Time to Talk? [North Korea Throwdown]

     

North Korea still remains skeptical of
US diplomatic attempts.

               After dominating headlines for the last month, North Korea has hinted that it may be willing to bring an end to its nuclear brinkmanship and begin a new round of talks with the United States. Pyongyang issued a detailed statement this past week outlining its terms for the dialogue, including demands that the US cease its “nuclear war practice” and annual war games with South Korea and rescind the stringent sanctions against North Korea’s economy.

               “They should take measures of retracting the U.N. Security Council’s ‘resolutions on sanctions’ cooked up under absurd pretexts,” the Policy Department of the National Defense Commission, North Korea’s highest governing body, said in a statement carried by its official Korean Central News Agency. “They should give formal assurances before the world that they would not stage again such nuclear war drills to threaten or blackmail [the North].”

                In response, a South Korean defense ministry official requesting anonymity stated “The tensions should gradually decrease from here, but we cannot lose ourselves to complacency. We do still have to be prepared for any provocations.” Nevertheless, as US Secretary of State, John Kerry, said during his recent visit to the peninsula, “...our preference would be to get to talks.”

                The only question remaining is what will the talks focus on?

Diplomatic Disasters

                World diplomacy with North Korea has a long and troubled past, plagued by the fact that US and international officials are completely unsure of the nation’s political status. Forced to use a fuzzy interpretation of state propaganda and gathered intelligence as a barometer, US diplomats have often missed key opportunities to get through to either of the Kim Jong’s. In the past, the US mantra has been to stop the North Korean nuclear program and to guarantee South Korea protection should Northern threats be actualized. However, if the US enters this new set of talks with the same mindset, the only item that will be guaranteed is a continuation of the vicious cycle of threats and provocation.

                Now that North Korea has a nuclear weapon, as well as the ability to launch such warheads globally coming in the near future, the US cannot afford to continue to treat North Korea as a misbehaving child but instead must look upon them as a viable threat. With that in mind, US diplomats need to recognize the fact that the current diplomatic stance only makes Kim Jong Un feel more threatened than reassured.

Ready for Reform

                Were Kim Jong Un reassured, the world might begin to see North Korea open up to more western thought and technology. Kim Jong Un has discussed improving North Korea’s dying economy and has hinted that the nation may move in the direction of reforms [however slight]. This fact was evidenced by the recent visit of Google CEO Eric Schmidt to Pyongyang, showing that Un may be ready to allow new development in North Korea.

                However, Charles Armstrong, Director of Korean Research at Columbia University, believes that any hope of change will be stifled by the current US approach to North Korean relations. “The dilemma, though, is that North Korea can only embark on serious reform from a condition of what it considers absolute security,” Armstrong notes in an op-ed for CNN. “Unfortunately, the quest for security and the desire for economic improvement have been in contradiction for some time. A genuine opening could unleash political and social changes...while the path of security through nuclear deterrence and missiles have led time and again to confrontation and renewed isolation.”

                The old adage states “Do not attempt to reason with a fool. He will only drag you down to his level and beat you over the head with his ignorance.” Call it nationalistic, but North Korea has been foolhardy in its recent provocation of the US. As history has shown, you cannot beat the ignorance of out of the communist political system, but instead, you can speak a language that they do understand: money. Only by providing  strong incentives instead of punishments, obtainable rewards instead of sanctions, and deliberate reassurance instead of threats in kind, will the US and the rest of the world slowly lure North Korea down the path of peace.

Sources:

-Washington Post, April 18, 2013, http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/north-korea-hints-at-willingness-for-talks-despite-ongoing-rhetoric/2013/04/18/33628576-a800-11e2-a8e2-5b98cb59187f_story.html

-New York Times, April 18, 2013, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/19/world/asia/north-korea-tension.html?_r=0

-The Guardian, April 18, 2013, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/18/north-korea-conditions-us-talks

-Charles Armstrong, “Why Sticks don’t work with North Korea,” January 25, 2013, http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/25/why-sticks-dont-work-with-north-korea/

Under Pressure...

