The Historic Stop

This is the first time since 1953 that a U.S. Secretary of State has visited Libya, the last U.S. Secretary of State to visit Tripoli was John Foster Dulles in May 1953, before Rice was even born[1]. Regarding to reports Rice may sign a trade and investment deal during her visit but the political analysts say the major signal is to start up a new era in U.S.-Libyan relations that have been considered by decades of mistrust and violence[1].

On the other hand after the 23 years of marking Libya as the region of violence, Libya and Russia have signed a deal on civil nuclear co-operation during a visit to Moscow by Muammar Gaddafi the Libyan president[2].

Is this could be considered as the psychological preparation for the public’s mind sets to see the new relations among the Non-Americanized countries and the United States?

Is this could be the guide line for the countries who are accused of the sponsors of terrorism?

Are the accused countries of the sponsors of terrorism are going to be allowed to access to the nuclear facilities under the supervision of United States?

Are all these issues considered as the plots for the dominants of the world to have the nuclear facilities under the supervision of United States?

Are we watching the 21st century’s colonial method?!!!


References

• [1] Aljazeera news " Libya and United States" followed by URL: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/newsfull.php?newid=158112
• [2] Aljazeera news " Libya and Russia" followed by URL: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2008/11/20081124572413465.html

Stall or Tackle?!

The modern global steel industry is dominated by China; the low consumption luxurious car is dominated by Japan, Lenovo now owns IBM's personal computing division, most Apple-branded products are made in China and science parks around Beijing and Shanghai are full of American brand names that have moved their research centers overseas[1].

The U.S. has now shed 605,000 jobs since the beginning of the year; The U.S. unemployment rate hits 6.1%, highest level in five years; Employers slashed 84,000 jobs in August, steeper cuts than analysts expected[2].

With no doubt, out sourcing of the American production system to the lower labor rate countries has considered as the most beneficial strategy which has led to the higher profit achievement for the business runners.

Don’t you think that the allocation of one quarter gained benefit of the out sourced income is not enough to tackle the current unemployment in the United States?


References:

• [1] Aljazeera news, “China trade dominance looms over US” followed by URL: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2008/10/20081021143831584145.html
• [2] Lose Angeles Times “The Unemployment and presidential campaign” followed by URL: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-fi-economy6-2008sep06,0,3121791.story

How Feasible is the Surviving of Capitalist System?

The financial crisis which has occurred in the year of 2008 can be issued as the major disaster through the economical studies. The effects of the September and October’s typhoon through the world’s share markets and financial institutions in the year of 2008 still have not recovered yet [1].

As discussed through the economical literatures the western countries like United States are following the capitalist structure which requires the empowerment and encouragement of the government for the privatization with almost zero intervention of the government on financial issues (Sloman, 2004).

The October 14, in the year of 2008 the ministry of treasury and finance of United States unveiled a plan to inject $250bn of the $700bn bailout into financial institutions [1].

Is that called the capitalist structure or following the communist way of controlling deficits by the government? Is that could be the last days of surviving of the capitalist system through the societies?


References:

1. "Aljazeera news" Global financial crisis followed by URL: http://english.aljazeera.net/business/2008/10/20081014122558818683.html
2. Sloman John, (2004), Economics, 5th edition, Pearson Prentice Hall.
   

Crusade or Fostering the Unity?

As the reviews through the news United States is going to adopt the religion through its politics by introducing Obama as the democrat leader. Meaning to say, since Obama is known as the person with the “virtue context” his pillars may improve the social believes[1].

Are the politicians trying to run the crusade amid U.S and Asia or they are going to build up the religion through the U.S society to gain the long term achievements by setting the public’s mind set in one united direction?

References:

1. "Aljazeera news" web site. The US. election diary, followed by URL: http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/imperium/2008/08/2008818858024416.html

Religion or the Culture?

According to "Aljazeera news", 92 per cent of Americans believe in God or a universal spirit, and nearly 80 per cent think miracles occur.
Most Americans believe that angels and demons are active in the world, and one in five Christians speaks or prays in tongues - ecstatic worship or prayer using unintelligible speech[1].

Since the United States is known as the society with the low context culture (Griffin, 2005), is it true to say "the religion instead of the culture has affected the society’s mind set"?


References:

1. "Aljazeera news" web site about "Diary of US. election" Followed by URL:http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/imperium/2008/08/2008818858024416.html
2. Ricky W. Griffin, Michael W. Pustay , (2005), International Business, 4th edition, Pearson Prentice Hall.

Why “There is no Free Lunch”?

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) had a vital role in helping to stabilize the region’s economies at the time of encountering to the financial crisis. In August 1997 the IMF came to the rescue of the Thai economy while the Thailand’s currency had been devaluated and the government was forced to accept the emergency IMF funding. In return the government had to agree to a series of terms and conditions defined by IMF by tightening fiscal and monetary policy (Griffin, 2005).

In the year of 1998 the same issue happened to the government of Indonesia when the IMF tried to develop a reform program to revive the foreign exchange market, by supporting the government’s budget. In return the government promised to increase the interest rates, cut government expenditure and introduce more financial deregulation (Griffin, 2005).

As discussed above what IMF had gone through so far as the revival program for the poor economies had led to the colonial authority on the governments, meaning to say the promises which have given by the mentioned countries to IMF is the evidence of how IMF got the colonial authority on the countries by gaining benefit by the defined terms given to them.

Have you ever heard the term of “There is no free lunch”?

Why once we owe to the other party we feel he got the authority on us? Is that issue coming from the context of the culture we came from or because of the beliefs which have given by the religion we believe in?



Reference:

• Ricky W. Griffin, Michael W. Pustay , (2005), International Business, 4th edition, Pearson Prentice Hall.