(c) AP Photo/Matt Dunham
Category Archives: myslienky
Otvorený list prezidentovi SR
Ani po výklade Ústavného súdu vo veci vymenovania p. Čentéša za
Generálneho prokurátora, ste sa pre občanov našej krajiny nevyjadrili dosť
jasne o tom, aké dôvody vás vedú k jeho nevymenovaniu.
Keďže Vy sám s tým máte problém , rada by som Vám pomohla. Vy
prosto nemáte pána Čentéša radi. Je to prirodzená ľudská vlastnosť , a netreba
sa za to hanbiť, ba práve naopak, treba to naplno vytrúbiť do sveta.
Tak ja , napríklad , nemám rada Vás. A mám na to hneď plno dôvodov:
·– pretože zahmlievate svoju účasť v KSČ
·– pretože Vás ako Generálneho prokurátora musel v roku 1992
odvolať vtedajší prezident Havel za „ nečinnosť“
·– pretože ste sa podieľali spolu s v. Mečiarom na zločinoch ako
únos prezidentovho syna a vražda Roberta Remiaša.
·– pretože ste sa spolu s V. Mečiarom podieľali na divokej
privatizácii- najväčšej rozkradačke štátu v dejinách samostatnej
SR ( ak nerátam Pentu)
·– pretože ste bývalého prezidenta Kováča nazvali starým
„..ujom“ a neodstúpili ste z funkcie predsedu NRSR už z morálnych alebo
etických dôvodov
·– pretože ste spolu s Mečiarovou kohortou dali vyrobiť hodiny ,
aby bývalému prezidentovi Kováčovi odrátavali čas do konca jeho
prezidentského obdobia /asi by sa vám dnes táto infantilná
trápnosť nepáčila/
— preto, že ste po tom všetkom mali guráž kandidovať za
prezidenta.
·— pretože Vašim poradcom je arcikomunista súdruh Číč, ktorý
ani nevie, že Slovenská republika už nie je socialistická. Najväčší
konformista v dejinách Československa- a vždy vo vysokých
štátnych funkciách, bez ohľadu na situáciu. Ak by tu vládla NSDAP , iste by
bol jej šéfom. Len pre občerstvenie pamäte: Súdruh Číč koncom 50
tých rokov vyhadzoval študentov práva zo škôl kvôli ich „
nevhodnému“ pôvodu.
Apropo, spolu s Mečiarom ste podpísali zákon NRSR 125/1996 z.z, o
protiprávnosti komunistického režimu .
·– Pretože ste klamali v prípade podvodníka Varehu. Tvrdili ste,
že ho nepoznáte a pritom vám pomáhal s kampaňou a bol prítomný na
vašej inaugurácii.
·– Pretože som si nevšimla, že by ste urobili niečo pre pospolitý
národ tejto krajiny, vyjadrili sa ku kauzám, ktoré systematicky
traumatizovali a traumatizujú spoločnosť: od nastenkového tendra
počnúc, cez emisie, až po kauzu Gorila., končiac.
·— Preto že Váš verbálny prejav väčšinou postráda pointu alebo
je inak nezrozumiteľný , ale pre zberateľov perličiek z úst verejných
činiteľov isto cenný
·– Pretože Vás okrem fujary , hokeja a pretekov nezaujíma nič,
vrátane vášho úradu. Skrátka , Vaša nečinnosť hraničí už s lenivosťou
alebo neschopnosťou.
Napriek tomu všetkému , v prezidentských voľbách 2004 som Vás
volila len preto, aby nezvíťazil Váš protikandidát Mečiar. Teda menšie
zlo. I keď zlo ,ako matematická veličina, nemôže byt nikdy väčšie alebo
menšie- vždy to bude len zlo.
V roku 2009 sme už konečne nemuseli voliť zlo, pani Radičova by
bola neporovnateľne lepšou prezidentkou ako Vy.
Či už nevymenujete pána Čentéša na právoplatne zvolený
post z relevantných alebo len ješitných dôvodov, je to len na Vás.
Vďaka schizoidnému výkladu Ústavného súdu / načo je vôbec taký
Ústavný súd/ na to máte právo.
