars, other prophets, might one day persuade men that man was nothing save a servant unto them, that men might yield up their birthright from God for pottage and walk no more in freedom.

Then might it come to pass that darkness would settle again over the lands and there would be a burning of books and men would think only of what they should eat and what they should wear, and would give heed only to new Caesars and to false prophets. Then might it come to pass that men would not look upward to see even a winter's star in the East, and once more, there would be no light at all in the darkness.

And so Paul, the apostle of the Son of Man, spoke to his brethren, the Galatians, the words he would have us remember afterward in each of the years of his Lord:

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

This editorial was written in 1949 by the late Vermont Royster and has been published annually since.

(Agradeço o editorial ao blog de Billy Kassel, que explica quem foi Vermont Royster)

Quão Esquerdista é Obama e o Viés Esquerdista da Mídia

Professor Tim Groseclose é um renomado economista. No livro acima ele mostra como o viés esquerdista da mídia perturba o pensamento político dos americanos. Ele também pontuou o esquerdismo de vários políticos e você mesmo pode fazer o teste no site dele para saber como você se enquadra, se souber ler em inglês e tiver paciência para ler sobre as leis americanas.

Vejam o esquerdismo de vários políticos americanos, maior número, maior viés para esquerda. Vejam o grau de Obama.

Abaixo, vídeo com uma entrevista de Gloseclose. No fim, ele diz que sem o viés da mídia, os americanos votariam como votam os texanos (na direita).






(Agradeço o vídeo ao site Culture War Notes)

Verdadeira, Rápida e Inteligente Oposição ao Esqerdismo nos EUA

Certa vez, eu disse a um representante do governo americano que uma das coisas que mais admiro nos Estados Unidos é capacidade do povo americano responder rapidamente aos erros.

Os negros, incluindo artistas e jogadores de futebol americano, fazem campanha contra a polícia pois um negro metido em vários problemas na justiça foi morto ao ser rendido por policiais porque tinha problemas de respiração.

Eles criaram uma camisa escrita" I can't breath" (eu não posso respirar).

Daí o povo respondeu com outra camisa. Abaixo:

Respire fácil, não faça nada contra a lei, com o símbolo da polícia.


(Agradeço a indicação das camisas ao site Weasel Zippers)

Putin ataca Ocidente e China pode Socorrer Rússia.

Vladimir Putin disse que o Ocidente quer desarmar a Rússia e destruir os recursos naturais do país. Quase uma declaração de guerra.

E hoje o jornal The South China Morning declarou que a China pode ajudar financeiramente a Rússia. Hum...

Vejamos o que disse o jornal.


Russia could fall back on its 150 billion yuan (HK$189.8 billion) currency swap agreement with China if the rouble continues to plunge.

If the swap deal is activated for this purpose, it would mark the first time China is called upon to use its currency to bail out another currency in crisis. The deal was signed by the two central banks in October, when Premier Li Keqiang visited Russia.

"Russia badly needs liquidity support and the swap line could be an ideal tool," said Bank of Communications chief economist Lian Ping.

The swap allows the central banks to directly buy yuan and rouble in the two currencies, rather than via the US dollar.

Two bankers close to the People's Bank of China said it was meant to reduce the role of the US dollar if China and Russia need to help each other overcome a liquidity squeeze.

China has currency swap deals with more than 20 monetary authorities around the world. Swaps are generally used to settle trade.

"The yuan-rouble swap deal was not just a financial matter," said Wang Feng, chairman of Shanghai-based private equity group Yinshu Capital. "It has political implications as it is a sign of mutual trust."

The rouble has lost more than 50 per cent against the US dollar this year, pushing Russia to the brink of a currency crisis, though measures announced by the central bank helped it recover some ground yesterday.

Li Lifan, a researcher at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, said the swap would not be enough for Russia even if it is used in its entirety. "The PBOC might agree to extend something like 15 billion yuan initially as a way of showing China's commitment to Russia."

This article appeared in the South China Morning Post print edition as Russia may seek China help to deal with crisis.

Grécia deveria sair do Euro. Só a Grécia?

Em 2012, eram fortes os debates que os países conhecidos como PIGS (Portugal,Irlanda, Grécia e Espanha) deveriam sair do euro. A coisa se acomodou,mas a crise continua.

