The Fourth Wall Game

Congress General Secretary Rahul Gandhi came, addressed and in many ways further scripted a new era for the entire spectrum of politics in UP. Each and every time he delves upon the subject, his innermost thought about that particular topic gets unfolded threadbare. One of the best things about his personality is that he never tries to give sermon or impose his thought on others. He never boasts of having invented some philosophy or knowledge. He does only one thing that is to give emphasis on the truth and what is written over the years and tried and tested time and again. And in doing so, he bares his heart for all. This is why common people, especially youth, get engrossed in rapt attention while listening to his speech word by word. His deportment and eagerness to mingle with the common people and down to earth approach towards the problems that people in general face comes him nearer to the people. It explains the meteoric rise of him in the politics of India. When he tells the students of IIIT at convocation in Amethi that one must develop the habit of questioning one’s thought and ideas because it gives one the broader perspectives, it shows how much he yearns for his fellow countrymen to develop a sense of reconciliation and forgiveness and shed one’s ego while dealing with the other fellowmen of different caste, class, creed and colour. Besides, the habit of questioning one’s ideas and thought also inspires one to listen to other’s thought and ideas. He candidly admitted before the IIIT students that he found a huge difference between what he had thought when he was in US and what he thought today. “I am still passionate about my ideas. But there is huge difference between what I viewed when I sat in US and what I view today……… I must tell you there is a huge difference. When I sat there I used to think that all the answers I had to the problems. But the answer was so obvious. Today when I realize that the most important thing one has to do is to question one’s ideas.” He further said, “when I am most certain about something…. and when I am 100% sure that the things are going like this way, it then turns out to be another way. That’s why the most important thing from my perspective is the ability to question oneself.” Elaborating further on the knowledge, he said “knowledge is created by the destruction of knowledge. A lot of ideas that I held earlier and that I thought very important are today destroyed. I don’t believe in those ones any more. They have been replaced by new ones.

I am absolutely certain that some of the ideas that I hold today will be destroyed in the days to come. And it is good thing.” The thoughts he put before the world about his ideas make him clearly distinct among his political ilk and bear out the evidence that how he is forward-looking in his approach towards any problem. He is like a running river which flows and gives life to its dependents. Without shying away from admitting the frailties of human being, he said “none of us can be all mighty God. We do not have eternal knowledge or understanding. Life is moving forward constantly. If we do not develop the habit of questioning ourselves, it is very likely that we become laggard in the days to come.” He urged the students there to move forward by developing the very ideas of questioning oneself. He shared his experience with them saying “being able to travel the country far and wide and interacting with the lot of people ranging from poor people, farmers, engineers, doctors, I see today the multiple perspectives. And what I realized after started meeting with them is that I learnt every point of view important. Knowledge is not the preserve of any person.” Having obtained degree you can not claim that you are more knowledgeable person than your other countrymen who can be farmer. You are quite efficient in IT but when it comes to cultivation, it is the farmer who can teach you how to cultivate. So, knowledge resides closure to where the problem is, he said. It clearly establishes how much humility he has and the honour he gives to his fellow countrymen, no matter how lowly their profession may be.}

The Globalist Free Traders are finding an evangelist in Thomas Friedman from the New York Times. In his book The World is Flat, Friedman calls periods of all time that paved the way in which for Globalization and Free Trade flatteners but he skips over some with the most major ones. The Lend Lease Act within the World War 2 era is one of them. It changed the course of background and it established that you can’t buy from people who don’t have money. You either must find a way to get compensated to them or perhaps you have to allow them to have things to restore their economic values in a very balanced geopolitical setting. You can not move production around seeking the cheapest labor markets on the world while there is an endless pool of workers that will do most something to survive and they’ll never have enough money to acquire anything the economical host nation should have left to market.