Myslím si, že pre Vás bude „ dobre“ , ak Pána Čentéša
nevymenujete. Mohlo by sa totiž ukázať, že je to morálny a slušný človek…
Jarmila Durániková , piatok 26. októbra 2012 11:44
Čítajte viac:
http://duranikova.blog.sme.sk/c/313341/Ked-bezocivost-sudruha-Harabina-prestava-byt-unosna.html
Dakujem vsetkym
GMO myths and truths
Pribúdajú a silnejú vedecké dôkazy o tom, že geneticky modifikované plodiny:
– sú vyrobené laboratórne technológiou úplne odlišnou od prirodzených spôsobov množenia
– môžu byť toxické, alergénne alebo menej výživné ako ich prírodné náprotivky
– ich výroba a používanie nie je primerane regulované na zaistenie bezpečnosti
– nezvyšujú úrodu/jej potenciál
– neznižujú, ale zvyšujú používanie pesticídov
– robia farmárom vážne problémy, ako sú “superburiny” znášajúce herbicídy, ohrozenie kvality pôdy a väčšia náchylnosť plodín na choroby
– majú zmiešané ekonomické efekty
– poškodzujú kvalitu pôdy, narušujú ekosystémy a znižujú biodiverzitu
– neponúkajú účinné riešenia klimatickej zmeny
– sú takisto energeticky náročné ako hocijaké iné chemicky pestované plodiny
– nemôžu vyriešiť problém svetového hladu, len odvádzajú pozornosť od jeho skutočných príčin – chudoby, nedostupnosti potravín a čoraz viac aj nedostupnosti pôdy na ich vypestovanie
– sú vyrobené laboratórne technológiou úplne odlišnou od prirodzených spôsobov množenia
– môžu byť toxické, alergénne alebo menej výživné ako ich prírodné náprotivky
– ich výroba a používanie nie je primerane regulované na zaistenie bezpečnosti
– nezvyšujú úrodu/jej potenciál
– neznižujú, ale zvyšujú používanie pesticídov
– robia farmárom vážne problémy, ako sú “superburiny” znášajúce herbicídy, ohrozenie kvality pôdy a väčšia náchylnosť plodín na choroby
– majú zmiešané ekonomické efekty
– poškodzujú kvalitu pôdy, narušujú ekosystémy a znižujú biodiverzitu
– neponúkajú účinné riešenia klimatickej zmeny
– sú takisto energeticky náročné ako hocijaké iné chemicky pestované plodiny
– nemôžu vyriešiť problém svetového hladu, len odvádzajú pozornosť od jeho skutočných príčin – chudoby, nedostupnosti potravín a čoraz viac aj nedostupnosti pôdy na ich vypestovanie
Monsanto a roundup: studia ukazala potencialnu karcinogenitu
LONDON, SEPT. 19, 2012 — /PRNewswire/ — The first animal feeding trial studying the lifetime effects of exposure to Roundup tolerant GM maize, and Roundup, the world’s best-selling weedkiller, shows that levels currently considered safe can cause tumors and multiple organ damage and lead to premature death in laboratory rats, according to research published online today by the scientific journal Food and Chemical Toxicology.
Researchers found that rats fed on a diet containing NK603 Roundup tolerant GM maize, or given water containing Roundup at levels permitted in drinking water and GM crops in the US, died earlier than rats fed on a standard diet. They suffered mammary tumors and severe liver and kidney damage.
The paper, “Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize” reports on a study conducted by a team of scientists led by molecular biologist and endocrinologist Professor Gilles-Eric Seralini, co-director of the Risk Quality and Sustainable Environment Unit at the University of Caen, France, who is an authority on studies into the health impact of GMO’s and pesticides. It was supported by independent research organization, CRIIGEN.
Dr Michael Antoniou, molecular biologist at Kings College, London, and a member of the CRIIGEN scientific council, says:
“This is the most thorough research ever published into the health effects of GM food crops and the herbicide Roundup on rats. It shows an extraordinary number of tumors developing earlier and more aggressively – particularly in female animals. I am shocked by the extreme negative health impacts.”
