The credit crisis erased $14 trillion (McKeef 2008-12-31) from world stock markets in 2008. Where does $14 trillion in world stock markets go? How can that much capital disappear from the market? The infamous year 2008 will be known in the future as the year that fundamental concepts in the moral mathematics of the market were forever changed. This credit crisis was the worst since the Great Depression of the 1930s but its ramifications may be even deeper.

                                                                                                                                                                          
100,000,000 dollars How can we visualize a billion dollars? How much more difficult is it to imagine a trillion dollars?

The most recent wiki entry (2009-01-01) describes how any attempt to visualize numbers higher than a million is complicated because there are too systems of numeric names and the difference between the two scales grows as numbers get larger. Million is the same in both scales, but the long-scale billion is a thousand times larger than the short-scale billion, the long-scale trillion is a million times larger than the short-scale trillion. The short scale system is used in the US and a long scale system is used in the UK. The short scale system of numeric names means every new term greater than million is 1,000 times the previous term: “billion” means “a thousand millions” (109), “trillion” means “a thousand billions” (1012), and so on. Long scale refers to a system of numeric names in which every new term greater than million is 1,000,000 times the previous term: “billion” means “a million millions” (1012), “trillion” means “a million billions” (1018). (wiki).”

6 zeros = 1 million, a thousand thousands or (106)1, 000, 000
8 zeros = a hundred million (108) 100, 000, 000 this image
9 zeros = 1 billion in the short scale system used in the US = a thousand millions or (109) or 1,000,000,000
12 zeros = 1 trillion in the short scale system used in the US = “a thousand billions (1012) or 1,000,000,000,000
12 zeros = 1 billion in the long scale system used in the UK: 1,000,000,000,000
18 zeros = 1 trillion in the long scale system used in the UK is a million billions (1018) or 1,000,000,000,000,000,00


1,000,000 6 zeros = 1 million, a thousand thousands or (106)1, 000, 000

This Adobe Photoshop image posted in my ocean.flynn Flickr account was my attempt to visualize 100,000,000 dollars

 “World stock markets ended on an uptick for the year on Wednesday, after some bourses registered their worst annual losses in history. Global stocks as measured by the MSCI world index ended up 0.76 percent for the day and posted their first monthly gain in seven months, but lost 43.36 percent for the year. About $14 trillion (9.6 trillion pounds) in market capitalisation was erased from world stock markets in 2008 in the wake of the worst credit crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s. “It has been a shocking year, hardly anything was spared in the carnage,” said Michael Heffernan, strategist at Austock Group in Australia. U.S. stocks edged up on Wednesday and saw their first monthly gain in five months, but the year has been the worst for Wall Street stocks since the Great Depression (McKeef 2008-12-31).”

read more | digg story

McKeef, Clive. 2008-12-31. “World stocks end up after historic losses.” Business News. Reuters.

Using advanced computer models to factor in deep-sea warming and other aspects of the carbon cycle that naturally creates and removes CO2, scientists, from countries including the United States, Canada and Germany, claim: We must bring carbon emissions down to near zero to keep temperatures from rising further (Elperin 2008).

read more | digg story

The debate surrounding climate change reveals the myriad of methods available for propaganda production. After watching the DVD entitled The Great Global Warming Swindle produced in response to Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth, I wanted to read more on critical responses to both.

Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation hosted Larry Lohman’s March 8, 2008 lecture to the Climate Justice Chicago Coalition entitled A Critical Conversation on Carbon Trading and produced by Chicago Access Network Television (CAN TV) in which he discussed how carbon trading creates transferable rights to dump carbon, slows the social and technological change, promotes socially and ecologically destructive practices and is ineffective and unjust. It was part of a speaking tour in the US.

A Selected Timeline of Critical Events

1990 Cap and trade was designed and tested in the United States, as a program within the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. The Economist magazine claimed it was “probably the greatest green success story of the past decade.” (July 6, 2002). Lohman claimed the concept of carbon trade distorted the goals of Kyoto Protocol.

Webliography and Bibliography

Durkin, Martin. The Great Global Warming Swindle.

Gore, Al. Inconvenient Truth.

Eilperin, Juliet. 2008. “Studies: CO2 output must cease altogether: Research points to years of warming even with ambitious emission cuts.” The Washington Post. March 10.

Lohman, Larry. Development Dialogue no.48 “Carbon Trading: A Critical Conversation on Climate Change, Privatisation and Power”

Lohman, Larry. 2008. A Critical Conversation on Carbon Trading. Chicago Access Network Television (CAN TV).