In the conclusion, you then have a continuous diminishing process certainly where an working poor class needs cheaper and cheaper prices even though the impoverished destitute classes tend not to make enough money growing their own economy proving you can not work with people who will not have money. You can use them for selfish purposes. This then provides boomerang coming back to knock get you started too. It is like your pet dog chasing its very own tail. Consumers inside the USA shop their exit of their jobs. The money spent with the retail levels quickly fans to the places the location where the products are made. The money isn’t going to stay within the USA to regrow its economy.

Who won World War 2? The American workers did. Who lost World War 2 50 years later? The American workers have. The U.S. adjusted through the most massive dislocation of workers in U.S. history with millions losing their jobs. More than 700,000 workers associated with the steel industry, over 400,000 auto workers and also over a million workers from the computer industry lost their jobs. One third of these over 55 who lost their jobs never found another. Now, workers as taxpayers pay to herald foreign auto assemblers. The State of Indiana of course things are considered, is paying Honda about 150 million dollars to take an assembly plant inside their state. This will provide 4000 new assembly jobs but recently, near to 20,000 auto parts factory workers have mislaid their jobs within the state. Taxpayers in other states have paid even more to have KIA, BMW as well as other foreign auto assemblers to make their states. Misssissippi is paying KIA 400 million dollars you can save KIA automobiles inside their state. These autos are describes to built from the USA instead of Made inside USA because the parts come from the wage slave workers in the world. The number of assembly workers to all these foreign plants is just a fraction in the workers from the existing workers in U.S. auto manufacturing plants. They also work with about half of what your vehicle workers made from the past.

Who won World War two inside final analysis?

Let us turn back in time to 1940. The USA was still being coming out in the Great Depression. Tariffs were blamed because the major cause on the depression. However the main cause in the Depression was the stock exchange crash plus the economy took this a nice touch during a time when tariffs weren’t even applicable. Free Traders today love to blame the Smooth-Hawley Tariffs because the cause on the Depression, but this bill was passed following your Stock Market crash in 1930 and not really did take hold before Roosevelt took over. Soon afterwards Roosevelt had the legal right to lower and raise Tariffs any time they want in 1934

The next phase ignited the strongest industrial might of all time. Tariffs had no part inside process. Roosevelt knew our nation cannot mobilize by semi-independent ways – mobilization were forced to come in its entirety based on many vital needs whether for that military and civilian uses. President Roosevelt had to market the war to your American people inside a sequence of actions. He started out by performing it with executive orders and schemes. Roosevelt said- what I am wanting to do is remove the dollar sign – we need for getting rid in the silly foolish dollar sign. This was very good news to England and Russia who was without much money left to battle a war.

Thus began the 1st wave of Free Trade nevertheless it was built on offering products made inside USA.
Many Americans accepted the premise thinking they might stay out on the war while accumulating our economy on the same time.

Lack of greenbacks was the most important problem from the world. The world was coming from a Great Depression. After World War 1, the allies wanted Germany being just one big farm with virtually no production capabilities. Hitler came and filled the void by making a strong military to invade other countries killing folks who were in how. In the process, Hitler demonstrated what sort of war machine can cause industrial might outside of nothing. China and Russia using a elite groups managing the masses was lacking this same capacities yet still killed millions because of their causes. They killed a lot more than Germany ever did, nevertheless the USA chose Germany being their first enemy. At duration Japan was claiming a right on the mainland to the sake of their unique economic survival. The U.S. approved their claim in the beginning from the century but reversed their agreements with Japan from the 1930s. Japan felt the U.S. betrayed them. This set takes place for Pearl Harbor. After all is said and done, it absolutely was really not a surprise attack.

Roosevelt wouldn’t want money to have in the best way. He took many aback when he was quoted saying, what I am wanting to do is to clear away the dollar sign- we need to have rid with the silly foolish old dollar sign. This also meshed while using new economic theories stating you will not owe anybody and funds if you owe yourself. On September 2, 1940, Roosevelt gave Britain 50 Navy Destroyers under his very own executive order. This violated international laws and understanding about neutrality. In essence, the U.S.A unofficially declared war on Germany on September 2, 1940.

