COMENTARIO DE LIBROS CON DIFUSION NACIONAL E INTERNACION

Mises Daily Street Freak

2012-02-13T06:11:00.001-08:00

Street Freak

Mises Daily: Monday, February 13, 2012 by Doug French

[Street Freak: Money and Madness at Lehman Brothers • By Jared Dillian • Simon and Schuster, 2011 • 368 pages]

Wall Street traders, like high-stakes poker players, are a different breed. The constant pressure, the appetite for risk, the ability to think and react in split seconds, all the while calculating odds in their heads that most can't do with an HP12C.

"These guys are a pretty weird bunch," Dr. Paul Zak says. "They're very rational and very competitive." Zak is a neuroeconomist at Claremont Graduate University who is studying the brains of traders to find out if this personality type has a certain genetic signature.

In his "Head Case" column in the Wall Street Journal, Jonah Lehrer writes that Dr. Zak and fellow Claremont neuroeconomist Steve Sapra have analyzed the genes of 60 professional traders working at five major Wall Street firms. Zak and Sapra focused on the genes known to affect the activity of dopamine.

Dopamine is a neurotransmitter in the brain that "helps to regulate decisions involving risk and reward," Lehrer writes, "allowing us to experience both the thrill of getting what we want and the pain of losing it all."

Traders who manage to last on Wall Street for a long time, "tended to hit a sweet spot of dopamine activity: their genes kept them from experiencing either very high or very low levels of the molecule," explains Lehrer. "These prosperous professionals were much more likely to have so-called Goldilocks genes, placing them solidly in the middle of the dopamine distribution."

Goldilocks is not what comes to mind as we watch the frantic activity on any trading floor. In fact, it's just the opposite, with people yelling, screaming and gesturing wildly. As Jared Dillian says in this video clip promoting his book Street Freak: Money and Madness at Lehman Brothers, "For someone who has bipolar disorder, being on the trading floor is the absolute worst place to be, because no one's going to notice that anything's wrong, because everybody is crazy." If Dillian had been working at Starbucks, his mercurial behavior might have called attention to his disorder. As is was, at Lehman, being manic, yelling and screaming, was "considered functional behavior on the trading floor."

Dillian tells his story in a fast-paced style that sweeps the reader up into the author's two worlds: the bare-knuckle world of price discovery on the trading floor, along with his descent into depression and the constant coping with his nearly debilitating obsessive-compulsive behavior. All of this makes the book hard to put down.

Street Freak is a great American success story — with a twist. A young man gets out of the Coast Guard and dreams of having a Wall Street career, working in the center of capitalism — the World Trade Center. But he doesn't have the top-tier college pedigree that paves the way to the brass ring. The competition is fierce in the Lehman Brothers training class. He has a slim chance of earning a position.

His training is rudely interrupted by 9/11 and the author must live with the memory of watching the second plane ram into the second tower right above him. Training resumes across the Hudson and would eventually include performing security-guard duties. But while his classmates don't take the menial job seriously, Dillian does, and it serves him well.

He's granted an interview and tells of reading Burton Malkiel's A Random Walk Down Wall Street, a book extolling the virtues of efficient-market theory. "I read the book," Dillian tells the interviewer, "decided it was loathsome, nihilistic, academic bullshit, and set out to spend the rest of my career proving it wrong."

Dillian gets his start in index arbitrage, only watching at first, then calculating his mentor's P&L, and finally was allowed to trade. When the firm moves back to New York, and the head man Dick Fuld abolishes business casual, the author goes on a cheap suit shopping spree at Men's Warehouse, spending for five suits what his coworkers pay for one. But his frugality put him on the wrong side of the "Lehman Handshake." (You'll have to read the book.)

The author has a gift for math, while knowing little about finance when he began. As he writes, "I just wanted to create money out of speed and pure intimidation." He says he had no idea what the market was doing, but tick by tick Dillian developed an extraordinary sense for the direction of the beast that is the futures market.

Street Freak is chalk full of market jargon and trading lingo and, occasionally, Dillian stops to explain a trade that tells you all you need to know about modern finance.

I was expressing a view, not just on interest rates but also on forward interest rates, through a cash-settled future. Furthermore, I was doing so in a nonlinear fashion, using options on futures. I'd used a derivative of a derivative to express a view on an imaginary concept. It was downright magical.

While Dr. Zak calls traders very rational, Dillian writes that to get anything done on Wall Street you have to not only act irrationally but also be insane: "Only insane people do exactly the opposite of what common sense tells you to do."

Very little of Dillian's recount of trading resembles deliberate rational thought. But perhaps there is no distinction between rational and otherwise. Ludwig von Mises wrote that there is only purposeful behavior or human action. "Praxeology does not employ the term rational," Mises wrote in Money, Method, and the Market Process, explaining that the "opposite of action is not irrational behavior, but a reactive response to stimuli on the part of the bodily organs and of instincts, which cannot be controlled by volition."

In Mises's view, economics doesn't deal with homo economicus at all, but with homo agens: man "as he really is, often weak, stupid, inconsiderate, and badly instructed."

Dillian's weaknesses overtake him. He attempts suicide unsuccessfully and later on exits the trading floor suddenly, checking himself into a psychiatric hospital. He emerges medicated but healthier, bolstered by the insight that he can write.

However, the Lithium wrecks his concentration (and sex drive) and the patterns and flows that he once saw so naturally are fuzzy and incomprehensible. He must learn to trade all over again.

$30.00 $25.00

As impregnable as its employees thought it was, Lehman Brothers was allowed to fail for its overexposure to real estate. While its trading floor was making millions, Lehman brothers amassed a real-estate portfolio that was, in Dillian's words "absolutely pornographic."

According to rumor, Dick Fuld refused an offer of $40 a share for Lehman from Korean Development Bank in its dying days. But unlike his traders, Fuld allowed his pride to get in the way of making the best trade possible.

When capitalism is allowed to work, liquidation creates new beginnings. This was the case for Lehman. The New York trading operation was bought by Barclays, and Nomura Securities purchased the overseas operations. Most everyone kept their jobs.

As for Jared Dillian, he's created the financial newsletter the Daily Dirtnap and is doing what he enjoys most.

Douglas French is president of the Mises Institute and author of Early Speculative Bubbles & Increases in the Money Supply and Walk Away: The Rise and Fall of the Home-Ownership Myth. He received his master's degree in economics from the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, under Murray Rothbard with Professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe serving on his thesis committee. French teaches in the Mises Academy. See his tribute to Murray Rothbard. Send him mail. See Doug French's article archives.

Fuente:

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

CEL: 93934521
Santiago- Chile
Soliciten nuestros cursos de capacitación y consultoría en GERENCIA ADMINISTRACION PUBLICA -LIDERAZGO - GESTION DEL CONOCIMIENTO - RESPONSABILIDAD SOCIAL EMPRESARIAL – LOBBY – COACHING EMPRESARIAL-ENERGIAS RENOVABLES , asesorías a nivel nacional e internacional y están disponibles para OTEC Y OTIC en Chile

bioetica La diversidad de criterios en torno al problema de la sobrepoblación mundial dificulta un adecuado control poblacional

2012-02-13T04:17:00.001-08:00

Fundacion de Ciencias de la Salud

Ver todas las noticias por Fundacion de Ciencias de la Salud

La diversidad de criterios en torno al problema de la sobrepoblación mundial dificulta un adecuado control poblacional.

La Fundación de Ciencias de la Salud edita el libro "Bioética: el estado de la cuestión".

- Mejorar la economía y eliminar la pobreza extrema; fomentar la seguridad y el bienestar social; promocionar a la mujer, o facilitar el acceso a una planificación familiar eficaz y sanitariamente segura, son algunas de las propuestas éticas que se hacen en la obra

- La primera parte del libro, dedicada a la metodología, tiene un claro espíritu didáctico, queriendo servir como material para la formación en bioética

- La segunda parte expone los rasgos esenciales de la bioética actual, algunos de los elementos que han jugado un papel determinante como posibilitadores de la situación actual y las claves del desarrollo futuro

- El énfasis en la deliberación como método específico y canónico de la bioética es una de las apuestas de esta obra

Madrid, febrero de 2012.- "La diversidad de puntos de vista, valoraciones y criterios en torno al problema demográfico de la sobrepoblación hace imposible una actuación mundial concertada y armónica", señala Miguel Ángel Sánchez González, profesor titular de Historia de la Medicina y Bioética de la Facultad de Medicina de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM) y co editor del libro "Bioética: el estado de la cuestión", una obra recién editada por la Fundación de Ciencias de la Salud que dedica su último capítulo a este asunto. A pesar de todo, "existen hechos y conceptos demográficos que son lo bastante convincentes como para fundamentar algunas estrategias de control poblacional permisibles y aconsejables que creemos necesarias y esperamos que sean también suficientes", añade. Mejorar la economía y eliminar la pobreza extrema; fomentar la seguridad y el bienestar social; promocionar a la mujer, o facilitar el acceso a una planificación familiar eficaz y sanitariamente segura, son algunas de las propuestas éticas que hace el experto.

En esta obra colectiva se revisa el origen, la situación actual y las perspectivas de futuro de esta rama de la ética que se centra en las ciencias de la vida. Su autoría se debe a 17 profesionales de reconocido prestigio dentro del mundo de la bioética que son además discípulos, colaboradores y amigos del profesor Diego Gracia, catedrático de Historia de la Medicina y director del Máster de Bioética de la UCM, co editor de la obra y presidente de la Fundación de Ciencias de la Salud, entidad sin ánimo de lucro que viene realizando una importante labor de formación y divulgación de la bioética.

La primera parte del libro, dedicada a la metodología, tiene un claro espíritu didáctico, queriendo servir como material para la formación en bioética. "No es posible aportar nuevos conocimientos, investigar, aplicar o innovar sin un método correcto", apunta Lydia Feito, profesora de Bioética y Humanidades Médicas de la Facultad de Medicina de la UCM y co editora de la obra. "Las aproximaciones que carecen de este rigor metodológico están abocadas al fracaso y, por ello, es necesario enfatizar la necesidad de conocer los métodos más importantes utilizados en este ámbito", añade. La segunda parte expone los rasgos esenciales de la bioética actual, algunos de los elementos que han jugado un papel determinante como posibilitadores de la situación actual y las claves del desarrollo futuro.

Precisamente, el énfasis en la deliberación como método específico y canónico de la bioética es una de las apuestas de esta obra. El texto del profesor Gracia, el más extenso del libro, se dedica a analizar dicho procedimiento. "Lo interesante de la deliberación es que, además de ser un método riguroso que permite ponderar los elementos en juego en un exquisito ejercicio de matización y prudencia, es también una actitud", explica el experto. "Supone la convicción de que el pensamiento no es único, sino múltiple; que la verdad es un objetivo, pero no es objetiva; y que son las personas quienes construyen un espacio común de valores mediante razones y justificaciones, donde todos aprendemos al escuchar y tratar de comprender a quien piensa diferente", afirma.

Sobre el Área de Bioética

Tiene por objetivo profundizar en las cuestiones éticas que plantea el ejercicio de la medicina, así como proponer y difundir posibles respuestas a tales problemas a través de cursos, guías y otros materiales didácticos de elaboración propia. Encabezada por el profesor Diego Gracia, presidente de la Fundación de Ciencias de la Salud, es la línea de trabajo más fuerte y de mayor prestigio por la enorme demanda que tiene y la creciente necesidad de posicionamiento y formación ética frente a los nuevos retos y posibilidades de la ciencia y la medicina. El curso "Bioética 4x4", el Ateneo de Bioética o las Guías de Ética en la Práctica Médica son algunas de las iniciativas más destacadas.

Fundación de Ciencias de la Salud

La Fundación de Ciencias de la Salud es una entidad sin ánimo de lucro que pretende ser un lugar de encuentro para los distintos sectores sociales involucrados en el mundo de la sanidad. Fundada en 1991, sus objetivos prioritarios giran en torno a la bioética, la salud, la ciencia y las humanidades, con un amplio elenco de actividades y proyectos.

Fuente: http://www.noticiasmedicas.es/medicina/noticias/13097/1/La-diversidad-de-criterios-en-torno-al-problema-de-la-sobrepoblacion-mundial-dificulta-un-adecuado-control-poblacional-/Page1.html

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

"Tenemos dos cerebros: el de la cabeza y el del estómago"

2012-02-07T11:28:00.001-08:00

"Tenemos dos cerebros: el de la cabeza y el del estómago"

Foto: Xavier Gómez

Ima Sanchís

El universo interior

Leyendo Inteligencia digestiva (La Esfera de los Libros) me entero de que la capacidad de mi estómago de generar ácido clorhídrico puede llegar a niveles industriales, mi zumo gástrico puede disolver un trozo de metal, y el plástico en pocas horas. Me entero de que tenemos un "estado microbiano" inteligente con sus reglas y divisiones sociales en las entrañas. "Por lo menos 400 cepas que necesitan comer y que producen sus subproductos beneficiosos o tóxicos y pueden ayudarnos a elevar nuestras defensas o bajarlas". En su clínica de salud digestiva de Madrid y su consulta en Barcelona (www.inteligenciadigestiva.com) Matveikova enfoca los problemas digestivos con una visión holística.

Mi estómago es inteligente?
Absolutamente, es una red extensa de neuronas (100 millones) interconectadas.

¿Un segundo cerebro?
Sí, su estructura neuronal posee la capacidad de producir y liberar los mismos neurotransmisores, hormonas y moléculas químicas que produce el cerebro superior.

¿Mi barriga tiene emociones?
En nuestro sistema digestivo se produce y almacena el 90% de la serotonina de nuestro cuerpo; su función es esencial: absorción, aporte nutricional y movimientos musculares. Es la misma serotonina que en un 10% se crea en nuestro cerebro superior y de la que depende nuestro bienestar.

¿La famosa hormona de la felicidad la tenemos en el estómago?
Sí, por eso debemos escuchar más al sistema digestivo. De cómo sintamos nuestras tripas depende nuestro ánimo. Si aprendemos a escuchar sus señales estaremos más sanos, perceptivos y equilibrados.