Found this article online, and thought it was brilliant.

Enjoy.

----------------------------------------------------------

By Noah Lotte

                For the politicians on Capitol Hill, I have yet another issue to bring to the table. I realize that you are extremely busy debating immigration and soundly arguing over gun control, however, recent events beg your attention elsewhere. To my fellow Americans, I recognize that we all struggle to meet our mortgage payments, much less figure out how much in taxes we actually do owe the government, but the time has come for us to recognize the newest threat to our liberties and freedoms.

                I have been deeply saddened the last week, praying for the families of those killed and maimed by the dual explosions at the Boston Marathon.  I dearly hope that this atrocity will never be forgotten and shall never be repeated. We must do our utmost to prevent such a bombing from ever occurring in the future. Examining the sequence of events that brought about the attack, it is clear what course of action we must take.

                For the sake of our liberties and our national security, I believe that legislation must be passed to ban the use and sale of pressure cookers. It was these everyday items that were used in the bombings, and had the terrorists been unable to access the cookers, these attacks could have well been prevented.  We must remove these tools of destruction from our homes and from our society. There will always be groups opposed to such legislation, but we cannot afford to let our political opinion stand in the way of safety. At the very least, we must require extensive background checks for anyone attempting to purchase a pressure cooker. Allowing a pressure cooker to fall into the wrong hands will only have the same consequences as those in Boston. It is our added civic duty to ensure that crazy aunt Matilda cannot unrestrictedly use pressure cookers as well.  Recognize we have just as much a duty to protect that nation as the government.

                In addition to background checks, we must also work to limit the amount of atmospheres pressure cookers can withstand. Currently, the average pressure cooker allows the user to build the pressure up to dangerous levels, as evidenced by the numerous pressure cooker accidents that have occurred in the last decade. Were we to limit the amount of pressure per cooker, we will reduce the potential devastation wreaked by accidental and purposeful explosions.

                My fellow countrymen, if I were the president and I knew this legislation would save one life, I would pass it. If I knew it would save a hundred lives, I would pass it.  But simply knowing the enormous danger that the unregulated use and purchase of pressure cookers poses to our society’s safety is enough.  We cannot afford to live in the past where these so-called “useful” items are freely accessible to anyone—if we are unsafe now, we may never have a future.

                Let us all put our signatures to this legislation and with our pressure protect the nation for our children.

Wanted: Mars Settlers...

     How is that midlife crisis treating you? Highschoolers--tired of school? Well, the good news is that there might be a way to escape from it all. The bad news? It will take the rest of your life.
      Not-for-profit Netherlands organization, Mars One, sent out a casting call last Monday for any and all volunteers for a decades long trip to Mars. Participants will also star in the consequent reality tv show, "Stars on a Planet." Mars One is looking for truly anyone: no prior experience as an astronaut or a degree in science required. Simply make a video stating why you should be shipped to Mars, and send it in. Great stuff, right?
      As of so far, the organization has received over 10,000 entries, from out of which the board of directors hopes to select 24 lucky [or unlucky depending how you see it] individuals. Mars One hopes to launch the first crew of four by 2023, with subsequent launches of four man teams every two years after.
       Money could be a problem though. Sending stuff into space has never exactly been cheap, much less getting humanity to Mars. Director and co-founder Bas Landsorp says he hopes the $25 application fee will waive some of that cost, though he notes that there is still much more fundraising to do. The accounting department estimates that final costs will be upwards of $6 billion. [sounds great. I'll send in the billion I found in the gutter the other day.]
      Props to private organizations [SpaceOne included] for showing explorative initiative. 

Finish...

Physics tonight. And a poem.

Finish.
What are you fleeing?
Running as if the Devil was right behind.
Kicking up little spurts of gravel,
In the recess of your mind.

Starburst, fireworks
Your breath comes heavy and hot.
Always looking for that finish tape
But never able to stop.