Around duration, Roosevelt used a classic 1917 law to trade in planes to personal manufacturers for newer models while using understanding the private firms would then send the earlier model planes to Britain at no costs. Then Roosevelt took yet another step. After getting re- elected, he Congress approved the Lend-Lease Act which bypassed money problems the British and Communist Russia can have had. Right after obtaining the act passed, Roosevelt constructed a list of products we can easily lend the allies. However, out in the billions of dollars of items sent towards the allies, the U.S. was later repaid just for a fraction in the total amounts like the ten per cent on the total U.S. agricultural production that traveled to Britain and Russia. The U.S.A. also produced and supplied 50% of all munitions utilised in World War 2.

Of course, this brought prosperity to your USA. After the war, dependant on the awesome industrial power, the USA launched the Marshall Plan. This helped restore your neighborhood value added economies in Europe and Asia. If we gave Japan this vast economic boost prior to a war, there would are already really no reason with the war with Japan. Free Traders ignore nearly all of this and chant about non-existent Tariffs that broke our economy through the pre-war era if the undeclared war started years before with Roosevelt’s version of Free Trade. They chant how competition rules the action but as you may know this was not the case throughout the World War 2 era. Then and from now on it is very questionable in the event the U.S.A ever was required to compete in a very global arena. Who, what, where and when concluded we needed to compete within a global arena.

In China, free trade is produced possible. It is a system which allows traders to transact business without the government intervention like subsidies, tax and tariffs. There are many countries, like New Zealand and Australia that’s signed a totally free trade agreement with China.

Because Chinese backpacks are cheaper than a number of other domestic products, it is quite good to enter into this type of agreement with China to produce countries rich in standard of living, since buying or producing products off their own countries would are more expensive since the labor price is higher as compared to China’s labor cost.

There ended up arguments using the developed countries that start free trade in China concerning together with the people who will miss their jobs. But despite what most believes, China cannot manufacture everything with a low cost. For instance, China can produce toys with a low cost yet it’s the US who will manufacture computers at cheap prices. If the US and China enter into these kinds of agreement, then it is rather beneficial for both countries simply because could trade computers and toys.

Another argument may be the wage conflict between China and the civilized world. Take for example, in the US the typical wage of any person will be $10 every hour, playing with China, it is just $2 by the hour. But this argument will undoubtedly matter if each countries are involve in manufacturing something.

Anna Hazare’s campaign for a stronger Lokpal Bill and his 12-day battle against corruption has given the Opposition, mainly the BJP, to present themselves as a party which can replace the ruling coalition at the Centre. A STAR News-Nielsen survey conducted across 28 cities with close to 9000 respondents after Anna ended his 12-day long fast – has revealed that the BJP will garner 32 % of the votes across India if Lok Sabha polls were held in the near future, while the Congress will manage to win just 20 % of votes. According to the survey, the BJP has turned out to be the most favoured party across all regions – 40:27 in the north; 20:15 in the east, and 46:15 in the west – barring the south, where 20 % respondents still prefer the Congress, while 16 % prefer the BJP.

The numbers mentioned above is in stark contrast to the ones that came out in a similar survey conducted by STAR News-Nielsen in May 2011 – before the Anna movement gripped the country’s imagination. Barely four months ago, was the Congress leading the pack with 30 % of the vote share while BJP had only 23 %. Also, except the west, the Congress was leading in all the current Lok Sabha, Congress has 207 seats and BJP has 115 seats. Anna’s movement, and the way the UPA government handled the situation, seems to have swayed a number of people who voted for Congress during last General election – around 11 % of the respondents who voted for the Congress last time now intend to vote for the BJP, while only 5 % are switching away from the BJP. Throughout Anna Hazare’s campaign, several UPA leaders, most vocally Kapil Sibal, had said that a few thousand people supporting Anna, do not represent a country of 1.2 billion.