Agora, com a persistência da crise, que inclui também a França, segunda maior economia da Europa, e eleições na Grécia, volta-se ao assunto.

Vejamos o texto de Jeremy Warner, do The Telegraph. Ele quer que a Grécia deixe o euro de forma ordenada e com apoio da Europa, mas não acredita nisso.

Será apenas a Grécia que possui uma estrutura econômica e política que qualquer ajuda econômica de fora seria inútil?

To save itself, Greece must exit the euro.

Of all the instabilities that concern international investors – from the plunging oil price to the collapsing rouble and the slowing Chinese economy, now fast transmogrifying into a systemic emerging market crisis – Greece is the one that bothers them least.

If you happen to be Greek, or are long of Greek bonds, the latest turn of events obviously matters a lot, but to the great bulk of the outside world it seems a contained and largely irrelevant problem, quite unlike the Greek meltdown of 2011/12 which brought the entire Eurozone close to collapse. It's yesterday's story, now eclipsed by the greater threat of mass retrenchment in emerging markets weighed low by excessive dollar debt.

Things have moved on quite a bit since back then, or at least, that’s what eurozone leaders have convinced themselves of; the banking system is stronger, and mechanisms are in place to prevent wider contagion from a Greek default or exit, including, crucially, the bond buying backstop of the European Central Bank.

Perversely, some would actually welcome such a development, which they think would act as a warning to others, re-energising reform programmes that have become badly stalled, and galvanising the ECB into putting aside its divisions, and embarking on full scale quantitative easing.

It’s an almost convincing, script, but also an unduly sanguine one which massively underestimates the capacity of events to spiral out of control. Once a chain reaction has started, it’s hard to stop. For an inherently unstable and inter-connected construct such as the single currency, it may be close to impossible, even with the weight of the ECB behind the endeavour. The political nature of Greece’s renewed crisis makes it all the more unpredictable.

The bottom line is that Greece, and a number of other eurozone nations, do indeed urgently need to leave the euro - but not in the politically chaotic fashion that would occur in the event of a Syriza election victory. To be forced out on the back of unilateral default would be a deeply destructive outcome.

We are not, of course, yet at that stage, and my sense is that it probably won’t come to that. If an election is triggered, Syriza’s current poll lead will likely melt away once Greeks come to look down the barrel of the awaiting gun and think about the consequences of pulling the trigger.

But say Alexis Tsipras, Syriza’s leader, does emerge victorious, what then? There is hardly any chance of the rest of the Eurozone agreeing another debt restructuring, and no chance at all if Syriza is serious about the rest of its agenda, including reversing wage and pension cuts, structural reforms and so on.

Mr Tsipras, nevertheless, seems to think he can get his way simply by threatening to blow up the euro anew. It worked before, so it can work again, he figures. He’s wrong. If the rest of the Eurozone thinks it is sufficiently prepared to withstand a Greek default without significant mishap, then his bluff will be called. Mr Tsipras must then do his worst or be exposed as a man of straw.

In the first instance after repudiating debts, the ECB would refuse to renew liquidity support to the Greek banking system, worth around €40bn as things stand, or a sum equivalent to 20pc of the Greek GDP. This would soon cause another collapse in output, and necessitate swift withdrawal from the euro so as to allow the Greek central bank to crank up the printing press to fill the funding gap and pay the government’s bills.

The new currency would plummet, inflation would climb, and pretty soon Greeks would be experiencing something close to the full scale economic wipe-out described in Adam Fergusson’s terrifying book about the hyper-inflation of Weimar Germany – “When Money Dies”.

Mr Tsipras thinks he can default and stay in the euro, that he can, to put it another way, both repudiate his debts and maintain the value of his assets. Unfortunately, it doesn’t work that way. The two things move together.

None of this is to argue that Mr Tsipras is wrong to seek a further debt restructuring. There is no chance whatsoever of Greece, or for that matter several other periphery Eurozone economies, repaying their debts. For Greece, this would be the same with or without Mr Tsipras’s unhinged political agenda. Only the creditor nations of the north refuse to acknowledge this reality. The current set-up is completely unsustainable.

