Wednesday, October 22, 2008

SARAH GETS HASSELED AGAIN

This Media is too much! Now. their trying to say Sarah Palin illegally made Alaska pay for Her chldren to travel with her during this campaign, these GODLESS AGAINST SARAH AND MCCAIN AND HER FAMILY ARE JUST TO MUCH.

Palin says election result rests in God's hands By ERIC GORSKI, AP Religion Writer OCT 22,08

CNN DENVER – Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin describes herself as a hard-core pro-lifer and expresses confidence that in spite of disheartening polls, putting this in God's hands, that the right thing for America will be done at the end of the day on Nov. 4.In an interview with evangelical leader James Dobson that aired Wednesday, Palin said she thought Republican presidential candidate John McCain would implement the GOP platform if elected — I do, from the bottom of my heart — but McCain doesn't support the platform on three issues important to evangelicals: abortion, gay marriage and embryonic stem cell research.The platform calls for a constitutional ban on gay marriage, an issue McCain says should be left to individual states. Similarly, the platform seeks a constitutional ban on all abortions; again, McCain supports allowing states to decide the question. McCain supports research using embryonic stem cells, which the platform opposes.Palin called it a strong platform and told Dobson, They are there, they are solid, we stand on them and, again, I believe that it is the right agenda for the country at this time.The Alaska governor talked by phone with Dobson for about 20 minutes Monday while she was in Colorado campaigning. Dobson's Focus on the Family radio program aired the interview Wednesday.Dobson asked whether Palin was discouraged by polls showing the GOP ticket behind.

To me, it motivates us, makes us work that much harder, Palin said. And it also strengthens my faith, because I'm going to know, at the end of the day, putting this in God's hands, that the right thing for America will be done at the end of the day on Nov. 4. So I'm not discouraged at all.Palin has not focused on her faith on the campaign trail, but it clearly has energized evangelical leaders like Dobson, whose radio show reaches an estimated 1.5 million Americans daily.Dobson has come around to supporting the McCain-Palin ticket after previously saying he could not in good conscience vote for McCain. He endorsed former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee late in the primaries.Palin thanked Dobson and supporters for their prayers and — when Dobson inquired about the importance of faith in her life — said: It is my foundation, yes, my Christian faith is.She also used terms like prayer warrior and intercession — words that might be unknown to the average listener but are common vocabulary in Pentecostal Christianity. Palin spent 20 years in a Pentecostal Assemblies of God Church, but she usually refers to her faith generically as Christian, not even evangelical.It is that intercession that is so needed and so greatly appreciated, Palin told Dobson. And I can feel it too, Dr. Dobson. I can feel the power of prayer, and that strength that is provided through our prayer warriors across this nation.She continued: When we hear along the rope lines that people are interceding for us and praying for us, it's our reminder to do the same, to put this all in God's hands, to seek his perfect will for this nation, and to of course seek his wisdom and guidance in putting this nation back on the right track.

Describing herself as a hard-core pro-lifer, Palin said the birth of a son with Down syndrome was this opportunity for me to really be walking the walk and not just talking the talk. There's purpose in this also and for a greater good to be met there.Palin said the campaign had to have faith that its message will be heard minus the filter of the mainstream media.That filter has to be erased, she said. So we have to have faith in the wisdom of the people that they'll understand what our message is. But even bigger that then, I have to have that faith that God is going to help us get that message out there.

REVELATION 13:16-18
16 And he(FALSE POPE) causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:(CHIP IMPLANT)
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.(6-6-6) A NUMBER SYSTEM

MORE MICROCHIP IMPLANT STORIES-VIDEOS
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1299279/be_prepared_for_2012_microchips/

http://www.care2.com/c2c/groups/disc.html?gpp=60&pst=690727

http://noworldsystem.com/2008/06/17/bilderberg-plans-microchip-implant-campaign-in-america/

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/41386

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3127696.stm

THIS GUYS GAY AND A NEW AGE OCCULTIST,BUT WHAT HE SAYS ABOUT CHIPS AND DECEPTION OF PEOPLE GO BY WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS HOW PEOPLE WILL BE DECIEVED AND KILLED FOR NOT ACCEPTING THE MICROCHIP. THESE BEINGS HES TALKING ABOUT ARE SEDUCING DEMONIC SPIRITS.LITTLE DOES HE KNOW BEING INVOLVED IN THE OCCULT LIKE HE IS.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEjBN8sGnw0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2arUAEQlr-Q&feature=related

Microchip to be implanted in humans in 2012?

It has been reported that the govt. plans to have everyone implanted with microchip devices by the year 2012.Europe & the United States have plans to begin implantation of newborns after they are born soon.Many people (including some of our servicemen) have already been implanted.THEY make it sound so great, so much simplicity in medical, travel, banking and so on.. basically we will all have UPC CODES and an implant the size of a grain of rice embedded into our bodies.Now there are still reports of veri-chips (microchips) causing cancer etc., in some pets... so why would they go ahead and FDA approve these CHIPS into humans?Do you think it is in our best interest?

Carlos Altamirano is implanted with the VeriChip, a microchip that is used to confirm everything from health history to identity.The microchips, already available in the United States, could tap into a growing industry surrounding Mexico's criminal concerns. Kidnappings, robberies and fraud are common here, and Mexicans are constantly looking for ways to protect themselves against crime.The microchip, the size of a grain of rice, is implanted in the arm or hip. Hospital officials and security guards use a scanning device to download a serial number, which they then use to access blood type, name and other information on a computer.
How much? One chip costs $150 and has a $50 annual fee. The scanning device and related software cost $1,200. Users can update and manage their chips' information by calling a 24-hour customer service line.

CNN NEWS VIDEO
http://edition.cnn.com/video/

YAHOO NEWS VIDEO
http://news.yahoo.com/video

MIDEAST CONFLICT NEWS
http://news.yahoo.com/video/1874;_ylt=A0wNcxFdg6xIgbkAwD6z174F

ABC NEWS VIDEO
http://news.yahoo.com/video/2461

FOX NEWS VIDEO
http://news.yahoo.com/video/3074

FOX BUSINESS VIDEO
http://news.yahoo.com/video/3045

AP NEWS VIDEO
http://news.yahoo.com/video/2529

BBC NEWS VIDEO
http://news.yahoo.com/video/2918

REUTERS VIDEO NEWS
http://news.yahoo.com/video/2704

AFP NEWS VIDEO
http://news.yahoo.com/video/3091

CNBC NEWS VIDEO
http://news.yahoo.com/video/3245

HOARDING OF GOLD AND SILVER

DOCTOR DOCTORIAN FROM ANGEL OF GOD
then the angel said, Financial crisis will come to Asia. I will shake the world.

JAMES 5:1-3
1 Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you.
2 Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are motheaten.
3 Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days.

REVELATION 18:10,17,19
10 Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come.
17 For in one hour so great riches is come to nought. And every shipmaster, and all the company in ships, and sailors, and as many as trade by sea, stood afar off,
19 And they cast dust on their heads, and cried, weeping and wailing, saying, Alas, alas that great city, wherein were made rich all that had ships in the sea by reason of her costliness! for in one hour is she made desolate.

EZEKIEL 7:19
19 They shall cast their silver in the streets, and their gold shall be removed: their silver and their gold shall not be able to deliver them in the day of the wrath of the LORD: they shall not satisfy their souls, neither fill their bowels: because it is the stumblingblock of their iniquity.

REVELATION 13:16-18
16 And he(FALSE POPE) causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:(CHIP IMPLANT)
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.(6-6-6) A NUMBER SYSTEM

WORLD MARKET RESULTS
http://money.cnn.com/data/world_markets/

HALF HOUR DOW RESULTS WED OCT 22,2008

09:30 AM -38.71
10:00 AM -339.06
10:30 AM -360.49
11:00 AM -257.27
11:30 AM -318.83
12:00 PM -281.32
12:30 PM -236.32
01:00 PM -293.59
01:30 PM -359.69
02:00 PM -342.89
02:30 PM -333.57
03:00 PM -375.78
03:30 PM -475.95
04:00 PM -514.45 8519.21

S&P 500 896.78 -58.27

NAS 1615.75 -80.93

GOLD 730.4 -37.0

OIL 67.38 -4.80

TSE 300 -558.92 9,236.88

CDNX -68.76 900.63

S&P/TSX 60 -34.25 554.80

Down down 400 points at low today before noon.
Stocks lower on Earnings.
Major Average lower in 3RD of 4 sessions.
All 30 Dow stocks down as of 10:10AM.
Hungarys central bank hiking rates to shore up its Currency.
Hungary has lined up potential help from IMF,ECD,as a last resort.
Whitehouse to announce NOV 15 World financial summit date in WASHINGTON.
27 U.S. states in a recession.
Argentina is plummiting for 2nd straight day.
Brazil is throwing all it can to save its currency.
Ukraine,Hungary are a mess.
Barclays placing 3 BILLION EUROS in government guarenteed Bonds in the U.K at about 4.25%.
Dow disintigrates to 689 points in last half hour,then rebounds back.

THE ECONOMY

Businesses cut 159,000 jobs in Sept,760,000 jobs year to date.
Jobless rate at 6.1% in SEPT. up from 4.9% in January.
Unemployed in January 7,567,000, in Sept 9,477,000.
Wage Income rose 0.4% despite job cuts,stronger growth since March.
2ND Quarter GDP was 2.83%,3RD Quarter Estimate 0.6%.
Last big recession was 8 months long,March to November 2001.
Corporate profits down for 5 straight Quarters.
Down $60.2 BILLION in 2ND quarter to $1.52 TRILLION.
Consumer prices up 4.9% and producer prices up 8.7% in past 12 months.
Inflation has slowed over the last 2 months except in FOOD and BEVERAGES.

NAOMI WOLF END OF AMERICA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjALf12PAWc

END OF AMERICA MOVIE
http://www.endofamericamovie.com/

Oil falls below $67 on US recession fears By MADLEN READ, AP Business Writer OCT 22,08

MRK 28.01 -1.96
USO 54.75 -4.02
WB 5.71 -0.38

NEW YORK – Oil prices tumbled below $67 a barrel to 16-month lows Wednesday after the government reported big increases in U.S. fuel supplies — more evidence that the economic downturn is drying up energy demand.The Energy Information Administration said crude inventories jumped by 3.2 million barrels last week, above the 2.9 million barrel increase expected by analysts surveyed by energy research firm Platts. Gasoline inventories rose by 2.7 million barrels last week, and inventories of distillates, which include heating oil and diesel, rose by 2.2 million barrels.

Over the last four weeks, the EIA said, motor gasoline demand was down 4.3 percent from the same period last year. Distillate fuel demand was down 5.8 percent, and jet fuel demand was down 9.2 percent.The main theme here that's driving this market into new low ground is demand deterioration, said Jim Ritterbusch, president of energy consultancy Ritterbusch and Associates. As we begin to see evidence that demand is leveling — it doesn't have to increase, just level — then we can start discussing a possible price bottom. But it appears premature at this point.Light, sweet crude for December delivery fell $5.43 to settle at $66.75 on the New York Mercantile Exchange, after falling as low as $66.20. It was the lowest close for a front-month contract since June 13, 2007, when crude settled at $66.26.The energy markets have also been weighed down by the weak stock market, as investors grow more pessimistic about how long it will take the economy to recover from the current global financial turmoil.On Tuesday, DuPont, Sun Microsystems and Texas Instruments reported disappointing earnings and bleak forecasts, sending the Dow Jones industrials average down 2.5 percent. The Dow was down another 4 percent by Wednesday afternoon following more gloomy reports from the soon-to-be acquired bank Wachovia Corp., drugmaker Merck & Co., and insurer Travelers Cos.Oil is now highly correlated with the stock market, said Clarence Chu, a trader with market maker Hudson Capital Energy in Singapore. People are looking to the Dow for sentiment on the economy.The price of crude oil has tumbled 55 percent from its peak of $147.27 reached in mid-July.

The drop has pulled down the retail price of unleaded gasoline to $2.858 a gallon, according to auto club AAA, the Oil Price Information Service and Wright Express. That's down about 3 cents from Tuesday, and down more than $1.25, or 31 percent, from its mid-July record.In addition to stocks, the dollar's strength this week relative to other currencies has contributed to oil's decline. Investors often buy commodities like crude oil to hedge against a weakening dollar, and sell those investments when the dollar rebounds.The euro fell below $1.28 for the first time in nearly two years Wednesday. The 15-nation euro dipped as low as $1.2736 in morning trading before recovering to $1.29, still down from $1.3003 late Tuesday in New York.

Meanwhile, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, which accounts for about 40 percent of global oil supply, signaled that the group plans to announce an output quota reduction at an emergency meeting Friday in Vienna.There should be a short-term boost to prices when they announce a cut on Friday, Chu said. But OPEC production has always been above their quotas, so there's a credibility problem.

Russia's top energy official said Wednesday that Russia, the largest oil producer outside of OPEC, may set aside an oil reserve to influence global prices — but won't cut output, according to news reports. Deputy Prime Minister Igor Sechin said the government was considering creating an oil production reserve which would allow it to work more efficiently with prices on the market.In other Nymex trading, heating oil futures fell 14.13 cents to end at $2.0562 a gallon, while gasoline prices dropped 12.1 cents to finish at $1.5709 a gallon. Natural gas futures fell 10.2 cents to settle at $7.21 per 1,000 cubic feet.On London's ICE futures exchange, Brent crude fell $5.20 to $64.52 a barrel.AP Business Writer Stevenson Jacobs and Associated Press Writers Louise Watt in London and Alex Kennedy in Singapore contributed to this report.