Going in circles
I can't seem to keep a straight line.
Running through the dark
Chasing the setting sun.
Twisting through the violent maze
God, when can I be done?

Colors burst, fireworks
Dead ends again and again.
The tar bubbles in the heat as I flee
My feet are black with stain.

Throw me down on the headshrink's couch
Drug me out with gin.
I'll still keep running, pounding on.
Flying forward, but I'll never win.

Blood burst, fireworks
Voices tell me to carry on
Gasping out my fleeting breath,
God, let me see the dawn.

Yes, to God I cry out my soul--
How dare He answer me not.
If He truly cared, loved at all,
He'd grant me peace to stop.

Rain burst, fireworks
Washes away the blood from my eyes
All this time, running the wrong way--
"It is finished," the dying man sighs

I take a step, and then I stop
Hope pouring into my veins.
Oh, this is peace, this is rest--
Letting go in my last death strains.

Lifeburst, fireworks
In death there's life I've found.
Not a grave but true paradise,
Now unchains me from the ground.

I began to walk, and then I run
Not from a fear but joy.
I've learned now its not a race
Not to a point, but to a grace
Not through a line, but through a grave
Now all a celebration of joy.

Starburst. Firework.
Breathe in. Love. Breathe out.
Sunrise, sunset--I see it all.
Fear? Its what I live without.

[all the times you ran away, love pursued you even more]

You say let it go...

      "I'm sorry. How could you ever forgive me?"
      Its a phrase that is always hard to say to a friend, and even harder to hear from one. Its a statement of complete remorse that painfully stitches up the wounds of a wrong.
       Forgiveness.
       Its tough to ask for and sometimes an enormous challenge to give to someone. We often hold on so tightly to our grudges against our siblings, against the world, stewing in the anger or frustration that we believe to be so righteous.

      But let it go.

     Oftentimes we focus so much on Easter Sunday, but we sometimes fail to recognize the magnitude of what happened today almost 2,000 years ago. See, today was the day that Christ died, the day that His blood poured out of His body satisfying God's demand for a righteous sacrifice for the sins of humanity. The price of man's sin had to be paid--and that price was death.
       A death that Christ gave Himself to willingly.
       Because of that death, the cost of every sin of the world--past, present, future--was fully paid. The ledgers of debt were cleared, the negative balance was erased. And every sin--past, present, and future--was forgiven.
       This is a fact that we so often overlook--that everyone has been fully and completely forgiven. You don't have to belong to a megachurch; you don't have to sing in the choir; you don't have to be the perfect father, mother, or sibling; you don't have to have a clean record; you don't have to be straight.
        It has all been forgiven.
       When I step out my front door, I sometimes can't help but look at the world with a skeptical eye, writing it off in my mind as a total, decadent, twisted loss. I turn and look into the mirror of my circle of friends and family, and see us as so much better than the world, those very special few who have a message of righteousness and love to bestow to those we choose. But I forget that Christians all were forgiven just as much as the rest of the world. We've just chosen to recognize the fact. But the fact that we ignore was that Good Friday wasn't about creating elitists, but about destroying the barrier between us and God's love.
      When Christ walked the earth, He didn't selectively pick and choose the righteous rulers to become His comrades; He spent His time and ate His meals with fishermen, with tax collectors, with prostitutes. His love was for the scum of society, the people that the righteous looked upon with repugnance. And when He died, He forgave them all. Even against the soldiers who provided His cruel and painful death, He refused to hold a grudge. "Father, forgive them."

      I firmly believe that you cannot be a Christian if you do not accept Christ's love for you. I firmly believe that you cannot be a Christian and refuse to share Christ's love for the entire world. Yes, God is just; consequences will come for where we all have abandoned Christ in our lives; but we get hung up on proclaiming God's great wrath and justice and forget to explain that every single one of us has been forgiven. We can't selectively choose to discriminate against people just because their sins stand out more or smell worse than the sins of the person next to them. We cannot shut the doors to the Church simply because someone has tried to find love in drugs, alcohol, pornography, or homosexuality.
       We so often urge unbelievers to not waste the gift of forgiveness that Christ's death provides, but I think it is often we who waste this gift by forgetting that every person is loved and is forgiven by Christ. We write the person off as a total loss, failing to see the forgiven soul under the sinful flesh.