¿Desde la digestión podemos influir en nuestras emociones?
Hay una relación continua de intercambio de información entre los dos cerebros. Un ejemplo: un estreñimiento crónico puede suponer una falta de serotonina, nos convierte en pesimistas y baja la libido.

Entonces, si cuidas tu estómago puedes mejorar tu estado de ánimo.
Absolutamente. Si empiezas a reconectar, sentir, entender lo que te sienta mal, ser consciente de lo que comes y cómo, en quince días notas un cambio. La gente que escucha sus tripas, se hace masajes y sabe comer, transmite más equilibrio, comprensión, paciencia y son más intuitivos.

¿...?
Si mimamos y relajamos el abdomen nuestras neuronas estomacales producen benzodiazepinas, las moléculas que usamos como ansiolíticos para relajar e inducir el sueño y para descontracturar músculos.

¿Y si no lo relajamos?
Hay muchas sustancias químicas que nosotros producimos y que si no somos capaces de liberar, manifestamos depresión, ansiedad o cansancio crónico.

Pues dígame como liberarlas.
Empezando con pequeños cambios: comer bien y con paz. Ir al baño sin prisa, unos 15 minutos. Nuestro intestino se mueve un centímetro al minuto, es una ola de movimiento muscular lenta, tranquila y equilibrada, hay que respetarlo.

De acuerdo.
Es muy beneficioso hacer un automasaje en la tripa, movimientos muy suaves empezando por el lado derecho y avanzando en el sentido de las agujas del reloj; eso relaja el sistema digestivo. Hacer diariamente diez minutos de estiramientos.

Qué más.
A media tarde, cuando aparece el cansancio, respirar con la barriga durante diez minutos. Un vaso de agua caliente en ayunas con unas gotitas de limón o menta activa la función muscular del estómago, vesícula e intestino. De vez en cuando un fin de semana de depuración a base de batidos de verduras es aconsejable. Y ejercicio regular.

Del sistema digestivo también depende nuestra piel.
Nuestro sistema digestivo representa el 70% de las defensas. Si uno come mal, tiene mucho estreñimiento o gastroenteritis, infecciones, o toma muchos antibióticos, se trastorna todo el tráfico, es decir la función de filtrar, defender, eliminar y absorber.

Entiendo.
Cuando este sistema depurativo, el más grande del cuerpo, funciona mal, otro órgano, como la piel, coge su función. Las consecuencias son dermatitis, psoriasis, acné, piel atópica, manchas... síntomas cuyo origen en un 80% es intoxicación interna.

¿Alimentarse mal envejece?
Hay una conexión directa entre el envejecimiento precoz y procesos degenerativos tanto de piel y articulaciones con la salud del estómago.

¿Con qué en concreto?
Ya lo estudió Iliá Mechnikov, premio Nobel de Fisiología y Medicina en 1908, la fermentación pútrida en el intestino es la razón principal del envejecimiento precoz. Y el estreñimiento y la putrefacción proteica están vinculados al desarrollo del cáncer y a los procesos degenerativos sistémicos prematuros.

¿Tiene arreglo?
Si la célula esta bien nutrida e hidratada y mantiene adecuadamente el proceso de eliminación y desactivación de las toxinas y de los radicales libres, puede estar joven y activa durante mucho tiempo.

¿Hay que lavar el intestino?
Con la vida que llevamos (sedentaria, estresada, alimentación cuya calidad no está muy controlada...) no eliminamos todo lo que ingresamos y por tanto absorbemos toxinas, sufrimos putrefacción, inflamación, intoxicación y bajan las defensas. La hidroterapia de colon una vez al año es muy recomendable.

¿Algún otro consejo?
Yo recomiendo a mis pacientes que de vez en cuando, durante un mes, retiren de su dieta trigo, azúcar, lácteos y alcohol; y fuera cereales, salvo arroz, avena y algo de centeno. El 80% de los pacientes que trato resultan ser intolerantes al trigo. Descansar del trigo es una manera de purificarse.

·······················

Compra el libro en Amazon.es:

Inteligencia digestiva - una visión holística de tu segundo cerebro

Inteligencia digestiva - una visión holística de tu segundo cerebro (Ebook Kindle)

Fuente: http://www.lavanguardia.com/lacontra/20120206/54250340177/irina-matveikova-tenemos-dos-cerebros-cabeza-estomago.html

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

It's 1980 Again

2012-02-07T05:41:00.001-08:00

It's 1980 Again

Mises Daily:Tuesday, February 07, 2012 by Doug French

Floyd Norris writes for the New York Times that it's 1980 all over again.

Discussion of gold has gone from nonexistent a decade ago to the question of whether its price is in bubble territory, and now a policy question in the Republican primary. Ron Paul has been stumping for a return to the gold standard for decades, and the populace has finally caught up.

The issue resonates with young people who worry about a dire future with a dollar crash and nationwide poverty. The gold issue is hot enough that Newt Gingrich has promised to appoint a gold commission, with The Case for Gold coauthor Lewis Lehrman and Jim Grant as cochairman.

When Ronald Reagan went through the gold commission charade in 1981 to satisfy a campaign promise of studying the gold standard question, Lehrman cast one of two dissenting votes on the commission that voted in favor of maintaining the fiat money status quo. The other "no" vote came from Ron Paul himself. As Murray Rothbard explained,

The gold standard was the easiest pledge to dispose of. President Reagan appointed an allegedly impartial gold commission to study the problem — a commission overwhelmingly packed with lifelong opponents of gold. The commission presented its predictable report, and gold was quickly interred.

In similar fashion, Norris and the NYT look to explore the worthiness of a gold standard by citing a University of Chicago survey of 37 economists asking if they agreed that "price-stability and employment outcomes would be better for the average American" if the dollar's value were tied to gold.

Norris makes a point that among the 37 were advisers to both Democratic and Republican presidents. As if this insured some sort of impartiality. Like Captain Renault in Casablanca, you will be shocked — shocked! — to know that all 37 of the esteemed economists polled think a gold standard is a terrible idea.

The first statement the 37 economists responded to was

If the US replaced its discretionary monetary policy regime with a gold standard, defining a "dollar" as a specific number of ounces of gold, the price-stability and employment outcomes would be better for the average American.

Those disagreeing were 43 percent and those strongly disagreeing were the other 57 percent.

With their answers, the responders also provided a one to ten degree of confidence in their opinion. Most were highly confident in their positions. The Ivy League is well represented with nearly half the panel coming from Yale, Harvard, or Princeton. Berkeley and Stanford combined for ten on the panel and the supposedly free-market Chicago had five representatives, as did MIT.

Anil K. Kashyap is a professor of economics and finance at Chicago and used the survey to make this snide remark: "A gold standard regime would be a disaster for any large advanced economy. Love of the G.S. implies macroeconomic illiteracy."

According to his webpage Professor Kashyap is currently teaching these two advanced MBA elective classes: "Analyzing Financial Crises" and "Understanding Central Banks." But Kashyap is plenty busy off campus. He's a consultant for the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago and a member of the Economic Advisory Panel of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. He does work for the government of Japan and, well, you get the idea.

Former Obama economic advisor Austan Goolsbee, also a professor at Chicago, seems downright annoyed by the gold questions, saying, "eesh. Has it come to this?"

One wonders how MIT's Bengt Holmstöm makes this judgment: "All insights from the past and current crises go against a gold standard."

To the contrary, history shows that with a gold standard there are fewer crises; and when there are crises they are short-lived, as in the case of the panics of 1819, 1873, and 1920. Since the last remnants of the gold standard were cast aside by Nixon in 1971, world economies have been a series of booms, busts, inflations, economic instability, with no real economic growth.

"This proposal makes no sense in the modern world," says Yale's William Nordhaus. "Just look at the Eurozone to see the consequences." Surely the good professor doesn't think Europe is currently on the gold standard. But assuming he equates the fiat euro with a gold-backed euro, Professor Nordhaus should read Philipp Bagus's The Tragedy of the Euro. Bagus points out that member states of the European Union run deficits expecting them to be financed by the ECB. So Europe has a tragedy of the commons at work with its monetary policy that sets up very dangerous incentives for member states, making the system unworkable.

Governments cannot print prosperity, and capital must be saved — it cannot be conjured from the ether.

A number of professors on the panel made comments to the effect that the price of gold is too volatile or unstable to back the dollar. Evidently it doesn't occur to them that it's not the price of gold that's volatile but the value of the dollar. The value of the dollar is volatile downward for the very reason that the Fed can create dollars from nowhere; evidenced by the M2 money supply increasing from $683.7 billion in August 1971 to the current $9,712.8 billion.

Creating paper and digits is cheap and effortless. Mining gold is anything but. It's expensive and the yellow metal is quite hard to find. Grant's Interest Rate Observer points out that, according to the US Geological Survey, the world supply of gold has increased at rate of only 1.7 percent a year from 1900 through 2009.

Granted, it hasn't been a steady 1.7 percent growth. Production boomed in the 1930s, for instance, but since the 2000s, growth has declined to 1.1 percent. However, as Grant points out,

Still, over the long run, the co-commissioners [Grant and Lehrman] agree, the Newmonts and the Barricks of the world are more dependable sources of monetary matter than the Federal Reserves of the world.

Behavioral economist Richard Thaler asks, "Why tie to gold? Why not 1982 Bordeaux?" Assuming Professor Thaler is being serious, wine doesn't make a terribly good money, although it might do better than our present paper system. After all, a number of things have been used as money throughout history: salt, sugar, cattle, iron hoes, tea, cowrie shells, and even cigarettes in prison camps.

Ultimately the commodity that is selected by the marketplace to be money will have these characteristics: generally marketable, divisible, high value per unit weight, fairly stable value, durable, recognizable, and homogeneous.

Thaler's 1982 Bordeaux flunks most of the test. While it's divisible, wine is anything but durable, certainly not homogeneous, and hauling Bordeaux around by the bottle or barrel would not be handy in this (as the professors like to say) modern world.

It's hard to make a case that 1982 Bordeaux is generally marketable, but having a bottle to trade with might serve you well in certain situations. Value would vary widely due to weather and harvests on the supply side and consumer preference on the demand side. This leads us to the problem that, in some parts of the world and for some people, wine — whether it's 1982 Bordeaux or Two Buck Chuck — is not recognized as having any value at all.

Meanwhile, the yellow metal passes the test with flying colors.

The second statement posed to the panel was, "There are many factors besides US inflation risk that influence the current dollar price of gold."

To this question 73 percent strongly agreed and 27 percent simply agreed.

MIT's Daron Acemoglu strongly agreed with this statement and commented, "Gold is intrinsically close to useless, so its price is determined as a 'bubble.'" Gold has been used for thousands of years as a medium of exchange and store of value. It's jaw-dropping to know a professor at MIT believes gold is useless. In fact it is the dollar and US Treasury debt that are the greatest bubbles the world has ever seen.

Professor Nordhaus also strongly agreed and wrote, "There is no discernible connection between gold price and CPI movements in the period since the demonetization of gold in 1971."

Really? This chart plotting the price of gold and CPI portrays a strong connection.

The connection reflected by the chart would be even stronger if John Williams's shadowstats SGS-CPI were used instead of the BLS's hedonically adjusted numbers.

LBJ's guns-and-butter policy of the 1960s combined with Nixon's big-government conservatism, each facilitated by a compliant Fed, led to Nixon's unshackling the dollar from its last faint gold restraint. The resulting stagflation of the 1970s brought on the cry to return the dollar to gold.

$8.00 $5.00

Bush and Obama's drones-and-caviar policy makes LBJ and Nixon look like rock-ribbed fiscal conservatives. The money printing has been relentless, and the yellow metal's price merely reflects this quaint old definition of "inflation."

To ask the question if 2012 is 1980 all over again answers the question as to why returning to gold is imperative. The nightmarish economic outcomes caused by being, as Jim Grant says, on a "PhD standard" demand change, and more people realize it each and every day.

Fiat paper, whose use is mandated by the state, is the PhDs' money; while gold, with a value derived from trade, is the people's money.

The people want their money back from the ivory tower — before it's too late.

Douglas French is president of the Mises Institute and author of Early Speculative Bubbles & Increases in the Money SupplyandWalk Away: The Rise and Fall of the Home-Ownership Myth. He received his master's degree in economics from the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, under Murray Rothbard with Professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe serving on his thesis committee. French teaches in the Mises Academy. See his tribute to Murray Rothbard. Send him mail. See Doug French's article archives.

Fuente: http://mises.org/daily/5910/Its-1980-Again

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

A PROPOSITO DE TRAANSPLANTES Y LA NUEVA VIDA

2012-02-07T05:26:00.001-08:00

Iniciativa 'Interlife' de Novartis

Un libro destaca los avances de la cooperación médica a través del trasplante

Directorio

MADRID, 7 Feb. (EUROPA PRESS) -

El libro 'Interlife, cooperación médica a través del trasplante', explica los detalles de esta iniciativa, impulsada por Novartis y otras entidades del sector de la salud, gracias a la cual 60 pacientes del Hospital Nacional de Kenia han recibido "una nueva vida".

La iniciativa 'Interlife' consiste en "dar vida" a través del trasplante, al ofrecer una nueva oportunidad a los pacientes a través de la formación y capacitación de profesionales sanitarios del Hospital Nacional de Kenia, por parte de reconocidos expertos del campo del trasplante en España.

De este modo, la obra, escrita por el periodista Marcos González, editor de la revista Corresponsables y director general de la editorial MediaResponsable, recoge la experiencia de su visita al Hospital Nacional de Kenia y los testimonios de los principales protagonistas de 'Interlife', entre pacientes, familiares, y profesionales kenianos y españoles y de Novartis.

El libro se presentará en Madrid y Barcelona, los próximos 14 y 16 de febrero, respectivamente, previa inscripción en la web 'respectivamente.http://eventos.corresponsables.com/presentacion-libro-interlife.php'.

Fuente:

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

Previous Mises Daily IndexMisrepresenting Inequality

2012-02-02T06:30:00.001-08:00

Misrepresenting Inequality

Mises Daily: Thursday, February 02, 2012 by Gary Galles

Sir William Thompson, Lord Kelvin, once said,

When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind.

