Blog @ MoreWhat.com

The IndUS Business Journal was the source of a search engine result on immigration. However it was the hit’s description that was of interest and the source of the article was only noticed while viewing the result. It is another example of focusing on the plight of prospective immigrants specifically from South Asia with the case made for the sterling credentials, wide variety of success of South Asian immigrants to the US and their contribution in billions of dollars of entrepreneurial startup businesses.

The question that never seems to be asked in stories like these is why didn’t these immigrants have this success in their country of origin? The myth of the global economy based on the words of American business leaders who speak to it is about a race to a goal. While arguing the need for the best and the brightest from around the world and the willingness to extend the American dream to countless immigrants invading the US or outsourcing American jobs to foreign nations, the real objective is nothing so noble.

From the perspective of corporate America, why limit yourself to dominating the economy of just one nation. The economic trend after the world was devastated by WWII resulted in nations like Germany and Japan becoming economic powers in the decades that followed. Each decade brings more and more countries out of the ‘third world’ and into competition with the former world’s leading economic powers. China is probably the most well known current contender to join the ranks of emerging economic powers to challenge the US.

If you are unwilling to challenge the competition with sound principles, truly innovative development in products and services and sincerely foster the human potential in your own country, the ‘global economy’ is a must sell. Abandon the nation instrumental to your success. Convince your government of a false need and betray your country. Attempt to defeat your foreign and domestic competitors by acquiring the foreign labor pool whether the most skilled and educated or those willing to work for less than your own citizens.

This has nothing to do with supporting the tradition of a nation of immigrants. This is all about business. And every proponent has a financial interest that drives their argument. The source of the article accompanying this post is nothing more than a special interest group promoting their own best interest in this economic scam.

Stanford Matthews.
MoreWhat.com

Immigration battle wages; government loses hope

7/13/2007
BY CHRIS NELSON
They are engineers, financiers, attorneys and physicians. They have won Nobel prizes, flown in space and hold executive-level positions at some of the largest and most influential companies in the world.

South Asians have contributed more to America’s economic might than perhaps any other ethnic group, but for those individuals lacking U.S. citizenship or a green card, the question remains — who gets to stay?

In the post-Sept. 11 era, where security concerns have led to tighter immigration policies, the answer is simple — very few. And in most instances, luck is the determining factor over whether one stays or goes.

crossposted at:
Reject the UN

It is not hard to believe that the only purpose of the UN is to provide a politically correct appearance for the selfish interests of all member nations. Nothing more than the same politically driven motives that smother any real progress on issues in the US Congress or similar government bodies in countries around the world. It is the international face of polarized agendas in every country on the planet.

A current example is the Doha round of trade negotiations of the WTO. You have the typical subgroups and silly names like the Group of Four (G4) and G10, Bulgaria, Iceland, Israel, Japan, Korea, Republic of Liechtenstein, Mauritius, Norway, Switzerland and Chinese Taipei, G6, G20, G33 and on it goes. The G4, the US, EU, India and Brazil as well as China are not interested in ending ag subsidies to protect their farmers. The 3rd world countries are interested in our markets as well as other industrialized countries and want to take advantage of their abilities to undercut the competition.

President Bush and President Putin had a meeting this week and it surely was not only about nukes and radar. President Bush’s ‘fast track’ trade authority expired at the end of June. That, together with all the aforementioned subgroups within the WTO and the failing Doha round and attempts to revive it by the APEC 21 nations meeting in Australia highlight the ‘my country first attitudes’ of so-called free trade agreements.

And of course the UN is involved.

WTO, UN chiefs say fate of billions hangs on global trade deal

Mon Jul 2, 1:25 PM ET

The heads of the United Nations and the World Trade Organisation on Monday both urged a successful conclusion to long-stalled global trade talks in order to lift billions of people out of poverty.

“The world desperately needs a successful conclusion to the Doha trade negotiations,” UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon told a meeting of the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) in Geneva.

