Source: http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5jVPOISBJO3A-FoE7tbdoLf5zIFCA

US anger over AIG resort trip

1 day ago

Less than a week after the US government had to bail out American International Group (AIG), the insurance company sent executives on a £250,000 retreat to a posh California resort, politicians investigating the company's meltdown said.

The tab included £13,000 worth of spa treatments for AIG employees at the coastal St Regis resort south of Los Angeles even as the company tapped into an £49 billion loan from the government it needed to stave off bankruptcy.

The retreat didn't include anyone from the financial products division that nearly drove AIG under, but politicians were still enraged over thousands of dollars spent on catered banquets, golf outings and visits to the resort's spa and salon for executives of AIG's main US life insurance subsidiary.

"Average Americans are suffering economically. They're losing their jobs, their homes and their health insurance," Democratic House Oversight Committee chairman Henry Waxman scolded the company during a lengthy opening statement.

"Yet less than one week after the taxpayers rescued AIG, company executives could be found wining and dining at one of the most exclusive resorts in the nation."

The hearing also revealed that AIG executives hid the full range of its risky financial products from auditors as losses mounted, according to documents released on Tuesday by a congressional panel examining the chain of events that forced the government to bail out the conglomerate.

The panel sharply criticised AIG's former top executives, who cast blame on each other for the company's financial woes.

"You have cost my constituents and the taxpayers of this country £49 billion and run into the ground one of the most respected insurance companies in the history of our country," said Democratic Rep Carolyn Maloney. "You were just gambling billions, possibly trillions of dollars."

AIG, crippled by huge losses linked to mortgage defaults, was forced last month to accept the government loan that gives the US the right to an 80% stake in the company.

Mr Waxman unveiled documents showing AIG executives hid the full extent of the firm's risky financial products from auditors, both outside and inside the firm, as losses mounted.

(end of article)




The recent sub-prime crisis and subsequent collapse of the stock market has seen the economies of even the greatest countries fall, the worst hit being America, where the whole fiasco started. Once economic superpowers, with large companies/banks like Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers, AIG and Bear Stearns, the recent events have seen these companies filing for bankruptcy. Also, when it seemed that history was going to repeat itself like during the 1997 Asia Financial Crisis, the US government introduced a radical new way to save the economy, something like a desperate last resort attempt to save it's economy from total devastation. It would spend US$ 700 billion to boost the companies that were falling, to give them another chance. At first, when the bill was first presented to the Cabinet, it was shot down almost immediately by the ministers and the general populace, saying that they should not be the ones paying for the mistakes of the companies, and this money would be mostly coming out of the tax payer's pockets. Finally, after some persuasion by the president, Mr. George W. bush himself, the bill was finally passed, and many companies got their money, AIG inclusive. Everything seemed to be going fine after all.

Not quite. Just after 1 week of receiving their $85 billion loan from the government, it was revealed that AIG had spent about $370 000 on a private trip for it's executives to the posh St. Regis resort, where they spent nearly $200,000 for rooms, $150,000 for meals, and $23,000 in spa charges. The worst part? The average citizen was indirectly paying for the expenses of these "fat cats", the people who take more than $70 million in pay a year, the same people whose decisions lead to the dismal fate of the economy now. And the average people are not pleased.

They say money is the root of all evil. From this article we can see how this is true, from the way the executives from AIG, who were once helpless, now squandering their wealth once they got a chance to. If I was one of the general public, I too would feel angry at how they have acted, arrogantly showing off their wealth while the rest of the country suffers under the relentless plunging of the stock prices. The worst part, in my opinion, is that the money is not rightfully theirs, it has been kindly bestowed upon them by the government, and yet this is how they spend it for their personal benefit, instead of using it to improve the economy of the country, as they were supposed to in the first place. This incident also shows extreme lack of foresight on the part of the executives, they might be enjoying themselves now in the lap of luxury, but when the public gets the news, there will be negative repercussions for a long time to come.

Lastly, although we feel outraged at the irresponsible splurging of this money, we must remember that there is no use crying over spilt milk. After this incident blows over and the relevant people punished, there is still the big problem of saving the economy, something that we all must work together to. After all, helping others is helping yourself as well.

English Blog Post

To start, I agree that democracy creates stability in a society.