New research by the credit rating agency Standard & Poor’s lends strong support to this contention. Despite five years of crisis induced macro-economic adjustment and recalibration, debt imbalances within the Eurozone have actually got worse, not better. S&P estimate that Spain, Italy, Greece, and Portugal - the eurozone’s top-four external debtor nations - will owe a total of €1.85 trillion to non-residents by the end of 2014, compared with €875 billion a decade earlier. Aggregate current account deficits have been substantially closed, but within the Eurozone, they persist at relatively high levels, causing inter-indebtedness to continue climbing.

In any case, the euro seems to offer these countries no credible way out of the mess they are in. When Greece and other developing nations were fast tracked into what was then the European Economic Community, it was essentially for political and strategic reasons, to foster democracy, non aggression, European integration, and liberal values. These were noble ambitions. The great irony is that with the advent of the euro, they have been turned on their heads. The EU is today having the opposite effect. Instability and fragmentation have replaced consensus and cooperation.

The challenge for Europe’s leaders is to recognise their mistakes, stop treating the euro as some kind of god given symbol of progress and modernity, and begin the process of reintroducing free floating exchange rates to the parts of the eurozone that need them. By correcting imbalances in trade, debt and competiveness, exchange rate movment provides a natural market mechanism for what the politicians seem incapable of achieving through negotiation and public policy. Currency adjustment also automatically delivers any necessary haircut to creditors.

What’s required is the emergence of sensible, centrist politicians prepared to articulate these realities, what Keynes called a period of “ruthless truth telling”. Now virtually returned to current account surplus, and with the primary budget back in balance, Greece is again quite capable of financing itself internally. Done properly, and with IMF support, Greece’s exit from the euro needn’t be the chaotic disaster Mr Tsipras's election threatens, but a new beginning for an economy driven to the edge by Europe’s folie de grandeur.

Is this a realistic possibility? No time soon, I am sorry to say.

Assim como os Pássaros é o Movimento de Manada do Mercado.

Eu já falei aqui que minha tese de doutorado é sobre movimentos supostamente irracionais do mercado, é sobre o "mercado" agindo porque é dominado por humanos, psicologicamente frágeis, como são todos os humanos.

Sobre isso, hoje li um artigo do Zero Hedge que mostra que o mercado segue o padrão dos passarinhos em "murmuração", quando eles se movem juntos parecendo ser um corpo gigante, alterando juntos a velocidade da formação deste corpo. É assim o movimento de manada do mercado, um pequeno grupo de investidores toma uma atitude que é seguida de imediata por todos mesmo que seja completamente irracional, e a velocidade de mudança é alterada de forma conjunta. Este movimento do mercado é observado no chamado "relative rotation graph".

O site Zero Hedge mostra dois vídeos, um com ospássaros outro com o relative rotatios graph dos índices de mercado.

Muito interessante. Vejam.







Leiam o texto do Zero Hedge, para entender melhor.

Quais são os Países mais Racistas do Mundo? Não é EUA, nem Brasil.

Max Fischer fez análise usando dados do Word Values Survey para descobrir quais são os países mais intolerantes racialmente do mundo.

Ele encontrou interessantes resultados divulgados no Washington Post, em tempos de guerra racial nos EUA. Os resultados devem ser vistos com cautela, pois pesquisas qualitativas envolvem a honestidade de quem pergunta e de quem responde, sem falar nas dificuldades de se fazer este tipo de pesquisa em alguns países.

Mas os resultados mostram que os países mais intolerantes são Índia e Jordânia. Com resultados ruins para Venezuela e França.

Aqui vai parte do texto, tendo o mapa acima refletindo os resultados.

I went back to the source, compiled the original data and mapped it out on the infographic above. In the bluer countries, fewer people said they would not want neighbors of a different race; in red countries, more people did.

If we treat this data as indicative of racial tolerance, then we might conclude that people in the bluer countries are the least likely to express racist attitudes, while the people in red countries are the most likely.

Before we dive into the data, a couple of caveats. First, it's entirely likely that some people lied when answering this question; it would be surprising if they hadn't. But the operative question, unanswerable, is whether people in certain countries were more or less likely to answer the question honestly. For example, while the data suggest that Swedes are more racially tolerant than Finns, it's possible that the two groups are equally tolerant but that Finns are just more honest. The willingness to state such a preference out loud, though, might be an indicator of racial attitudes in itself. Second, the survey is not conducted every year; some of the results are very recent and some are several years old, so we're assuming the results are static, which might not be the case.