Kelvin's statement is an important reminder that when magnitudes of certain variables or their relationships are in question, without the ability to accurately measure them, you don't know very much; certainly far too little to claim knowledge of "the answer." Unfortunately, his view, while dominant in the natural sciences, has often been abused in the social realm, in defense of misguided government policies.

Nowhere is this clearer than in the most recent iterations of claims about wealth, poverty, and inequality that seem to arise everywhere from Occupy protesters to President Obama's reelection campaign. Here, the discussion typically relies on measures that are highly inaccurate (compounded by ambiguous and confusing terms, such as statements about "the rich," sometimes meaning people with high current incomes and other times those who have a great deal of financial wealth, even though those groups are very different and the cutoffs are typically arbitrary and often unstated), yet they are used as if they met Kelvin's criterion, providing a reliable basis for social policy.

When advocates for ever-more redistribution focus their antirich rhetoric on those with a great deal of wealth, they rely on seriously incomplete and misleading measures of wealth and ignore variables crucial to an adequate analysis of current financial wealth.

Several huge sources of wealth are omitted from the financial measures used by those fixated on inequality. These include pension-fund assets, which largely represent the retirement funds of the nonrich; Social Security wealth (the present value of benefits qualified for but not yet received); and human capital — the knowledge, energy, and abilities embodied in working people but not yet turned into financial wealth. These represent trillions of dollars of wealth, spread far more evenly through the population than financial-wealth measures imply. The same is true of our tremendous wealth in the form of consumer durable goods, from cars to refrigerators to computers. Such omissions guarantee misunderstanding.

Wealth-inequality complaints, in their rush to justify more government redistribution, also ignore many important determinants of financial-wealth differences. A key one is demographics. Disparities in measured wealth in large part reflect age differences in the population.

When people are young, they have not yet had time to convert their capabilities into financial wealth by earning income, then saving and investing in financial assets (e.g., a major reason for low measured wealth in Hispanic households is the youth of their primary earners). However, when they have gotten older, especially approaching or during retirement, they have had time to convert their unmeasured human capital into measured financial wealth. The result is that much of the apparent wealth inequality really reflects age differences in the population (magnified as baby boomers have aged). This demographic bias is also used to buttress claims by those opposed to reducing tax rates, because the immediate positive effects on financial asset prices go to the owners at that time — those productive enough and old enough to have accumulated the financial wealth to own them — even though they would benefit all productive Americans as people responded to improved incentives.

If anything, measures of income inequality and poverty are even less reliable.

One major reason is that that in-kind welfare programs go uncounted in the official data, so that they do not improve the measured situations of the poor. This is a very large error. Of the over $500 billion given annually in government means-tested assistance (not including another quarter trillion or so dollars Medicare spends on the elderly), roughly three-quarters is now given in kind.

The official data further omits taxes, disguising the disproportionate burdens borne by higher-income families. It also hides the impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit. Even though the EITC is refundable, putting dollars directly into recipients' pockets, it is ignored as a "negative tax," making its $40 billion plus in annual transfers to lower-income families disappear from view.

Income studies also fail to incorporate nonsalary benefits and payments to workers, which have increased most among those not at the top of income measures. Mark Warshawsky of the Social Security Advisory Board found that recent expansions in measured earnings inequality were almost completely attributable to rising benefits costs.

The official Census survey also ignores substantial underreporting of income (e.g., people working "off the books" to maintain greater eligibility for various benefit programs) in the Census survey. For example, the more accurate measures of the Survey of Income and Program Participation have routinely found poverty rates 25 percent below official Census estimates. The underreporting by lower-income households is also reflected in the dramatically smaller inequalities in measures of consumption — far better indicators of well-being — than of current income.

Just as the official data dramatically underestimates the condition of those at the lower end of the current income distribution, it overestimates the incomes of those at the higher end. For example, the recent Congressional Budget Office study of inequality, the most common current "proof text" of increasingly unjustifiable disparities, is based on individual taxable income reported to the IRS. However, many forms of income not formerly reported as individual income now are, due to changing incentives, sharply biasing upward measures of the share of income going to higher-income earners. Many people have shifted from filing as businesses under the corporate tax to filing as individuals as a result of decreasing individual tax rates, dramatically exaggerating increases in their incomes. Top managers have also moved from receiving income as stock options taxed as capital gains to nonqualified stock options, making them countable as taxable personal income. The late 1980s cut in income tax rates also saw greater income reporting, raising measures of income inequality.

Inequality complaints also commonly overlook other important determinants of market outcomes, including far more workers and hours worked by members of higher-income families, family size (positively correlated with income), and the far-higher cost of living in large urban areas, where larger incomes tend to be earned. Official household-income measures also ignore that households have become substantially smaller than in the past, thus substantially underestimating the growth in income (e.g., real per-household income rose only 6 percent between 1969 and 1996, while real per capita income rose 51 percent). Further, our aging population has increased the proportion of those retired, increasing apparent income inequality.

Income data is so flawed that many policies and programs that increase recipients' well-being actually make them look poorer.

While official data ignores massive in-kind aid to those near the bottom of the income distribution, such programs reduce benefits as market incomes rise (e.g., the 30¢ reduction in food-stamp benefits for each dollar of net income) or terminate eligibility if incomes exceed a certain level (e.g., Medicaid). Most EITC recipients are also in the phase-out range of incomes, where they lose 21¢ in benefits (as well as paying other taxes) for every added dollar earned, sharply increasing their effective tax rates. Such disincentives lead many to earn less, reflected in the measured data, making the recipients of huge transfers from others actually appear poorer.

Market responses to redistribution also make inequality look worse. Income redistribution compresses after-tax wage differentials between current high- and low-income earners. But by reducing the after-tax payoff to the necessary investment and sacrifice, it reduces the supply of high-income workers over time, raising their pretax earnings. Conversely, it increases the supply of low-income workers, with the opposite effect. Because income data counts only the changed market earnings, measured incomes grow more unequal.

Beyond such massive mismeasurement, which means that the data used to promote increasing redistribution do not come anywhere near meeting Lord Kelvin's standard of knowing what you are talking about, there is another major problem with the interpretation of changing income shares.

Even if, properly measured, certain groups increased their share of financial wealth or current income, that does not imply that their increase in wealth came at the expense of others, so that the government must intervene to "fix" it. Such a view fundamentally misunderstands the nature of markets. Whatever level of wealth one starts at, the way to get wealthier in a market economy is not to make other people poorer but to make them better off.

This follows from the voluntary exchanges of the marketplace — you and I won't agree to trade unless we both feel we get more in value than we give up. Increasing your wealth in a market economy therefore depends on providing goods or services that others value more highly than what it costs you to provide them: a win-win situation. If the wealthy are getting wealthier in the marketplace, this means that they are employing their wealth to improve, not harm, the well-being of others. But the improved options, products, and services — which are increases in real wealth — that buyers receive in exchange for payments that make some suppliers rich are ignored in standard measures of wealth.

While increased wealth in a voluntary-exchange economy comes from creating wealth for others, there are other ways to increase wealth — ways that make others poorer. They have a common denominator: government and its ability to coerce people. Examples include tariffs, quotas, restrictions on entry and competitors, price controls, licensing rules and requirements, and subsidies. All create wealth for some (typically well-organized and informed special interests) by taking it away from others (typically the poorly informed and unorganized general population). Such policies do leverage government power to increase some people's wealth at others' even-greater expense, and can thereby be properly condemned, but one need not know what happened to the distribution of income to do so.

$7.00 $5.00

Disparities in Americans' officially measured financial wealth or current income do not justify abandoning the well-established principle that wealth creation in a market economy benefits others. To the extent that such differences arise from the voluntary exchanges of the market, everybody benefits, whether incomplete data reflects it or not, and there is no problem to fix. Added government interference would then simply reduce people's incentives to make others better off. To the extent that some increase their wealth by using government power to harm others, the problem is the abuse of government power; and decreased government involvement, not increased government intervention, is the only real solution.

Political support for a plethora of redistribution policies has long been maintained by twisting Lord Kelvin's dictum — treating "meager and unsatisfactory" data that dramatically mismeasures wealth, poverty, and inequality in America as if it were accurate. That abuse reflects the huge payoff for those groups who use it to win redistribution in their favor, but it does not even remotely reflect reality. And since reality is the necessary basis for effective judgments, the result is to undermine accurate understanding, and therefore the potential for effective policy — particularly "take your hands off" as the most effective government policy.

Gary M. Galles is a professor of economics at Pepperdine University. Send him mail. See Gary Galles's article archives.

Fuente:

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

Twin Deficits

2012-01-12T05:21:00.001-08:00

Twin Deficits

Mises Daily: Thursday, January 12, 2012 by Gary North

[LewRockwell.com, 2011]

There are two deficits that we hear about most: the federal government's deficit and the balance of payments of the United States. They are linked, but they are very different in their effects.

The federal deficit is seen by Keynesians as mostly a benefit and by Austrians as mostly a liability, and for the same reason: higher government spending.

The balance-of-payments deficit is seen by virtually all economists as a benefit for Americans and their creditors. Otherwise, the exchanges would not take place.

At some point, the twin deficits will become unsustainable. Then the debtors will have a choice: either default or else adopt a systematic reversal of policies: debt repayment. This means a federal-budget surplus and a balance-of-payments surplus. Balanced budgets won't do it. There will have to be surpluses.

That day is coming. That will be the day of reckoning — of counting up.

The participants give no indications that they believe that day is coming.

Neither did Greece's politicians in early 2010.

Federal Deficits

The heart of the disagreement between Keynesians and Austrians is easy to state. Each group has a unique selling proposition (USP). I have boiled them down into four words each.

Keynesians: Federal deficits overcome recessions.

Austrians: Tax cuts increase liberty.

If you are a glutton for punishment, you can view my presentation on this at the Mises Institute in 2010:

If you think about this, the positions can both be used to justify federal deficits in the short run. The federal deficit exists because tax revenues do not cover expenditures. Austrians favor lower taxes, no matter what. So, Austrians are concerned with the deficit because spending cuts do not match — or, better yet, exceed — tax cuts. The government continues to expand its operations. The goal of Austrians is to shrink the state. This means spending cuts.

The assumption of the Austrians is as follows. The government is not ready — will never be ready — to cut spending prior to a crisis that forces them to cut spending. They recognize that only a financial crisis will stop the government from spending. So, in the meantime, it is best to take whatever tax cuts we can get. This increases the deficit. But, the Austrian says, there are two ways to have a deficit:

with higher taxes, or
with lower taxes.

Congress is going to spend. Which way is better for liberty? Austrians generally conclude: the lower tax / high deficit way.

But doesn't this mean there will eventually be a Great Default? Yes, it does. But there is going to be a Great Default in either case: high tax or lower tax. So, let us keep more of our after-tax money today and prepare for that default. Congress is going to spend every dime that comes in, and then borrow against future revenues. Nothing will change this, short of a financial crisis when lenders will no longer lend at low rates. Call this the "Greek event."

Keynesians applaud the deficit for a different reason. They see increased government expenditures as an enormous advantage for the economy. Federal borrowing enables the government to increase expenditures in the short run without tax hikes. There is therefore no tax revolt by voters. The government can therefore spend more as a result.

Austrians want less government spending. Keynesians want more government spending. Both sides accept a rising deficit. Keynesians think the deficit gives consumers a chance to increase spending, even if this means taking on more personal debt. They also think there will never have to be a Great Default. They trust deficits and central bank inflation to defer the Great Default forever.

Austrians think the deficit gives future-oriented people time to prepare for the Great Default, which is inevitable in a world dominated by Keynesian economics.

Trade Deficits

An analogous pair of attitudes separate Keynesians and Austrians over the long run, yet unites them temporarily.

Both schools of opinion favor free trade, meaning no sales taxes on imported goods and no import quotas. Both see this as an advantage for customers on both sides of a border, just as they see benefits from people trading across the street or even next door. Both schools of opinion favor customer authority. The difference is this: Keynesians think that economic planners, especially the federal bureaucracy, know best what is good for customers. Austrians think customers know best what is good for them. Keynesians want to use state coercion to benefit certain voting blocs over others. Austrians do not.

So, both groups look at the trade deficit, which is a subset of the balance of payments, and conclude, "no problem." If some customers want to buy more than they sell — that is, if they want to borrow — that is their business.

Both groups of economists know there are limits to this process. A payments imbalance can exist only while lenders agree to lend to borrowers at rates borrowers are willing and able to pay. Loans must eventually be repaid.

But isn't this also true of federal debt? Keynesians admit that, in theory, the US government should run surpluses in good economic times, to reduce the debt. But, in practice, Keynesians never say, "Congress should run a surplus next fiscal year." I do not recall that any Keynesian in the last 50 years has recommended this in public. They may admit in theory that there should be surplus years, in which principal should be reduced, but that is always a theory only, never actual policy.

Austrians, understanding Congress and understanding Keynesians, recognize that federal surpluses cannot last long. So, the debt will grow. The goal, then, is to let taxpayers keep more of their wealth. Run the deficits. Let taxpayers keep more of their wealth. The losers will be the short-sighted lenders who let the US government borrow at historically low rates.

The economists have the same view of trade deficits. It's up to customers to decide where to put their money. If they want to buy imported goods, that is their decision. If exporters want to sell on credit, that is their decision. This is what customer authority and seller's authority is all about.

But isn't it better to be an exporting nation? That is irrelevant for economic theory, say Austrians. What is relevant is individual authority, not political authority. What is relevant is for the government to butt out.

What about government-funded trade subsidies by exporting nations? Austrians say these are a bad idea. The government should butt out. But these subsidies do exist. The Austrians say, "So what?" But doesn't this make American customers dependent on subsidies from foreign governments? The Austrian responds, "Flat-screen TVs are not heroin. If the exporters' subsidies from their governments ever end, Americans will buy fewer imported goods. There will not be widespread withdrawal symptoms. It is silly to think of families' budgeting as a detox program." Again, this goes back to the Austrians' view of individual responsibility. People should be responsible for what they do with their property. Governments should butt out.

Show me an advocate for tariffs as a tool of social planning, and I'll show you a person with a central planner deep inside, trying to get out. "Tariffs must save customers from themselves." So, the tariff supporter wants the government to send out people with badges and guns to tell citizens that they are not allowed to buy imported goods at "unfair" low prices. "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you." To which an Austrian-influenced shopper asks, "Then why are you pointing that gun at me?"

