Share This

Thursday, June 9, 2011

US dollar died, debt default is unimaginable, "playing with fire", creditors say


The Day the Dollar Died 



UD debt default is unimaginable  The National Debt Clock next to an IRS office near Times Square, May 16, 2011. REUTERS/Chip EastBy Emily Kaiser  SINGAPORE, Agencies

SINGAPORE - Allowing a brief US debt default to force government spending cuts is a "horrible idea" that could destabilize the world economy and sour already tense relations with big creditors, government officials and investors said on Wednesday.

A growing number of US Republican lawmakers think a technical debt default might be a price worth paying if it gets the White House to accept deep spending cuts. This idea, once confined to the party's fringe, is seeping into the mainstream, Reuters reported on Tuesday.

"How can the US be allowed to default?" said an official at India's central bank. "We don't think this is a possibility because this could then create huge panic globally.

Indian officials say they have little choice but to buy US Treasury debt because it is still among the world's safest and most liquid investments. It held $39.8 billion in US Treasuries as of March, according to US data.

The US Congress has balked at increasing a statutory limit on government spending as lawmakers argue over how to curb a deficit which is projected to reach $1.4 trillion this fiscal year. The US Treasury Department has said it will run out of borrowing room by August 2.

If Washington cannot make interest payments on its debt, the Obama administration has warned of "catastrophic" consequences that could push the still-fragile economy back into recession.

"It has dire implications for the economy at a time when the macro data is softening," said Ben Westmore, a commodities economist at National Australia Bank.

"It's just a horrible idea," he said.

The Republicans' theory is that bondholders would accept a brief delay in interest payments -- maybe a couple of days -- if it meant Washington finally addressed its long-term fiscal problems, putting the country in a stronger position to meet its debt obligations later on.

But interviews with government officials and investors show they consider a default such a grim -- and remote -- possibility that it was nearly impossible to imagine.

"It just wouldn't happen," said Barry Evans, who oversees $83 billion in fixed income assets at Manulife Asset Management. "They would pay their Treasury bills first instead of other bills. It's as simple as that.

As for China, Washington's largest foreign creditor with $1.14 trillion in Treasuries as of March, a default could fray political and economic ties.

Yuan Gangming, a researcher with the government think tank Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, smelled some political wrangling behind the US debt debate as the 2012 presidential election draws nearer and said Republicans "want to make things difficult for Obama.

But with time running short before Treasury exhausts its borrowing room, Yuan said default was a real risk.

"The possibility is quite high to see a default of the US debt, which would harm many countries in the world, and China in particular," he said.



China warns U.S. debt-default idea is "playing with fire"

Emily Kaiser

(Reuters) - Republican lawmakers are "playing with fire" by contemplating even a brief debt default as a means to force deeper government spending cuts, an adviser to China's central bank said on Wednesday.

The idea of a technical default -- essentially delaying interest payments for a few days -- has gained backing from a growing number of mainstream Republicans who see it as a price worth paying if it forces the White House to slash spending, Reuters reported on Tuesday.

But any form of default could destabilize the global economy and sour already tense relations with big U.S. creditors such as China, government officials and investors warn.

Li Daokui, an adviser to the People's Bank of China, said a default could undermine the U.S. dollar, and Beijing needed to dissuade Washington from pursuing this course of action.

"I think there is a risk that the U.S. debt default may happen," Li told reporters on the sidelines of a forum in Beijing. "The result will be very serious and I really hope that they would stop playing with fire."

China is the largest foreign creditor to the United States, holding more than $1 trillion in Treasury debt as of March, U.S. data shows, so its concerns carry considerable weight in Washington.

I really worry about the risks of a U.S. debt default, which I think may lead to a decline in the dollar's value," Li said.

Congress has balked at increasing a statutory limit on government spending as lawmakers argue over how to curb a deficit which is projected to reach $1.4 trillion this fiscal year. The U.S. Treasury Department has said it will run out of borrowing room by August 2.

If the United States cannot make interest payments on its debt, the Obama administration has warned of "catastrophic" consequences that could push the still-fragile economy back into recession.

It has dire implications for the economy at a time when the macro data is softening," said Ben Westmore, a commodities economist at National Australia Bank.

"It's just a horrible idea," he said.

Financial markets are following the U.S. debate but see little risk of a default.

U.S. Treasury prices were firm in Europe on Wednesday, supported by a flight to their perceived safety on the back of the Greek debt crisis and worries about a slowdown in U.S. economic growth.