“The rat has long been used as a surrogate for human toxicity. All new pharmaceutical, agricultural and household substances are, prior to their approval, tested on rats. This is as good an indicator as we can expect that the consumption of GM maize and the herbicide Roundup, impacts seriously on human health.”
In the peer reviewed paper, the research team say they believe this is the first long-term animal feeding trial to examine the effects of Roundup, the world’s most used herbicide, and a commercial Roundup tolerant GM maize. Researchers studied 10 groups, each containing 10 male and 10 female rats, over their normal lifetime – two years.
Three groups were given Roundup in their drinking water, at three different levels consistent with exposure through the food chain from crops sprayed with the weedkiller: the mid level corresponded to the maximum level permitted in the US in some GM feed; the lowest corresponded to contamination found in some tap waters. Three groups were fed diets which contained different proportions of NK603 – 11%, 22% and 33%. Three groups were given both Roundup and NK603 at the same three dosages. The final control group was fed an equivalent diet with no Roundup or NK603 but containing 33% of equivalent non-GM maize.
Researchers found that NK603 and Roundup both caused similar damage to the rats’ health whether they were consumed on their own or together. Females developed fatal mammary tumours and pituitary disorders. Males suffered liver damage, developed kidney and skin tumors and experienced problems with their digestive system. The team also identified a “threshold effect” where even the lowest doses were associated with severe health problems.
The report states: “Similar degrees of pathological symptoms were noticed in this study to occur from the lowest to the highest doses suggesting a threshold effect. This corresponds to levels likely to arise from consumption or environmental exposure, such as either 11% GM maize in food, or 50ng/L of glyphosate in R-formulation [the lowest concentration of Roundup in the rats’ drinking water] as can be found in some contaminated drinking tap waters, and which falls within authorized limits.”
- Up to 50% of males and 70% of females died prematurely (before deaths could be put down to normal aging) compared with only 30% and 20% in the control group.
- Across all treatments and both sexes, researchers found treated rats developed 2-3 times more large tumors than the control group, defined as 17.5mm in females and 20mm in males.
- By the beginning of the 24th month 50%-80% of females in all treated groups had developed large tumors, with up to three per animal. Only 30% of the controls were affected.
- The tumors “were deleterious to health due to a very large size”, making it difficult for the rats to breathe, causing problems with their digestion and resulting in hemorrhaging.
- The first large detectable tumors appeared after four and seven months in males and females respectively but only after 14 months in the female control group and 23 months in a control male. However, the majority of tumors were only detectable after 18 months.
Treated males suffered severe liver and kidney dysfunction. Liver congestions and necrosis were 2.5 to 5.5 times higher than in the control group. There were also 1.3 – 2.3 times more instances of “marked and severe” kidney disease.
The lowest dose tested in the study (50 nanograms per liter) is below safety limits for glyphosate in water and crops. EU legislation sets the Maximum Residual Level (MRL) in water at 0.1 mg/liter, 1 mg/kg in maize, and 20mg/kg in other animal feeds like soy, oats and barley. The US sets an MRL in some animal feed of 400mg/kg.
The research findings raise serious questions about the current regulatory process for licensing industrial chemicals, pesticides and other novel crops. The scientists observe that GM crops have been approved safe for consumption on the basis of 90-day animal feeding trials. They also point out that only Roundup’s active principle, glyphosate, has been tested rather than the commercial product, which includes ingredients that enable the glyphosate to penetrate plants more efficiently.
The research also highlights the urgent need for more research into the long-term effects of all GM food crops, which are currently grown on 1.8% of the world’s agricultural land. In the US, 70% of processed foods contain GM ingredients without GM labeling, and 85% of maize now grown in the U.S. is GM. In the UK and Europe, GM maize is not consumed directly by humans but it is widely included in animal feed. Hundreds of thousands of tons of GM maize are imported to the UK each year for use in the diets of chickens, pigs and dairy cows. Meat and dairy products from animals fed on GM are currently sold in British supermarkets without any requirement for GM labeling.
Patrick Holden, Founder and Director for the Sustainable Food Trust, says:
“This research raises a number of serious issues and it is now essential that regulators examine the findings carefully and that other researchers replicate this study on a larger scale to see if the same results are obtained.