Here's what the data show:

• Anglo and Latin countries most tolerant. People in the survey were most likely to embrace a racially diverse neighbor in the United Kingdom and its Anglo former colonies (the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) and in Latin America. The only real exceptions were oil-rich Venezuela, where income inequality sometimes breaks along racial lines, and the Dominican Republic, perhaps because of its adjacency to troubled Haiti. Scandinavian countries also scored high.

• India and Jordan by far the least tolerant. In only two of 81 surveyed countries, more than 40 percent of respondents said they would not want a neighbor of a different race. This included 43.5 percent of Indians and 51.4 percent of Jordanian. (Note: World Values’ data for Bangladesh and Hong Kong appear to have been inverted, with in fact only 28.3 and 26.8 percent, respectively, having indicated they would not want a neighbor of a different race. Please see correction at the bottom of this post.)

• Wide, interesting variation across Europe. Immigration and national identity are big, touchy issues in much of Europe, where racial make-ups are changing. Though you might expect the richer, better-educated Western European nations to be more tolerant than those in Eastern Europe, that's not exactly the case. France appeared to be one of the least racially tolerant countries on the continent, with 22.7 percent saying they didn't want a neighbor of another race. Former Soviet states such as Belarus and Latvia scored as more tolerant than much of Europe. Many in the Balkans, perhaps after years of ethnicity-tinged wars, expressed lower racial tolerance.

• The Middle East not so tolerant. Immigration is also a big issue in this region, particularly in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, which often absorb economic migrants from poorer neighbors.

• Racial tolerance low in diverse Asian countries. Nations such as Indonesia and the Philippines, where many racial groups often jockey for influence and have complicated histories with one another, showed more skepticism of diversity. This was also true, to a lesser extent, in China and Kyrgyzstan. There were similar trends in parts of sub-Saharan Africa.

Japão Morrendo, sendo Preenchido com Espantalhos.

A reportagem é da Associated Press, que destaca as cidades fantasmas do Japão, que são preenchidas com espantalhos. Há cidades que têm mais espantalhos do que gente.

O Japão está morrendo. A reportagem ressalta muitas causas econômicas, mas não lembra nenhum instante de que o Japão legalizou o aborto ainda na década de 40, muito antes dos países ocidentais, e que atualmente  300 mil japoneses são abortados todo ano. Isto mesmo, 300 mil por ano, mais do que uma cidade inteira de gente.

Mas vejamos parte do relato da AP:

Scarecrows outnumber people in dying Japan town

By ELAINE KURTENBACH

NAGORO, Japan (AP) — This village deep in the rugged mountains of southern Japan once was home to hundreds of families. Now, only 35 people remain, outnumbered three-to-one by scarecrows that Tsukimi Ayano crafted to help fill the days and replace neighbors who died or moved away.

At 65, Ayano is one of the younger residents of Nagoro. She moved back from Osaka to look after her 85-year-old father after decades away.

"They bring back memories," Ayano said of the life-sized dolls crowded into corners of her farmhouse home, perched on fences and trees, huddled side-by-side at a produce stall, the bus stop, anywhere a living person might stop to take a rest.

"That old lady used to come and chat and drink tea. That old man used to love to drink sake and tell stories. It reminds me of the old times, when they were still alive and well," she said.

Even more than its fading status as an export superpower, Japan's dwindling population may be its biggest challenge. More than 10,000 towns and villages in Japan are depopulated, the homes and infrastructure crumbling as the countryside empties thanks to the falling birthrate and rapid aging.

In Japan's northeast, the massive earthquake and tsunami that struck in March 2011, killing more than 18,000 people, merely hastened along the decline.

First the jobs go. Then the schools. Eventually, the electricity meters stop.

Neither Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's ruling Liberal Democratic Party nor any of its rivals have figured out how to "revive localities," an urgent issue that has perplexed Japanese leaders for decades.

But some communities are trying various strategies for attracting younger residents, slowing if not reversing their decline. In Kamiyama, another farming community closer to the regional capital of Tokushima, community organizers have mapped out a strategy for attracting artists and high-tech companies.