Dow tumbles 560 on earnings forecast worries By TIM PARADIS, AP Business Writer OCT 22,08

^DJI 8,519.21 -514.45
^GSPC 896.78 -58.27
^IXIC 1,615.75 -80.93

AP – Trader Robert Duffy works on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange Wednesday, Oct. 22, 2008. (AP Photo/Richard … NEW YORK – Stocks are ending sharply lower as investors worry that the economy is poised to weaken even as frozen credit markets slowly start to show signs of recovery.Corporate profit forecasts, a jump in the dollar and falling oil prices Wednesday indicate investors are worried that an economic slowdown will sweep the globe.The major indexes each lost more than 4 percent, including the Dow Jones industrials, which is ending down 560 at the 8,469 level after being down as much as 698 points in the final half hour of trading.

World leaders to meet on economy in Washington By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Writer OCT 22,08

WASHINGTON – Leaders from 20 nations will meet Nov. 15 in Washington to address the global financial crisis — the first in a series of summits to resolve what economists predict could be a long and deep economic downturn, the White House announced Wednesday.The first meeting will be held to discuss underlying causes of the financial crisis, review progress being made to address it and start developing reforms needed to ensure it does not happen again, White House press secretary Dana Perino said.The president had spent the past couple of days on the phone with a lot of different leaders talking to them about their thoughts about this meeting, Perino said.This will be the first in a series of summits that bring together leaders from countries that participate in the G-20 finance process to discuss current economic challenges. The so-called G-20 are: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the European Union.

At the first meeting, working groups will be set up to develop recommendations to be considered by leaders in subsequent summits. The White House will host a dinner on the eve of the summit. The location of the meeting, however, has not yet been announced.Bush, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, who met at the Camp David, Md., presidential retreat last week, announced the series of summit, saying the international community needs to work together to address the credit crisis that has shaken markets around the globe.

Noting that the summit will be held after the election, it's too early to know whether the president-elect, be it John McCain or Barack Obama, who were notified about the meeting Wedneday morning, will be in attendance. It's also unclear whether subsequent summits would be held while Bush is still in office.The leaders will review progress being made to address the current financial crisis, advance a common understanding of its causes, and, in order to avoid a repetition, agree on a common set of principles for reform of the regulatory and institutional regimes for the world's financial sectors, Perino said.The managing director of the International Monetary Fund, the president of the World Bank, the United Nations Secretary-General and the chairman of the Financial Stability Forum also have been invited to participate.

Brazil takes new steps to help banks amid crisisReuters, Wednesday October 22 2008 (Recasts with Mantega comments, adds byline, changes dateline, previous SAO PAULO)By Isabel Versiani

BRASILIA, Oct 22 (Reuters) - Brazil on Wednesday allowed its two largest state banks to buy stakes in financial firms, the government's latest step aimed at shielding the domestic banking sector from the global credit crunch.It also freed up the central bank to conduct swap operations with other central banks, giving it another tool to add liquidity to the foreign exchange market as the country's currency, the real, tumbled anew against the dollar.Finance Minister Guido Mantega told a briefing in Brasilia Brazil's financial system was solid and that no bank was collapsing but he said the lack of liquidity could cause problems for some banks.We are taking this measure to help facilitate liquidity and to give an alternative to those financial institutions which don't have this liquidity, Mantega said.The Brazilian financial system is solid, it's one of the most solid in the world, he added.

Central bank head Henrique Meirelles told the same briefing the move allowing the central bank to carry out swaps with other central banks was a preventive step which would not be used yet.Despite the new steps, the real plunged more than 5 percent to 2.36 per dollar on Wednesday and the stock market <.BVSP> lost nearly 5 percent as investors fled emerging markets and sought safety in dollars.Recent official steps have ranged from foreign exchange swap auctions to increasing credit lines to farm and construction industries to allowing bigger banks to take over the loan portfolios of smaller banks in potential distress.Brazil said earlier on Wednesday it would allow state-controlled Banco do Brasil and Caixa Economica Federal to buy stakes in other financial institutions.While Brazil's major banks are seen as sound, some smaller banks are seen as potentially vulnerable to a drying up of credit. Analysts forecast conditions will remain hard for the entire sector -- and probably unbearable for smaller players.Policymakers have already moved to support smaller banks by sharply reducing reserve requirements to those institutions and injecting as much as 160 billion reais ($68.41 billion) into the banking system.The government also issued a decree authorizing the central bank itself to acquire such portfolios if needed.

SMALL BANKS SEEN VULNERABLE

The Brazilian government has allowed larger banks to use part of their reserve requirements deposited in the central bank to buy loan portfolios of smaller institutions.Some of Brazil's largest banks are already making their moves. Bradesco , the country's largest private-sector bank, and Unibanco said this month they purchased loan portfolios of smaller rivals.Spain's Santander bank, which owns Banco Real, also said this month it had closed deals to buy loan portfolios of other institutions and Banco do Brasil said it was in talks to do the same.Smaller banks are thus having to chose between paying very high rates for credit or being taken over, which has hit their shares.Daycoval , Cruzeiro Sul and Panamericano are among the small banks whose shares have fallen heavily since September. ($=2.339 reais) (Additional reporting by Renato Andrade and Ana Nicolaci Da Costa; Writing by Stuart Grudgings; Editing by James Dalgleish)

Argentina market plunges on plan to nationalize pensions
Bloomberg NewsPublished: October 21, 2008


The main stock index in Argentina fell as much as 14 percent Tuesday, it biggest loss in 11 years, on speculation that the government would nationalize pension funds, potentially depriving the equity market of one of its biggest investors.

Telecom Argentina, a large telephone company, plunged as much as 27 percent, the most ever. BBVA Banco Frances and Banco Macro led a decline in banks. Empresa Distribuidora y Comercializadora Norte, the Buenos Aires-based electricity distributor, lost more than a fifth of its value, the steepest fall since its trading debut in April last year.President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, grappling with a financial crisis that has frozen access to credit, was scheduled to propose an overhaul of the pension system at 4 p.m. New York time that may give the government control of $29 billion in privately run retirement accounts.Clearly if you take away all these buyers and you go to a government plan that's not going to be investing in equities then that's obviously negative for the local market in Argentina, Will Landers, who manages $5 billion in Latin American equities at BlackRock Inc., said in an interview.The Merval index fell 13 percent to 1,018 in late trading in New York, heading for its biggest loss since October 1997. The Merval's decline was the biggest move among global benchmarks.Argentina pension funds were net buyers of stocks for a third straight month in September, investing about $144 million in domestic equities, according to Deutsche Bank. They have $4.1 billion invested in domestic stocks, or about 13 percent of their total holdings.

Disappearing Into Irrelevance

Fernandez has struggled to find new sources of funding for the government since the global financial crisis complicated efforts to renegotiate $20 billion in defaulted bonds and pay off about $6.7 billion owed to the Paris Club group of creditors. The country has not had access to international debt markets since defaulting on $95 billion of bonds in late 2001.It's disappearing into irrelevance for an emerging market institutional investors' perspective, said Bill Rudman at WestLB Mellon Asset Management in London.Telecom tumbled the most on the Merval, losing 1.85 to 5 pesos.
Edenor dropped 23 percent to 67 centavos.Banco Frances, a large private bank, lost 22percent to 2.85 pesos, the lowest since November 2002. Banco Macro slid 19 percent to 3.06 pesos.

Hungary: Central bank makes emergency rate hike
Associated Press 10.22.08, 10:38 AM ET


BUDAPEST, Hungary - Hungary's central bank Wednesday made a steep emergency interest rate hike to stabilize the country's currency, hurt by the financial crisis, raising the possibility that other countries in the region could follow its lead.The National Bank of Hungary's Monetary Council raised the base rate to 11.5 percent from 8.5 percent. The base rate is the interest paid by the central bank to commercial banks using its two-week bill facility, the main instrument used by the National Bank of Hungary to manage liquidity on the interbank market.The move is meant to protect the national currency, the forint, which has fallen 16 percent against the euro since the start of October, according to Neil Shearing of Capital Economics.Investors are worried that Hungary, like many emerging markets, may suffer badly as the financial crisis causes foreign investment to pull out of the country.

But while countries like Hungary try to shore up their currencies with rate hikes, the higher cost of borrowing will put extra pressure on economic growth just as the world prepares for an economic slowdown.Today's move could be the final straw that tips the Hungarian economy into recession in 2009, said Shearing.But he warned that Hungary is not alone in its predicament. Turkey could soon raise interest rates and policy makers in Poland and Romania will also be monitoring developments in foreign exchange markets, Shearing said.While these countries are forced to consider rate hikes, the neighboring European Central Bank joined other major monetary authorities around the world in slashing rates earlier this month, and is expected to continue to do so into next year.

Ukraine's PM expects IMF decision on WednesdayReuters, Wednesday October 22 2008

KIEV, Oct 22 (Reuters) - Ukraine Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko said she expected the International Monetary Fund to decide on a loan for the country on Wednesday and warned that stagnation threatened the eocnomy.Ukrainian officials say the country could receive a credit worth up to $14 billion.The IMF is meeting today...to adopt all the necessary decisions. We are hoping very much that they will be positive, Tymoshenko told a government meeting. (Editing by Clarence Fernandez)

Emerging Markets-Shares up but Ukraine, Hungary pressured
Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:28am EDT By Sebastian Tong


LONDON, Oct 20 (Reuters) - Emerging market assets bounced on Monday due to improved risk appetite and easing of global credit conditions but fears over foreign debt exposure continued to weigh on Hungary and Ukraine.Russian stocks led broader gains for the sector's equity markets, which saw the benchmark .MSCIEF rise 2.5 percent higher to 582.29 by 1105 GMT.Emerging sovereign debt spreads 11EMJ tightened 7 basis points but still traded at a five-year high of 622 bps.We are taking our lead from global equity markets and also from the fact that global credit markets are slightly looser, said Beat Siegenthaler, chief strategist emerging markets at TD Securities.

We needed a break after recent falls. But trade is very quiet.The prospect of a global economic slowdown was underlined by China data showing gross domestic product growth slid into single figures in the third quarter.But government efforts to stem the global crisis that has wiped out $15 trillion off the stock market in over the last 12 months helped lift sentiment.Like their counterparts in the developed West, governments in emerging economies have moved to stabilise their financial markets, to avert a banking crisis and currency collapse similar to Iceland's.Russia's rouble powered to its highest level since August after its central bank set curbs on currency trading to stamp out short sellers.Russian shares, which have sagged to three-year lows, rose on expectations that energy cartel OPEC might cut output this week and boost prices that have fallen by more than half in three months. Confidence has been further bolstered by Moscow's promise to start spending its wealth fund to buy shares and bonds this week.The dollar-denominated RTS Index .IRTS soared 7.3 percent while the energy shares-laden MICEX Index rose 4.5 percent.

HUNGARY, UKRAINE WORRIES

Over the weekend, South Korea pledged $130 billion in state guarantees and capital injections for banks while Kazakhstan said on Monday it would inject a total of $15 billion into its slowing economy which has been hard-hit by rising bad corporate and bank debt.Ukraine's prime minister said she was confident that talks with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) would prove successful and enable the country to secure financial assistance of up to $14 billion to shore up the country's financial system.The country's hryvnia currency , which hit an all-time low of 5.9 to the dollar on Oct. 9, remained under pressure to fall nearly 3 percent against the greenback.Ukraine is probably the most exposed (in emerging Europe) because its banks have many foreign links. They also have a large current account deficit and of course political problems, said Siegenthaler.Worries over an exposed banking system and large external financing needs also weighed on Hungary, dragging stocks .BUX 2.4 percent lower and its forint currency 0.65 percent down against the euro. The country scrapped a treasury bill auction on Monday and has lined up the IMF and the European Central Bank for potential financing help.The cost of insuring Hungarian debt has risen with five-year credit default swaps (CDS) quoted at 540 bps, up 10 bps from Friday's close.

Hungarian monetary policymakers are set to meet at 1200 GMT.
Risk premiums are likely to remain elevated, and exchange rate stability and bond market liquidity may become a key concern for monetary policy. Therefore, future policy measures are likely to support bond market liquidity and keep interest rates high until money market conditions stabilise, Citi said in a research note.(Additional reporting by Peter Apps; Editing by Victoria Main)

Germany hits out at French protectionism plan
RENATA GOLDIROVA Today OCT 22,08 @ 09:14 CET


France's idea that EU governments take stakes in European strategic companies to shield them from foreign bidders and the impact of the financial crisis has ruffled feathers in Germany, with the country's economy minister immediately going public to defend free market rules. The French proposal ... goes against the successful principles of our economic policy, German economy minister Michael Glos said on Tuesday (21 October), AFP and FAZ report, shortly after Nicolas Sarkozy had presented his fresh economic vision in the European Parliament. Mr Glos opposed the French push for wider protectionism by describing current state intervention in the banking and insurance sector as an indispensable exception so as to prevent a possible breakdown of financial flows and help protect jobs and growth.Germany remains open to capital from all around the world, the German minister concluded.