Marc Ostwald, a strategist with Monument Securities in London, said markets were working on the assumption that the U.S. debt story "will go away." But nervousness would grow if a resolution was not reached in the next five to six weeks.

'WOULDN'T HAPPEN'

The Republicans' theory is that bondholders would accept a brief delay in interest payments if it meant Washington finally addressed its long-term fiscal problems, putting the country in a stronger position to meet its debt obligations later on.

But interviews with government officials and investors show they consider a default such a grim -- and remote -- possibility that it was nearly impossible to imagine.

"How can the U.S. be allowed to default?" said an official at India's central bank. "We don't think this is a possibility because this could then create huge panic globally."

Indian officials say they have little choice but to buy U.S. Treasury debt because it is still among the world's safest and most liquid investments. It held $39.8 billion in U.S. Treasuries as of March, U.S. data shows.

The officials declined to be identified because they are not authorized to speak to the media.

Oman is concerned about the impact of a default on the currency reserves of the sultanate and its Gulf neighbors.

"Our economies are substantially tied up with the U.S. financial developments," said a senior central bank official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

"It just wouldn't happen," said Barry Evans, who oversees $83 billion in fixed income assets at Manulife Asset Management. "They would pay their Treasury bills first instead of other bills. It's as simple as that."

Monument's Ostwald called the default scenario "frightening" and said bondholders' patience would wear thin if lawmakers persisted in pitching this strategy in the coming weeks.

"This isn't a debate, this is like a Mexican standoff and that is where the problem lies," he said.

Yuan Gangming, a researcher with the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, a government think tank, smelled some political wrangling behind the U.S. debt debate as the 2012 presidential election draws nearer and said Republicans "want to make things difficult for Obama."

But with time running short before the U.S. Treasury exhausts its borrowing room, Yuan said default was a real risk.

"The possibility is quite high to see a default of the U.S. debt, which would harm many countries in the world, and China in particular," he said.

(Reporting by Kevin Lim and Jong Woo Cheon in Singapore, Suvashree Dey Choudhury in Mumbai, Aileen Wang and Kevin Yao in Beijing, Abhijit Neogy in Delhi, Marius Zaharia in London and Umesh Desai in Hong Kong; Editing by Dean Yates and Neil Fullick)



TV Shows, Movies & Music · Show Links TV
Enhanced by Zemanta

U.S. Military, Businesses Seek Better Defenses on the Inside





Credit: Technology Review
By Robert Lemos

Research projects at the Pentagon highlight the need to prevent data theft that happens within an organization's walls.

For most of the history of the Internet, companies and government agencies have split networks into two categories: internal, trusted systems and external, untrusted ones. The most common approach to security has been to erect a wall that treats data and communications as potentially dangerous if they come from outside and safe if they come from within.

Yet some of the most serious breaches, such as the massive handover of U.S. State Department cables to WikiLeaks late last year, come from corporate and government insiders. Even if they mean no harm, insiders can present security risks: several major data breaches have occurred after attackers tricked employees into downloading malicious software that took hold inside the organization's firewall.

"In the early 2000s, you would see a lot of organizations focus on outsiders exclusively," says Joji Montelibano, who leads the insider-threat technical team at the Software Engineering Institute's CERT program at Carnegie Mellon University. "With the prevalence of information technology everywhere now, the ways an insider can harm an organization have increased dramatically."



In hopes of counteracting the trend, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)—the research arm of the U.S. military—has called for research that would improve the government's ability to identify threats from within. DARPA is taking a two-pronged approach: last August, an agency project named Cyber Insider Threat (CINDER) called for proposals for better systems to detect attackers who have already compromised a network. Two months later, DARPA launched Anomaly Detection at Multiple Scales (ADAMS), to detect insiders just before or after they go rogue.

The proposed ADAMS technology will likely model typical user behavior and alert managers when a user is acting off-profile. Such a system, for example, could have caught Bradley Manning, the U.S. intelligence analyst who is alleged to have leaked the diplomatic cables, by warning officials that Manning had suddenly accessed thousands of cables from his computer.

"If I'm trying to get information out of my company, I'm probably going to start at the simplest level and work my way up—I would try to e-mail it to myself, I would try to post it to a website, or upload the file to a peer-to-peer network," says Daniel Guido, a consultant with iSec Partners, who frequently tests firms' security to identify potential weaknesses. "They are going to approach exfiltrating information outside the company in a very particular way, and if you think like they do, you will be much more effective" as a defender.