Nagoro is more typical of the thousands of communities that are turning into ghost towns or at best, open-air museums, frozen in time — a trend evident even in downtown Tokyo and in nearly or completely empty villages in the city's suburbs.

The one-street town is mostly abandoned, its shops and homes permanently shuttered.

The closure of the local elementary school two years ago was the last straw. Ayano unlocks the door and guides visitors through spotless classrooms populated with scarecrow students and teachers.

When she returned to her hometown 13 years ago, Ayano tried farming. Thinking her radish seeds may have been eaten by crows, she decided to make some scarecrows. By now there are more 100 scattered around Nagoro and other towns in Shikoku.

Like handcarved Buddhist sculptures, each has its own whimsical expression. Some sleep, their eyelids permanently shut. Others cuddle toddler scarecrows, or man plows and hoes.

Ayano brings one along for company on her 90-minute drive to buy groceries in the nearest big town. But most remain behind, to be photographed and marveled at by tourists who detour through the winding mountain roads.

"If I hadn't made these scarecrows, people would just drive right by," said Ayano, who greets a steady stream of visitors who wander through the village.

The plight of Japan's countryside partly a consequence of the country's economic success. As the nation grew increasingly affluent after World War II, younger Japanese flooded into the cities to fill jobs in factories and service industries, leaving their elders to tend small farms.

Greater Tokyo, with more than 37 million people and Osaka-Kobe, with 11.5 million, account for nearly 40 percent of the country's 127 million people, with another 10 million scattered in a handful of provincial capitals.

"There's been this huge sucking sound as the countryside is emptied," said Joel Cohen, a professor at Columbia University's Laboratory of Populations.

Japan's population began to decline in 2010 from a peak of 128 million. Without a drastic increase in the birthrate or a loosening of the staunch Japanese resistance to immigration, it is forecast to fall to about 108 million by 2050 and to 87 million by 2060.

By then, four in 10 Japanese will be over 65 years old.

The government has a target of preventing the population from falling below 100 million, but efforts to convince Japanese women to have more babies have yielded meager results. Young Japanese continue to drift from the countryside into big cities such as Tokyo, where the birthrate is a mere 1.13 children, thanks to long working hours, high costs and killer commutes.

The population of Miyoshi, which is the town closest to Nagoro, fell from 45,340 in 1985 to about 27,000 last year. A quarter of its population is over 75 years old. To entice residents to have more children, the town began offering free nursery care for third children, free diapers and formula to age 2 and free health care through junior high school.

(Agradeço o texto da AP ao site Zero Hedge)

Vídeo: O Que Pensam os Negros Revoltados dos EUA.

Enquanto Obama se diverte com Papai Noel, Ami Horowitz foi procurar saber o que pensam os negros americanos que se revoltam com casos policiais nos EUA. Os negros representam apenas 13% da população americana, mas, da população na cadeia dos EUA, os negros são 70%.

O que há de errado? É culpa dos policiais,  do sistema judiciário americano, ou é da cultura negra, cuja música sempre estimula a vida mansa e o sexo, e que possui a maior taxa de abortos entre todas as raças dos EUA (eu já falei no meu outro blog, que o lugar mais perigoso para uma criança negra nos EUA é no ventre materno)? Em Nova Iorque a chance de uma criança negra ser abortada é bem mais de 50%!!!

Ami Horowitz perguntou aos negros revoltados por que eles achavam que os EUA eram racista. E se Obama estava ajudando eles.

Horowitz quase apanha, não ouviu nada além de muitos palavrões, eles não querem saber de fatos, os negros querem a morte de um policial que, em briga, matou um negro, e eles não aprovam o primeiro presidente negro dos EUA.

Vejam vídeo abaixo da entrevista de Horowitz. É bastante revelador.






(Agradeço o vídeo ao site Weasel Zippers)

Charge Engraçada: Vida "Natureba" e Sobrevivência

Quando os homens viviam mais parecidos com os animais, como querem o extremistas naturalistas, a vida terminava bem cedo, hehe.

Fonte: The TOF Spot

Quando Capitalismo de Adam Smith foi adotado? Não no século 21, nem no século 20, nem no 19...