Berlin also poured cold water over Mr Sarkozy's suggestion to set up an economic government to oversee the 15-nation eurozone. The minister's remarks came hours after French President Nicolas Sarkozy told MEPs that he did not want European citizens to wake up a few months from now and discover that European companies belong to non-European capital which has bought at the lowest point of the stock exchange.He had added that the eurozone government should consist of heads of state and government and gather regularly to co-ordinate action. It is not the first time in recent days that France and Germany have differed in their economic views. At EU leaders' summit last week, the French president led calls for giving a helping hand to European industry, in particular carmakers, arguing that the US administration had injected $25 billion into the sector in cheap loans. But Berlin questioned the approach, diplomats said.

Stocks open lower as investors watch earnings By TIM PARADIS, AP Business Writer OCT 22,08

Reuters – A staff member of the Tokyo Stock Exchange reacts after the afternoon trading session in Tokyo October … NEW YORK – Wall Street tumbled again Wednesday as investors again shifted their focus away from improving credit markets and fixated on worrisome corporate earnings that are raising fears of a deep and painful recession. The major indexes fell more than 1 percent, including the Dow Jones industrial average, which fell 350 points.While reduced strains in world credit markets have eased some investors' nervousness about the economy, market anxiety remains high as hundreds of companies this week release third-quarter earnings and in some cases fourth-quarter forecasts that offer a glimpse of the rough conditions that may lay ahead.On Wednesday, commercial and personal property insurer Travelers Cos. said hurricane-related losses pushed third-quarter profit down 82 percent and forced it to lower its full-year forecast.In other earnings, Wachovia Corp., which is being bought by Wells Fargo & Co., said it swung to a huge loss in the third quarter while the drug maker Merck & Co. said its quarterly profit fell 28 percent and that it would cut more than 10 percent of its work force.In midmorning trading, the Dow fell 350.93, or 3.88 percent, to 8,682.73. On Tuesday, the Dow retreated 231 points after forecasts from DuPont Co., Sun Microsystems Inc. and Texas Instruments Inc. raised fears that companies' outlooks for the fourth quarter and beyond could signal a severe economic downturn.Broader stock indicators also fell. The Standard & Poor's 500 index fell 36.59, or 3.83 percent, to 918.46, and the Nasdaq composite index fell 37.44, or 2.21 percent, to 1,659.24.

Meanwhile, credit markets showed more signs of improvement after virtually freezing up last week. Bank-to-bank lending rates fell sharply overnight, indicating that credit is becoming easier to obtain. The London Interbank Offered Rate, or Libor, on three-month loans in dollars fell to 3.54 percent from 3.83 percent, dropping for an eighth straight day.Demand for Treasury bills, regarded as the safest assets around, grew slightly compared to the previous day as economic worries led investors to shun risky assets in favor of government bonds.The three-month Treasury bill yielded 1.06 percent, down from 1.07 percent late Tuesday. The levels are a notable improvement from the 0.20 percent seen last Wednesday, when investors were willing to take the slimmest of returns in exchange for a safe place to keep their money.The dollar was sharply higher against other major currencies, while gold prices fell.In other corporate news, AT&T Inc. said its third-quarter earnings rose 5.5 percent but missed analyst expectations in part because of strong sales of iPhones, which the carrier subsidizes. The stock fell $1.89, or 7.4 percent, to $23.84.Other companies reporting results were mixed. Travelers rose 59 cents, or 1.6 percent, to $36.92, while Wachovia fell 14 cents, or 2.4 percent, to $5.95. Merck fell 99 cents, or 3.3 percent, to $28.98.Light, sweet crude fell $4.38 to $67.80 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. On Tuesday, oil fell as a stronger dollar dented demand for commodities and overshadowed worries about a planned OPEC output cut.Declining issues outnumbered advancers by about 8 to 1 on the New York Stock Exchange, where volume came to 141.8 million shares.The Russell 2000 index of smaller companies fell 11.58, or 2.2 percent, to 519.07.Financial markets overseas fell sharply. Japan's Nikkei stock average fell 6.79 percent. Britain's FTSE 100 fell 3.43 percent, Germany's DAX index fell 3.52 percent, and France's CAC-40 lost 4.26 percent.
On the Net: New York Stock Exchange: http://www.nyse.com Nasdaq Stock Market: http://www.nasdaq.com

Brussels to educate Ireland on EU realities
VALENTINA POP Today OCT 22,08 @ 18:58 CET


EUOBSERVER / STRASBOURG - The European Commission plans to help the Irish government communicate Europe better to citizens after June's shock No vote on the Lisbon treaty, with a new inter-institutional agreement to pull together the PR efforts of the main EU institutions.It's not about the European Commission interfering with the procedures and referenda on the Treaty, but it is investing in trying to correct the situation where so many people said they didn't know anything about the EU, or didn't know enough to take a position when they were asked, communication commissioner Margot Wallstrom said on Wednesday (22 October) in Strasbourg.Ms Wallstrom plans to sign a memorandum of understanding on launching a new communication management project in Ireland when she visits Dublin on 13 to 14 November.The one year partnerships - already up and running in Germany, Hungary and Slovenia with eight other EU states about to sign up - see the commission provide EU literature, journalist training, school manuals and other civic education programmes. One concrete project in Germany was Guess who is going back to school, in which about 500 German officials paid visits to their former schools, explaining to pupils what their job is within the EU institutions.The commissioner on Wednesday also signed an inter-institutional agreement between the European Parliament, commission and Council to co-ordinate the three institutions' communication efforts.

She said the move was not designed to create a propaganda machine but to support the fundamental democratic principle of the right to know. It is the first time we have this framework after heavy resistance from member states, the commissioner explained.

The new agreement foresees co-ordinating future communication efforts on common priorities, such as the 2009 European elections, energy and climate change and the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall.It is also designed to avoid situations where both the parliament and the commission organise events or print leaflets on the same topic without knowing what the other is doing.Co-ordination will be provided by the Interinstitutional group on information (IGI) comprised of Ms Walstrom on behalf of the commission, French minister Jean Pierre Jouyet on behalf of the European Council and the vice-president of the European Parliament, Spanish conservative MEP Alejo Vidal-Quadras. IGI will not have its own budget, but will draw from the coffers of the three institutions.

Irish public was misinformed

Going back to the Irish referendum on the Lisbon treaty, Ms Wallstrom said the public debate included a lot of emotional arguments and disinformation, such as the idea that by voting Yes, people would have to send their children to an EU army.The EU uses too much bureaucratic language, too much of a jargon impenetrable to normal people. There is no need for emotional arguments either, but for a factual language that people can understand, she explained.Asked what would be the outcome of a pan-European referendum on the Lisbon treaty - as suggested by some Irish campaigners - Ms Wallstrom stressed that it is the ultimate challenge from a communication point of view to hold any referendum on a complex legal text.Whatever you do, you won't have in the end everybody reading a 400-page document, she said. That's what MEPs are being paid for.

Ukraine disappointed with EU hypocrisy
ELITSA VUCHEVA Today OCT 22,08 @ 18:25 CET


EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS – Ukraine is generally satisfied with the outcome of an EU-Ukraine summit that took place in Paris last month, but is disappointed the final political declaration failed to underline the country's European identity, Ukraine's deputy foreign minister, Kostyantyn Yeliseyev, said on Wednesday (22 October).In an open spirit, I would like to tell you my disappointment with the fact that the EU rejected the idea to recognise Ukraine as a state with a European identity, Mr Yeliseyev told a group of journalists in Brussels.It's a funny thing, when they negotiated this document, I suggested OK, if you don't want that, put in the political statement the sentence that you recognise Ukraine as a European state with an African identity. They said of course not. Ok, let's put with Asian identity. [Again] No,the deputy foreign minister recounted, saying nobody could give him a proper answer on why the reference to European identity was not acceptable.This is just to show you sometimes the hypocrisy also of the EU, Mr Yeliseyev said.The Ukrainian diplomat underlined some positive achievements of the high-level meeting in September, such as concluding an association agreement with the EU based on the principle of political association and economic integration, or the launch of a dialogue on a visa-free regime.Additionally, some very important political features were agreed in September, for instance for the first time the EU recognised that Ukraine is a European country and that we [EU and Ukraine] share a common history and common values, Mr Yeliseyev said.But he deplored that even today there is a group of sceptics within the EU who are trying to some extent to block further progress in EU-Ukraine relations, naming the Netherlands, Belgium and Spain.

Business as usual

Following comments from European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso last week that the EU is concerned with the recent political crisis in Ukraine, Mr Yeliseyev said the situation should not be over-dramatised.I don't see any problems, any interconnection between the negotiations [with the EU] and the current internal developments in Ukraine, he said.Ukrainian president Victor Yushchenko earlier this month dissolved parliament and announced early elections would take place in December, in an ongoing power struggle with Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko.The vote would be the third time in three years that parliamentary elections are held in Ukraine.Sometimes people are trying to over-dramatise the situation [in Ukraine], Mr Yeliseyev said. There are political disputes between major political forces in Ukraine [but] to my mind this is very common to any EU member state … It is a common practice for democracy.We are trying to do business as usual [and] the administrative machine in Ukraine is working properly.

The eternal visa issue

Ukraine's deputy foreign minister also raised the question of visa requirements for citizens from his country - a very sensitive issue for Ukrainians.The EU made much of a visa facilitation agreement with Ukraine that came into force at the beginning of this year that was supposed to make receiving short-stay and multiple entry visas easier for Ukrainian citizens. But Ukrainians say it has not made any real difference.Unfortunately on the ground there is no fully fledged implementation [of this agreement] … There are [still] a lot of problems, a lot of negative examples how the EU side is discriminating Ukrainian citizens in this field, Mr Yeliseyev said.Some EU states - including Spain, Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium - are very unfriendly when it comes to visa policy towards Ukraine, the minister pointed out.As a result, during the first half of this year the quantity of Ukrainians travelling to EU member states decreased 2.5 times. This is unacceptable, totally unacceptable, he added, with Kiev to launch a dialogue on a future visas free regime on 29 October.

Donors pledge billions to rebuild Georgia
RENATA GOLDIROVA Today OCT 22,08 @ 18:06 CET


EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - The international community has pledged $4.5 billion (€3.4 billion) toward the rebuilding of Georgia hit by the short war with Russia over South Ossetia in August, with the European Commission alone putting aside up to €500 million to address Tbillisi's needs between 2008-2010. It is a moral imperative to help a neighbour in need, commission president Jose Manuel Barroso said when opening a donor's conference in Brussels (22 October). He added that it was also in the interest of the EU to help Georgia to get back on its feet - for wider stability as well as energy security reasons. Prior to the outbreak of the conflict, the Georgian economy was booming, with growth expected to reach 10 percent this year. But with a large chunk of infrastructure damaged and the flow of foreign investement decreased, current forecasts put the figure at around five percent. According to EU external relations commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner, the commission package of up to €500 million will be channelled to three main purposes - to strengthen the Georgian economy, build strategic infrastructure, including energy infrastructure, and provide food and shelter to those in need. However, Ms Ferrero-Waldner stressed that the recent war should not distract Georgia from economic and political reforms, which are essential and which should further advance.In response to their pledges, Georgian deputy prime minister Lado Gurgenidze expressed a big thank you to all donors, saying that the final cheque exceeded Georgia's expectations. We are deeply moved and humbled by the solidarity especially in the time of the financial crisis, he said. Some 38 countries and 15 international organisations took part in the donor's conference.

Concerns over use of funds

But shortly before the conference opened, representatives of civil society and the opposition in Georgia issued an open letter, urging all donors to ensure the funding is used to improve living conditions, not to strengthen the current regime.

Financial support should be delivered through the most direct channels and with the utmost transparency and within a strict monitoring mechanism, which avoids unconditional funding, reads the letter. It continues by saying that any additional funds available should go to supporting concrete democratisation programmes.The media, the judiciary and the electoral processes are cited as areas with the biggest shortcomings. The signatories were not part of the Georgian official delegation nor present at the conference. When asked about the letter, deputy prime minister Lado Gurgenidze said he had not read it and limited himself to the pledge that every euro would be spent to the best possible use.Today is just the beginning. There are three years of hard and productive work ahead of us, the politician concluded.

FIRES AND EXPLOSIONS

REVELATION 8:7
7 The first angel sounded, and there followed hail and fire mingled with blood, and they were cast upon the earth: and the third part of trees was burnt up, and all green grass was burnt up.

Wildfire breaks out in S. Calif., east of L.A. OCT 22,08

FONTANA, Calif. – At least 100 acres have burned in a wildfire that broke out Wednesday morning amid hot and gusty weather in San Bernardino County, east of Los Angeles.The fire broke out in Fontana northwest of Interstate 15 at about 12:45 Wednesday, and winds in excess of 30 mph were pushing it west into the mountains and canyons of suburban Rancho Cucamonga, about 40 miles northeast of Los Angeles, county fire spokeswoman Angie Samayoa said.People in about 100 homes near a Buddhist temple have been told they may want to evacuate but are not being ordered to do so, Assistant San Bernardino County Fire Marshall Mike Horton told KABC-TV.Homes are not directly in the line of fire, Samayoa said.More than 300 firefighters were on the scene and water drops from aircraft were coming after sunrise, Samayoa said.The fire broke out five years to the day after the beginning of the Grand Prix wildfire, which burned 59,000 acres and destroyed 135 homes in the same area, officials said.

Southern California was experiencing strong Santa Ana winds a week after similar conditions spurred several major wildfires.The dry northeast winds were expected to peak at 50 mph through Wednesday evening, but were expected to be weaker than last week's siege.Temperatures will also reach the 90s in many areas.