The critic of trade deficits says, "This can't go on forever." The Austrian says, "Then it will stop." The critic says, "I think the government should use force to make it stop now." The Austrian says, "Why is Congress competent to decide?"

Congress Is the Problem

The reason why there is a trade/payments deficit is this: foreign central banks buy US debt. They create their own domestic currencies and use them to buy US dollars. Then they use these dollars to buy US government debt.

Why do they do this? Because it subsidizes exports. Their domestic currencies do not rise. Foreigners can buy more imported goods.

Every administration wants this to continue. Each administration wants buyers of the government's IOUs. Each administration thinks that there will never be a time to pay off this debt. "Federal debt is forever. Federal debt will grow forever." So, foreign central bank purchases of T-bills at 0.01 percent is free money for the administration.

Politicians like free money even more than customers do. There is a reason for this: the all-or-nothing position of most members of Congress. Congress wants the export nations' subsidies, which holds down Treasury debt interest rates. Unlike Congress, a customer can cut back on his spending and still muddle through. He cuts back at the margin. The politicians cannot cut back on their spending without being threatened by a loss at the next election. It's all or nothing for members of Congress. It's not all or nothing for a buyer of imports.

If a defender of tariffs wants to take a free-market position, he should call for a ban on the sale of all government debt to foreigners. That is where the main export subsidy is. The government should pass a law: "As of [date], the United States government will no longer make interest payments on its debt to any owner of this debt who is not an American citizen. It will also no longer redeem its debt held by noncitizens." Foreigners would start selling their US debt on the day some Congressman begins sending the draft around to other House members. Interest rates would soar. The depression would begin. The Great Default would be next, either openly or by Federal Reserve hyperinflation.

Links between the Deficits

This is why the twin deficits are connected. The US government is running massive deficits. Foreign central banks buy US government debt. This is the main form of their export subsidies: holding down their domestic currencies' price in relation to the US dollar.

There are other links. The main cause of the trade deficit is the cost of imported oil. The US government offers a military safety shield for Saudi Arabia. It allows the Saudis to buy American jets and weapons. The Saudi military is dependent on these exports from the United States. So, the government accepts dollars for oil. It gets OPEC to do the same.

Again, the connecting links are made at the highest level: government to government.

This is good for American consumers of energy. It keeps oil prices low. It is a subsidy from OPEC.

The Austrian economist says, "Make hay while the sun shines. Consume cheap oil while it is still cheap. If Saudi bureaucrats want to sell us their only valuable resource in exchange for government promises to pay, good for American consumers."

It is true that Americans may squander this cheap oil. They may not use the savings to save money the way intensely future-oriented people would. Americans will probably remain present oriented. They will not sacrifice consumption today for more consumption later. But I do not expect Congress to balance the federal budget by cutting spending. I do not expect Congress to become the exemplar of future orientation anytime soon.

Future Orientation

Ludwig von Mises called this time preference. Some people are highly future oriented. They are willing to sacrifice present consumption for even greater future consumption. Mises said they have low time preference. Other people are the reverse. So, at any given interest rate, some people will save more than others.

Mises did not pass judgment on people's motivations. He did pass judgment against government policies that use coercion to restrict people's peaceful pursuit of their own self-interest, as they see it.

There is a crucial economic chapter in the book of Deuteronomy that recommends thrift. It is chapter 28. Here, we read of positive sanctions and negative sanctions relating to credit/debt.

The LORD shall open unto thee his good treasure, the heaven to give the rain unto thy land in his season, and to bless all the work of thine hand: and thou shalt lend unto many nations, and thou shalt not borrow (v. 12).

The stranger that is within thee shall get up above thee very high; and thou shalt come down very low. He shall lend to thee, and thou shalt not lend to him: he shall be the head, and thou shalt be the tail (vv. 43-44).

These passages indicate that it is better to be a creditor than a debtor. But this is another way of saying that it is better to be future oriented than present oriented. Low time preference is better than high time preference. Leadership is better than followership. "The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender" (Proverbs 22:7).

These are ethical issues. They are not technical issues. There is great debate over whether a specific debt is a good idea or a bad idea. The old answer is correct: it depends mainly on whether the debt is for a tool or consumption. Even here, it is not always clear. A consumption debt — water in a drought, food in a famine — may be a good idea. The issue is (1) goal and (2) future orientation. What is the purpose of the goal? If it is accumulation of assets, then the question arises: accumulation for what?

The future-oriented person prefers greater capital in the future to present capital. He may be a miser. He may be a philanthropist with a vision. In either case, his desire for greater wealth in the future is reflected in his low time preference. He will save at a lower rate of return than a high-time-preference person will.

When this outlook is widespread in a society, it will be marked by reduced debt and increased credit. The old Jewish gag is this:

Question: "Why are there gentiles?"

Answer: "Someone has to pay retail."

(This is qualified by an observation made by my Jewish roommate regarding Fresno, California in the 1940s: "When the Armenians moved in, the Jews moved out.") But the gag has a corollary: "Somebody has to borrow." To sell more, you must lend more. Low-time-preference people lend to high-time-preference people. It's win-win, given the time perspective of both groups. But it may be win-lose if either side is incorrect about what lies ahead.

If a nation has the power to inflate its currency, the high-time-preference person may be a winner. The low-time-preference person lends in a currency that is worth a lot. After the inflation, the high-time-preference person pays off the loan by selling an egg. This happened in the German inflation of 1922–23. Farmers won. Urban people lost.

Is the American shopper stupid for buying cheap imports that have been subsidized by some Asian central bank's domestic inflation and its willingness to buy bonds from the US government? Not necessarily. When the Fed inflates, as it will, the Asian central banks will find out how shortsighted their monetary policies were. They will discover that mercantilism fails.

Conclusion

$24.00$14.00

The twin deficits — trade and federal — are linked. They are linked by

the mercantilistic central-bank policy of inflating the domestic currency in order to buy IOUs from the US government, and
the Keynesian policy of increasing US government spending by borrowing.

We have two fiat-money governments specializing in what each does best. The Asians specialize in lending fiat money to buy fiat promises. Congress takes advantage of this blindness of Asians. Both sides say, "Let's party!"

The winners are American consumers — for as long as the party continues.

Gary North is the author of Mises on Money. He is also the author of a free 20-volume series, An Economic Commentary on the Bible. Visit his website: GaryNorth.com. Send him mail. See Gary North's article archives.

This article originally appeared on LewRockwell.com, December 8, 2011.

Comment on this article.

Fuente:http://mises.org/daily/5829/Twin-Deficits

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

NUEVO LIBRO DE VARGAS LLOSA Lanzamiento. Será un ensayo, La civilización del espectáculo

2012-01-06T04:28:00.001-08:00

Lanzamiento. Será un ensayo, La civilización del espectáculo

Nuevo libro de Mario Vargas Llosa sale en abril

Es primera obra de no ficción que publica desde que ganó Nobel

Tema lo ha abordado varias veces en sus columnas periodísticas

Análisis. La cultura del espectáculo será comentada por el Nobel peruano.

El premio Nobel de Literatura 2010, Mario Vargas Llosa, publicará en abril La civilización del espectáculo, un ensayo que aborda la idea de que el único fin en la vida es pasársela bien. Este tema ha sido uno de los más recurrentes en las columnas que publica en diversos diarios del mundo.

En el libro, que editará el sello Alfaguara, el escritor arequipeño realiza "una dura radiografía" sobre el mundo actual, en el que la creciente banalización del arte y la literatura, el triunfo del amarillismo en la prensa y la frivolidad de la política son algunos ejemplos del "mal" que afecta a la sociedad contemporánea, adelantó el autor.

Vargas Llosa se encuentra en República Dominicana, donde consideró que es "innegable" el progreso exhibido por América Latina en las últimas décadas, como lo demuestra el crecimiento económico registrado en naciones como Brasil, Colombia, Chile, República Dominicana y Perú, a pesar de la "catástrofe" registrada en la economía mundial. Sin embargo, advierte que otros países de esta región se están quedando atrás debido a gobiernos a los que calificó de "dictaduras mesiánicas" y "populismos catastróficos".

"Atrás han quedado, afortunadamente, los tiempos en que Latinoamérica apostaba por su futuro sobre la base del desorden, autoritarismo y la anarquía que representan la bomba y el fusil", expuso en Santo Domingo el novelista momentos después de ser investido "Doctor Honoris Causa" por la Universidad APEC.

Consideró, por el contrario, que el camino hacia la libertad es el del trabajo, la democracia y la educación.

Reivindicando a los clásicos

Entre los temas que a Mario Vargas Llosa le apasiona tratar está el de la cultura y cómo ésta es reflejo de la sociedad que la cobija. Varios de sus artículos periodísticos exploran este asunto. Uno de los más recordados es "Breve discurso sobre la cultura", publicado en julio de 2010, meses antes de que le concedieran el Premio Nobel.

En esa columna de opinión proporcionó su definición de cultura como "la reivindicación de un patrimonio de ideas, valores y obras de arte, de unos conocimientos históricos, religiosos, filosóficos y científicos en constante evolución y el fomento de la exploración de nuevas formas artísticas y literarias y de la investigación en todos los campos del saber".

En esa nota periodística hace un alegato contra la confusión actual a la hora de discernir qué es arte y qué no. Indicaba allí que "fuimos impugnando y deshaciendo a ese cuerpo exclusivo de pedantes que se creían superiores y se jactaban de monopolizar el saber. Pero lo conseguido es una victoria pírrica".

Datos

•El anterior libro ensayístico de Mario Vargas Llosa fue El viaje a la ficción, dedicado al escritor uruguayo Juan Carlos Onetti y que vio la luz en 2008.

•La civilización del espectáculo será el segundo libro que publica el narrador peruano siendo premio Nobel. En 2010, dio a imprenta la novela histórica El sueño del celta.

•Una novedad es que será el primer ensayo, obviando al dedicado al conocido pintor colombiano Fernando Botero, que realiza el escritor arequipeño en el que la literatura o algún autor no es el tema central.

Fuente:

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

Why Do Languages Die?

2012-01-04T05:30:00.001-08:00

Why Do Languages Die?

Mises Daily: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 by Danny Hieber

The history of the world's languages is largely a story of loss and decline. At around 8000 BC, linguists estimate that upwards of 20,000 languages may have been in existence.[1] Today the number stands at 6,909 and is declining rapidly.[2] By 2100, it is quite realistic to expect that half of these languages will be gone, their last speakers dead, their words perhaps recorded in a dusty archive somewhere, but more likely undocumented entirely.[3]

What causes this? How does one become the last speaker of a language, as Boa Sr was before her death in 2010? How do languages come to be spoken only by elders and not children? There are a number of bad answers to these questions. One is globalization, a nebulous term used disparagingly to refer to either global economic specialization and the division of labor, or the adoption of similar cultural practices across the globe.

The problem with globalization in the latter sense is that it is the result, not a cause, of language decline. Another bad answer, encompassed in the former definition of globalization, is trade and capitalism. Trade does not kill languages any more than it kills any other type of cultural practice, like painting or music. Trade enhances the exchange of cultural practices and fosters their proliferation; it does not generally diminish them. Historically, regional trade has fostered the creation of many new lingua francas, and the result tends to be a stable, healthy bilingualism between the local language and the regional trade language. It is only when the state adopts a trade language as official and, in a fit of linguistic nationalism, foists it upon its citizens, that trade languages become "killer languages."

Most importantly, what both of the above answers overlook is that speaking a global language or a language of trade does not necessitate the abandonment of one's mother tongue. The average person on this planet speaks three or four languages. Must youth in Japan abandon Japanese in order to partake in global English commerce? Must a business executive in Germany stop speaking German to her kids in order to be successful at her English-speaking office? Why bother giving up one language for another when you can just speak both?

The truth is, most people don't "give up" the languages they learn in their youth. They tend to speak those languages either until they die or they no longer have someone to speak them with. Instead, languages are lost when the process of intergenerational transmission is altered or interrupted. To wipe out a language, one has to enter the home and prevent the parents from speaking their native language to their children. Given such a preposterous scenario, we return to our question — how could this possibly happen?

One good answer is urbanization. If a Gikuyu and a Giryama meet in Nairobi, they won't likely speak each other's mother tongue, but they very likely will speak one or both of the trade languages in Kenya — Swahili and English. Their kids may learn a smattering of words in the heritage languages from their parents, but by the third generation any vestiges of those languages in the family will likely be gone. In other cases, extremely rural communities are drawn to the relatively easier lifestyle in cities, until sometimes entire villages are abandoned. Nor is this a recent phenomenon. The first case of massive language die-off was probably during the Agrarian (Neolithic) Revolution, when humanity first adopted farming, abandoned the nomadic lifestyle, and created permanent settlements. As the size of these communities grew, so did the language they spoke. But throughout most of history, and still in many areas of the world today, 500 or fewer speakers per language has been the norm. Like the people who spoke them, these languages were constantly in flux. No language could grow very large, because the community that spoke it could only grow so large itself before it fragmented. The language followed suit, soon becoming two languages. Permanent settlements changed all this, and soon larger and larger populations could stably speak the same language.

Quite impressively for someone with little to no knowledge of the linguistics of his day, Mises had already come to understand these connections between language decline, community growth, and economic exchange even in his earliest writings:

In primitive times every migration causes not only geographical but also intellectual separation of clans and tribes. Economic exchanges do not yet exist; there is no contact that could work against differentiation and the rise of new customs. The dialect of each tribe becomes more and more different from the one that its ancestors spoke when they were still living together. The splintering of dialects goes on without interruption. The descendants no longer understand one other.… A need for unification in language then arises from two sides. The beginnings of trade make understanding necessary between members of different tribes. But this need is satisfied when individual middlemen in trade achieve the necessary command of language.[4]

Thus urbanization is an important factor in language death. To be sure, the wondrous features of cities that draw immigrants — greater economies of scale, decreased search costs, increased division of labor — are all made possible with capitalism, and so in this sense languages may die for economic reasons. But this is precisely the type of language death that shouldn't concern us (unless you're a linguist like me), because urbanization is really nothing more than the demonstrated preferences of millions of people who wish to take advantage of all the fantastic benefits that cities have to offer.