Dizem que Adam Smith é o pai da disciplina economia, mesmo que muitas de suas teses terem sido publicadas antes por outros, ver a Escola de Salamanca, por exemplo. Dizem também que ele é o pai do capitalismo, mas quando o capitalismo de Adam Smith, da mão invísivel livre do estado, foi usado? A história diz que nunca.

Muitos dizem que o desenvolvimento do mundo se deve ao capitalismo. Mas que capitalismo nós estamos falando? Daquele do "livre mercado" não é, pois este nunca existiu.

Vejamos o excelente texto de David W. Cooney sobre assunto. Vou colocar aqui parte do texto no site Practical Distributism, leiam todo acessando o link.

Has Smith's Capitalism Ever Been Tried?

Posted by David W. Cooney

There is, in the vast realm of people calling themselves capitalists, a very peculiar group. While, like all capitalists, they claim that capitalism is responsible for every material advancement and new technology since they days of Adam Smith, they simultaneously claim that every economic problem that has occurred is not the result of capitalism. These are the true believers in Smith's "invisible hand," the individual self interest that will inevitably (and unintentionally) guide the overall market in a way that is best for all. They invariably blame every economic problem on government meddling. It is government meddling that causes Smith's invisible hand to veer off course. When confronted with any economic problem that has occurred, they counter that the government was meddling in the economy. They claim that capitalism cannot be blamed because the fact that the government was meddling proves that capitalism wasn't being used. If that is the case, if the existence of government meddling in things related to the economy means that capitalism is not being used, has Smith's capitalism ever actually been tried?

Adam Smith's pivotal work, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, was published in 1776. In it is outlined what is generally accepted as the classical form of capitalism. While I acknowledge different forms of capitalism, for the purpose of this article, we will use the term "capitalism" as synonymous with Smith's version. For today's followers of Smith, the government's only economic role is to protect private property through things like copyrights and patents, and to prosecute things like fraud and theft. Anything beyond these types of things means that capitalism isn't actually being used. For them, anything they consider government meddling in the economy negates capitalism, and Keynesian policies are considered socialist. Let's set aside the fact that Keynes' goal was to save capitalism, and accept their assertion for the moment. Assuming the validity of their claim that any government meddling beyond the above limits negates the presence of capitalism, let's stroll back through the last two centuries to see when Smith's economic theories were actually being used.

Since most economies throughout Europe and the U.S. had adopted Keynesianism by the mid 1900s, the followers of Smith would have to admit that, according to their views, capitalism has not been used for the majority of the 20th Century up to the present day. In fact, as the years have gone by, governments have expanded their Keynesian policies even beyond what Keynes probably envisioned. How can we not conclude that we have been moving steadily further from anything resembling Smith's views on the role of government in economics. This conclusion is confirmed by comments that we have abandoned capitalism. Some followers of Smith state outright that we do not live in a capitalist society today, and have not for some time. 

Since most economies throughout Europe and the U.S. had adopted
Government "meddling" in economics goes beyond Keynesian redistribution. Capitalists blame government lending rules for theeconomic crisis that started in 2008. I frequently hear complaints from capitalists about other regulations that impact economic decisions. Environmental standards is a current example where many of them claim that government is going beyond its limits and preventing capitalism from working. Some of them seem to waver a little when it comes to safety standards, but isn't it in the self-interest of producers to produce safe products? Isn't there a demand for safe products created by the self-interest of the buyers? It seems that Smith's theories would make even government safety standards unnecessary for a true market economy, meaning that their existence is a form of meddling in the market economy. The early 1900s saw the first farm legislation and meat inspection requirements at the federal level. Some states had been passing agricultural legislation before that, and George Washington had argued in favor of agricultural regulations during his presidency. The U.S. and Europe had dairy regulations going back as far back as the 1870s. Since that time, government meddling in agriculture has moved well beyond safety standards into direct market manipulation through crop limits and agricultural subsidies

In the realm of technology, the invention of the automobile is widely acknowledged as one of the most pivotal developments for the advancement of economic society as well as of society as a whole. However, the horse buggy industry, fearing its new rival, caused state legislation to be passed to impair the development and adoption of the automobile. There was one state where the law required that, upon reaching any intersection, the driver of an automobile was not only required to stop, but to turn off the engine, get out of the vehicle and walk up to the intersection to look both ways down the cross road, and even fire a gun to warn anyone who was out of visual range that an automobile was at the intersection. Only then could he start the engine and drive through the intersection. Even if Smith's followers were to allow for government safety regulations, these examples of extensive government meddling in economic matters show that capitalism has not been used since the late 19th Century.