FEARFUL SIGHTS AND GREAT SIGNS FROM HEAVEN

LUKE 21:11
11 And great earthquakes shall be in divers places, and famines, and pestilences; and fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven.

India launches 1st unmanned moon mission By GAVIN RABINOWITZ and SETH BORENSTEIN, Associated Press Writers Wed Oct 22, 7:37 am ET

AFP NEW DELHI – India launched its first mission to the moon Wednesday, rocketing a satellite up into the pale dawn sky in a two-year mission to redraw maps of the lunar surface.Clapping and cheering scientists tracked the ascent on computer screens after they lost sight of Chandrayaan-1 from the Sriharikota space center in southern India. Chandrayaan means Moon Craft in ancient Sanskrit.Indian Space Research Organization chairman G. Madhavan Nair said the mission is to unravel the mystery of the moon.We have started our journey to the moon and the first leg has gone perfectly well, he said.Chief among the mission's goals is mapping not only the surface of the moon, but what lies beneath. If successful, India will join what's shaping up as a 21st century space race with Chinese and Japanese crafts already in orbit around the moon.To date only the U.S., Russia, the European Space Agency, Japan and China have sent missions to the moon.As India's economy has boomed in recent years, it has sought to convert its newfound wealth — built on the nation's high-tech sector — into political and military clout. It is hoping that the moon mission — coming just months after finalizing a deal with the United States that recognizes India as a nuclear power — will further enhance its status.Until now, India's space launches have mainly carried weather warning satellites and communication systems, said former NASA associate administrator Scott Pace, director of space policy at the George Washington University.You're seeing India lifting its sights, Pace said.While much of the technology involved in reaching the moon has not changed since the Soviet Union and the U.S. did it more than four decades ago, analysts say new mapping equipment allows the exploration of new areas, including below the surface.

India plans to use the 3,080-pound lunar probe to create a high-resolution map of the lunar surface and the minerals below. Two of the mapping instruments are a joint project with NASA.In the last year, Asian nations have taken the lead in moon exploration. In October 2007, Japan sent up the Kaguya spacecraft. A month later, China's Chang'e-1 entered lunar orbit.Those missions took high-resolution pictures of the moon, but are not as comprehensive as Chandrayaan-1 will be or NASA's half-a-billion-dollar Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter scheduled to be launched next year, Pace said. The most comprehensive maps of the moon were made about 40 years ago during the Apollo era, he said.We don't really have really good modern maps of the moon with modern instrument, Pace said. The quality of the Martian maps, I would make a general argument, is superior to what we have of the moon.NASA has put probes on Mars' frigid polar region, but not on the rugged poles of the moon. Yet the moon's south pole is where NASA is considering setting up an eventual human-staffed lunar outpost, Pace said.The moon's south pole is certainly more rugged than where Neil Armstrong landed. It's more interesting. It's more dangerous, Pace said. We need better maps.Beijing in 2003 became the first Asian country to put its own astronauts into space. It followed that last month with its first spacewalk.More ominously, last year China also blasted an old satellite into oblivion with a land-based anti-satellite missile, the first such test ever conducted by any nation, including the United States and Russia. The Indian mission is not all about rivalry and prestige. Analysts say India stands to reap valuable rewards from the technology it develops and, according to Pace, it already shows increased confidence in difficult engineering and quality control. The $80 million mission will test systems for a future moon landing, with plans to land a rover on the moon in 2011 and eventually a manned space program, though this has not been authorized yet. And the Indian space agency was already dreaming of more. Space is the frontier for mankind in the future. If we want to go beyond the moon, we have to go there first, said Indian space agency spokesman S. Satish. Associated Press writer Seth Borenstein reported from Washington.

MUSLIM NATIONS

EZEKIEL 38:1-12
1 And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
2 Son of man, set thy face against Gog,(RULER) the land of Magog,(RUSSIA) the chief prince of Meshech(MOSCOW)and Tubal,(TOBOLSK) and prophesy against him,
3 And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech(MOSCOW) and Tubal:
4 And I will turn thee back, and put hooks into thy jaws,(GOD FORCES THE RUSSIA-MUSLIMS TO MARCH) and I will bring thee forth, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of them clothed with all sorts of armour, even a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords:
5 Persia,(IRAN,IRAQ) Ethiopia, and Libya with them; all of them with shield and helmet:
6 Gomer,(GERMANY) and all his bands; the house of Togarmah (TURKEY)of the north quarters, and all his bands:(SUDAN,AFRICA) and many people with thee.
7 Be thou prepared, and prepare for thyself, thou, and all thy company that are assembled unto thee, and be thou a guard unto them.
8 After many days thou shalt be visited: in the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is brought back from the sword, and is gathered out of many people, against the mountains of Israel, which have been always waste: but it is brought forth out of the nations, and they shall dwell safely all of them.
9 Thou shalt ascend and come like a storm, thou shalt be like a cloud to cover the land, thou, and all thy bands, and many people with thee.(RUSSIA-EGYPT AND MUSLIMS)
10 Thus saith the Lord GOD; It shall also come to pass, that at the same time shall things come into thy mind, and thou shalt think an evil thought:
11 And thou shalt say, I will go up to the land of unwalled villages; I will go to them that are at rest, that dwell safely, all of them dwelling without walls, and having neither bars nor gates,
12 To take a spoil, and to take a prey; to turn thine hand upon the desolate places that are now inhabited, and upon the people that are gathered out of the nations, which have gotten cattle and goods, that dwell in the midst of the land.

ISAIAH 17:1
1 The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.

PSALMS 83:3-7
3 They (ARABS,MUSLIMS) have taken crafty counsel against thy people,(ISRAEL) and consulted against thy hidden ones.
4 They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance.
5 For they have consulted together with one consent: they are confederate against thee:(TREATIES)
6 The tabernacles of Edom,and the Ishmaelites;(ARABS) of Moab, and the Hagarenes;
7 Gebal, and Ammon,(JORDAN) and Amalek;(SYRIA) the Philistines (PALESTINIANS) with the inhabitants of Tyre;(LEBANON)

EZEKIEL 39:1-8
1 Therefore, thou son of man, prophesy against Gog,(LEADER OF RUSSIA) and say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech (MOSCOW) and Tubal: (TUBOLSK)
2 And I will turn thee back, and leave but the sixth part of thee, and will cause thee to come up from the north parts,(RUSSIA) and will bring thee upon the mountains of Israel:
3 And I will smite thy bow out of thy left hand, and will cause thine arrows to fall out of thy right hand.
4 Thou shalt fall upon the mountains of Israel, thou, and all thy bands,( ARABS) and the people that is with thee: I will give thee unto the ravenous birds of every sort, and to the beasts of the field to be devoured.
5 Thou shalt fall upon the open field: for I have spoken it, saith the Lord GOD.
6 And I will send a fire on Magog,(NUCLEAR BOMB) and among them that dwell carelessly in the isles: and they shall know that I am the LORD.
7 So will I make my holy name known in the midst of my people Israel; and I will not let them pollute my holy name any more: and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, the Holy One in Israel.
8 Behold, it is come, and it is done, saith the Lord GOD; this is the day whereof I have spoken.

JOEL 2:3,20,30-31
3 A fire(NUCLEAR BOMB) devoureth before them;(RUSSIA-ARABS) and behind them a flame burneth: the land is as the garden of Eden before them, and behind them a desolate wilderness; yea, and nothing shall escape them.
20 But I will remove far off from you the northern army,(RUSSIA,MUSLIMS) and will drive him into a land barren and desolate, with his face toward the east sea, and his hinder part toward the utmost sea, and his stink shall come up, and his ill savour shall come up, because he hath done great things.(SIBERIAN DESERT)
30 And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke.(NUCLEAR BOMB)
31 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come.

ELECTION 2008 Obama admits Kenyan birth? Campaign doesn't respond to claims in lawsuit over birth certificate October 21, 2008 9:22 pm Eastern By Drew Zahn
2008 WorldNetDaily


Philip J. Berg

Pennsylvania Democrat Philip J. Berg, who filed a lawsuit demanding Sen. Barack Obama present proof of his American citizenship, now says that by failing to respond Obama has legally admitted to the lawsuit's accusations, including the charge that the Democratic candidate was born in Mombosa, Kenya.As WND reported, Berg filed suit in U.S. District Court in August, alleging Obama is not a natural-born citizen and is thus ineligible to serve as president of the United States. Though Obama has posted an image of a Hawaii birth certificate online, Berg demands that the court verify the original document, which the Obama campaign has not provided.Now Berg cites Rule 36 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which states that unless the accused party provides written answer or objection to charges within 30 days, the accused legally admits the matter.Since Obama has only filed motions to dismiss and has not actually answered the charges in the lawsuit, Berg claims, according to Rule 36, Obama has legally admitted he is not a natural-born citizen.Now Berg is asking the court for a formal declaration of Obama's admission and asking the Democratic National Committee for another presidential candidate.In a statement released today, Berg argues that he filed Requests for Admissions on Sept. 15, meaning Obama had until Oct. 15 to answer or face the consequences of Rule 36.Obama and the DNC admitted, by way of failure to timely respond to Requests for Admissions, all of the numerous specific requests in the Federal lawsuit, Berg's statement reads. Obama is not qualified to be president and therefore Obama must immediately withdraw his candidacy for president and the DNC shall substitute a qualified candidate.Berg's original lawsuit leveled several charges at both Obama and the DNC – accusing the former of lying about his place of birth, faking his birth certificate and fraudulently running for office; and accusing the latter of not properly vetting its candidate.

Though it hasn't given Berg the evidence he seeks, the Obama campaign has publicly answered allegations that the candidate was born in Kenya and faked his Hawaii birth certificate.Smears claiming Barack Obama doesn't have a birth certificate aren't actually about that piece of paper, says the Fight the Smears section of Obama's website, they're about manipulating people into thinking Barack is not an American citizen.The truth is, Barack Obama was born in the state of Hawaii in 1961, a native citizen of the United States of America, the campaign website states. It also includes images of a Hawaii birth certificate bearing the name Barack Hussein Obama II.Berg has also taken the controversy public through his website and through repeated public offers to revoke the lawsuit if Obama will produce legal documents that establish his citizenship.Without those documents, Berg has chosen to file two additional motions in district court in Philadelphia. The first asks the court to notify Obama and the DNC of what Berg understands they have now legally admitted, and the second asks for an expedited ruling, given the quickly upcoming Nov. 4 election.It all comes down to the fact that there's nothing from the other side, Berg told Jeff Schreiber for his blog, America's Right. The admissions are there. By not filing the answers or objections, the defense has admitted everything. He admits he was born in Kenya. He admits he was adopted in Indonesia. He admits that the documentation posted online is a phony. And he admits that he is constitutionally ineligible to serve as president of the United States.

EU-Russia talks likely to resume in November
VALENTINA POP Today OCT 22,08 @ 09:25 CET


EUOBSERVER/STRASBOURG - French president Nicolas Sarkozy and EU external relations commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner have both stressed the need to resume talks on a new treaty with Moscow in November, despite concerns on the consequences of getting back to business as usual with Russia before it fully complies with the ceasefire agreement in Georgia.Given the state of the world today, I don't believe the world needs a crisis between Europe and Russia. We can defend our differences, human rights, but it would be irresponsible to create the conditions for a conflict for which we have no need, Mr Sarkozy, who chairs the rotating EU presidency and brokered the cease fire between Moscow and Tbilisi, told members of the European Parliament on Tuesday (21 October).Europe should not be an accomplice in starting another Cold War.His remarks were echoed by Europe's commissioner for external relations Benita Ferrero-Waldner, who explained the need for dialogue with Russia due to the complex interdependence of the EU and Russia in the field of energy and on the international stage in issues like Iran, non-proliferation of nuclear weapons or climate change.We will have a very important discussion at the next GAERC [foreign ministers meeting] on 10 November and then I do hope that we find the right understanding on pursuing negotiations for the New EU-Russia Agreement. Because, indeed, they have only been postponed, she said, adding that the EU needs to treat Russia as it is not as we would wish it to be.At a summit last week in Brussels, EU leaders postponed until next month a decision on whether to reopen talks on the partnership and cooperation agreement with Russia, suspended after the military invasion of Georgia. The GAERC meeting will take place only four days ahead of an EU-Russia summit held in the French city of Nice.Russia invaded Georgia on 7 August as Georgian forces shelled Russia-backed rebels in South Ossetia. But Moscow's later promise to pull troops back to pre-7 August positions and let OSCE monitors into South Ossetia have not yet been fulfilled. Signalling a change of tone towards Tbilisi, Mr Sarkozy also alluded to Georgia's share of the blame in the August war.

We saw a war with a completely disproportionate reaction from the Russians in the case of Georgia. It was disproportionate to intervene as the Russians did in Georgia. I also use the word reaction, because that was because there was a preceding inappropriate action, and Europe has to be fair. Europe shouldn't hesitate to step out of the ideological framework, the French president said.