        Friends, do not forget the reason for Christ's sacrifice.

       It is hard to forgive someone, yes. My brother? Its hard. Myself? Doubly hard. The world? The challenge of a lifetime.
     
But it all has been forgiven by Christ. Shall we do the same?

[You say let it go]

When you feel like you're damaged goods, broken by your past or by your life, remember: every fiber of your being is loved, and every wrong deed in your history was washed away by the crimson sacrifice of Christ today.

DEFCON 1: Teddy Bears

          

        A military court in Belarus has sentenced one of its border guards to two years in prison for failing to protect the country from an invasion by foreign teddy bears last July.

            No guys, it’s not April yet.

The invading teddies parachuted into the capital city of Minsk and other outlying areas, carrying placards protesting Belarusian human rights abuses.

While initially a publicity campaign carried out by a Swedish advertisement agency seeking to show solidarity for pro-democracy groups, the stunt has morphed into an all-out diplomatic war between Sweden and Belarus. In response to the plane drop, Belarus withdrew its ambassador from Sweden, and president Alexander Lukashenko issued a state memo declaring that any further “teddy-planes” would be shot down.

And in the midst of all of this, the border guard who failed to report the plane in a timely manner has become a scapegoat.

Not So Cuddly

            You may ask yourself, what kind of nation would so blatantly show hate for teddy bears? Unfortunately for the teddies, Belarus is a prime suspect. For the last few years, Belarus has been ranked by Amnesty International as one of the most dangerous nations with respect to human rights. As the CIA World Factbook notes, Belarus “while a republic in name is in fact an authoritarian dictatorship” ruthlessly ruled by Alexander Lukashenko.

 In recent years, the regime’s human rights violations have steadily increased, from the unwarranted arrest of more than 600 political activists and presidential candidates at a rally to strict sanctions against Jewish and LBGT communities. The US State Department classifies Belarus as a rogue nation, detailing the government as “a brutal, authoritarian dictatorship that blatantly ignores human rights and fundamental freedoms.”

Surprisingly, Belarus is often left off the list as one of the most restrictive nations in the world. However, these teddy bears may have just saved the day—bringing the plight of Belarusians back into the spotlight.

  

Dear Money...

     Should the government spend more money to stimulate the economy? Should the government spend less and let the private sector be the stimulus? The debate in the US rages back and forth.

     And then I found this article. Its from my macroeconomic class [so it may refer to "last chapter"], but I think it provides some good points against increasing government spending.

     Feel free to debate it.
-------------------------------------
(from Gwartney & Stroup Macroeconomics 5th Edition)

Fiscal Policy 

What do we mean by the term fiscal? Merriam-Webster says that it comes from the Latin word fiscus, which means “basket” or “treasury.” It has come to mean anything pertaining to government financial matters. This can include government taxation, spending, and borrowing. All three of these areas of fiscal policy will affect the economy. Basically, changes in the government’s budget affect the overall economy. How so?

When the government spends more than it receives as revenue, there is a budget deficit. Assuming a constant money supply, the deficit is funded by borrowing. Typically, the US Treasury borrows by offering bonds.

When government revenues exceed government spending, there is a budget surplus. The surplus will reduce the government’s debt burden.

What causes the government’s budget to change? General changes in the economy affect both taxes and spending. Also, there may be intentional changes in government spending or taxation. This is called discretionary fiscal policy.

Last week we began our discussion of attempts to correct economic instability. This week our focus will be on attempts to use fiscal policy to affect the economy. You have already been introduced to Keynesian theory In general. Keynesian theory led the government away from the desire to balance the budget. Why would we want to balance the budget when we could simply change our spending habits to fix the economy?