Senator Tom Kent was a guest on the popular weekly television show Front Page Challenge with host Fred Davis and panellists: Pierre Berton, Betty Kennedy, Gordon Sinclair on Dec. 6, 1981. He managed to stump the panellists.
“Senator Tom Kent was the head the 1981 Royal Commission on Newspapers called the Tom Kent Commission. Kent described the state of media concentration such as newspaper monopolies in Canada as “monstrous.”    The Kent Commission made some tough recommendations. These included making Thomson sell its recently acquired flagship paper, the Globe and Mail, putting a stop to Southam’s expansion, and breaking up regional monopolies like the Irving empire in New Brunswick (CBC 1981).”.

The commission want[ed] to forbid companies from owning newspapers and television or radio stations in the same market. Both publishers and reporters attack[ed] the Kent report saying it [was] too harsh. They sa[id] the commission want[ed] to put the government in the newsrooms of the nation, which would infringe upon their freedom (CBC 1981).”

“The Kent Commission wasn’t exclusively about concentration of media ownership but also looked at press councils, quality of print journalism in Canada and new technologies such as the introduction of computers in newsrooms. Kent proposed a Canada Newspaper Act aimed at controlling media concentration, particularly cross-ownership of newspapers and other media. But the government largely ignored Kent’s recommendations as it did a decade earlier with the Davey report (CBC 1981).”

CBC placed this story under Politics and Economy > Concentration to Convergence: Media Ownership in Canada > Tom Kent stumps Front Page Challenge panel

Canada’s health care system is similar to most members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The only OECD members who do not have a public health system on par with other members are the USA and Mexico. In spite of that the United States continues to pay a higher percentage of its GNP to its health care system than Canada [1].

Canadians view its medicare system as “a moral enterprise, not a business venture (Romanow 2002:21)” and they overwhelmingly support the tenets of the Canada Health Act which states that need not money determines access to health care. “Canada’s Medicare system since its inception in 1966 has become one of the “most fully socialized health care systems.” In the 1960s medical systems in Canada and the US were similar. Medicare was a$100 billion enterprise in 2002, one of our Canada’s’s largest expenditures (Romanow2002:20). However, this amounts to a smaller percentage of Canada’s national net worth which was $4.8 trillion as of December 2006 (StatisticsCanada 2006) than that of in 1992. Commissioner Ray Romanow’s mandate in 2001 was to “review medicare and engage Canadians in a national dialogue on its future”(Romanow 2002:6). This was accomplished through an 18-month investigation resulting in a report that was evidence-based and values-driven making recommendations to strengthen and improve medicare’s quality and sustainability making it more truly national, more comprehensive, responsive and accountable (Romanow2002:6).” In the 1970s pharmaceutical costs accounted for a small percentage of total medicare costs. By 2002 they were among the highest costs in the systemand they continue to rise. The report did not confirm claims that user fees, medical savings accounts, de-listing services, greater privatization, a parallelprivate system, as proposed by the leaner goverment lobbyists, were the cure for the medicare system (Romanow2002:21).

More surgeries, treatments and tests are being performed, but demands often outstrip their ability to deliver the necessary services on a timely basis. As a participant in the Commission’s “Policy Dialogue on Access”at Dalhousie University put it, long waiting times are not caused by the system performing fewer diagnostic and surgical procedures but because medical advances now allow us to deliver more of these services and to a wider range of people (Romanow 2002:192)

Public and private sector care providers (including fee-for-service doctors) have been part of our health care system since the inception of medicare in Canada.

Whereas in the 1970s medicare costs consisted mainly of physican fees and hospital expenditures (Romanow2002), currently the cost of pharmaceutical expenditures is the most rapidly increasing part of medicare (Lexchin 2007). In his recent Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives report Lexchin (2007) reveals how the cost of pharmaceuticals accounted for $18.5 billion in 2004 and $20.6 billion in 2005. Spending on physicians was c. $18 billion in 2005. It is crucial to note that shareholders in pharmaceuticals enjoyed substantially greater returns than shareholders (20.1% in 2003; 23.5% in 1996) in other forms of manufacturing (10.8% in 2003 and 12.2 % in 1996) in Canada.[2] Canada, Mexico and the United States do not have as comprehensive public plans for pharmaceuticals as do other OECD countries where the greatest expenditures on pharmaceuticals come from the public purse. OECD governments have more control over amounts spent on pharmaceuticals.


A List of Acronyms

CCPACanadian Centre for Policy Alternatives

CIHI Canadian Institute for Health Information

OECD Organisation for EconomicCo-operation and Development

PMPRB Patented Medicine Prices Review Board a part of Health Canada, sets an upper limit on how much companies can charge
for new patented medications.