Adam Smith opposed tariffs. The first United States tariff for the explicit purpose of protecting U.S. manufactured goods from foreign competition was enacted in 1816. However, it is generally acknowledged that the Tariff of 1789 - the year the U.S. Constitution was ratified - was not only to protect domestic industries from foreign competition, but was an economic retaliation to the tariffs Great Britain...

Smith was one capitalist among many in his day, but even then he was hailed as the pivotal character defining capitalism. Despite the praise his theories received, most of the countries we regard as capitalist in that time had economic policies more akin to the proposals of James Steuart. Smith spoke of the "invisible hand," which is the collective impact of everyone acting for their own self interest, but the economists of his day complained that the people weren't willing to work where the economists wanted. Steuart proposed laws to compel the peasants of his day to work in the factories and mills by restricting their ability to be self-sufficient, and such laws were frequently passed.

You see, the common peasant of the time was, for the most part, content with his lot. He enjoyed a sufficient amount of personal freedom. He was able to provide for the needs of his family. He was granted, by law, many days off of work for local and religious holidays. The peasants of Ireland enjoyed nearly 170 days off every year, and the peasants of other countries enjoyed nearly as many. This leisure time, used for religious observances, celebrations and fun, was characterized as "indolence" and "sloth" by the capitalists of Smith's day. Some were proposing that workers should only have one day off per week (52 days a year) while others proposed that they would only have one day off in ten (36 days a year). It isn't hard to imagine why the average peasant worker in Smith's day didn't find the prospect of working in the factories as enticing as the owners wished or the capitalists seemed to assume they would. It was in the best interests of the factory owners that the peasants work for them, but the peasants believed it was in their own best interest to remain as they were. Factories and mills were being built, but the peasants didn't flock to work in them. If Smith's invisible hand had been allowed to follow its natural course, those factories would have simply failed. Instead, laws were passed to prohibit certain home industries that had traditionally existed. If your cottage industry conflicted with the interests of the factories and mills, it was targeted and made illegal. Even in Smith's day, the owners of large capital manipulated the power of government to give the invisible hand a helping hand in their favor.

The modern day proponents of Smith's capitalism are quick to criticize distributists as advancing a mere theory, an economic system that has never been tried and simply won't work in the "real world." While going back to the societal structure of the time is not necessary for distributism, many aspects of economic society during the High Middle Ages were essentially distributist in nature. It was a time of technical and political innovation and personal advancement. It was a time of overall economic stability. In the 13th Century, peasants enjoyed 76 days off each year for religious and local celebrations. Special events like weddings, fairs and tournaments were also typically days off. They also got an additional half day off the day before each holy day. It was a society was essentially distributist that first established the university, the idea that the role of government has natural limits, and the idea that the common citizen could advance himself from a serf to a free person (peasant) who could own his own land. Therefore, what distributists propose are not untried and fanciful theories that won't work, but actual tried and proven economic policies that, with certain accommodations for modern society and technology, can also work today.

...Capitalism is presented as the greatest economic development in the history of mankind, directly responsible for the material enrichment and technological development that has occurred in the 238 years since "Wealth of Nations" was published. However, we have seen that there hasn't been any time since Smith himself where his theories have actually been implemented. What we have known as "capitalism" has never existed without government support and "meddling" in economic matters well beyond the limits of Smith's theory. It may be true that government meddling decreased in certain ways as a result of Smith, but there was always a significant level of government meddling in the economy.

The period commonly called Laissez Faire might have come closer to Smith's idea than any other, but, even in that time, there was enough government meddling that some of Smith's followers argue the period wasn't truly capitalism and even cannot be accurately called Laissez Faire. Ought we accept the claims of Smith's followers that his theories have resulted in material advancement and technological development when, according to the standards of these same followers, Smith's theories were not actually in effect? 

Has Smith's capitalism ever been tried? 

The answer appears to be no