Ok. First, we have seen how other forms of government such as Communism have failed horribly in the past, like in the case of U.S.S.R, where the communist government fell into disarray after their leader, Joseph Stalin, died without a successor. This caused among other things, a bad economy, and decreased citizen welfare. For example, the country could not keep up with growing food consumption despite having its own agricultural industry, and had to import from other countries. Also, due to the economy being heavily towards export of raw materials such as oil, its economy was very vulnerable to global price shifts. This slump in economy also caused citizens to become poorer and thus unable to afford health treatment. One indication of that is the climbing death rate of citizens, about 10 per 1000 in 1983 compared to 7 per 1000 in 1964. These numbers were also far worse than those of the nearby non-Communist Central-European countries' levels. Eventually, this lead to the dissolution of the Communist Party. The U.S.S.R is now a federal state, with each state pracitising direct democracy.

While over here in Singapore, we had gained independence from colonial rule and we were under the democratic rule of the PAP, from 1963 to now. So far, they have been the ones that have won the elections everytime with landslide victories, although the opposition parties have had their share of wins. The similaties between both parties, even though they might have different ideas on how to run the district they're in charge of, is that when they have lost they do not stage rebellions or protests with its supporters to overthrow the party in rule. This I think is a sure sign of political stability in a country, something not seen in other coutries, such as U.S.S.R above.

Why is this so? Well, democracy means that the government is decided by the people who vote for those they want. The government then has the responsibility to give the people what they need, and then what they want. In the case of U.S.S.R, the government's general communist policies meant that everyone was poor, and didn't get much welfare. Also, this means most poeple were unhappy with the government, thus it was a matter of time that soon the government would be overthrown. Over here in Singapore, we the people have been living in rather good conditions, and the amount of povertised people has been rather low. This I think would explain why we have been quite content with our government.

Another factor to consider is the stability of life. In Russia, there were wars going on at the time the Communists were in power, and they repeatedly got involved with wars, examples include the failed peace treaty with Germany and declaring former allies US as enemys during the cold war; probably meant that civilians couldn't have been having a very peaceful time living there. On the other hand, we in Singapore have been busy establishing diplomatic ties with other countries, helping them out when needed and so on. All this to give others a good impression of us. This has paid off, since the only war Singapore has been involved in was World War 2, where we were captured by the Japanese, and we did not even provoke them to begin with! Since then, life here has been pretty peaceful. This I feel is good evidence that there is definite stability in the society.

In conclusion, a democratic government is needed for stability in a country, as policies, both foreign and local, will have an impact on the civilians. Adding on to that, in democracy the civilians themselves pick what they want for themselves. Although other forms of government exist as well, we can see here that democracy is a sure-fire way to create stability in a society.

China thwarts two separate terrorist attacks.

Just today, news broke out from China authorities that they have thwarted two separate terrorist attacks, including one on the coming 2008 Olympic Games premises. According to a Xinhua report, the separatist miliants tried to hijack a plane, but were foiled by the crew. In response to these incidents, Wang Lequan, the chief of the Xinjiang regional committee of the Communist Party of China, said the government was prepared to strike against the "three evil forces" in the region: terrorists, separatists and extremists. There has been no further details provided for both cases from the news report.

I think that this is a good sign that the world is stepping up to increase its defence against terrorrism, especially China, who is getting its act up after being hit by a slew of food scares. I think that there are three main reasons that this is a piece of good news; one, people will now have a sense of security when venturing into China, and two; China will probably have an undisturbed and unblemished record after it has held the most important and momentous event in its country for a long time, the Beijing Olympics; and three; this shows two rather good points about the nation itself and the people. I shall elaborate on the third one.

I think that this is a sign that China is trying to show the world that it is capable of doing things well. This I perceive as a sign of self-promotion, which is good, as it will fuel its rapidly growing economy by drawing more trusting investors. More importantly, it shows the government is really putting in a big effort to improve the country's image. This is understandable, as after so much hype about the Beijing Olympics, the last thing the nation needs is a bomb to go off in a crowded stadium. And to add insult to literal injury, the whole world is watching as well. Meanwhile, the terrorists responsible are away in hiding laughing their heads off. Rather dreadful, isn't it?

The second thing that I see from that article is that the people are also putting in effort to help their country and in everybody's eternal strive for self-gratification, i'm glad to see that they have spared a thought for their country and others around themselves. Just imagine the world if everyone was selfish and kept to himself. I recommend the crew on that flight should be given a medal for their bravery against the hijackers.

On the whole, I feel that this article has given me anew insight into the Chinese nation and its mentality, and it has also led me to discover the spirit they have in them whenever they do something, be it hosting a perfect Olympics, or to stop a group of hijackers.

There might be other people to thank for the success of the thwarting, but due to the limited length of the article, I am unable to do so. Sorry.

All the best for the Olympics!

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/03/09/china.terror/index.html