They even challenged his team members to prove its legitimacy in the elections. But if they were to contest elections against Team Anna members tomorrow, the politicians would be in for a surprise. In a Kiran Bedi vs Kapil Sibal contest, 74 % of respondents in the STAR News-Nielsen survey would vote for the iconic former IPS officer, while Sibal would manage just 14 %. Similarly, a contest between Arvind Kejriwal and P Chidambaram would end up in a defeat for the home minister – 58 % of the respondents claim they will vote for the RTI activist while 24 % would choose Chidambaram. Interestingly, the Anna campaign has given the country a brand new youth icon. Around 62 % of the respondents feel that Arvind Kejriwal, the most vocal member has as the new role model for young India. He has significantly higher approval ratings in north (75 %). Respondents however do not lay the blame for corruption on the doors of any particular political party – a third of respondents (75 %) believe that all parties are equally responsible for corruption. Another 49 % of the respondents believe that feels that giving or accepting bribe is in the fabric of the country and it cannot be stopped by people in India. A similar number – 46 % – believe that corruption can be stopped if people unite against it.

Our country faces numerous issues, yet so many of them could be solved with just a little foresight. Unfortunately, politicians are rewarded by getting reelected, not by offering viable long-term plans for the country. A case in point is the current status of Wall Street reforms. The largest banks have only gotten bigger since the financial crisis began – so much for addressing the “too-big-to-fail” rumblings. Plus, Wall Street quickly reestablished its propensity to pay out large bonuses to their bankers for taking speculative risks. Derivatives, which were a contributing factor in the real estate meltdown, currently stand at ten times the planet’s gross domestic product. Someone is going to get burned when those take a fall, and the taxpayer is usually the one to take the hit. Yes, there have been some small reforms. However, the bankers in Manhattan are smart enough that, when one door closes, they can always find another opening or loophole.

The old problems have most definitely not been fixed. In my own state of California, legislators just decided not to ban bribes to politicians. This was ostensibly because the state could not afford the $200,000 tab each year. The fact that paid fines would more than offset that cost seemed not to matter. Anyone with a double-digit IQ knows the real reason. Since my business is mainly real estate – I’m a mortage note buyer – I have a particular interest in how that industry is affected by government policies. Let’s see how the elected officials have done so far: The housing market needs to go through a natural market recovery, which it can do if left alone by the Feds and the states. The real estate bubble took years to build, and it will take at least that many years in which to recover to something approaching normality. If the government will stop butting in, the housing market will have a chance to catch its breath and stabilize. Community and regional banks will be more willing to lend as the volatility decreases.

For those situations where banks prefer not to tread, owner financing can pick up some of the slack. When a mortgage note (often called a real estate note) is created, a much more transparent and honest transaction occurs. The former property owner also has the flexibility to keep the mortgage note or to sell the note to a mortgage buyer. There are lots of viable solutions to the economy and housing market. The government could be part of the solution by making sure that market forces play out fairly without the big banks running roughshod over everyone else. So far, the bureaucrats have only made the problem worse, and Joe Six-pack has no clue to the long-term implications of government policies and programs. Will those few politicians who still have a brain and a heart for the country, please take control!

A recession or a slump is a shortage of money, which is created when banks refuse to supply the economy with money by tightening up on lending. To end our current slump more money must be put into circulation, which under our idiot system would be done by the banks lending more money. When banks simply refuse to lend more money we are locked into the slump and are prevented from emerging form it. The sensible solution would be for government to start printing money and spending it into circulation as a service to the community. That option is very simple, very logical but has the disadvantage of yielding no profits for the banks. Banks prosper by raking in interest on lending money they conjured out of thin air. Government seems to believe it must protect bank profits at all costs and that banks take precedence over everybody else.