In short, these people make the conscious choice to leave an environment where network effects and sociological benefits exist for speaking their native language, and exchange it for a greater range of economic possibilities, but where no such social benefits for speaking the language exist. If this were the only cause of language death — or even just the biggest one — then there would be little more to say about it. For as Mises so lucidly states,

Since nobody is in the position to substitute his own value judgments for those of the acting individual, it is vain to pass judgment on other people's aims and volitions. No man is qualified to declare what would make another man happier or less discontented. The critic either tells us what he believes he would aim at if he were in the place of his fellow; or, in dictatorial arrogance blithely disposing of his fellow's will and aspirations, declares what condition of this other man would better suit himself, the critic.[5]

Far too many well-intentioned individuals are too quick to substitute their valuations for those of the last speakers of indigenous languages this way. Were it up to them, these speakers would be resigned to misery and poverty and deprived of participation in the world's advanced economies in order that their language might be passed on. To be sure, these speakers themselves often fall victim to the mistaken ideology that one language necessarily displaces or interferes with another. Although the South African Department of Education is trying to develop teaching materials in the local African languages, for example, many parents are pushing back; they want their children taught only in English. In Dominica, the parents go even further and refuse to even speak the local language, Patwa, to their children.[6] Were they made aware of the falsity of this notion of language displacement, perhaps they would be less quick to stop speaking their language to their children. But the decision is ultimately theirs to make, and theirs alone.

Urbanization, however, is not the only cause of language death. There is another that, I'm sad to say, almost none of the linguists who work on endangered languages give much thought to, and that is the state. The state is the only entity capable of reaching into the home and forcibly altering the process of language socialization in an institutionalized way.

How? The traditional method was simply to kill or remove indigenous and minority populations, as was done as recently as 1923 in the United States in the last conflict of the Indian War. More recently this happens through indirect means — whether intentional or otherwise — the primary method of which has been compulsory state schooling.

There is no more pernicious assault on the cultural practices of minority populations than a standardized, Anglified, Englicized compulsory education. It is not just that children are forcibly removed from the socialization process in the home, required to speak an official language and punished (often corporally) for doing otherwise. It is not just that schools redefine success, away from those things valued by the community, and towards those things that make someone a better citizen of the state. No, the most significant impact of compulsory state education is that it ingrains in children the idea that their language and their culture is worthless, of no use in the modern classroom or society, and that it is something that merely serves to set them apart negatively from their peers, as an object of their vicious torment.

But these languages clearly do have value, if for no other reason than simply because people value them. Local and minority languages are valued by their speakers for all sorts of reasons, whether it be for use in the local community, communicating with one's elders, a sense of heritage, the oral and literary traditions of that language, or something else entirely. Again, the praxeologist is not in a position to evaluate these beliefs. The praxeologist merely notes that free choice in language use and free choice in association, one not dictated by the edicts of the state, will best satisfy the demand of individuals, whether for minority languages or lingua francas. What people find useful, they will use.

By contrast, the state values none of these things. For the state, the goal is to bind individuals to itself, to an imagined homogeneous community of good citizens, rather than their local community. National ties trump local ones in the eyes of the state. Free choice in association is disregarded entirely. And so the state forces many indigenous people to become members of a foreign community, where they are a minority and their language is scorned, as in the case of boarding schools. Whereas at home, mastering the native language is an important part of functioning in the community and earning prestige, and thus something of value, at school it becomes a black mark and a detriment. Given the prisonlike way schools are run, and how they exhibit similar intense (and sometimes dangerous) pressures from one's peers, minority-language-speaking children would be smart to disassociate themselves as quickly as possible from their cultural heritage.

The result is that, two generations ago, after the Prussian model of compulsory education had firmly taken root in countries across the world, an entire generation of minority peoples decided that their language was worthless, and when they had children of their own, refused to teach it to them. The impending die-off of languages is no less the result of processes put in motion a century ago by the state as it is the result of continuing hegemony today.

Mises himself, though sometimes falling prey to common fallacies regarding language like linguistic determinism and ethnolinguistic isomorphism, was aware of this distinction between natural language decline and language death brought on by the state. In fact, the entire first chapter of one of his earlier works, Nation, State, and Economy, is devoted to issues of language and the state. He notes,

Quite distinct from natural assimilation through personal contact with people speaking other languages is artificial assimilation — denationalization by state or other compulsion.… If individuals are put into an environment where they are cut off from contact with their fellow nationals and made exclusively dependent on contacts with foreigners, then the way is prepared for their assimilation.[7]

This is precisely what the Bureau of Indian Affairs accomplished by coercing indigenous children into attending boarding schools. Those children were cut off from their culture and language — their nation — until they had effectively assimilated American ideologies regarding minority languages, namely, that English is good and all else is bad.

Nor is this the only way the state affects language. The very existence of a modern nation-state, and the ideology it encompasses, is antithetical to linguistic diversity. It is predicated on the idea of one state, one nation, one people. In Nation, State, and Economy, Mises points out that, prior to the rise of nationalism in the 17th and 18th centuries, the concept of a nation did not refer to a political unit like state or country as we think of it today. A "nation" instead referred to a collection of individuals who share a common history, religion, cultural customs and — most importantly — language. Mises even went so far as to claim that "the essence of nationality lies in language."[8] The "state" was a thing apart, referring to the nobility or princely state, not a community of people (hence Louis XIV's famous quip, "L'état c'est moi.").[9] In that era, a state might consist of many nations, and a nation might subsume many states.

The rise of nationalism changed all this. As Robert Lane Greene points out in his excellent book, You Are What You Speak: Grammar Grouches, Language Laws, and the Politics of Identity,

The old blurry linguistic borders became inconvenient for nationalists. To build nations strong enough to win themselves a state, the people of a would-be nation needed to be welded together with a clear sense of community. Speaking a minority dialect or refusing to assimilate to a standard wouldn't do.[10]

Mises himself elaborated on this point. Despite his belief in the value of a liberal democracy, which would remain with him for the rest of his life, Mises realized early on that the imposition of democracy over multiple nations could only lead to hegemony and assimilation:

In polyglot territories, therefore, the introduction of a democratic constitution does not mean the same thing at all as introduction of democratic autonomy. Majority rule signifies something quite different here than in nationally uniform territories; here, for a part of the people, it is not popular rule but foreign rule. If national minorities oppose democratic arrangements, if, according to circumstances, they prefer princely absolutism, an authoritarian regime, or an oligarchic constitution, they do so because they well know that democracy means the same thing for them as subjugation under the rule of others.[11]

From the ideology of nationalism was also born the principle of irredentism, the policy of incorporating historically or ethnically related peoples into the larger umbrella of a single state, regardless of their linguistic differences. As Greene points out, for example,

By one estimate, just 2 or 3 percent of newly minted "Italians" spoke Italian at home when Italy was unified in the 1860s. Some Italian dialects were as different from one another as modern Italian is from modern Spanish.[12]

$8.00 $5.00

This in turn prompted the Italian statesman Massimo D'Agelizo (1798–1866) to say, "We have created Italy. Now we need to create Italians." And so these Italian languages soon became yet another casualty of the nation-state.

Mises once presciently predicted that,

If [minority nations] do not want to remain politically without influence, then they must adapt their political thinking to that of their environment; they must give up their special national characteristics and their language.[13]

This is largely the story of the world's languages. It is, as we have seen, the history of the state, a story of nationalistic furor, and of assimilation by force. Only when we abandon this socialist and utopian fantasy of one state, one nation, one people will this story begin to change.

Fuente:

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

Set Culture Free Mises Daily: Monday, January 02, 2012 by Joel Poindexter ArticleComments Also by Joel Poindexter AA 53 Recently Salon featured an interview with author Robert Levine, entitled "Does culture really want to be free?" Levine has written

2012-01-02T15:03:00.001-08:00

Set Culture Free

Mises Daily: Monday, January 02, 2012 by Joel Poindexter

Recently Salon featured an interview with author Robert Levine, entitled "Does culture really want to be free?" Levine has written a new book, Free Ride, on the subject of intellectual property (IP). His subtitle is How Digital Parasites Are Destroying the Culture Business and How the Culture Business Can Fight Back, the thesis of which is predicated on a misunderstanding of property rights and a poor grasp of economics.

In this essay I'll begin with a brief outline of property rights, explain how IP fails to meet the requirements of tangible property, and refute some of Levine's other fallacies.

Over time, property rights emerged as a way of mitigating conflict over scarce goods. If there is a finite amount of something, say hammers, it's possible that at some point conflict over the use of a tool may arise. Establishing property rights, and institutions to enforce those rights and arbitrate disputes, tends to reduce this conflict.

Hans Hermann-Hoppe explains this concept by using the Garden of Eden as an example, where everything is in abundance. However,

outside the Garden of Eden, in the realm of scarcity, there must be rules that regulate not only the use of [property] but also of everything scarce so that all possible conflicts can be ruled out (emphasis in original).

If there are an infinite number of hammers, or a device exists to infinitely reproduce them, then the problem of scarcity disappears, along with the need for property rights. Intellectual property is not a scarce commodity. Whether it is the design plans to a rocket engine, the arrangement of musical notes, or the pixels of a digital image is immaterial. None of these meet the scarcity requirement to necessitate property rights. Each can be infinitely reproduced, without denying their use by the original owner.

Levine and other advocates of IP rights view reproduction as theft. But theft is not a synonym for duplicate. A key element of theft is depriving the original owner of his or her property, which does not occur when an item is reproduced. Therefore, IP should not have the protection that scarce property enjoys.

In the course of the interview Levine quotes Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor regarding copyright and free speech. "The framers intended copyright itself to be the engine of free expression," she said. An interesting argument indeed, considering the actual wording from article 1, section 8 reads, "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries…." There is nothing in that clause regarding free speech. The history of copyright laws is rooted not only in protection for guilds but also in censorship. So to suggest that copyrights are intended to secure rights to free expression could only be described as Orwellian.

Levine asserts that "copyright laws … create some kind of market for intellectual property." And he's right to one extent; they do create some kind of market. The question however is, is it the kind of market a free society would have? Certainly not; there is a market now, but rather than one based on spontaneous order and voluntary trade, it's one of central planning, which is predicated on coercion.

The market for intellectual property would, and does, exist independent of IP laws. There are no laws that seek to regulate the hat industry in the way that IP laws do music, and yet there remains a vibrant market for headwear. A market is nothing more than two or more individuals exchanging in commerce. There need not be for utilitarian reasons, nor should there be for moral reasons, government regulation of any industry.

$30.00$27.00

Perhaps if the historical record supported Levine's thesis that government intervention is vital to the culture market we could at least find it plausible. To see that such regulation is not in fact necessary one need only look to the case of book publishing in the United States vis-à-vis England in the 19th century. Michele Boldrin and David K. Levine (no relation) did just that while researching for their book Against Intellectual Monopoly, and what they found is compelling.

During this period England had strict laws of copyright while publishers in the United States were free to reprint works from foreign authors. Despite the lack of legal protection, English authors and American publishing houses still found it profitable to contract with one another. In some cases these authors earned more in the United States than they did from royalties at home.

This relatively liberal set of copyright laws allowed books to be published on such a scale that their domestic price was but a fraction of what Britons paid. For example, a copy of Charles Dickens's A Christmas Carol was available in the United States for only 6¢, while the same book was available on English bookshelves for almost $2.50. The result of such low prices, as Boldrin and Levine point out, was that literacy rates in the United States were much higher.

We might also ask what explains great classical music. Jeffrey Tucker has noted that it was theabsence of IP laws that allowed composers to freely emulate and build on one another's works. Had IP laws been enforced in the manner they are today we would have missed out on so much of the great work. As Tucker explains, "There would be no progress in culture, ideas, or technology without [copying]."

Concerning the music business, Levine conflates low CD sales with a decline in total demand for music. But CDs aren't music; they're just one of many formats. It happens that they're becoming less desirable to consumers, as the principle of revealed preference has shown. Music downloads and streaming are increasingly becoming the most common media, and live performances are still the most lucrative aspect of the industry.

Many critics of digital downloading point to single-song sales as a terrible thing for artists. But this is only a terrible thing if the artist possesses marginal talent. Most people have probably experienced a time when they heard a song they liked on the radio and bought the CD, only to discover that overall it wasn't that good. Allowing consumers to buy one song at a time provides musicians an incentive to produce not one or two good songs for radio, but an entire record's worth of quality music.

Levine says in the interview,

Most online companies rely for their content, and hence for their money, on traditional media companies. If they destroy that business model, it's unclear what they're going to have to distribute. If you look at YouTube, eight of the top 10 videos are major-label music videos. If the major labels shrank to the point where they can't make videos, YouTube isn't much of a business.

These online companies are only the intermediary between producer and consumer, so it really doesn't matter who is creating content. Whether the traditional media companies or their business models survive or not, the Internet can still marry supply with demand. As far as clarity of what's going to be distributed is concerned, we can't know this a priori regardless of who's doing the production. Whether it's a traditional record label or an independent artist using YouTube to market himself, consumer preference will ultimately decide.

It does not follow that, because some of the highest-rated videos are from major labels, YouTube would become irrelevant for the business in their absence. All that shows is that major labels continue to provide the most popular products. If these traditional companies get left behind, there's still going to be a "top ten" on YouTube. The logical equivalent to his argument would be wringing our hands over Michael Phelps's eventual retirement from swimming. His departure won't mean that swimming as we know it will end; there will always be champion swimmers, and, who knows, maybe there's someone faster out there.

When asked to name the winners and losers following the digital age, Levine declares a short-term victory for the technology sector, and says the losers are large media companies. The long-term loser, he says, is everyone. Interestingly enough, he ignores the group that all of this is meant to serve: the consumers.

$8.00$6.00

It is for consumers that businesses innovate, and artists create. In order to earn a profit, firms look to produce valuable goods; and to put food on the table artists hope to please their patrons. IP laws are nothing more than monopoly grants — and an affront to property rights in real things. In their absence, consumers would have access to more and better goods, because, without IP laws, emulation and improvement are possible.