Geneva post-mortem

A political solution to the conflict can only to be found in Geneva, Mrs Ferrero-Waldner said, welcoming the fact that the talks were launched on 15 October, despite the fact they started with a difficult moment.The internationally-mediated talks between Russia and Georgia failed last week after Russia insisted on giving delegates from Georgia rebel enclaves South Ossetia and Abkhazia full diplomatic status.French minister for European affairs, Jean Pierre Jouyet, also speaking in front of the MEPs on Tuesday, said the talks were a success because all parties came to the table.Look at how long peace talks take - for instance in the Balkans. I think that the fact that we already got all the parties around the table is already an important step forward, even though we are fully aware that the process will be lengthy, he explained.MEPs took national lines on the debate, with Polish, Baltic, Finnish and Swedish MEPs defending Georgia while Austrian and Italian deputies inclined toward Russia.Belgian liberal MEP Annemie Neyts said it would be regrettable if the decision of resuming talks had already been taken come what may. Having decided that whatever happens, we will pick up the negotiations, even before the [EU-Russia] summit, I don't know whether that is showing the greatest of diplomatic skills, she said. But Dutch socialist Jan Marinus Wiersma urged the EU to be non-confrontational.

Eastern European hearts

Strong divisions on the subject between post-Communist EU states and old Europe also exist at diplomatic level in the run-up to the 10 November foreign ministers debate, with some eastern countries even calling for the EU-Russia summit to be called off over Russia's non compliance with peace accords.Do we want the Nice council to be remembered in the heart of eastern Europe as another day when Europe rewarded Russian revisionism and aggression? Is this the leadership Mr Sarkozy wants to show us? a senior diplomat from one of the post-Communist EU countries told EUobserver, saying the EU would create a dangerous precedent if it legitimised Russia's occupation of Georgia by restarting treaty negotiations. The French presidency wants to celebrate success on all fronts. But we in the east are fed up with paying the price for those who play games in the West. We've been paying for the last 60 years and it cost us a lot of lives.But a Belgian diplomat underlined that negotiations on such an agreement [the EU-Russia partnership treaty] should not be seen as a present we give to Russia. It's of interest to the whole of the EU.

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS ON FINANCIAL CRISIS

HERES AN INTERESTING STORY ABOUT GOG AND MAGOG STATUES IN LONDON ENGLAND AND INTERESTINGLY ITS CONNECTED TO THE LONDON STOCK EXCHANGE. I KNOW GOG AND MAGOG IS RUSSIA IN THE BIBLE.
http://www.lordmayorsshow.org/visitors/history/gogmagog

AND THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS IS A MAIN THINK TANK IN BRINGING ABOUT A WORLD GOVERNMENT AS WELL AS THE TRILATERAL COMMISSION, THE CLUB OF ROME,AND MANY OTHERS GROUPS.

HERE ARE LINKS TO THESE NEW WORLD ORDER, ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT GROUPS TO DO YOUR OWN IMFORMATION. THE LEADER WILL BE THE EUROPEAN UNION THE BIBLE SAYS.

http://europa.eu/ (EUROPEAN UNION WEBSITE)

http://www.clubofrome.org/ (CLUB OF ROME)(10 WORLD TRADE BLOCS)

http://www.cfr.org/ (AMERICA)(COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS)

http://www.ecfr.eu/ (EUROPEAN UNION)(COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATINS)

http://www.trilateral.org/ (TRILATERAL COMMISSION)

HHERE IS A TRANSCRIPT OF THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS ON THE FINANCIAL CRISIS.

Transcript

Council on Foreign Relations Panel Discussion ,International Implications of The Financial Crisis Speakers: Timothy D. Adams, Managing Director, The Lindsey Group
Simon Johnson, Senior Fellow, Peterson Institute for International Economics, Ronald A. Kurtz Professor of Entrepreneurship, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cofounder, Baselinescenario.com Presider: Roger C. Altman, Chairman, Evercore Partners, Inc. October 16, 2008 Council on Foreign Relations


ROGER ALTMAN: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Good morning and welcome to the Council. I'm Roger Altman and this morning we're going to discuss the international implications of this financial crisis, which we're all more familiar with than we'd like to be. I'm joined by Simon Johnson on my right and Tim Adams on Simon's right.
Simon is a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International economics and a co-founder of BaselineScenario.com, which is a website on the financial crisis. He was previously the International Monetary Fund's economic counselor and director of the research department, and at the IMF, Simon led the Global Economic Outlook Team. He's also the Kurtz Professor of Entrepreneurship at MIT's Sloan School.
And Tim is a managing director of the Lindsey Group. Previously Tim served as undersecretary of the Treasury for International Affairs and was responsible for all of the wide range of matters that that position always carries with it, including exchange rate issues, G7 issues, and the IMF and World Bank issues. And prior to assuming that post as undersecretary, Tim was chief of staff, both to Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill and to his successor John Snow.

I will remind everybody that the normal rules of the council on non-attribution apply, and our format is going to be a discussion between the three of us for about 25 minutes, and then we will open this up to questions from all of you for the remainder of our hour. Needless to say, I think we are having this discussion at about as propitious a moment as one could have. If anyone in the audience knows exactly where this is going from here, please stand up and tell us right now -- (laughter) -- and I assure you that Tim and Simon and I will dutifully take notes. In fact, you can take the podium if you'd like.

But we all know we're witnessing the most severe financial crisis since the 30s and that it has gone further and gone deeper and shaken more of the foundation than anyone that I know foresaw, certainly including me, and exactly what happens now, whether we've seen the bottom -- and as we're going to discuss this morning -- what the international and geopolitical implications of this is subject for great debate.
So I'm going to start, if I may, by asking a very basic question, which is -- and I'll start by asking this of you, Tim, and then I'll ask Simon to answer it too -- how do you think that this crisis alters the geopolitical balance of power, at least over the medium term, or does it?

TIMOTHY ADAMS: Well, that is a basic and key question, without a doubt, Roger. I think it certainly accelerates the trends that this council and other forum have made note of, of a diminution of power away from the U.S. and Europe to other nodes -- political and economic nodes around the world, whether it's China or Russia or the Middle East, and I think this certainly situates that.

I note a headline out of the Sydney paper that said, quote, End of U.S. Era, Now China Calls the Tune. I note yesterday or the day before that the Pakistan delegation goes to China to raise funds for its government; Iceland getting a bailout from the Russians. And what we're seeing are countries -- and I think probably more over the coming weeks and months as this crisis convulses to the emerging markets. I know Simon has some thoughts about that, but that's the next shoe to drop: the number of countries that will seek refuge in the safe harbor of countries where cash is king and they have a lot of it or they're very resource-rich, or in fact those countries -- Russia, for example -- seeking to regain some of its prominence by reaching out to its former client states in a way that reasserts its authority, maybe in Central Asia. There was a discussion yesterday about the elections in Azerbaijan.

So I think it accelerates that process. I don't want to count the U.S. out. I think as we move from a unipolar world to a multipolar world -- a multipolar world without multilateralism likely -- that the U.S. is still the dominant power -- the dominant economic power, the dominant military power -- and will remain so, I think for our lifetime, but the world is going to look very different, and I think this speeds or accelerates that process.

ALTMAN: Just before you answer, Simon, I made the first of what I'm sure will be several mistakes today as my day unfolds, because that's been my usual style, and that is I'm so used to saying that the usual council rules on non-attribution apply that in fact that's not right for this morning. The meeting is on the record and is being teleconferenced regionally, so let me just correct myself so everyone knows that the ground rules actually really are. Simon.

SIMON JOHNSON: Thank you, Roger. Well, I think I'd like to disagree a little bit with Tim on at least some parts of the broad picture. I would completely emphasize and agree with what Roger said a moment ago, which is this is the worst, most severe financial crisis since the 1930s. I think it's also, almost without a doubt, going to be the most severe recession -- global recession that we've seen at least since the 1930s, and that's my baseline view. I think it could be worse.

Now, why is that good for the United States? My view is that, you know -- well, everybody is going to go down. This is a global synchronized downturn. The U.S. -- and the U.S. is going to be at the center -- is at the center of it, so the U.S. is going to have a very -- series of very big problems. It's actually going to, I think, be less affected and bounce back quicker than other parts of the world. And we can go through this in detail, but let me just quickly run through the reasoning here.
I think the Eurozone is in very bad trouble. I was, as Roger said, chief economist at the IMF through the end of August, so I'm not going to tell you how I know this --(chuckles) -- but I can tell you that my very strong feeling is they still don't get it. They still don't understand the mess they're in. And in fact, we're in this mess in part because they were so slow to react in the middle of September. I think they will be obsessed with keeping inflation down. I think that will prove to be exactly the wrong policy. Charles Goodhart, a former senior Bank of England official said the other week that he thought that Eurozone would break apart. That's a remarkable statement from the former central banker governor. We can talk about that.

I think the Gordon Brown just bought the -- just acquired basically half the British banking system. Good luck to him with that. It's going to be very -- I don't think that makes his life any easier. I think that their position will become more difficult. And I think all of these problems -- and, as Tim said, it's happening right now -- feed directly into commodity prices. I think the price of oil is already high. If you look at the implied price of oil that's in the stock price of major oil companies around the world, it's much lower. I wouldn't be surprised if oil prices go down to something in the region of $20 to $30 a barrel. I'm not saying it's definitely going to happen. Obviously people in the market don't feel that way right now, but it's certainly possible. And I know a number of prominent emerging markets that have built their economies around this assumption of oil at somewhere in the $50 to $60 range, which seemed pretty conservative six months ago or three months ago. Now it actually seems like they're not ready for this. So it was economies based on commodity exports, including Russia, though not exclusively Russia; including Brazil, who's going to have trouble.

And then this is a question where I think Roger and I may differ on this a little bit and we can discuss it, is what happens to the big manufacturing export powerhouses, particularly China. How much does $2 trillion of reserves more or less buy you in this world when financial systems are disintegrating, when currencies are coming under enormous pressure, and when nobody really wants to buy your exports? To what extent can China switch into domestic demand? To what extent can they diversify their markets? I'm happy to discuss that further. My view is their prospects are also rather limited. So the whole world goes down; the U.S. goes down with it. Well, then the U.S. bounces back, but for reasons we can talk about.
So my overall message for everyone based in the U.S. and thinking forward about the U.S. is reassuring. The rest of the world, not so much. (Laughter.)
ALTMAN: Let's see, everybody's a loser and that's reassuring. Okay. I'm going to follow up one thing that you just said and ask Tim if he agrees or not agrees, which is that the Eurozone will be damaged more than the U.S. will be damaged. Can you agree with that?

ADAMS: Yes, relative to the U.S., simply for all the reasons that we have discussed: the structural rigidities in Europe, the lack of a labor mobility and product mobility, the absence of innovation, inability to have a unified fiscal response -- there's no central fiscal authority -- a central bank that has a single mandate that up until a few weeks ago seemed to take that mandate with a great amount of zeal in almost this zealous approach to inflation, which I thought was overdone at the time.

So I think, as I said before, never count the U.S. out. We have so many important attributes of innovation and -- I refer to it as the double I's. It's innovation and it's the intangibles. It's a great university system. It's the ability to innovate. We're going to wash our system; we're going to flush it. We're not going to be like Japan. We're not going to have zombie corporations. We're going to price these assets to their appropriate value, whatever that is, and we're going to wash them out of the system, and 36 months from now we're going to be back on our feet stronger than ever.

But I agree with Simon that this is a coordinated or a unified global slowdown. The idea of decoupling has now been completely dismissed. You know, in the election of 1992 Ross Perot talked about the great sucking sound of NAFTA. There's a great sucking sound going on now. It's called capital coming out of the emerging markets. And that is going to have a profound effect, as Simon has noted, across the board. Some countries, I think like China, will probably do better than others, but there are a whole host of markets out there that 24 months ago were the darlings of global portfolio managers and are now on the brink of disaster.

But, yes, Roger, I think the U.S. comes out of this better than Europe, for a whole host of issues dealing with structural rigidities and our ability to respond.
JOHNSON: I would just add to that list -- all of which I would agree with -- I would add two things and one piece of evidence. I think the balance sheet of the U.S. is much stronger going into this than the Europeans, so obviously the federal government -- (inaudible) -- put on the table or acquired at least a contingent responsibility for about 70 percent of GDP over the past two weeks. If you add up all the bits and pieces, you know, it's real money. But we go into it with, you know, private sector holdings of government debt below 50 percent. We can afford this, we can afford more, and we will grow our way out, for the reasons that Tim said.

Not to pick on anyone in particular, but look at the U.K. where you have bank liabilities -- assets and liabilities six times GDP, right? The -- (inaudible) -- banks are different, basically. And, you know, Gordon Brown just acquired the Royal Bank of Scotland. It's now under his control and he's already saying what the lending policy will be. That bank has a balance sheet equal to the GDP of the U.K. So how they manage that, how they manage that through the recession and how they manage, you know, government-controlled lending without getting themselves into even more trouble is a very interesting question. The U.S. is not going to go there.
And the other thing I would emphasize is the flexibility of U.S. policymakers. And I think you have to have sort of been through a lot of things with them, closely watching them and talking to them, to see that they're very -- and I know they've had a little bit of a bad press recently, and obviously mistakes have been made. I'm not a second guesser. I have never claimed that I would have done anything different from what they did. I'm in the business of trying to come up with creative ideas moving forward, not recriminations.