The Keynesian view of fiscal policy is that the government can influence the economy by changing its budget. When we are in a recessionary period, a Keynesian would suggest that we should either increase government spending or reduce taxes. In other words, running deficits will help move us towards potential output and full employment. If inflation is becoming a problem, a Keynesian would suggest that reducing government spending or increasing taxes would put downward pressure on prices. So, running a surplus should help curb inflation.

If we have the tools to make it so, why isn’t our economic world perfect?

Crowding Out: reality sets in and spoils our noble ambitions…

This sounds like a nice simple idea, but there is a significant problem associated with borrowing to finance a government deficit. Do you remember our discussion a couple of weeks ago about how resource markets are interrelated with the overall market for goods and services? Government borrowing affects the demand for loanable funds. When the government needs to borrow funds to cover a deficit, it increases the overall demand for loanable funds. Other things constant, this pushes the price of loanable funds (the interest rate) upward. The higher interest rates will dissuade private spending. This scenario is referred to as crowding out. Thus the increased borrowing of the government crowds out the private sector from borrowing and spending. This makes the deficit-running fiscal policy less effective.

There is even more to this situation. Remember that higher interest rates will draw interest from foreigners who want to invest in dollar-denominated financial assets, thus making the US dollar relatively more valuable (appreciating against other currencies) and leading to a decline in net exports. (It will be more expensive to purchase goods with dollars.) So, the crowding out effect pretty much wipes out the intended effect of the policy. Whew! And we just thought we could run a little deficit and fix the economy… Oh boy, what a mess we have gotten ourselves into!


But wait, it appears there may be even more going on…

What if people realize that someone is going to have to pay for that new government spending? After all, we are no dummies. The New Classical view of fiscal policy argues that people will anticipate having to pay more future taxes due to current government spending and borrowing. This awareness will cause them to save more and spend less. The reduction in spending caused by increased savings will offset the deficit’s affect on the interest rate as well. Thus, the fiscal policy is really of no use. 

Even more discouraging news for those who would perfect the market via fiscal policy…

Do you remember how President G.W. Bush sent out checks to help stimulate the economy? Did you notice the time lag between reading about his intentions in the news and actually holding a check in your hand? That time lag is also a classic problem with discretionary fiscal policy. In fact, if it takes too long for a fiscal policy to actually be carried through, the result may be all wrong.

It should also be noted that there are some automatic fiscal stabilizers already in place. Unemployment compensation, corporate tax profit, and progressive income taxes work in opposition to the direction of the economy. When national output and income rise, unemployment compensation declines, corporate tax revenues increase and progressive tax revenues increases. On the other hand, when national output and income decline, unemployment compensation expenditures increase, corporate tax revenues decline and progressive tax revenues decline. So, these items tend to increase the budget deficit automatically during times of recessions and increase the surplus (or decrease the deficit) during expansions.


Could things get worse?

If you thought that you could fix the economy by implementing fiscal policies, I am sorry to disappoint you, but I must add this one last downside to the whole concept. I could sum it up in one word – politics. Politicians are motivated, as everyone else, by self-interest. For that reason, they will be much more likely to vote for expansionary policies than restrictionary policies. Politicians who vote for more spending are generally more popular than those who vote for restricting spending. This naturally makes deficit spending more likely, even when inflation is high.


Let’s sum it all up.

Here is the modern-day wisdom regarding fiscal policy:

· Timing is difficult and critical.

· Automatic stabilizers tend to move us towards potential output and full employment.

· Fiscal policy is not really that productive.

· All the demand-side policies we have discussed thus far will have differing results based upon all sorts of variables.


So, as time has passed, the potency of fiscal policy has come into question. Please be sure to pause a moment to review actual government budget figures which are presented in Exhibit 8. You may continue the graph in your own mind to include the massive spending of the recent years and imagine what sort of long-term effects may emerge from the current administration’s policies.