Levine's conclusion that anything outside of the current scheme is going to result in the [destruction of the] "Culture Business" is shortsighted. It looks only at "what is seen" while ignoring "what is unseen." We see that big media and technology companies thrived. We don't see what could have come about as a result of copying, emulation, and, ultimately, improvement.

Joel Poindexter is a student working toward a degree in economics. His writing has been published by the Ludwig von Mises Institute, LewRockwell.com and the Tenth Amendment Center. He lives with his wife and daughter near Kansas City. See his blog. Send him mail. See Joel Poindexter's article archives.

Comment on this article.

Fuente:misses org

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

FELIZ AÑO ANUEVO A NUESTROS MILES DE LECTORES UN ABRAZO

2011-12-29T05:24:00.001-08:00

A LOS MILES DE NUESTROS QUERIDOS LECTORES Y AMIGOS, LES DESEAMOS UN FELIZ 2012

Estamos a punto de despedir el año, y en nuestra red de110 Blogs temáticos queremos aprovechar la ocasión para desear a todos Feliz Año Nuevo. Que el 2012 que entra nos de mucha felicidad, ilusión y motivación para afrontar los retos que nos depara el mundo global

Dar las gracias a todos, a los miles de miles que han apoyado y leído nuestro trabajo en las Redes sociales Facebook, Twitter en las que estamos presentes todos los días . A todos:UN FELIZ Y PROSPERO AÑO NUEVO.

Rodrigo González Fernández

http://consultajuridica.blogspot.com

Santiago-chile.

Fuente:

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

The "Mystery" of the Endowment Effect

2011-12-28T09:43:00.001-08:00

FROM MISSES ORG.

The "Mystery" of the Endowment Effect

Mises Daily: Wednesday, December 28, 2011 by Per Bylund

The development of modern neoclassical economics is the story of how a discipline lost its way. Before the mathematization of economics, economists tried to explain prices and macro patterns in the market place from individual human action. But modern "mathonomics" has evolved into a subfield of mathematics with no obvious ties to the real economy. Assuming "perfect" conditions and general equilibrium, the conclusions of economic analysis follow directly from the premises — as one would expect from solving mathematical equations — and are hence of little scientific interest. It follows that phenomena in the real economy that do not seem to fit the "perfect" models should be dismissed as imperfections; what remains to explain is the causes of action rather than its effect. The task of economics has therefore shifted from explaining the effect of human action to tracking the causes of it.

This radical shift suggests that we already know all there is to know about markets (at least to the limited extent predicted by mathematical models), while it provides a breeding ground for analysis of behavior instead of action. In other words, in order to track the ultimate causes of our mathematically precise economic models, economists shift focus toward psychology and the identifying building blocks of actors' perception of self. Economists have moved from being experts at explaining economic phenomena and the market process to being at best run-of-the-mill mathematicians and second-rate psychologists.

Considering this development, it is no wonder that economists are puzzled by phenomena like the "endowment effect." Indeed, I have myself experienced statements by established economist scholars about this psychological effect that is assumed to be a mystery. In layman terms, the endowment effect is

a hypothesis that people value a good or service more once their property right to it has been established. In other words, people place a higher value on objects they own than objects that they do not. In one experiment, people demanded a higher price for a coffee mug that had been given to them but put a lower price on one they did not yet own. (from Wikipedia)

From a mathematical-economic point view, the endowment effect demonstrates the inability of formal economics to explain what drives human action. Indeed, the endowment effect seems to shift an actor's indifference curves, and thus his subjective valuation of goods and services, depending not on qualities in the good itself or its price but on the contextual, circumstantial characteristics and psychological state of the instant and situation. The economic explanation to market valuation is therefore at odds with real valuation and the models need to be expanded to include psychological drivers of subjective valuation. And therefore economics must embrace behavioral studies and neuroscience.

From an Austrian point of view, however, there is no problem and never was one. The "endowment effect" is but an illusory problem that arises due to the confusion of means and ends in modern economics. The only reason economists today find bewilderment in such an "effect" is that they have adopted precise mathematics as the end of economic analyses rather than seeing it as one of its possible means. In fact, the endowment effect, while literally impossible in mathematical analysis and assumed away in indifference-curve analysis, is necessary in any type of exchange. Both Menger and Böhm-Bawerk were well aware of this, and neither they nor any later Austrians ever recanted — and for good reason.

$30.00 $22.00

Let us borrow an illustration from Böhm-Bawerk's Positive Theory of Capital (pp. 143–47), in which a farmer "has just harvested five sacks of corn." These sacks are to keep him alive until the next harvest and therefore he makes plans for how to use them. Böhm-Bawerk writes,

One sack he absolutely requires for the sustenance of his life till the next harvest. A second he requires to supplement this bare living to the extent of keeping himself hale and vigorous. More corn than this, in the shape of bread and farinaceous food generally, he has no desire for. On the other hand, it would be very desirable to have some animal food, and he sets aside, therefore, a third sack to feed poultry. A fourth sack he destines for the making of coarse spirits. Suppose, now, that his various personal wants have been fully provided for by this apportionment of the four sacks, and that he cannot think of anything better to do with the fifth sack than feed a number of parrots, whose antics amuse him. (p. 150)

The farmer therefore dedicates each sack to a certain use intended to give him the most possible satisfaction. The sacks are substitutes, which means that it does not matter to this farmer which particular sack is used to distill brandy or feed the parrots. Indeed, to this farmer the sacks can be used interchangeably, and the loss of one sack of grain (no matter which one) will always mean (assuming the farmer's preferences do not change) the parrots will have to find food on their own or find another benevolent farmer with grain in excess of his personal needs. At any loss of grain, the farmer will readily reorganize the stock at hand so that he maximizes his utility.

Imagine if this farmer somehow loses two of his sacks so that he has only three sacks left. Obviously, he will use the three sacks for food but will have no grain to distill brandy or feed parrots. And if he were to increase his stock by one sack, he would distill brandy — the parrots would always (under the aforementioned preferences) have to wait until the farmer has a total of at least five sacks on hand.

Let us assume this farmer has some money under his mattress and the opportunity to purchase a fourth sack of grain. The economic problem is what the price of that fourth sack would be. From the farmer's perspective, it is obvious that he could give up some value to get his hands on the extra grain. How much? He would only purchase the sack of grain if it makes him better off, that is to say that he will not give up a higher value for the sack of grain than the value he would receive in using it. In fact, since he intends to use this fourth sack of grain to distill brandy, he would be willing (and, we have assumed, able) to pay anything less than the value he attributes to that brandy. Were he to pay more than this value, then he would be worse off; were he to pay an equal value, then going through with the exchange means nothing to him — so why would he do it? The only way this farmer would go through with the exchange is if he gives up less value than he receives. And the same goes for the seller — he or she will sell a sack of grain to the farmer only if the value of it is perceived as lower than the value of the payment for it.

This means both the buyer and seller gain from trade, which is an age-old economic truth. But it also means that the price, in terms of the actors' subjective valuation, is necessarily (a) lower than the value of the good purchased for the buyer, and (b) higher than the value of the good sold for the seller.

Let us assume the farmer (we'll call him A) has already purchased the fourth sack of grain and that he paid eight silver coins for it. Another farmer (let's call him B) visits and wishes to purchase a sack of grain. What price would A require in order to sell the sack to B? Neoclassical economics assumes indifference and therefore that the price of this fourth sack of grains is eight silver coins. But this is not true — we have already shown that A was willing to pay eight silver coins for the sack of grains because he valued the sack of grains at more than eight silver coins. He would not have chosen to give up those coins if he did not place a lesser value on them than the grain. Farmer B would have to pay farmer A a price that exceeds the value A sees in using the grain to distill brandy, perhaps ten silver coins (and, for the sake of simplicity, we can say that he values the brandy at nine silver coins).

The endowment effect is the price difference between eight and ten silver coins. To neoclassical economists, it is supposedly a mystery that farmer A, when having only three sacks of grain, is willing to pay the price of eight silver coins for an additional sack of grain, but when he has acquired it, he is not willing to sell it for less than ten silver coins!

$45.00 $42.00

But there is no mystery to the endowment effect — and there is no effect. Indeed, farmer A does not value the fourth sack of grain differently depending on whether he wishes to acquire it or if he considers selling it — he values the sack of grain exactly the same. Throughout this example, the value of the fourth sack to the farmer is his use of it to distill brandy. The value is not the price he is willing to pay to acquire it, and it is not the price he is willing to accept to give it up. Exchange is not the result of an equality in valuation, as indifference-curve analysis assumes, but a result of inequality in the parties' valuation. The seller must value that which he gains through the exchange more than what he gives up, just as the buyer must value that which he gains more than that which he gives up. Only when this is the case is exchange possible and expected.

The bewilderment due to the endowment effect is only because neoclassical economics has sacrificed economic truth for the sake of the mathematical means in economic analysis. In a strictly mathematical analysis the conclusions follow directly from the assumptions. Those using such frameworks in economic analyses need to look somewhere outside the framework to find causes and explanations, because math is tautological and does not identify causes or provide explanations — only illustrations.

The obvious solution to this shortcoming in the framework is to replace it with something better and more realistic, not persist in seeking explanations elsewhere.

Per Bylund is a PhD candidate in economics at the University of Missouri and senior fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institutet i Sverige. Visit his website. Send him mail. See Per Bylund's article archives.

Comment on this article.

Fuente: http://mises.org/daily/5839/The-Mystery-of-the-Endowment-Effect

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

The Competitiveness Distraction

2011-12-27T11:33:00.001-08:00

The Competitiveness Distraction

Mises Daily: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 by T. Norman Van Cott

Does the ongoing failure of US elementary and secondary education bode ill for US international competitiveness? What about government regulation run amok along with a host of other maladies? Business and economic commentators uniformly answer yes without ever getting specific about the meaning of competitiveness. They apparently view competitiveness and the national maladies as one and the same. Evidence about the maladies is prima facie evidence about competitiveness, at least for the commentators.

To be sure, things like failing public education sap overall US production potential. However, overall production potential does not determine competitiveness, at least as economists have defined the term for close to 200 years tracing back to David Ricardo in 1821. For economists, competitiveness traces to the apportionment of production capabilities across goods and services, not overall capabilities. Apportionment of capabilities determines producers' alternative earning opportunities — their opportunity costs, the final arbiter of competitiveness. When it comes to competitiveness, living standards are a distraction.

Take the case of a professional athlete like Albert Pujols, long-time slugging first baseman for the St. Louis Cardinals who will be playing for the Los Angeles Angels next year. The skills that make him such a tremendous baseball player — upper and lower body strength, eye-hand coordination, and quickness — would undoubtedly make him a phenomenal mower of lawns. Indeed, it is no exaggeration to say that Mr. Pujols could probably cut more lawns per day than anyone in St. Louis, Los Angeles, or anywhere else for that matter.

Would Mr. Pujols's lawn-cutting prowess translate into competitiveness in lawn-cutting circles? Nope. Just the opposite. He is surely among the highest-cost lawn cutters wherever he lives. That's because his cost for cutting grass depends on what he can earn were he not cutting grass — in this case, playing baseball. He will reportedly earn about $155,000 per game next year. Assuming he could cut, say, 40 lawns per day, that translates into an opportunity cost of close to $4,000 per lawn. So is the fastest mower of lawns in the country serious competition for other lawn cutters? Duh.

Can Mr. Pujols's lawn-care competitiveness ever change? Sure, but it takes a change in his baseball earnings relative to his lawn-cutting abilities. Looking at only one activity tells us nothing. Likewise, positing that both abilities fall (or rise) tells us nothing absent knowledge about how his abilities are changing relative to each other.

It is the latter error writ large to a whole country that ensnares commentators. Unless changes in a country's overall production abilities are skewed, its competitiveness — that is, opportunity cost — doesn't change.

Am I am overstating the commentators' position? No. Consider World Economic Forum's (WEF) "Global Competitiveness Report," issued annually for over 30 consecutive years, usually to much media acclaim. Its most recent report (more than 500 pages!) claimed to rank the competitiveness of 142 countries, defining competitiveness as "the set of institutions, policies, and factors that determine the level of productivity of a country." In econospeak, productivity is merely another term for overall production potential or living standards. The WEF offered no hint of opportunity-cost thinking when discussing competitiveness.

Some might think that the fact that people in wealthier countries sell lots of things to people in other countries supports the idea that international competitiveness traces to living-standard differentials. Not true. After all, the same people that sell a lot abroad also buy lots of things from people in other countries. Do we want to say that higher living standards simultaneouslyundermine competitiveness? That would be silly. In the final analysis, wealthier nations buy lots of things from the rest of the world because they're wealthier. These purchases provide foreigners the wherewithal to buy things from them. So people from wealthy nations sell and buy a lot abroad because they're wealthier. The composition of what is sold and bought turns on the arbiter of competitiveness: opportunity costs, not wealth.

The competitiveness gurus' lack of attention to economic fundamentals leads them to polar opposite competitiveness "stories" in other venues. For example, it is common to hear pundits intone about people in poor economies having a competitive advantage when they sell in the United States. Say the pundits, lower foreign living standards mean foreigners work for less, dooming any Americans who try to compete with them.

$25.00$20.00

This story is completely at odds with the commentators' maladies story. To wit, how can Americans becoming poorer make Americans less competitive, but foreigners being poorer make foreigners competitive? Hint: it can't. Being poorer can't reduce competitiveness for some and increase it for others. That's because competitiveness doesn't turn on overall production capabilities. Think Albert Pujols and lawn cutting.

So does this mean that levels and changes in living standards are unimportant? Not at all! Living standards obviously matter. They measure the effectiveness of economic systems and policies. However, positing a link between living standards and competitiveness is asking living standards to answer a question they can't answer. If systems and policies cause a nation's residents to be poorer, just say so. Competitiveness rhetoric is a distraction.

T. Norman Van Cott, an adjunct scholar with the Indiana Policy Review Foundation, is professor of economics at Ball State University, Muncie, IN. Send him mail. See T. Norman Van Cott's article archives.