The U.S. policymakers have consistently tried to really come up with smart, innovative ideas, particularly of late, and they deserve a lot of credit, okay? It's not enough --

ADAMS: I agree with that.
JOHNSON: -- we are going to go into a recession. The Europeans have not. The Europeans have basically gone from denial to complete disarray to being somewhat disorganized. And finally on Sunday, I think under a fair amount of pressure and with a reasonable amount of luck actually -- that that was when the G7 meeting was, that weekend -- that they actually managed to pull something out that I thought Monday was reasonable. Wednesday it doesn't look so good, right, because the markets went down and overnight doesn't look so -- so we'll see what comes out of that.

But Eurozone policymakers in particular, at the national level and at the Eurozone level, are not flexible. They have an inflation mantra. They are perfectly positioned to handle the 1970s. This is not the 1970s; this is something very different, and the U.S. knows this. The guys at the top of the U.S. know this now, all right? Maybe they should have woken up a week earlier, but they've woken up. The Europeans, not really. And the piece of evidence I just threw out there is what of course is happening to long-term interest rates in the United States. Despite all the disruption, despite all the problems seen around the world, these rates are low, they've stayed low, and in fact in some of the most stressed moments over the past few weeks the dollar has actually strengthened, particularly relative to the euro.

So the U.S. is a safe haven. People believe in the U.S. balance sheet and they believe in the ability of the U.S. to bounce back, and they're right, and that's how the U.S. will come through.

And I didn't mean to be flip, and I'm sorry if I at all injected a humorous note. My wife gives me a very hard time for this. She says, you shouldn't smile and laugh when you're on television, but, you know -- (chuckles) -- if you don't try and make it a little --(Cross talk.)

ALTMAN: -- making a career out of it. (Laughter.)
JOHNSON: If you don't try and see the positive side here, Roger, a lot of people are going to be a lot more depressed.

ALTMAN: I agree with that. Well, we're going to have a very hard time fitting into allotted time this morning all the questions, but let me turn to this one. You're both reflecting quite a bit of optimism about the snap-back, at least here in the U.S. Let me strike a querulous note on that by asking this: How damaged is the system of what I'll call Western finance? I happen to think it's quite damaged. And why do you think it's going to be such a short time for it to recover to what we'll call normal, healthy functioning in terms, say, of credit flows?

ADAMS: Well, I think if you're using the last seven years as your baseline, we won't snap back to that, for a variety of reasons. One is I don't think banks are going to get back in the lending business. We can force them as much -- Hank can call them up and urge them to lend, and the chances are Brown will call them up in the U.K., but I don't think it's going to happen. I think we're going to see a replay of what we saw in the early '90s where you simply used your deposits and go out the longer the yield curve and try to use the spread to rebuild your balance sheet. That's a long, tough process, and I think the animal spirit of the lending community is gone for a considerable period of time. In fact, we've just taken out a whole piece of our infrastructure, and that is the mortgage piece of it.

So when we do have an up-cycle in housing -- some day it will come -- you know, I'm concerned that there is the absence of the infrastructure to take advantage of that upside. I think we're in for a long, tough period if it's relative to the period that just ended, and that is because household balance sheets, especially for the lower 50 percent, the bottom 60 million households in this country, are probably under water and getting worse. They have very little liquidity. They live paycheck to paycheck. And over the past two years they've spent $400 billion more than they've earned. And how did they do that? They did it with cheap and abundant credit that's no longer there.

And so I think -- in some ways I think that Senator Edwards was right; there are two Americas. There are multiple Americas, but there are certainly two Americas, and those at the bottom half are going to struggle through this period, not for two years, not for three years, but maybe for a decade. But I do think that banks are going to be hoarding cash, protecting capital, and trying to protect their balance sheet for a long period of time, and this period that we've been in where we've seen this -- (inaudible) -- around the big high-cost banks through the securitization process has now ended. I don't know what replaces it, but for the meantime we're back to the big, high-cost institutions that we were told 24 months ago couldn't be managed, and there was a question about whether they could actually manage the risk, but that's not a centerpiece of our financial system.

Whether it's that way five years from now I don't know, but it is not going to be a recipe for swift response with respect to getting credit flows, which is why I think you'll see the federal government more involved in directing credit, whether it's student loans, whether it's mortgages, whether it's supporting state and local governments. I think what you'll see is, out of Washington, a more activist government with respect to where capital flows are going.

ALTMAN: Let me ask you to answer that question, Simon, but let me punch it up a bit. Martin Wolf was here at the council yesterday morning and he spoke his usually -- usually a very trenchant way, but one of the points he made was the following, that we've seen 50 years of finance evolution in three months and now, he argued, what you have here in the United States is the emergence of a European-style banking oligopoly, which he said is cozy but not conducive to entrepreneurship and growth. And that's another way of asking the same question: How damaged and changed is the system of Western finance, and what does that imply for recovery?
JOHNSON: Well, I think it's a system of global finance, Roger, because everyone who is doing any kind of modern industrial production or service operation is using the same sort of financial system and these financial systems got highly leveraged, and I think it's the degree to which you can sustain high degrees of leverage and large bank balances relative to the size of national economies. That's really an important question everywhere and -- you know, I won't name particular countries but I'd say broadly across emerging markets that's absolutely true. I think obviously what's happening in Russia, which is very much in the public arena so I can discuss it, is just the canary in the coal mine in this regard. So the entire system, the way in which we structure and involve financial credit in production is going to be rethought, and it's damaged everywhere.

Now, in that context I think what Martin is saying and what you're saying is very important because the issue is going to be to what extent can a country find innovative ways around these bottlenecks in the existing system, new ways to come up with forms of credit, new kinds of lending instruments that do not create system risk? And the issue for the U.S. I think is exactly going to be when we consolidate regulation -- because it's going to be consolidated; you can't play nine big guys against 54, 55 regulars anymore. Yes, you're going to have one or two big consolidated regulators quite quickly would be my prediction, all right, and they'll integrate securities regulation and banking regulation I think much more than in the past because it doesn't make any sense to keep themselves separate anymore.
But the question is, when you do that, do you do it in a way that encourages this entrepreneurship? Remember, I am a professor of entrepreneurship. In addition to doing very macro things I work on very micro things. And so, you know, if you take the ideas and the innovation comes out American universities, we're very good at finding productive ways to put them -- ways to put them to work in new start ups and new ideas in the U.S., and that's actually one of our big advantages. Can we make that happen in the financial sector or do we put such a -- do we get so scared by what happened that we say, no, all we do is just pure, plain vanilla stuff? And then I think it's harder to recover.

But, as I said, I believe in the flexibility of U.S. policy and I believe the Congress will come up with some sensible legislation, and that will allow innovation within a system that will be much more severely constricted than in the past, for sure. Other countries will struggle with the same problem and they will not find such good solutions.

ALTMAN: Let me just interject one of my own comments. I think what you might be missing is the following: Markets overshoot -- markets chronically overshoot, and when they do so in an extreme fashion we see bubbles, and bubbles, for better or worse, actually occur with considerable regularity, this being one of the worst, but we've had lots of them. And then when they overshoot on the downside, which is what we're seeing now, of course the psychology overshoots too. And in this particular case what I mean is we're entering into a period where the psychology of lenders and the psychology of all sources of finance is going to overshoot, to a great degree, to the conservative side, and it's going to take quite some time -- it always does, longer than rationality would suggest -- for the psychology to return to normal.
So if you think of the psychology of risk management systems, of credit standards, of all lending criteria, just to name three, we're going to go into a period where it's going to take -- it's going to be extremely conservative -- in effect the once burned twice shy mentality -- and in my experience over almost 40 years in finance, it's going to take longer than the equations and the analysis would suggest for that extreme conservative psychology to come back towards the center. And that's a reason why, in my view, the amount of time it will take to return to what one might call normal, healthy credit flows is going to be longer rather than shorter.
ADAMS: And we may make it worse in Washington. If we have a Congress that rushes in -- and I believe Simon is right; I believe there is going to be a rush to rewrite the regulations and rewrite the institutional framework. If we end up with a financial version of Sarbanes-Oxley on steroids, we're going to have real problems. And it's going to be in law for the next 50 years. Think how long it took us to undo -- (inaudible) -- and you might argue whether that was smart or not, but once this new regulatory regime is put in place it will be with us for our lifetime, and my fear is that there are enormous unintended consequences coming from that, but there will be such a political response, just as you noted in markets and psychology, that Washington overreacts, that it will only exacerbate the very problem that you just laid out.

JOHNSON: Okay, well, I have two responses to what you're saying. First of all, I think it's actually going to be a lot worse wherever possible, but in addition to your psychological point, which is very important, you're going to see defaults, you're going to see people rewriting contracts, you're going to see the kind of behavior we've seen in a relatively isolated form in emerging markets over the past 20, 30 years when they've run into financial problems, but you'll see it in a much more synchronized way across lots of countries, including countries that you'll be amazed when it happens there, right, because you thought it was sort of not an emerging market.

So they will have the psychology problem and the rewriting of contracts, the breakdown of relations with creditors, and then it's a terribly long workout process. I don't think the U.S. is going to have that. I think the U.S. will actually have more inflation or be comfortable with more inflation than some other places, and that will help a little bit smooth this out.

On the how far it takes to come back -- you obviously know much more about finance than I do, but I do know a little bit about technology because I work at MIT and I work a lot with technology entrepreneurs, and the psychological facts of the Internet's run up and then the bust were quite profound. You know, nobody wanted to touch anything to do with new technology for at least three or four days. (Laughter.) And then they start thinking about new -- honestly, these guys are crazy. I don't so this. I'm a professor. I'm a very -- I should say I'm a very positive, optimistic person. I was not bearish about the global economy, not that bearish until the Lehman, AIG sequence of events, okay? I moved my view. I'm very proud of that. That's the point of the website; I communicate -- I'm trying to communicate what my view is and why it has moved and what continues to move it, and how you can turn things around.

So I do, it's true, have a positive, somewhat optimistic bent, which you may be resisting, but at the same time I've seen it -- I mean, I've seen it with the MIT students, I've seen it with the people around MIT, and I've seen other countries come to MIT and try to learn from us: How do we get this kind of dynamic optimism in an entrepreneurial sense? And, you know, we try and help them but it's basically an impossible task, right? Now, you may be right that finance is different. It could be that finance is different and the same sort of enthusiasm won't spill over, but then I think the entrepreneurs will figure out how to grow companies without any external finance. Don't ask me how they'll do it, but these guys are pretty good.
ALTMAN: Two quick responses. First of all, the events of the last year have instructed me that I actually know nothing about finance -- (laughter) -- but secondly, I have a rather different memory of the fallout from the dotcom bubble than you do. But in any event, I want to rattle off about three quick questions before we have to turn to the audience.

First, let's get a little deeper into the implications of this for the LDCs, or the emerging countries. There's a lot of talk that those emerging countries that run current account deficits are going to go back to some version of the 1997, 1998 crisis. What's your view on that? And I'll start with Tim.

ADAMS: Well, I think it's going to look different in that it's less the sovereign problem now and more the corporate problem. We've had about $800 billion flow into emerging markets just last year. That will probably be, in 2009, a number about half that. It's principally going into the corporate sector, but there is foreign direct investment taking advantage of the natural resource sectors in many of these countries, but there's a tremendous amount of corporate borrowing -- not equity but debt -- and a lot of that debt is going to have to be rolled over in the next 90 days and the next four quarters.

So I think what you're going to see is enormous stress in the corporate sector of many of these emerging markets, and therefore you could see nationalizations and public support for the principal corporates in many of these countries, which is just going to add to their own balance sheet problems. But those countries which have been running a large current account deficit and have been dependent on foreign capital or imported capital -- and I remind myself that we import $2 billion every single day to run our economy -- I think it will be tougher for them to import capital and I think they're going to pay more for it.

So I agree. As I said, it's a great sucking sound of capital coming out of the emerging markets and that's going to have a profound impact, especially for those who have been living on the edge anyway, the outliers, but I think it flows into even the countries, as I noted earlier, that were the darlings of the market just 24 months ago.

ALTMAN: Simon?
JOHNSON: Absolutely we're in a period of very rapid -- not total but very rapid outflows of capital from most emerging markets, and of course I think the hedge funds have pretty much left. Now it's domestic investors who are really trying to crowd out the exits. I would divide the countries into three categories. The first is the obvious ones that have large credit account deficits, and for the reasons Tim mentioned it's very hard for them to finance that. You know who they are; they're mostly in Eastern and Central Europe, but there's some others scattered around the world.

In addition -- and that's been a fairly obvious vulnerability in the world for some time, but in addition, what we're seeing now is cracks -- very important big cracks in countries where the government holds lots of reserves and had actually been very conservative, but the private sector has acquired lots of debt, so Russia will be an interesting example. The numbers in my Washington Post article on Sunday, roughly speaking, gross liabilities are about equal to -- of the private sector -- are about equal to the reserves of the central bank, right? And the central bank -- you know, we can discuss strategy for or against doing this, but so far they seem to have committed about $200 billion to basically replace the buyout of those positions and shore up their banks as a result because the banks would obviously have a problem if they can't rollover their debt.

Now, so you immediately sort of change the basis of calculation. It's not the solvency of the Russian government sector -- official sector anymore; it's what's the balance sheet of Russia? What's the rollover risk? How long are capital markets going to be closed? How much capital is going to leave? When should they --when will they want to spend their reserves? And of course the IMF is -- also in the newspapers -- is considering or is about to make a bunch of loans to emerging markets, and this is going to be a key -- this is a key strategic question: To what extent do you allow the oligarchs to get out of their positions basically, right? So I think there's a big, big problem there for them, and that's a large set of countries.