Related Articles


Breached Companies Say They Did All They Could 

Executives for Sony and Epsilon, an e-mail marketing company, insist that they had tight security before they lost consumer data.


Making the Case for Security

Data security scholar Eugene Spafford argues that the subject needs to be taken more seriously at the highest levels of companies.

 The Costs of Bad Security

Mounting threats to the security of information are forcing companies to make more sophisticated cost-benefit analyses when they craft their security strategies.

 Newscribe : get free news in real time
Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

Signing off for the niceties of colonial masters, obedient servants, wives ...





Marina Mahathir, daughter of Mahathir MohamadImage via Wikipedia

Musings By Marina Mahathir

Civil servants, when writing to others, sign off with the phrase declaring themselves as servants of the people, their real masters in theory.

THE penny dropped for me the other night. It suddenly dawned on me that the ubiquitous sign-off “Saya yang menurut perintah” on government letters was in fact a translation of that quaint colonial bit of politesse, “Your obedient servant”.

While the latter may not have been meant at all sincerely (Humphrey the smarmy Chief Secretary in Yes Prime Minister comes to mind), still I find it fascinating that while we have studiously imitated all the administrative niceties of our former colonial masters, we have managed to go our own way on this little courtesy.

You see, “Saya yang menurut perintah” literally means, “I who obey orders”. This is not quite the same as “Your obedient servant” that should be translated as “Pembantu setia anda” or perhaps, more accurately, given the way we treat our helpers these days, “Hamba abdi setia anda”.

Not only are the words lost in translation, so is the sentiment behind them.

The English version, used by civil servants when writing to others, is meant to convey that they are servants of the people.

As I said, this may not be meant sincerely at all but, as the Brits would have it, correct form is everything.
Our version however begs the question: whose orders are you obedient to? Ostensibly, these should be orders by the government of the day and by extension, the people who voted them in.

We also pay the taxes that make the salaries of civil servants possible. And at over one million of them, that’s a lot of taxes.

But we all know that obeying their real masters, that is, us, is not really our civil service’s calling. So whose orders are they obeying?

It’s a valid question when you see so many cases where the people’s concerns seem to be dismissed in favour of, well, who knows?

For example, why are the residents of Gebeng’s worries about the Lynas rare earth plant hardly entertained? How is it, when we are supposed to become ever more developed, we are expected to hold ourselves to lower safety standards than Austra­lians?

When civil servants make life difficult for the people, what is that obedience for?

I read a sad story about someone who, finally, after years of trying, gave up staying in this country, where he was born and bred, because the family could not get their utilities fixed.



It might seem small but these are public amenities our taxes pay for, and we should not have to beg for them to be fixed. Why don’t we simply call ourselves a Third World country so that our expectations are not too high?

The other day I met someone who was so tired of trying to jump through the bureaucratic hoops trying to get his proposal approved that he went overseas to try and sell it. And did so with far less aggravation.

I can’t say whether his project has any merit, but I can understand his agitation at not being able to discuss facts and figures, merits and demerits without being passed from one clueless person to another.

So perhaps our bureaucracy ought to have a far more honest sign-off from now on. How about “Saya yang akan melambatkan (I who will slow things down)”?

Talking about obedience, every paper’s been abuzz about this obedient wives’ club this week. Talk about anachronistic; nobody has pushed this type of archaic concept since at least the 50s.

I don’t know whether to laugh or cry to read of women degrading themselves like this, blaming everything on their own sex’s supposed inability to keep their men.

Life’s miseries are attributed to women smelling less than fragrant! Wow, who would have thought of that!

Not long ago, a male politician said the best Muslim wife is the one who would drop everything, undoubtedly even feeding the baby, every time hubby wants some nooky. He should be the patron saint of the OWC (Obedient Wives Club) .

It does strike me as interesting that the guys who like to say these things are rarely the sort women would generally drop everything for. Do you think George Clooney ever has to even think about this?

I actually propose another club we women should join. It’s the Good Husband and Father Fan Club. Like any fan club, members will extol the virtues of the good husbands and fathers they know.

Hubbies who help at home and who do homework with their kids, for example, would qualify. If they are clean and smell nice, they would get lots of bonus points.

Each month there could be a Hubby and Father of the Month, and they would all compete for Hubby and Father of the Year.

And yes, their prowess in bed would also be a consideration.