Fuente:http://mises.org/daily/5835/The-Competitiveness-Distraction

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

Lew's Big Idea

2011-12-26T11:15:00.001-08:00

Lew's Big Idea

Mises Daily: Monday, December 26, 2011 by Doug French

Going on 30 years ago Lew Rockwell had an idea. The idea was to form an institute to celebrate the works of a forgotten scholar — Ludwig von Mises — and promote the study of Austrian economics, a school of economic thought that recognized freedom as paramount if society is to be prosperous, a school of thought that had been long forgotten, a school of thought that recognized the damage that government intervention causes.

For three decades Lew's big idea has carried on with the help of donors like you. Ideas may be free; however, teaching those ideas and implementing them are not. In 2011, Mises.org has enjoyed 1.2 million unique visitors each month. Lives and minds are changed by the thousands each and every day by Mises.org. And while the vast resources contained online at Mises.org are free to its users, the cost to keep it running 24 hours a day, 365 days a year is far from free.

The 800 articles, the 100 audio dailies, the 337 lectures and interviews in media, the 80 live video webcasts that were added just this year could not be created out of thin air the way the Fed creates money. Donors must forgo consumption and care enough about liberty and freedom to make all of this possible — and they have done so for three decades.

Many in the mainstream must believe that Austrian economics — Rothbard, Mises, Hazlitt, and Ron Paul — appeared from nowhere. Of course they haven't. It's taken 30 years of hard work by the Mises staff and sacrifice from our donors to elevate the ideas of liberty to the national stage.

Now is our time. Now is the time for the ideas of liberty to take hold. There is more interest in our ideas than ever before. The Institute held 16 conferences in 2011, attended not just by enthusiastic followers and students but those curious about ideas they hadn't heard about before: something other than the same old government prescriptions to solve the same old problems caused by government itself.

Book sales are a good indication of the interest level, and books sales continue to be strong. However, the Institute must work hard to keep up with consumer tastes. The world has changed. Not everyone prefers big, hardcover books. With the help of donors we've created new audiobooks, including editions of Human Action and Man, Economy and State. We've published over 150 ebooks and a number of new (and old) titles have been introduced or reintroduced in cheaper pocket formats to educate a new generation.

The Institute's newest program, the Mises Academy, has been a smashing success with over 30 classes offered, many with enrolments of over 200 students tuning in for lectures from all over the world.

None of this can occur for free. Although the message of free markets can be spread more efficiently and effectively than ever before, resources are required. Now is not the time to rest on our laurels. The ideas of Mises and Rothbard have captured the world's attention, and we must seize this moment.

Please help us make 2012, the Mises Institute's 30th anniversary, our most successful and productive year yet, leaving no stone unturned to advance the cause of free markets and liberty. With your help we can move mountains for freedom; and now is the time!

Please give generously.

Comment on this article.

You can subscribe to future articles by Doug French via this RSS feed.

Fuente:

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

HAY QUE LEER EL NUEVO LIBRO DE EUGENIO TIRONI

2011-12-16T04:27:00.001-08:00

eugenio tironi el empresario.

eugenio tironi, analista político:

"Los 'Chicagos' en Chile se convirtieron en más economicistas que los propios marxistas"

Aún se siente parte de la Concertación, pero cree que el bloque está recurriendo a Michelle Bachelet en "un ritual sin contenido" y que en el encuentro de la ex presidenta y los partidos "van a volar plumas".

Por Patricia Arancibia Clavel 

 Eugenio Tironi Barrios (60) nos vuelve a sorprender con la publicación de un nuevo libro: "Abierta: Gestión de controversias y justificaciones". Agudo, punzante, irónico, no usa anestesia a la hora de ocupar el bisturí para hacer la disección del momento que vive Chile. Analista de fuste de nuestra realidad socio-política, su pensamiento y reflexiones no dejan indiferente ni a la clase política ni empresarial que lo sigue, pese a su permanente posición crítica. Bien dispuesto al diálogo, conversamos en torno a un café, sin prisa pero también sin pausa.

- Este ha sido un año productivo: ¿esperas tanta controversia con el nuevo libro como con "¿Por qué no me quieren?"?
 - Ojalá. Este último lo vengo trabajando hace un par de años y es un rediseño de mis propias bases conceptuales y de lo que hacemos en la empresa que dirijo. Si bien puede parecer un libro técnico, es muy personal e integra muchas facetas y experiencias de mi vida emocional, profesional, valórica. No sé todavía cómo será clasificado en las librerías: si en política, sicología, empresa, autoayuda o sociología.

- ¿Cuál es la tesis de fondo?
 - Que -con pavor de algunos- ya no podemos comprender nuestro mundo a partir ni de las leyes divinas ni de las leyes de la ciencia, que fueron -durante siglos- los referentes de las certidumbres que necesitamos y buscamos obsesivamente como seres humanos. Que debemos construir certidumbres aceptando que siempre serán provisorias y que éstas se construyen colectivamente.

- ¿Cómo aterrizas este planteamiento a la realidad actual chilena?
 - Como sociedad, hemos construido mitos y modelos que hemos revestido de una jerga, autoridad y metodología que las convierten en verdades absolutas. Por ejemplo, en estas últimas décadas hemos creído a pie juntillas en la "ley del mercado" pero hoy ésta no es capaz de dar cuenta de sus desbordes. Los mitos se derrumban, y con ello, nuestras justificaciones y narrativas. Es necesario revisar y aceptar que las "verdades absolutas" y hasta las "leyes naturales" están siempre imbricadas con las creencias.

- ¿Cuál es el principal mito que se está derrumbando hoy en Chile?
 - Que las cosas ocurren de acuerdo a las leyes de la economía y que incluso el amor y la felicidad se pueden llevar a una métrica costo/beneficio. Los "Chicagos" en Chile se convirtieron en más economicistas que los propios marxistas, dándole a su creencia en el modelo económico un marco interpretativo que les permitía una justificación satisfactoria y cómoda de sus actos pues se basaba en leyes naturales. Llevamos más de 30 años renunciando a la política a favor de los expertos en políticas públicas y economistas, pues la creencia en la "razón económica" permeó también a todos los gobiernos de la Concertación.

- ¿Incluso el de Michelle Bachelet?
 - Por supuesto. Prueba de ello es que cuando la gente le pedía alguna medida específica, ella respondía que lo haría encantada, pero que su ministro de Hacienda no se lo permitía. A su vez, el ministro decía que también lo haría encantado, pero que no podía porque no sabía cómo reaccionarían los mercados. Es la abdicación de la voluntad o el deseo -que es lo propio de la política- ante las así llamadas leyes económicas. Y a los políticos les fue muy cómodo aceptarlo porque se apelaba a "lo sagrado". Esa misma creencia condujo a que el primer gobierno de Piñera, el del "pendrive", desplazara a los políticos por técnicos. Ellos, se pensó, solucionarían todos los males del país… 

- ¿Por qué hablas del primer gobierno de Piñera, hay acaso un segundo?
 - Sin duda. Este gobierno ha tenido un giro copernicano desde que Chadwick y Longueira entraron al gabinete. La UDI se tomó La Moneda y Hinzpeter sólo queda como "niño símbolo". Nadie ha derrumbado más el mito del valor de las leyes económicas que este segundo gobierno. Éste acabó con la dimensión sagrada y mitológica del mal llamado "modelo", al cual por años nos sometimos todos. Por ejemplo, profanó el dogma que el alza de impuestos conduce a menor inversión, crecimiento y a mayor desempleo. O que el gasto público tiene que estar focalizado en los más pobres: todas sus iniciativas sociales están focalizadas a la clase media: post-natal, 7%, los cambios en la universidad. O con Barrancones, que las decisiones ambientales son técnicas. O que el Estado tenía que retirarse de la minería… y suma y sigue.

- ¿Longueira desplazó a Hinzpeter?
 - Si yo quiero saber para donde va el gobierno escucho a Longueira. Todo lo que él dijo cuando entró como ministro se ha venido cumpliendo. Creo que desde (Pedro) Vuskovic que no había un ministro de Economía tan poderoso como Longueira. En la historia post-90, ésta es la administración que tiene más políticos en ejercicio dentro del gabinete.

- Y ¿cómo evalúas este cambio?
 - Como extraordinariamente positivo. Nos ha hecho una sociedad con menos tabúes, menos dogmas, menos "modelos", y por lo mismo más reflexiva y creativa. Si el presidente desahució Barrancones y se salta la Corema, ¿por qué la gente en las calles no puede suspender HidroAysén? Si el gobierno subió los impuestos el 2010 y no pasó nada con las empresas, ¿porqué no subir otros? Si Codelco recurrió a Raimundo Espinoza, el demonizado dirigente de los trabajadores del cobre, para avalar su postura frente a Los Bronces, ¿por qué no reforzamos la legislación pro-sindical? No eran tan malos los sindicatos entonces y tampoco es tan malo que el Estado tenga la principal minera del cobre… Lo que digo es que este gobierno ha corrido la frontera de lo posible, nos ha vuelto más adultos. No sé si era esto lo que pretendía, pero este ha sido el resultado.

- No deja de ser paradójico que el gobierno haya privilegiado a los políticos sobre los técnicos, cuando la clase política en general está tan desprestigiada…
 - Los cambios de los que hablamos aquí se han realizado a pesar de los políticos, no a partir de los políticos. Hay un gran retraso en la clase política. Ésta no se ha sentado a reflexionar sobre todo esto que está pasando. Mucho más sensible a estos cambios ha sido el mundo de la empresa.

- ¿Cuáles son tus argumentos para esa afirmación?
 - Veamos el recambio generacional: basta analizar el promedio de edad de los ejecutivos de las empresa con el promedio de edad de los parlamentarios; el número de mujeres; el grado de reflexibilidad; la disposición a recoger información, interpretarla, conversarla y dejarse transformar por ella. Eso es algo que se vive todos los días en el mundo de la empresa y no en el mundo de la política.

- Pero los empresarios han sido poco dados a comunicar lo que hacen y no han expresado con claridad su adecuación a los nuevos tiempos…
 - Hay una especie de disociación entre lo que es el mundo de las empresas, que posee estas características mucho más innovadoras y dinámicas que el mundo de la política, con los empresarios como grupo social. Cuando se corporativizan y hablan como tales, usan todavía el mismo lenguaje y la misma justificación de los tiempos de la Guerra Fría, polarizando Estado vs. Mercado, capitalismo tipo EEUU vs. el europeo, al que ven como una amenaza monstruosa.

- ¿Cómo enfrentas tu "doble militancia"? Por un lado, trabajando codo a codo con los empresarios y por otro, haciéndoles fuertes y ácidas críticas…
 - No hay doble militancia. Yo soy un empresario. De hecho, en torno a mí trabajan más de 100 personas. Lo que "vendemos" son dispositivos para aumentar la capacidad reflexiva de las empresas. Esto implica mantener e incentivar el espíritu crítico sin el cual no hay innovación, creatividad ni adaptación. Este es mi negocio, para usar la jerga económica. O mi vocación, si se prefiere. Si yo les llevara el amén mi labor no tendría sentido. Para eso que contraten a un bufón.

- ¿Ha mejorado la relación empresa/política?
 - Me encanta ver a un Longueira, un Allamand o una Matthei tener que gobernar en democracia y conocer los límites que ello implica. Me encanta ver cómo se han venido enamorando del Estado, al igual como la Concertación lo hizo del mercado cuando le tocó gobernar. Esto está produciendo más cercanía entre las dos élites, como también entre el mundo empresarial y el político. Ya no es algo abstracto, son experiencias comunes. Antes, la división era fuerte y estaban en una especie de guerra civil permanente.

- ¿Cuánto de esta nueva arquitectura conceptual del gobierno de Piñera se basa en los gobiernos concertacionistas?
 - Casi todo. De hecho está usando el método Bachelet. Prueba de ello es que tiene funcionando más comisiones que Bachelet, tirando a la basura la idea que este sería un gobierno de decisiones y no de comisiones. Ahora está hablando de reforma tributaria, que es tan importante como cambiar la Constitución, proponiendo a un grupo transversal para que la estudie, que supongo no será de puros economistas, pues toda estructura tributaria descansa en supuestos morales, y es sobre ello que hay que discutir y concordar antes de llamar a los técnicos. El gobierno está aprendiendo a dialogar, lo que es excelente. Diría que hay una especie de conversión de este gobierno al bacheletismo.

- Y en este nuevo escenario, ¿en qué pie está la Concertación?
 - Ufff! La Concertación nunca entendió lo que fue el gobierno de Bachelet, el cual inició la ruptura con el reinado de los expertos. Recordemos cuando en relación al Transantiago, ella dijo que se arrepentía de haberle hecho caso a su intuición. Era una reivindicación tácita de la política, que consiste justamente en dejarse llevar por la intuición. En esto consiste en realidad el liderazgo y la innovación. El empresario exitoso es el que sigue su intuición: el que la reprime es un administrador. La Concertación no entendió lo que nació con Bachelet, y por eso nombró a Frei de candidato. Creo que todavía no lo entiende. Se ha resistido a realizar una renovación de su arquitectura, de su matriz conceptual.

- Pero ahora la Concertación está volcada a Bachelet, como su tabla de salvación…
 - Claro, es como comulgar pero sin haber hecho el proceso previo de constricción, que pasa por la confesión donde se reconocen las culpas anteriores. En mi libro "Radiografía de una derrota", busqué explicar por qué la Concertación llegó a ese estado patético. Porque seamos claros: aquí no ganó Piñera; perdió la Concertación. Nunca he recibido críticas tan duras. Se tomó como un sacrilegio. El senador Frei dijo que no lo iba a leer. Altos dirigentes políticos me acusaron de traición, deslealtad. Y todo lo que estaba diciendo es que la Concertación -de la que me siento parte- no había entendido el fenómeno Bachelet, y por eso perdió. Ella produjo un cambio profundo en la sociedad que la Concertación, en vez de proyectarlo, buscó clausurar.

- ¿La ves como candidata presidencial? 
- Creo que hoy la Concertación recurre a ella en un ritual sin contenido. Pero Bachelet, sin embargo, tiene el sartén por el mango. Por lo que le he leído, ella ha venido conceptualizando su propio fenómeno. Es indicativo que su fundación tenga el nombre de Dialoga. Veremos ahora qué pasa cuando se produzca su encuentro con los dirigentes concertacionistas. Van a volar plumas. Si yo estuviera en su posición, pondría condiciones realmente drásticas para ser candidata. Exigiría un cambio total de arquitectura, de base conceptual, de nombre, de personas, de estilo. Para que tenga sentido su candidatura tiene que reposarse en una nueva coalición cultural y generacional. De lo contrario su regreso será una pantomima, no una gesta épica.