The third set of countries that we see are those for whom exports at the margin are an important part of the economy, either because its commodities -- and this is a lot of countries -- so 80 or 90 countries in the world will be hit very hard by what I expect to happen to commodity prices. I don't know how you word that; it's not a matter of reserves. It's not a reserve issue but a cash flow issue.

And then of course there's manufacturing exporters -- and this is where I hope you'll come back here a little bit on China, Roger, because I know you have views on this subject. You know, I would like to believe that $2 trillion is a lot of money. I used to think it was a lot of money. It sounded like a lot of money, you know, two months ago or three months ago, but given the nature of the problem we're facing, given the destruction of finance, and given the fact that China isn't particularly responsible for any of this -- well, we can argue about the capital flows piece, but their markets I think are just drying up, and their ability to switch into domestic consumption -- and this is obviously not typical of China, but in general, just like other emerging markets, government consumption is a small part of GDP, less than 20 percent. Infrastructure is pretty much bottlenecked; it's hard to get more money through there. You can say they could spend a lot of money building a social safety net and pension system -- I'm in favor of that -- but that's a five- to 10-year project. That's not going to get them through the short term.

So I think -- I mean, I would like to be convinced, or I would like you to convince me otherwise, but I feel pretty negative about them. And my three categories basically exhaust all the emerging markets in developing countries out there.
ALTMAN: All right, let me follow that up, although I want to also get to the dollar, and one or two other issues before we open this up.

How negative effect will this have on China?

JOHNSON: I thought you were going to tell me.
ALTMAN: No, I'm going to ask you. (Laughter.)

JOHNSON: (Laughs.) To me, that's implausible. I think we can see pretty much, you know, how a lot of this plays out, including in some rather unpleasant ways in the Eurozone, because we know a lot about the policymakers and how they respond. We know a lot about those economies.

But, you know, the Chinese economy has many black boxes inside other black boxes, and the question is how many flexibility does it have? Can they switch -- could they switch to being a more domestically driven economy? Theoretically, absolutely -- and a good idea. And would be (laughs) kind of -- (inaudible) -- to do it.
But, it's hard to know. And it's -- (inaudible) -- even after talking to lots of the policymakers, it's hard to know, do they get it? Do they want to do it? Can they do it? Can the do it quickly? I'm not sure.

The $2 trillion buys them time, no question about it. They're not in the same category as Russia, as far as we know. I'm pretty confident about that. So, the immediate pressure is not there.

But, if you think that we're in this big, fairly rapid global slowdown over the next six to nine months -- and that affects, you know, all the markets where they (place their ?) exports, and you think that those exports would be adversely hit -- which is, would be my expectation, then, I'm not sure.

I think it's -- there's a big slowdown. And, you know, their economy's obviously got a productive dynamic -- (inaudible) -- tended to be more tied to exports. Then they have a less productive, more stake-driven part, right, where the bad loans have traditionally accumulated, and that's essentially more domestically oriented.
So, particularly, can these productive export -- (inaudible) -- towards the domestic market and make money doing so?

ALTMAN: Let's turn -- let's turn then to a big imponderable, which is the implications of all this for exchange rates. And I think there are as many views on this question out there as there are people who are interested in expressing them.
But, Tim, what's your point of view, starting with the dollar?

ADAMS: I think the dollar is something of a safehaven, in the short-term, as this crisis convulses through the emerging markets. And capital is a coward, it goes where it's treated well. We treat it well in the United States, and so I think it comes here.

Longer term, though, I worry about a world awash with dollars in treasuries. We're going to -- we're going to issue lots of debt over the next year. And I suspect we're going to re-inflate our way out of it.

You can't tell that now because we're in a deflationary period, but I think the magnitude of the policy response -- with more to come on the fiscal side, and maybe even more to come on the monetary side -- is that I think we're sowing the seeds for another inflationary period, the next double. It may be three or five years down the road.

But, I think that's how we ultimately get out of this is, is we're going to re-inflate asset prices, and we're going to do it aggressively. That --ultimately, that is less attractive for the dollar.

But, I think, in the short-term, it is attractive -- the capital flow here, because it's a race to the bottom. We've led this cycle, and the emerging markets and the Europeans are going to be cutting rates behind us. And just on a sheer interest rate differential, I think the dollar benefits.

ALTMAN: Simon?
JOHNSON: Yeah, I think I broadly would agree with that. I think the dollar clearly has been a safehaven over the past few weeks, and those were -- (laughs) -- pretty upsetting week. Right now the European balance sheets don't -- balance sheets are in play, and the European balance sheet doesn't look as good, and the Eurozone obviously has issues going forward.

So, I think that this all -- and, as you know, I guess, the implied inflation in the -- if you look at the U.S. index bonds, they're at 1 percent -- 1 percent a year -- (inaudible) -- over the next 10 years.

I would agree with -- tend to agree with Tim that that's a little optimistic, that what you'll tend to get is -- (inaudible) -- inflation of asset prices, as opposed to, sort of, more general wage-price inflation, asset prices stay where they are, and the real burden of debt goes down. I think some degree of that, at the margin, would actually be helpful, including to the poor people, who Tim stressed -- rightly, how vulnerable they are in the U.S. Of course, if inflation gets out of control, then everybody's got a big problem, including, and particularly, the vulnerable people. (Inaudible) -- I'm not suggesting it's a panacea, nor is it my recommendation at this point, but I do think it seems likely to be in the cards.
I find it very hard to believe the Germans would ever want to go -- move toward and kind of inflation. Even 2 percent -- (laughs) -- makes them uncomfortable. I think the French will stay in very close to the Germans.

I think other European countries will increasingly wonder if they really should go through such difficult times in order that Germany can keep inflation down at 2 percent. I think they'll see other countries around them, including the U.K., who will tend to inflate their way out of this, and that will have repercussions.
So, inflation -- (inaudible) -- strong short-term inflation in the U.S., longer term, how that plays out -- (inaudible) -- how the other big currency -- (inaudible) -- are doing politically.

ALTMAN: All right, let's open this up and take questions from all of you. The floor is open. Joe?

QUESTION: Yes, I'd like to spend a little more time on China. -- (inaudible) --
ALTMAN: Hold on a sec, Joe -- to mike.

QUESTION: I'd like to spend a little bit more time on China because they're kind of the big unknown here. And that is, do you believe that they're going to go through a recession -- the way the global recession is that you're talking about? If they are, how are they going to use their reserves right now? And what's that going to do towards their continued move from socialism to capitalism? In other words, internal unrest?

JOHNSON: Well, -- can I, can I start with that one? ALTMAN: Sure, please do.
JOHNSON: Well, the joke in the U.K., of course, is that, you know, if you remember the 1983 British Labour Party manifesto called for the nationalization of banks. So, Gordon Brown's actually achieved that this week. (Laughter.) So, I'm not sure anybody's on the move -- anybody's moving from Western socialism to capitalism. That's a global remark.

On China, I mean, it's a big unknown. It's not that big, remember, I mean, they've -- in talking in global terms, they're about 10 percent of GDP, if you use the -- the weight in the purchasing power parity weights, which tends to play their role up -- expand their role.

So, I think what happens with China is important for China. I don't think it saves the world economy. The idea that China can, sort of, pull the rest of us out of that strikes me as being somewhat implausible.

How they're going to use their war chest is a great question, and maybe Roger can speak to that. You can think of some very interesting, strategic things they could do to support other countries, particularly relatively small countries that will -- you know, perhaps, don't want to go to the IMF, for whatever reason; perhaps don't want to approach their, sort of, usual sources. And, of course, the U.S. Treasury may have less ready cash than in some previous crises.

And will China step in and make strategic investments there and help out people? That I don't know. I mean, that -- you could see them -- that obviously plays, or goes into the geopolitical issue, coming out of this.

Maybe you come out of this with the U.S. and China as two bigger -- relatively bigger players into world. compared to everybody else. I'm not sure.
I mean, the Chinese economy strikes me as being not sufficiently flexible. There's a lot of rigidity in any middle-income country. It's very hard for them -- it's very hard for them to handle it. But, they have handled some pretty big bumps in the road before, so we'll see.

ALTMAN: I'd add one comment. I believe that the Chinese authorities are interested in playing the role that Simon just alluded to -- in other words, making a series of what you might call strategic investments which, among many other things, would help accelerate the development of a more modern infrastructure within China.That infrastructure might pertain to financial services, or it might pertain to other industrial sectors, but, I believe they have that as a goal. Now, whether they actually pull the trigger and begin to implement it or not, I don't know. But, I think that's one of the things that's very much on their minds, based on information that I've seen.

ADAMS: They do have enormous fiscal capacity to build lots of railroads, lots of highways, lots of bridges. And, like other places, they won't be bridges to nowhere -- schools, public buildings. So they can turn on the fiscal spigot, and they can do it fairly quickly, and they can do it in a very massive fashion. The problem is that there's a lag effect from the time it's turned on until it actually makes a difference.

I think (we ?) probably have a soft landing -- exports were growing close to 26 percent last year; 40 percent of their exports go to the U.S. and Europe. That obviously is going to decline, but still an investment-led economy.Some of that investment is a function of exports, but it's still investment led and I think if they take pretty aggressive action they can probably get by with a soft landing, but a soft landing of 8 percent, which may, for some, feel like a recession if you're used to 12, or 13 or 14 percent growth. We really don't know what their growth rate. We know what the numbers say, but it could be more.

QUESTION: But, they'll still be growing? ADAMS: They'll still be growing, absolutely.JOHNSON: Well, I'm not so sure about that. (Laughs.) I mean, I think one thing that's very important in these situations is not to suffer a failure of imagination. I mean, I think we've had a number of really big disruptive events in the past few days. Basically, an emerging market crisis broke out at the core of the world economic and financial systems. We've never seen anything like that, to my knowledge, ever, okay.

So, I would not necessarily want to assume that China continues to grow. I mean, the numbers will probably show growth -- (laughs) -- as Jim said. I'm not -- I would not want to assume they necessarily continue to grow. I think it depends on these -- (inaudible) --Of course, I could throw one other geopolitical -- (inaudible) -- into the balance. You know, if the Chinese were really able to get strategic on -- they could do the following, they could actually set up a Asian monetary fund, which has been very much discussed. They have these currency swaps, which have been built out of the -- (inaudible) -- Chiang Mai Initiative. And there's been a lot of interest in Asia in doing something like this for a day like this.

Now, they haven't done it. It's not in place. It's very hard to put in place any kind of institutional arrangement of that nature actually in a crisis. And China's relationship with the rest of Asia is obviously not uncomplicated.But, they have a lot -- they have a big war chest. Other countries definitely would like to be able to participate in the cover provided by that war chest. So, that would be a very big strategic shift which, if it happens, would really change a big part of the world.

ALTMAN: Okay, let's take some other questions. Yes, ma'am? QUESTION: Barbara Samuels. I wanted to push on both sides of the equation, in terms of more on the financial architecture. You have Gordon Brown suggesting we have a Bretton Woods II. We have, at the U.N., the Financing for Development powwow with heads of state, ministers of finance, and the like, at the end of November.
And at question really are the roles -- we already see the deteriorating role of the IMF, the World Bank and others, and the rating agencies are on play here, what are the kind of big ideas?

Political leaders are under pressure to really say, 'how can we be more successful?' How can -- instead of having Chavez, China and others go into developing countries and fill the hole that was big before but even bigger now, what can we do there?

The other side of the spectrum, of course, is risk management. We have failures. We're being criticized there. There's a real opportunity here to really look at the ways that we do credit analysis, securitization, derivatives and the like. So, on both fronts, what are the big ideas that we need to push for the third way? Thank you.

ADAMS: First of all, I support the idea of returning to Bretton Woods, or some similar location -- Bretton Woods is nice this time of year. And if we did nothing other than reaffirm our post-war principles and values, and our belief in trade flows, and capital flows, and that these institutions matter.

There have times where I've been very tough on the Fund. It was tough love, because I think it matters. It's imperfect, but it's the best we have. And if we start trying to reinvent or invent new institutions, it takes some time. We should embrace the Fund and try to make it a useful instrument for our collective objectives.

I think one of the big ideas is to look at why so many emerging markets exported capital to the developed world. Because our models and theory always told us that capital should stay in those places because of the abundance of labor. Why do they export capital -- as Martin Wolf said, to the U.S., which was like one big hedge fund that just intermediated its capital and then sent it back out.

The reason is there's no financial infrastructure in many of these countries, and they lack the institutional framework. They don't have rule of law; they don't have a judiciary system; (they don't have ?) enforceable contracts.

If we can find ways through a development agenda that creates the institutional framework that savings can stay in these countries and be intermediated there -- it doesn't need a round trip through New York, it's hard for those here who do that -- then it's a way for those countries to become stronger in terms of, more resilient in terms of global shocks, but they can put their own capital to work, and take a development approach that's more bottoms up than pouring capital in from the top.
JOHNSON: So, let me reply in three pieces. First of all, the IMF does have a role today, and it's a good thing you have the IMF. The IMF has that $200 billion in ready cash. I would guess they could lay their hands on another $100 billion pretty easily. That can actually help a lot of emerging markets countries.

Now, we can discuss the strategy. I'm not sure the strategy they will be recommending is what I would be recommending, but that's a -- that's a different issue. At least there's a -- there's a firewall there. If it's used well, I think it could actually be very helpful.