It is quite acceptable for the nation’s economy to be smashed so long as the banks can continue raking in the bucks. Government long ago dropped the ball of money creation and handed that privilege over to un-elected private-profit corporations known as banks. It works like this: Let’s imagine the government is $1000 short of money and instead of just printing more and spending it, it does the “modern” thing of borrowing it from the banks. How is this borrowing done? Well, what government does is print pieces of paper with a fancy design on them. It calls these fancy pieces of paper “bonds.” �It assigns each bond a value (say, $100). �It then sells 10 of these this $100 bonds to a “financial institution” (a bank). The bank creates $1000 out of thin air (in other words, prints money) in order to buy the bonds. Later, the bonds are “redeemed,” which means the government buys them back AT INTEREST. �Essentially then, government has borrowed $1000 from the bank and repaid the loan at interest. The bank created the money it lent to government out of thin air and made a nice profit on the loan.

Okay, that’s a simplified picture but it is nevertheless the essence of what happens, stripped of its usual smoke screen of complexity and gobbledygook. It becomes obvious to anyone with an ounce of common sense that government could just as easily draw up a fancy piece of paper with “$100” on it and call it a “note” and SPEND it directly into circulation, bypassing the banks altogether. After all, if a private corporation called a BANK can create money out of nothing and spend it (by lending it to people) then why not have your elected government create it instead and SPEND it into the economy, say by grants to industry, building roads, increasing pensions or reducing taxation or whatever? In the latter case the new money is not LENT, so does not have to be repaid at interest and so does not set us up for an even greater round of borrowing a few years down the line. In this fashion the economy could be re-inflated very quickly and the money shortage eradicated without us having to grovel to the banks for the privilege of borrowing our own means of exchange from them. So why does government not do it that way? Good question. I’ll take a look at that in my next article

Earlier, during the time of dictators, there were strict restrictions on the expression of views and publication of news. People had made it a habit to live a silent life. They had no right to oppose even on injustice. Arabian women were more wretched species in the country that had no right to decide even their own future. But, sooner or later, the destiny of the dark is to disappear and give way to the lights of hopes for better tomorrow. This is exactly what taking place in Arab today. The continent is experiencing the warmth of change-rays coming from all over the world, inspiring Arabian individuals, and spreading light in their lives. Thanks to the online availability of Arab news that every Arabian can access to, and share his or her views online.

It has revolutionized the whole world today and Arab is no exception. The online Arab news is reaching to every household with the excess of internet, and to every individual holding a mobile or an i-Pod. There are several online magazines of Arab people, being published for Arab people, by Arab people. This makes them aware of the political, economical developments taking shape in and out of Arab continent, and how it is affecting their social life. This awareness then forms a view in their mind, and many like-minded people get a step ahead to exchange their views through online forums available on the Arab news portals. The easy and fast process of exchanging views inspires them very much to do it.

The process doesn’t stop here. Many online magazines and news portals also provide comments from experts in every sector, which further enhances knowledge of individuals, and corrects their understanding of the affairs, if so is required. Thus it strengthens their confidence of the topic, and encourages them to participate in such events more openly. Not only men, but Arabian women are also equally participating in such online venues and registering their pros and cons towards anything which is affecting their entity.

It is true that not all parts of the continent are using internet so profusely to bring about changes but some economies have really opened door to the foreign views by allowing free access to internet. Some extremist countries are still restricting the free use of internet and any such facility which might augment the awareness of locals and challenge the dictatorship of so called leaders. However, the wave is continuously flowing on its way and it is sure to reach every nook and corner of the continent; sooner or later though. If you are an Arabian and want to share your views towards the developments in your region, join online forums available on some of the very good Arab news portal online. You can meet several people who agree with your views and they will support your views by adding their own views to it. This will provide a common platform for you to raise voice against evils and contribute to the welfare of current and coming generations.