"Quien entró al gobierno con Piñera fue la nueva élite empresarial"
- Se critica a Piñera por creer que dirigir un gobierno es como dirigir una empresa…
- No soy de los que ven al mundo empresarial, o al de la política, en el campo del pecado. Soy partidario de introducir la política en las empresas y las empresas en la política. De romper ese "muro de Berlín" en que por un lado están los santos y en el otro los pecadores. Me gusta que las personas que vienen de la empresa se metan en el Estado, busquen utilizar sus metodologías, e introduzcan sus mejores prácticas. En lo que discrepo es que unos u otros lleguen al otro campo con la mentalidad de los cruzados frente a los herejes. Ese fue el error del primer gobierno de Piñera. Llegó con la idea mesiánica de que como conocían las leyes económicas y habían tenido éxito en los negocios, en un dos por tres iban a cambiar la gestión del Estado, recibiendo el aplauso de la ciudadanía. No ha sido así.
- ¿El error fue llegar con muchos técnicos?
- Quien entró al gobierno con Piñera no fue la derecha, fue la nueva élite empresarial post-90 que hizo fortuna con la Concertación. Ese grupo fue el que hizo la OPA sobre La Moneda, dejando de lado a las familias con más prosapia, a los políticos y a la UDI, cuyos dirigentes habían hecho el servicio militar en el régimen de Pinochet. A todos ellos los mandó para la casa. Que ese grupo tomara el gobierno ha sido bueno para el país, si se piensa en el largo plazo. El hecho que la elite empresarial haya tenido acceso a esa experiencia, de pasearse por La Moneda, de sentirla propia, y darse cuenta de la magnitud inmensa de los problemas que enfrenta un gobierno, fue algo positivo. Conocieron la frustración de no ser comprendidos y a su vez, la satisfacción de alcanzar pequeños logros, pero que benefician a millones. Aprendieron lo que son las retribuciones no económicas.

Fuente:

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

El Jefe de Protocolo del Estado de Portugal publica ‘O libro do Protocolo’

2011-12-15T06:47:00.001-08:00

El Jefe de Protocolo del Estado de Portugal publica 'O libro do Protocolo'

El Jefe de Protocolo del Estado de Portugal, el embajador José de Bouza Serrano, acaba de publicar O libro do Protocolo, una publicación en la que aborda temas tan interesantes y variopintos como las reglas del protocolo oficial, la organización de consejos de administración en las empresas, cómo se escribe una nota de condolencia o cómo se debe de proceder a la hora de invitar a nuestro jefe a una comida en nuestra casa. Está editado por Libros Esfera, tiene 632 páginas y se vende al precio de 29,25 euros en las principales librerías.

Texto original en portugués:

Editorial: A Esfera dos Livros

Proponer una traducción

¿Cómo debo saludar al Presidente de la República? Quais são as regras por detrás de uma visita de Estado? ¿Cuáles son las reglas tras una visita de Estado? Como se organiza um banquete no Palácio da Ajuda? ¿Cómo se organiza un banquete en el Palacio de Ajuda? Se quiser convidar o meu diretor para jantar em minha casa, como devo proceder? Si desea invitar a mi jefe a cenar a mi casa, ¿qué debo hacer? Como se organiza um conselho de administração de uma empresa? ¿Cómo se organiza una junta de directores de una empresa? Como escrevo uma nota de pêsames? ¿Cómo se escribe una nota de condolencia? Com uma experiência diplomática de mais de 30 anos, o atual Chefe de Protocolo do Estado, José Bouza Serrano, traz-nos O Livro do Protocolo, onde procura responder a todas as questões protocolares, cerimoniais, de cortesia e de etiqueta com que nos deparamos no nosso dia a dia em sociedade. Todas éstas son preguntas a las que se da respuesta en este trabajo.

Con una experiencia diplomática de más de 30 años, el actual jefe de Protocolo de Estado, José Bouza Serrano, responde en O libro do Protocolo a todas las preguntas de ceremonial y protocolo de cortesía que nos encontramos en nuestro día a día en la sociedad. Ao longo destas páginas, amplamente ilustradas, o leitor poderá encontrar as regras do protocolo oficial, com a descrição dos seus procedimentos nos diversos órgãos de soberania, do Presidente da República aos Tribunais, tomará conhecimento da lei das Precedências, que nãos é mais do que o elenco de pessoas organizadas, por lei, segundo a sua importância, que determina a sua colocação numa cerimónia oficial, de algumas particularidades e variantes específicas do Protocolo Diplomático, Religioso, Autárquico, Académico e Empresarial. A lo largo de estas páginas, ampliamente ilustradas, el lector encontrará las reglas oficiales del protocolo, con la descripción de los procedimientos en los distintos órganos de la soberanía.

El autor también aborda cuestiones fundamentales como la relación a través de la comunicación escrita y la oral las formas de tratamiento y la ropa, sin olvidar la decoración, la seguridad y los medios de comunicación. Uma menção ainda para os rituais de passagem na nossa caminhada pela vida, onde como em tudo existem regras a seguir, do nascimento, passando pelo casamento até à morte.

Fuente:

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

.La Tercera Revolución Industrial será la convergencia de Internet y las Energías Renovables .

2011-12-14T05:19:00.001-08:00

La Tercera Revolución Industrial será la convergencia de Internet y las Energías Renovables

por PYMESUR

Sobre el libro titulado La Tercera Revolución Industrial del economista, escritor y asesor norteamericano Jeremy Rifkin, dice cómo el poder lateral está transformando la energía, la economía y el mundo. La Tercera Revolución Industrial (TRI) está al alcance de la mano si se toman las decisiones correctas; y con ella es posible imaginar un nuevo tipo de sociedad, más democrática, descentralizada, justa, solidaria y sostenible. El núcleo de dicha revolución es la convergencia de Internet y las energías renovables, un nuevo paradigma comunicativo-energético que caracterizará lo que llama Era postcarbónica, propia del nuevo régimen económico que denomina capitalismo distribuido. Según Rifkin ya existen las condiciones científico-técnicas que hacen posible la sustitución masiva del petróleo, el uranio y los minerales raros como fuentes de energía y base de las políticas industriales. Por otra parte, existen sobradas evidencias de que estas fuentes se agotan y que no es viable a medio plazo el mantenimiento de un modelo económico y social basado en su uso.

Las consecuencias de empeñarse en ello son graves y pueden serlo aún mucho más: encarecimiento de la energía, guerras y, sobre todo, deterioro medioambiental y calentamiento del planeta hasta el punto de poner en peligro la supervivencia misma de la especie humana.

los cinco pilares sobre los que se sostiene esta TRI son:

La transformación hacia la energía renovable
La transformación del parque de edificios de cada continente en microcentrales eléctricas que recojan y reaprovechen in situ las energías renovables
El despliegue de la tecnología del hidrógeno y de otros sistemas de almacenaje energético en todos los edificios, y a lo largo y ancho de la red de infraestructuras, para acumular energías como las renovables, que son de flujo intermitente.
El uso de la tecnología de Internet para transformar la red eléctrica de cada continente en una "interred" de energía compartida que funcione exactamente igual que Internet (millones de edificios podrán generar localmente -in situ- pequeñas cantidades de energía y podrán vender los excedentes que reingresen en la red, compartiendo esa electricidad con sus vecinos continentales)
La transición de la actual flota de transportes hacia vehículos de motor eléctrico con alimentación de red y/o pilas de combustible, capaces de comprar y vender electricidad dentro de una red eléctrica interactiva continental de carácter inteligente.

El poder lateral, según Rifkin, es la capacidad transformadora de quienes son capaces de poner en práctica el nuevo modelo comunicativo-energético. Es la alternativa al poder vertical propio de las sociedades basadas en la 1ª y 2ª revolución industrial, cuyas empresas y gobiernos tienden a la centralización, a la concentración, a la apropiación excluyente de los recursos y al ejercicio autoritario del poder, de arriba hacia abajo.

La TRI sienta las bases para una transformación profunda de las relaciones sociales, sustituyendo la competitividad de los mercados por una nueva era de relaciones colaborativas.

La ideología económica neoclásica que se deriva de la física newtoniana es sustituida en la TRI por otra visión muy distinta, basada en el pensamiento sistémico y ecológico y las leyes de la termodinámica, que nos ayudan a comprender las interconexiones complejas entre la vida humana y la biosfera. Ya está sucediendo y muchos países están poniéndose en camino hacia ese nuevo horizonte: Alemania, EEUU…

Sin embargo, el proceso es aún lento; Rifkin reclama que se hagan ya apuestas decididas y se dejen a un lado los meros proyectos piloto, pues el tiempo apremia y si no se avanza decididamente en esta dirección corremos el riesgo de una crisis medioambiental apocalíptica, en forma de aceleración del calentamiento global, como consecuencia de los procesos de retroalimentación positiva del planeta.

Para avanzar en esta dirección es fundamental la sensibilización social y la participación activa de los ciudadanos, además del decidido y firme compromiso de los gobiernos. Aunque el lobby de las industrias basadas en el petróleo, el uranio y los materiales escasos son poderosos, también hay gobiernos de países desarrollados y empresas que empiezan a tomarse en serio esta alternativa.

El papel de los gobiernos y de los Estados es fundamental para transitar de la Segunda a la Tercera Revolución Industrial, la iniciativa privada por sí sola es insuficiente, pues es a través de la inversión pública como se pueden generar las condiciones adecuadas para que las empresas se orienten en esta dirección.

Si bien es también posible que para mantener la apuesta por la TRI tengan que desarrollar políticas militaristas para mantener al otro lado de sus fronteras a los millones de personas que van a ser activamente excluidas del nuevo modelo de desarrollo ¿Va a ir por ahí la nueva arquitectura europea que está impulsando Alemania?

A mi juicio, existe un serio peligro de que la TRI se convierta en una alternativa elitista, no porque tenga que serlo en sí misma, sino por las asincronías y contradicciones del proceso sociohistórico de sustitución de la Segunda Revolución Industrial por la Tercera.

Una perspectiva meramente localista, regional o a nivel de un sólo país o un grupo reducido de países es insuficiente. El reto no es sólo implantar la TRI, sino hacerlo de manera que sea una oportunidad para el conjunto de la Humanidad, y no sólo para unos pocos. Por eso es tan importante el papel que este sentido desempeñen la ONU y las grandes instituciones internacionales.

Francisco Malagón

Consultor en Comunicación Social

Fuente:pymesur

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com

Guía para regalar libros chilenos en esta Navidad

2011-12-13T02:29:00.001-08:00

Guía para regalar libros chilenos en esta Navidad

Se acerca la Navidad y ya empezamos a preguntarnos qué regalar a nuestros familiares y amigos. Acá una guía útil para encontrar los títulos que queremos obsequiar.

Sin lugar a dudas, el 2011 ha sido un excelente año para la literatura nacional, ¿qué mejor entonces, que regalar esta Navidad libros de autores nacionales?

Foto: El Mercurio

El premio Cervantes reavivó el interés por Nicanor Parra.

Este fin de año está marcado por la mejor noticia del mundo de las letras, el reconocimiento con el Premio Cervantes aNicanor Parra, por lo que toda su obra es un excelente regalo. Poemas y Antipoemas, Artefactos y Hojas de Parra entre otros son excelentes títulos para regalar. A quienes les interesa la faceta de traductor del antipoeta, El Rey Lear de Shakespeare, es una excelente opción.

2011 ha sido el año de Alejandro Zambra, el autor de Bonsái y La vida privada de los árboles este año sorprendió con Formas de volver a casa, que vuelve a la década de los '80 para dar vida a esta gran obra aclamada en el mundo entero.

Otro lanzamiento que ha tenido gran éxito es El cuaderno de Maya, de Isabel Allende que cuenta la historia de Maya, una joven de diecinueve años, que a ratos pareciera tener otra edad. Este libro ha sido todo un éxito de ventas y se ha mantenido a la cabeza de los ranking desde su lanzamiento.

Hernán Rivera Letelier sorprendió este año con El escritor de Epitafios, una novela absorbente sobre un ángel que contempla el pasar de la vida, y una narración llena de las genialidades características de este tremendo escritor.

Foto: Catalonia

Compro Lago Caburga de Elizabeth Subercaseaux se lanzó este año tras el tremendo éxito de Vendo casa en el barrio alto. Así Compro Lago Caburga se perfila como una continuación, que si bien en Vendo casa… se centró el la sociedad capitalina hoy se traslada al ambiente político. Una novela muy entretenida, llena de descripciones detalladas y agudas que crean una tremenda empatía con el lector.

Este año estuvo también marcado por tristes pérdidas en el mundo literario, como fue la muerte de José Miguel Varas a los 83 años, su novela Neruda Clandestino, narra las aventuras de nuestro Premio Nobel, sus refugios y aventuras mientras escribía Canto General y escapaba de la policía.

Otra pérdida, dolorosa e inesperada fue la muerte de Pilar Donoso, la hija del célebre escritor José Donoso se quitó la vida sumida en el tormento que le trajo el libro escrito por ella, con los diarios de vida y cartas de su padre. Correr el tupido velo es la historia de su familia, un libro doloroso, pero también de una inmensa calidad literaria.

Con un año tan dinámico en el ambiente literario, un libro de uno de nuestros autores es un excelente regalo, porque regalar un libro es regalar cultura.

Fuente:

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
Diplomado en "Responsabilidad Social Empresarial" de la ONU
Diplomado en "Gestión del Conocimiento" de la ONU

Diplomado en Gerencia en Administracion Publica ONU

Diplomado en Coaching Ejecutivo ONU(

PUEDES LEERNOS EN FACEBOOK

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=1020328166

Siguenos en twitter: @rogofe47
HTTP://consultajuridica.blogspot.com
http://el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
http://lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
http://calentamientoglobalchile.blogspot.com
http://respsoem2.blogspot.com

http://coachingdechile.blogspot.com

http://chile-renovables.blogspot.com

http://agriculturablogger.blogspot.com