“Existing trade barriers, agricultural subsidies, and restrictive rules on intellectual property rights reinforce global inequities — and they make a mockery of our tall claims to eliminate hunger and poverty from the world,” he said.

It is always done. Use concern over humanitarian interests to promote the selfish goals of member countries. And the other common characteristic is present in all conflicts between two or more adversaries. That is to focus your strategy against the largest or most successful competitors or opponents. The common theme in announcements about the trade talks focus on the G4 their protective policies against unfair trade practices of international competitors. Not a strategy that is lost on any other of the 150 member nations in the WTO. It is simply more common to attack the kings of the hill in seeking global sympathy for one’s mission or goals, right or wrong..

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Stem Cell Breakthrough Announced Amid Fierce Debate

By Michael Bowman
Washington
07 June 2007
Bowman report - Download 697k
Listen to Bowman report

Scientists in the United States say they have for the first time been able to create stem cells from the ordinary skin cells of mice, a breakthrough that could lead to new medical breakthroughs and eliminate a contentious ethical and political debate over the use of human embryos for such research. From Washington, VOA’s Michael Bowman has more on the breakthrough.

Scientists say stem cells offer the promise of cures to everything from cancer to spinal cord injuries. Stem cells are malleable and can be used to create virtually any kind of tissue. But there has been a fierce ethical debate over stem cell research, because until now, it was assumed the cells had to be harvested from human embryos, destroying them in the process.

But teams in the United States, using a process pioneered by a leading Japanese researcher, say they have now successfully transformed skin cells from mice into what are, in effect, embryonic stem cells.

Biologist Rudolf Jaenisch at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology led one of the teams.

“We can take any skin cell and treat it in a certain way,” he said. “And after two or three weeks we will have embryonic stem cells which are indistinguishable from normal embryonic stem cells which have been derived from embryos.”

Could the same be done with human skin cells? No one knows just yet, or whether embryonic stem cells created in such a fashion would be as useful in research as those harvested from living embryos. Scientists say further study will be required, and that definitive answers may not be forthcoming for some time.

In the meantime, the political and ethical debate over embryonic stem cells continues to rage in the United States. Jaenisch says he is well aware of the political furor surrounding embryonic stem cell research, and cautions against injecting his findings with regard to mice into the current debate.

“Many who are opposed to embryonic stem cell research will use this [breakthrough] and say, ‘Ha! We do not need it [to use embryos].’ This is the wrong conclusion,” he said.

Meanwhile, in the U.S. Congress there has been more contentious debate on legislation to allow more federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, legislation that President Bush has said he will veto.

Before Thursday’s vote to send the measure to the president’s desk, Indiana Republican Mike Pence stood in opposition.

“Congress is once again poised to pass legislation that authorizes the use of federal tax dollars to fund the destruction of human embryos for scientific research,” he said. “I believe that life begins at conception. It is morally wrong to create human life to destroy it.

California Democrat Lynn Woolsey has a different point of view, stressing the seemingly limitless potential of stem cells to improve human health.

“How can we tell a parent watching a child suffering from cancer that we are not going to do every single thing possible to save that child? How can we tell a teenager that there is a chance we could repair a damaged spinal chord, but we are not going to pursue it,” she asked.

President Bush has authorized federal funds for stem cell research involving a small number of stem cell lines from discarded embryos. U.S. researchers say those lines are badly contaminated and of little scientific value, and that the United States is falling behind other nations with few restrictions on such research.

(source: voanews.com)

Whaling ship drifts off Antarctic area

Houston Chronicle - 8 hours ago
By RAY LILLEY AP Writer. © 2007 AP. WELLINGTON, New Zealand - A Japanese whaling ship crippled by fire drifted off the world’s largest penguin breeding grounds Friday, and New Zealand alerted other countries it may need help if the vessel leaked oil …

That’s what you get for killing whales.
MoreWhat.com staff