The unfolding currency war that currently dominates the financial press has its causes firmly rooted in US monetary policy deployed since the credit crunch and the ensuing global financial crisis according to analysts at “EurasiaTrade”. The failure of Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch, the astonishing relegation to practical insolvency and subsequent nationalization of mortgage financing giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as well as the bailouts of AIG, GM and others called for an unprecedented effort to plug the huge holes in the good ship America’s hull.

Interest rates slashed to zero, TARP (Troubled-Asset Relief Program), $1.25trn worth of quantitative easing, the Federal Reserve’s discount window, the TALF (Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility) and other attempts were made to stabilize the financial system and then rebuild the US economy. “All these bailouts and stimulus took their toll on the US dollar and, as a result, it has weakened significantly since 2007. The trouble is, because the US is the largest trading partner for several major economies around the world, it has had the effect of making their exports to the US proportionally more expensive. Seeing as those countries have an obligation to provide an environment conducive to economic growth that’s every bit as valid as America’s, they have taken steps to protect their economies”, said a “EurasiaTrade” analyst. Whilst the scale of the US efforts have been unmatched by all with the exception, perhaps, of the United Kingdom, the net effect has resulted in the currencies of America’s main trading partners to fall in concert with the US dollar but this is appears to be of less concern to US authorities than the fact that China’s currency, the renminbi or yuan, remains undervalued against the dollar despite relentless pressure from Washington.

China, they say, is intervening in the FX market to keep the yuan cheap and hurting US exports by making them more expensive to buy in China. The “EurasiaTrade” analyst explained, “Well what on earth did the Americans expect China to do? They have to protect their economy too. We don’t agree with suggestions that China played its part by simply accepting US T-Bonds and agency debt in return for cheap goods instead of calling time on America’s excessive borrowing. Your local electrical store isn’t going to tell you to stop buying LCD televisions from them using your credit card because they think you’re running the risk of becoming tapped out, are they?” “EurasiaTrade” says they expect the situation to worsen in the coming months as investors begin to lose patience with US monetary profligacy and demand higher yields for holding US debt. The US is headed for austerity whether it likes it or not; it’s just a matter of whether it goes quietly or not. After all, nobody likes a complainer.

In a column appearing in The New Media Journal on May 29, Freelance writer Paul R. Holllrah warns “Beware of the National Popular Vote.”

The National Popular Vote Plan is an interstate compact, whereby participating states agree to allocate their electoral votes to the winner of the National Popular Vote, as opposed to the candidate who secures the most votes in their state. The compact would take effect when enough states (constituting the requisite 270 electoral votes required to win the Presidential election) agree to participate. Currently eight states and the District of Columbia, constituting 132 Electoral votes, have ratified the compact.

Mr. Hollrah then asserts: “Any scheme for selecting a president and Vice President by national popular vote would clearly violate the intent of the Framers and may very well be unconstitutional.” Contrary to Hollrah’s assertion, delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were deadlocked regarding how to select the President. One proposal had the U.S. Congress select the President. Another proposal was to have the State Legislatures choosing the President. A third alternative was to conduct a direct popular vote. All proposals were rejected. Given this impasse, the conventioneers decided to delegate “plenary authority” to the states to award their electors, as reflected in Article ll, Section 1, Clause 11 of the U.S. Constitution, which states: “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors.” Accordingly, the intent of the Framers was for each state to have the autonomy to select electors in any way that it deems fit.

Moreover, the Plan is in fact constitutionally permissible. There is no provision in the U.S. Constitution mandating that the President must be selected by a particular electoral method. The winner-take-all-electoral voting system currently employed in 48 states was not in fact part of the grand design of the Founders. In 1789, the year of the first Presidential election, voters of only five states were permitted to mark ballots for Presidential electors. The other states granted the power of voting for Presidential electors to their state legislatures. The winner-take-all approach of awarding electors was a scheme devised by partisan parochial interests to maximize their political advantage. States have the Constitutional authority to change their means of awarding electors. Massachusetts has done this 11 times. In fact, Maine and Nebraska changed from winner-take-all to the Congressional Allocation method.