Footnotes



[1] The US spent more on administrative costs. They also spent more per person $2548 (US) compared to $1886 (US) in Canada. See http://www3.who.int/whosis/core/core_select_process.cfm


[2] Given that pension plans returns are based on the strength of investment portfolios we find ourselves in 2006 with a moral dilemma. How do we ensure the future of pension plans with a healthy investment portfolio while calling for ethical management of that same portfolio?

Selected Bibliography

Lexchin, Joel. 2007.”CanadianDrug Prices and Expenditures: Some statistical observations and policyimplications.” Ottawa, ON:CanadianCentre for Policy Alternatives. ISBN 978-0-88627-520-4.

OECD health data 2004.

Romanow, Ray. 2002.Buildingon Values: The Future of Health Care in Canada –Final Report. ISBN0-662-33043-9.

Philip H. Winne, Nesbit, John C., Gress, Carmen L. Z. 2006. “Cautions about Rating BC’s Schools.” Faculty of Education. Simon Fraser University. 2006-10-31 15:44

The Issue: This is the second year The Vancouver Sun has published a special section on the academic effectiveness of BC’s elementary schools as rated by the Fraser Institute. We’re told the Institute’s ratings of elementary schools, as well as the report it released in April rating econdary schools, are widely discussed. Reportedly, families consult them when buying homes in hope of boosting educational opportunities for their children. Although it doesn’t happen in BC, in the U.S., some jurisdictions use ratings like these, along with other information, to decide how much funding schools receive.

It’s worth keeping in mind the Institute’s rating of a school is not the same thing as what students know or how competent teachers are or how effective schools are. Focusing on students, there’s more to what they know than any one rating can reveal. As well, there is evidence that ratings like these are related to socioeconomic status and wealth. For example, see Selcuk Sirin’s award winning article, “Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A Meta-analytic review of research 1990-2000″, published in the Review of Educational Research in 2005, and the 2006 Statistics Canada study, “Income and the Outcomes of Children,” by Shelley Phipps and Lynn Lethbridge, respectively. When important decisions are at stake, it’s important to understand what these kinds of ratings are and what limits they have.

The Institute poses a very worthwhile question: “In general, how is the school doing academically?” To answer it, they calculate a rating from 0 to 10 points for each elementary and secondary school that enrolls at least 15 students. Our answer to this question would take a book.

Flynn-Burhoe, Maureen. 2007.“Think Tanks: Corporate Director Board Interlocks: Fraser Institute.”


Flynn-Burhoe, Maureen. 2007. “Tag clouds with shaft of light: Playing tag with the Fraser Institute.”.
You may copy and use this image and text by following the Creative Commons License 2.5 BY-NC-SA guidelines.
Tag clouds with shaft of light over the Canadian topography, or playing tag with the Fraser Institute.

This tag cloud was merged with a Google Earth view from West Coast mountains towards Ottawa and Washington in the East. The beam of light in the background is the Enron tower.

In the Adobe Photoshop toolbar under Filter > Liquify > I maximized the brush to create powerful wind patterns effects in the clouds hovering over the Canadian topology.

I studied the Fraser Institute’s on-line annual reports and web pages to piece together the following categories, tags or folksonomies to introduce mass media users to one of the most highly cited think tanks which emerged in 1974 at the height of Thatcherism. These are the tags in the cloud:

Economic Freedom, Milton Freeman, Education, Environment and Risk, Privatizing Correctional Services (1998), Alan Greenspan, Skeptical Environmentalist by Bjørn Lomborg, Fiscal Policy, Sally Pipes, T. Patrick Boyle, MacMillan Bloedel, Governance, Csaba Hajd, Ralph Klein, Private vs. Public Health, Can the Market Save Our Schools? (2000), Law and Markets, Caring For Profit: Economic Dimensions of Canada’s Health Care Industry (1987), Non-profit Studies, Adam Smith, Atlas Foundation, Sir Antony Fisher, Regulatory, Pharmaceutical Policy, The Illusion of Wage and Price Controls, Preston Manning, Entrepreneurship and Markets, Michael Walker, IEA, Alan Campney, Social Affairs, School Report Cards, Thatcher, economic conscience, Bill Emmott, George Shultz, John Raybould, Trade and Globalization, Schumpeter, The Economist, Cato Institute- Washington, Rent Control: A Popular Paradox

See also Think Tanks: Corporate Director Board Interlocks: Fraser Institute

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.