“Looking critically at all aspects of food production, be they intensive, low input, organic or GM crops, has become a priority given that we can no longer be sure that global food supplies will be capable of feeding the growing global population. GM crops hold out the promise of helping to meet the triple challenges of climate change, resource depletion and population increase, but if they have negative effects on health we need to recognise this as quickly as possible and apply our energies in other areas.
“On the basis of this study, we have to conclude that there is now a serious question mark over the safety of at least one GM crop. This suggests that all currently licensed GM crops should be re-evaluated and that in future safety studies in laboratory animals must be conducted over significantly longer periods of time that are equivalent to the animals’ normal life span not simply their adolescence.”
The researchers hypothesize that the reason why NK603 GM maize, NK603 sprayed with Roundup, and Roundup on its own, all produced very similar negative health outcomes, is that both the GM maize and the weedkiller Roundup “may cause hormonal disturbances in the same biochemical and physiological pathway.”
Glyphosate, the active ingredient in the herbicide Roundup is a known endocrine disruptor, and previous research has shown that it can cause liver and kidney failure if consumed above maximum permitted residue levels. However, this is the first research that suggests that even very low levels, such as those found in drinking water, are harmful when consumed over an extended period.
The paper says: “The results of the study presented here clearly demonstrate that lower levels of complete agricultural glyphosate herbicide formulations, at concentrations well below officially set safety limits, induce severe hormone-dependent mammary, hepatic [liver] and kidney disturbances.”
It suggests that overexpression of the GM “transgene” EPSPS, which makes NK603 tolerant to Roundup in the field, may disrupt biosynthetic pathways and cause similar problems. Most edible GM crops use EPSPS to make them tolerant to Roundup.
Prof Seralini’s co-authors are Emilie Clair, Robin Mesnage, Steeve Gress, Nicolas Defarge, Manuela Malatesta, Didier Hennequin, and Joel Spiroux de Vendomois.
Copies of the research can be obtained on request from CRIIGEN www.criigen.org and from Food and Chemical Toxicology www.journals.elsevier.com/food-and-chemical-toxicology
Further resources are available on the SFT website including: pictures; a graphic showing premature death among female rats; and a backgrounder on the GM debate.research.sustainablefoodtrust.org
SOURCE Sustainable Food Trust
Read more here: http://www.heraldonline.com/2012/09/19/4274523/first-peer-reviewed-lifetime-feeding.html#storylink=cpy
Monsanto vs Francuzko okolo zakazu GMO kukurice
Monsanto Maize: EU Blocks France Ban On MON 810 “Yieldgard”
Days after France attempted to ban a genetically-modified strain of maize created by the controversial agricultural company Monsanto, based in St. Louis, Mo., the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)rejected France’s grounds for banning the maize on Monday, even though France believes the corn is harmful to the environment.
Days after France attempted to ban a genetically-modified strain of maize created by the controversial agricultural company Monsanto, based in St. Louis, Mo., the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) rejected France’s grounds for banning the maize, even though France believes the corn is harmful to the environment.
“Based on the documentation submitted by France, there is no specific scientific evidence, in terms of risk to human and animal health or the environment,” the EFSA said on its website.
Monsanto’s maize, known as MON 810 or its trade name “YieldGard,” was introduced in 1997 as corn with naturally-occurring soil bacteria inserted into its DNA structure that could better resist insects, as the pests simply can’t digest the protein produced by the bacterium. But while the GM maize can keep stalk borers away, some experts believe the crop can be harmful to plants and other animals. The EFSA, however, rejected France’s ban on the crop, citing a lack of evidence.
“[Europe’s health commissioner John Dalli] will consider how to follow up on this ruling, though technically we could ask France to raise its ban [on MON 810],” said Frederic Vincent, a spokesman for Dalli. “The commission will wait for the conclusions of the next environment ministers’ meeting June 11 in Luxembourg and hopes for a positive outcome to its proposals for cultivation, which have been blocked for almost two years by France and others.”
This is not France’s first battle with Monsanto’s genetically-modified maize: In 2008, the country banned the MON 810 strain after public protests, but even though a French court overturned the ban in November, citing that the government failed to prove that Monsanto’s crops “present a particularly elevated level of risk to either human health or the environment,” the French government reinstated the ban again anyway this March. The ban has been supported by France’s agricultural minister, Bruno Le Maire.