Mr. Hollrah incorrectly couples supporters of the National Popular Vote Plan with Electoral College abolitionists. The Plan would not “emasculate the Electoral College.” Participating states would simply alter the way they award their Electoral Votes. The Electoral College will still exist under the Plan. On the Monday following the second Wednesday in December after the Presidential election is held, electors representing each state and the District of Columbia will still cast their Presidential ballots. On January 6, the Vice President will declare the winner to a joint session of the U.S. Congress. This is the process done now, and this is what will be done after the National Popular Vote Plan has been adopted by enough states to take effect.

Finally, Mr. Hollrah asserts that the National Popular Vote “is a liberal scam.” While there are certainly liberal supporters, the Plan also enjoys the support of many contemporary conservatives. They include former Republican Presidential candidates Fred Thompson and Tom Tancredo, former U.S. Senator Jack Garn (R-UT), former Chairman of the Michigan Republican Party, Saul Anuzis, and Ray Hanes, the former Chairman of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC.)

The left does not necessarily stand to gain if the National Popular Vote Plan is actuated. With some polls showing a dead heat between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, but with Obama garnering leads in the preponderance of swing states, it is easy to envisage a scenario where Mr. Obama could win a second term without mustering the most votes.

The National Popular Vote Plan will simply “even the playing field. ” The President will be elected the same way as a Cemetery Commissioner, a Governor, or a U.S. Senator. It will obliterate the dynamic where candidates assiduously cultivate support from voters in only about 15 “showdown states” while relegating the majority of Americans to the Electoral Sidelines.

Mr. Hollrah is a resident of Oklahoma. This is a state which has been ignored by Presidential nominees since 1976, and is becoming increasingly Republican at the Presidential level. It was John McCain’s best state in 2008. Barring an electoral cataclysm, the state will not be contested for many election cycles in the future. Only under the National Popular Vote Plan will Mr. Hollrah’s vote in Tulsa, OK be as sought after as a vote in Tulsa, OH. Under the winner-take-all system, Mr. Hollrah’s vote is futile. It is a forgone conclusion that Oklahoma will award all of its electoral votes to the Republican Presidential nominee.

Data collected from the research from the nonprofit Catalyst disclosed that sixty of the Fortune 500 corporations do not possess any female directors. Out of the same group, 136 firms have no women among their top five executives. Moreover, there are 26 Fortune 500 companies which have neither a female in executive management, nor a woman board member. More than half of the United States workforce is made up of females. It is also widely recognized that they receive less than their male counterparts and the statistics are far worse for women of color. This disparity upsets women at every level of the job market. Women, who comprise almost 40% of the students attending elite business schools, find it especially difficult to rise into the ranks of senior management among the States’ largest public companies.

The companies were labeled in categories by industry following a review of the Catalyst information. Wall St press investigated their corporate websites to find out if they had any females in top management at all. While they finally managed to find somebody, they were usually in public relations, human resources, investor relations, or accounting. In the 21st Century it is incomprehensible how public companies can manage to eliminate women from such crucial positions, when Intuit Inc claims that a billion women will enter the workforce by 2020. The statistics are disgraceful and point to lingering misogyny in the board rooms and executive suites of a number of the largest companies. It is widely recognized that females make up a powerful global consumer force which has resulted in greater knowledge of mobile technologies, urban migration, increased access to education for women and a much wider use of the Internet. The study showed that with micro-credit burgeoning, combined with low market entry fees, that a ‘she-economy’ is about to evolve. There are more females in national positions than at any other time in history. The list consists of 3 queens as Head of State, 4 Governor Generals and 14 concurrent women national leaders.

This, in conjunction with the findings of the study, has led a few experts to state that we are about to enter the ‘women’s decade’. However, this is definitely not reflected in the board rooms and executive suite’s business sectors of the world. In the area of world politics, women are also still only noticed because of their lack of a major presence.}