But the IMF's role, obviously -- the traditional role, and the role they seem likely to play this time around, is as firefighter and a helper for emerging markets that are vulnerable to large capital flows, which is just about everyone right now.
I think Gordon Brown is putting on the table a very interesting question, which is, where do we go from here; what's the bigger architecture? And I don't think anybody has any particularly good ideas there, except to say it's probably not the existing traditional Bretton Woods institutions. Those who've got a certain amount of baggage, have a certain amount of history, they can continue to play a role. But, I think he's looking for something bigger, broader, and something that involves spa treatments and hotels, which is probably not a good -- obviously, not a good idea to do that now.

I think we have to get through -- I don't think you'll see anything until we get through the worst of this global recession. I think people are not ready to do it. If you know anyone who is ready to put $2 trillion on the table -- oh, I guess we do know one country -- (laughter) -- China, then, you know, maybe you can have a conversation about that, but I really don't think that's, that's a realistic possibility. It could be a little bit of a distraction, if anything. On mismanagement, I would say the following: I've, among other things, you know, done some work on mathematical models. Some of my very best friends are quantitative finance people. I've even published in quantitative finance journals. I knew we were in trouble last August when I --

ALTMAN: They must have a lot more time to talk to you now.JOHNSON: (Laughs.) You know, they're a little -- a little down, some of them. But, I -- (inaudible) -- in trouble last August when -- (inaudible) -- quoted in the newspapers as saying that his models, or the models they were working with, were -- at his shop, were good, except for events that occur once every 10,000 years. And he said we've had three of those this week. (Laughter.)

So, I think that -- I think that quantitative finance is going to end up being constrained to a rather small part of the economy. There will be limits set on it relative to the size of GDP. And no one is going to be so very confident in mathematics, and the management of risk, through anything that can't be understood in plain language when you tell it to the C.E.O. I don't think we're going to go back to make that -- we'll make that very same mistake again. We'll make different big ones. ALTMAN: Yes, sir?

QUESTION: John Beatty (sp) from UBS.You seem to be relatively sanguine about the prospects of the U.S. economy, however you haven't really discussed the increasing size of the U.S. current account deficit. Given the dearth of U.S. domestic savings, there's an increasing need to rely on foreign direct investments to finance these deficits.As time goes by, do you really think that the rest of the world will be willing to continue to finance the U.S. current account deficit when sovereign wealth funds, in particular, are increasingly looking to diversify their investments into other areas?

ALTMAN: -- (inaudible) --ADAMS: Well, as I noted earlier, we import $2 billion every day to run our economy. We spend too much; we save too little. And I suspect those trends are going to change. And I'm actually hoping for a change in values in this country, in the sense that we begin to live within our means and we decide that we don't need to fill our house -- houses full of stuff that we buy from other places.

And so if we can see a rise in household savings -- which have been dropping for 30 years, we didn't get here two years ago, or five years ago, this has been three decades in the making -- if we can see that transition to higher household savings, and living within our means, I think that's a positive long-term trend. Getting from here to there can be quite painful.

Running a current account deficit, or a capital account surplus isn't necessarily a bad thing if those -- if those investments are used for productive enterprises which create a cash flow that pays for itself. Unfortunately, a lot of what we borrowed went into building housing stock that, as a percentage of GDP, became the highest since the 1950s. And what we found was that we've got excess housing stock and that housing stock isn't worth what we thought it was two years ago.

So, it wasn't into productive enterprises; it wasn't into something that created a cash flow so it could pay for itself. It went into an asset which is now dropping in value. So, the theory is not a bad thing, but I think for us we need some substantial changes in the way in which we run fiscal policy, and the way in which we approach household savings and the way in which we spend -- both at the federal level, but also at the household level.ALTMAN: Let's get a few more questions in.

Yes, ma'am -- in the back? QUESTION: Hi, Cathy Taylor (sp), Dutch's (sp) friend. Thanks very much for your comments.It may be a small issue, given the magnitude of what we're dealing with and the largesse of most of the companies involved, but it concerns me that I've heard virtually nothing from the government, or really anyone else -- the Press, about small business. And small business has historically been the real engine of growth and job creation in our country, and even more importantly in emerging markets.So, without access to the very open Fed window that the larger companies have, what do you see as some of the prescriptions for small businesses that are not going to see the (raft ?) that they expected, but might be able to help fill in that 8, 10 percent forecast of unemployment?

ALTMAN: Simon, do you want to --JOHNSON: Well, that's -- that's an absolutely essential issue in this economy and others. The small businesses are going to get very much squeezed. And this is where, you know, you have to decide who -- government has to decide to what extent they want to get involved in lending.
Gordon Brown has said, one of the things the Royal Bank of Scotland will do is lend to small businesses. So, you might feel good about that. On the other hand, this is politically directed lending. It always goes wrong everywhere where it happens, right.

A little bit, though, could help. And so I think some temporary measures to try and smooth out that part of the credit hit for small businesses -- for example, in the U.S., would be worth thinking about. But, it's very hard to design a way to do that that doesn't start to become a monster, a political monster that then creates lots of other problems.

So, I think that sector is really going to be damaged. Bigger businesses, as you say, will probably come through this relatively well, because, you know, Mr. Paulson has created what I'm calling an ark. It's a very nice ark, and it's got some nice chairs on it, and -- (inaudible) -- got seats on the ark. But not everybody got seats on the ark. (Those, as you know, hunt the unicorn, ?) is now a little bit of an issue in this economy, and more globally, right.

There's a lot of people who are vulnerable. And a lot of people are going to be hurt by this, and the small business sector is definitely going to get damaged.
ALTMAN: I'm afraid I agree with that. Yes, sir? QUESTION: Peter Schlesinger (sp).
It seems that the subprime was sort of the catalyst and the instigator of some of this downfall; and also the derivatives that very few of the investors were able to understand, particularly foreign investors. Do you think that there has been enough emphasis given by the institutions to help in that area? And how much more danger is there out there? And are we still going to receive more surprises, do you feel, in the magnitude of the subprime loans?

ALTMAN: Tim, do you want to take that? JOHNSON: Yeah, well, could I -- could I start with that one? I think this is really very important and we don't lose sight of this, because there is still an underlying housing problem in the United States. And while many sensible policy proposals have been put on the table and then quickly adopted in the U.S. over the past few weeks, I don't think we've really got to grips with, or come up with ideas for how you break this debt spiral in falling house prices, foreclosures, forced sales, further falling house price.In many communities in the U.S. it's absolutely devastating. You have to find a way to get in there earlier, and find ways to keep people in their homes, and find ways to restructure their mortgages. And none of this is stuff we're very comfortable with in the United States, okay.

There are people with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- who, by the way, now work for the government, who actually quite good at taking over foreclosed properties and finding ways to limit the losses of that foreclosure. You need to find a way to scale it up and get them earlier involved, so that when mortgages already go delinquent they're involved in restructuring and keeping people in their home. Some sort of rent-to-own program would be one good idea.

Option ARMs are a train heading straight for it. Anyone who thinks that most option ARMs are not going to go delinquent, we can talk afterwards. You just have to get ahead -- we have to, I'm afraid, put some ideological and other preconceptions to one side and get serious about the housing problem.

That will -- you don't -- you can't turn it around -- it's a two, to four or five year problem there, you can't turn it around completely. But, if you could show that the house prices are going to stop falling, and that there's sort of a deceleration of the fall, at least, that would help a lot, I think, turn around other parts of the economy, including the real economy. ALTMAN: Other questions?
I'm going to pose one myself, then.

Fiscal deficits. It's likely to emerge that the U.S. faces not only the largest nominal deficit in its history, but --(Audio recording cuts off here for approximately 40 seconds.)JOHNSON: (In progress) -- direction, because they feel themselves to be more fiscally constrained. They're worried about their balance sheets. And I think they're -- they're probably making a mistake, under the circumstances, but that's, that's where they're coming from.They would like to claim they have stronger automatic stabilizers -- and that means we don't have to use as much discretionary fiscal policy, but I think that's a, that's a business as usual thinking that's going, that's going to really constrain what they do.You know, obviously, what matters, geopolitically, is what you buy with your money. And so what's happening to commodity prices? What's happening -- you know, how much fuel do you need for your aircraft carriers? Can you, can you go out and build -- do you put some of the money into military spending, or into keeping the, you know, U.S. hard and soft power strong? I think those are pretty good value propositions, actually, in this environment.

Europeans will most certainly cut back. They will use much -- something much closer to the fiscal austerity that has got people into trouble in previous severe episodes.
So, again, I think this shifts the relative balance towards the U.S. Although, I'm not sanguine about it, and don't say I'm sanguine -- I'm relatively sanguine, yes, but everybody goes down, it's a disaster, right? And the question is now managing disaster; coming out of it; and making sure we do have a snap-back.The snap-back is not guaranteed in the United States. That depends on good policy. I'm putting my faith in good policy, good politics in the U.S., which I think will come through. But, that's not all a done deal.

ALTMAN: Where I disagree with Simon is in the use of the word snap. (Laughter.) Tim, do you want to comment? ADAMS: Enormously constraining, especially with our ability to project ourselves globally, and at a time when we probably need to provide more bilateral assistance. In other places around the world we're simply not going to be able to do it, and we'll be constrained on a whole host other fronts.
It couldn't have happened at a worse time, as we think about the retiring Baby-Boomers; Social Security goes cash-negative, 2017; asset-negative, 2041. And that's, that's a tenth of the problem that we have with Medicare and Medicaid. We have enormous long-term, medium-term and short-term fiscal challenges in this country. And I hope -- I hope whoever the next president is can address them.
We've seen in Sweden, in Canada and other countries throughout history -- recent history, use financial (crises ?) to get their fiscal house in order. This is a wake-up call for this country, and we should seize it.

ALTMAN: One more host prerogative: I want to ask someone in the audience what they think of the emergence of these unprecedented deficits.Rick, what do you think the impact of these will be on financial markets, and the recovery -- financial recovery pattern as people wake up and realize how big the deficit's going to be?

QUESTION: I think it's going to be a very significant reaction. But, Roger, let me, let me take advantage of having this mike to make one comment and ask one question.Your comments about the psychological response to stress of this sort on the part of managements of companies reminds me of a conversation I had with a newly elected C.E.O. of the Chase Manhattan Bank in the early '80s, when the Latin American debt crisis was really hitting its zenith and Chase and other banks were being criticized for their international activities.So, I said to this guy, so what's the response of the Chase Manhattan Bank to this situation? Do you pull in your horns? Do you curtail your international activity? And he said emphatically, Not on my watch. That is not going to happen. And yet, for the next two years all you read about was Chase Bank closing branches in Latin America and other parts of the world.

It's simply human nature to become more conservative after a shock of that order of magnitude. This is much worse. So, my feeling is you're going to have a pulling in of the horns on the parts of these companies, which will be exacerbated by a greater degree of regulation. So, I think we haven't really taken into account that human-nature, conservative response to this kind of extreme stress.Let me ask you a question, Tim, and I was interested in your comments about sort of a chapter one being deflation; chapter two being inflation. I'm more worried about chapter one than chapter two, because I think the policy response to a highly -- potentially inflationary environment, I think, is one we understand and how we can deal with it.
I'm much more concerned about the deflationary prospects. And we have much more deleveraging to come -- we have declining house prices, we're going to have more regulation. It seems to me we are really sowing the seeds of a deflation, which is going to be hard to control and hard to reverse.

So, my question is, what are the -- (inaudible) -- (responses ?) available to people here, in light of these very elevated fiscal deficits -- here, and in other parts of the world, to try and counteract that deflation? ADAMS: Well, the Fed has already doubled the size of the balance sheet, and they'll maybe triple it, or increase it four-fold. We'll do what countries have done throughout history, we'll monetize the problem and we'll print money. And we'll inflate our way out of it. At the top of our discussion I noted that the bottom 50 percent of households in this country -- 60 million households are probably, technically, bankrupt -- that they owe more on the assets, including their home, and their trucks, and their cars, than the value of those. They have no cash flow and they've been living on credit. The average American has over 10 credit cards.The only way you're going to fix that is to inflate our way out of it. And I think that's -- that's where we are five or six years from now, but in the meantime it is going to be continued deleveraging and continued deflation. But, I think officials turn to the traditional methods that officials have been using for a long time and will simply print money.
ALTMAN: Do you agree?

QUESTION: I don't know what the alternative is. I think -- (inaudible) -- we have more than doubled the -- (inaudible) --. But, I think that's right, I think all we can do. But, I think it's very worrisome.I think also deflation is a lot harder to -- we had very little experience in dealing with it, and less experience in dealing with it successfully. So, I think deflation is hard to turn around, and I think that's what we're in for.ADAMS: And I also agree with Simon. I think we have to address housing -- housing prices individually. We've been pouring money in from the very top. I think we've got to have a bottoms-up approach, and I think there's actually a political consensus developing in Washington to do that. It will be expensive; it'll be timely; it would be difficult to manage from a bureaucratic standpoint, but I think we have to have a bottoms-up approach.

ALTMAN: My job to be sure we end on time. So, we've reached that point. So, I'll just close with a rhetorical question, which is: Apropos of this last discussion, it's interesting to say -- and very provocative to say that the Fed may expand its balance sheet, ultimately, three times or four times. But, the question is whether there is a line which might be crossed, where such expansion would undermine confidence rather than promote confidence.On that note, thanks everybody for being here. (Laughter, applause.)

ALLTIME