Besides the government’s attempts to cut off Monsanto’s maize from France, protesters both in the U.S. and abroad are speaking out against the billion-dollar biotech corporation. In March, thousands of people marched the streets of Washington, D.C., dressed in hazmat suits, and called themselves “Occupy Monsanto.” The protesters believed Monsanto was helping to bankrupt small-time farms across America by chemically-engineering and genetically-modifying seeds that made it not only unnatural, but anti-competitive. Protesters also disapproved of the way Monsanto allegedly poured out millions of dollars to have firms lobby on its behalf.
“In the name of Wall Street profits, chemical corporations such as Monsanto genetically engineer crops to withstand high doses of their toxic weed killers that contaminate our food and water, and have not been proven safe,” said Ariel Vegosen, a member of “Occupy Monsanto,” in March. “We deserve to know what we are eating. Virtually every major country requires labeling of GMOs in foods so their citizens can make informed choices, including all of Europe, Japan and even China. Monsanto’s lobbying dollars are pouring into politicians so it’s clear we have a GMO contaminated US Congress that threatens our health and the health of the planet.”
Occupy Monsanto also coordinated simultaneous protests in Seattle, Los Angeles, Winnipeg, and Dusseldorf, and hopes to launch its next round of protests on Sept. 17, 2012. Occupy Monsanto hopes to specifically occupy Monsanto’s scattered facilities around the world on that day.
slohnute z: http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/343993/20120522/monsanto-maize-eu-blocks-france-ban-yieldgard.htm
Francuzko, GMO a Monsanto
France Bans Growing Of Genetically Modified Monsanto Corn
France will temporarily ban the growing of Monsanto Co. (MON)’s genetically modified corn MON810 ahead of guidance by European regulators on the crop’s safety, the agriculture and environment ministries said.
The ban will come into force on March 18 after the European Commission, the European Union’s regulatory arm, told France it didn’t plan immediate measures against the Monsanto corn, the ministries wrote in a joint e-mailed statement today.
France last month asked the EU to suspend approval for MON810, citing recent scientific studies that show growing the corn variety poses “important risks” to the environment. The commission told France it has consulted the European Food Safety Authority and doesn’t plan any urgent measure ahead of the opinion, the ministries wrote.
“Because of the proximity of the planting period, the Agriculture Ministry has decided today to take a precautionary measure that means to temporarily prohibit the cultivation of the corn MON810 on the national territory in order to protect the environment,” according to the statement.
France is the European Union’s largest corn grower, data from the bloc show. Last year, French farmers planted corn on 1.55 million hectares (3.8 million acres), producing 15.5 million metric tons of the grain, according to crop office FranceAgriMer.
Monsanto’s MON810 is a so-called Bt corn that includes a genetic modification that makes the plant toxic to insect pests including the European corn borer.
“The new ban is not justified by scientific evidence,” John Combest, a spokesman for Monsanto, said in a e-mail today. The company does not market MON810 in France because “we seek planting where we have broad farmer and government support,” Combest said.
To contact the reporter on this story: Rudy Ruitenberg in Paris at rruitenberg@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Claudia Carpenter atccarpenter2@bloomberg.net
slohnute z: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-16/france-bans-cultivation-of-genetically-modified-monsanto-corn.html
Island a jeho ticha zmena politickeho systemu
uz sa tu o tom raz pisalo….
New constitution in Iceland: the conspiracy of silence …
Iceland finished 2011 with a growth of 2.1% and is projected by the European Commission forecasts, the rate reached 2.7% in 2013 thanks mainly to the creation of new jobs.
Iceland is the only European country that rejected by referendum rescue private banks, collapsed leaving some of them and judging many bankers for their financial crimes but curiously the French and European media do not discuss or very few …
There is no official censorship in the media press, radio or TV but journalists and experts from all sides, so quick to talk about what is happening in Egypt, Lybia and Syria, are completely silent on what happening in Iceland. Have they been spoken in many political debates for the presidential election? Have we seen images on TV? Of course not because the Europeans could have the bad idea to be inspired …
In Iceland, the people did resign a government in full. The major banks were nationalized and it was decided not to pay the debt they had contracted with banks in Britain and Holland, their bad debt generated by financial policy.
– 2008: The banks Glitnir, Kaupthing and Landsbankinn are nationalized to prevent their failure rather than unconditionally inject public capital, as in Spain or other European countries. All debts of Iceland equal then 9 times its GDP.The currency collapsed and the stock exchange suspends activities after a fall of 76%.
– 2009: The IMF, as usual, requires, in exchange for actions called “adjustment” of cuts in social spending that provoke the anger of the population, the government fell and the calling of early elections.
The left won an absolute majority, causing the collapse of the Independence Party, a conservative party that has traditionally been the dominant force in the country and retains only 23.7% of the vote.Johanna Siguroardottir is chosen to head the government bringing together social democrats and environmentalists on the left.
The dire economic situation of the country persists. Through a law, it is proposed to Great Britain and Holland repayment of debt and a payment of 3,500 million euros, amount to be paid monthly by all Icelandic families for 15 years at a rate 5% of interest. But the people down the street again and demand that the law be put to referendum.
– January 2010: President refuses to ratify the law and announced that there will be a referendum.
– March 2010: The referendum is held and not to pay the debt outweighs by 93% of the vote.
Meanwhile, the government tries to regulate legally the responsibility of the crisis. Detentions of several bankers and executives begin.
Interpol launches an investigation and all bankers involved leaving the country. In this context of crisis, an assembly shall be elected to draft a new constitution to replace the current is simply a copy of the Danish constitution.
To do this, use is made directly to the sovereign people elect 25 citizens without political affiliation among the 522 candidates who stand for (condition: be an adult and have received the support of at least 30 people).
– September 2010: Former Prime Minister Geir Haarde is sued for negligence in managing the crisis. Interpol also issued an international arrest warrant against former chairman Sigurdur Einarsson of.
– February 2011: The Constituent Assembly began its work to present, from opinions collected in the various meetings held throughout the country, a project of Magna Carta.
– March 2011: After some criticism about the low turnout (36%) to appoint members of the Constituent Assembly, the Prime Minister, in consultation with leaders of major parties represented in Parliament, shall establish an advisory committee to continue revision of the constitution. The latter proposes that Parliament appoint a “Constitutional Council” consisting of 25 members of the Constitutional Assembly dissolved.
– April 2011: The new citizens say no to a second referendum on the payment of the debt, after the Icelandic President Olafur Ragnar Grimsson refused to sign the cons-law of 16 February 2011 (known as the “third law Icesave “). The new center-left government in effect ensured that the new agreement negotiated Icesave was better than the previous one but the Icelandic population continues to refuse to be harnessed for the failure of banks deemed irresponsible.
– July 2011: Based on reports of the Constitutional Committee and the National Forum (people), the Constitutional Council unanimously adopted a draft constitution which was submitted to Parliament on July 27. The latter, responsible for amending the draft, has tackled this problem in the fall of 2011 and discussions are ongoing.
The main proposals of the new Constitution
Of a total of 114 articles and nine chapters, it may be noted in particular:
– Article 15 : Right to information. The information and documents held by public authorities should be available without exception and public access to these documents should be guaranteed by law.
– Article 63: Creation of an Oversight Committee of the Government’s responsibility. An investigation into the actions and decisions of Government may be requested by one third of the members of Althingi (Icelandic parliament).
– Article 65 : Right to direct consultation. 10% of voters may request a national referendum on the laws passed by Althingi.
– Rule 66: Possibility of direct appeal to Althingi. 2% of voters can submit a question in Parliament and a bill may be filed if it is supported by 10% of voters.
– Article 90: Education Cabinet. The Prime Minister is appointed by Parliament.
– Article 99 : Independence of the courts. The independence of courts shall be guaranteed by law.
– Section 105: Independence of local authorities. Revenue sources of local authorities must be guaranteed by law, as is their right to determine the use of these resources.
The new constitution should be submitted to a referendum before the vote by Parliament. It should take place June 30 in conjunction with the presidential election or the fall.
Iceland is certainly a small country of 320,000 inhabitants, however, but it gives a lesson in democracy to the great states of Europe and the world. Consider for example that in France, the constitutional reform of 2008 has been completely written to the Elysee and that parliamentarians have taken only two votes after being subjected for weeks to intolerable pressures from the head of state …
Spekulacie: Spanielsko uz svoj dlh splatilo, 3x
BY JEROME DUVAL , YVES JULIEN
In ten years, Spain has repaid 1,020 billion euros of debt, including interest rates. Three times the amount that the State had borrowed in 2000. A massive transfer of wealth punctured on population and public services for the benefit of rich creditors. As in Greece or Portugal …
The Spanish government debt is the cynosure of all Europe, the fact that financial markets (investment banks, vulture funds and insurance companies) continue to speculate on this debt with one goal: raise juicy profits .
And this causes the depletion of the population as a whole, because all this speculation led to a gradual increase in interest payable, in turn reducing other government spending: education, retirement benefits, pension and unemployment, justice, health or social services.
All these austerity measures, equivalent to the structural adjustment plans carried out south of the planet from the 1980s, only increase social inequalities, impoverishment through ever more important people, especially the most (women, ethnic minorities, youth, immigrants, unemployed and retired).
However, contrary to the dominant discourse, it is not government spending, which increased the debt of the Spanish state, but, rather, measures that caused deficits forcing a growing debt, and whose application for the entire population is more than doubtful.
For example, lower taxes on inheritances and donations, on the top slice of income tax and the abolition of wealth tax has benefited the richest, with assets in response to their greed , was also protected by tax evasion, lower taxes on corporations and unit trusts.
Snowball effect
Therefore, the logic is operative to charge to the entire population of the economic benefits achieved by a small number of people who get rich through debt.
But it is not easy to know the exact proportion of the budget dedicated to repayment. This is due to a deliberate policy to cover these issues in the population, made possible by the special nature of the indebtedness of the states, very different from the general understanding that one can have loans to individuals or businesses.
For these loans, lending money (called capital), as interest, to reimburse the As of the deadline. In the case of a State, only the interest on loans (called letters, bills or bonds, depending on whether short, medium or long term) are paid regularly until maturity, while capital must be repaid in full when the loan ends (expires).
For this reason, the usual operation of the States is to borrow again to pay all debt off old debts, allowing them to cover these expenses, because they are balanced on a budgetary basis: expenses for payment maturity equivalent to revenues for issuance of new debt.
However, increasing the debt by a deficiency resulting from poor fiscal management, it increases each time plus the payment, which in turn requires more emissions every time. In addition, the new debt may be issued under different conditions, for example with higher interest rates (which has happened recently), which leads to the classic snowball effect (increase of debt the combined effect of high interest rates and new loans to pay old).
Need for a debt audit
Careful study of the general budgets of the state (available on the website of the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Finance) to verify the amount of money spent by the Spanish State as a repayment of capital in recent years (see table). For example, the principal repayment for 2010 is comparable to the total state budget for this year. If we add interest and principal repaid recently, we see that between 2000 and 2010 the Spanish government paid more than three times what it was in 2000, and still on duty nearly double. This table can also see how the interest and principal repaid, just as total debt continued to rise since 2000 and with the current speculation in the Spanish government debt, this trend is not nearly be reversed.
In conclusion, it seems totally unfair to save on public services like education and health to repay a debt in order to reduce a deficit that has benefited the rich.Under public pressure if necessary, the state must open all public debt accounts for the population, based on national and international law, can decide whether to repay what has already been paid several times, and hit cancel debts of illegitimacy.
Thus, the audit of the Spanish debt would reverse the transfer of wealth brought about by the debt service not to the benefit of rich creditors, but destined for the welfare of the population as a whole.
Yves Julien, Jerome Duval ( Patas Arriba , coordination Attac – CADTM) – Valencia
Photo: Photo: Dan Simpson
BASTAMAG FEBRUARY 14, 2012
THE EMPHASES ARE IN
ON THE SAME TOPIC:
slohnute z http://www.internationalnews.fr/article-speculation-l-espagne-a-deja-rembourse-trois-fois-sa-dette-104831395.html a prehnane cez google translator