Chinese anger at sale of Qing Dynasty seal

China has reacted angrily to the sale of an 18th century Qing Dynasty seal by Sotheby's in London.

An Imperial Khotan-Green Jade Seal is pictured at Sothebys auction house in London

The green jade seal, belonging to the emperor Qian Long (1736-1795) fetched £3.6 million, six times its estimate, at the auction on Wednesday following frantic bidding by eight competing collectors.

News of the sale was greeted with anger on the Chinese internet, where the country's growing nationalism frequently finds its voice.

"Bandits have seized our treasures and are now selling them off at auction for ridiculous profits. How can we tolerate such behaviour?" wrote one user of the Sohu Internet portal. "The Chinese government must get fully involved in this matter." The seal, lot 136, was the prize object in a 261-lot sale which raised a total of £8.3m.

Although Sotheby's said it was 'not aware of any issue' with the seal's provenance – it was acquired in Paris in the 1970s by a European collector according to the catalogue notes – the auction revived memories of a controversial sale in March this year.

In that case, the sale in Paris of two bronze heads looted during the sacking of the Summer Palace in 1860, caused indignation across China, leading to diplomatic interventions by the Chinese government to try and halt the sale.

Last month China's announced that it was mounting a global expedition to attempt to document lost treasures from the Summer Palace, including those held in the British Museum and Victoria & Albert Museum.

Sections of China's state media urged caution when responding to the sale, pointing out that many lost relics were not looted, but 'legitimately' sold out of China for profit by Qing Dynasty officials.

However following Wednesday's sale the State Administration of Cultural Heritages responded to popular pressure by again voicing opposition to the auction of looted cultural relics, and urging auction houses to comply with the spirit of relevant international treaties and professional ethics.

It also promised to expand support for Chinese organisation charged with studying, collecting and cataloguing China's lost cultural heritage which was widely disseminated around the world during the colonial era.

A study by UNESCO, the United Nations cultural arm, estimated that there were 1.67m Chinese relics in 200 museums around the world, and up to ten times that number in private collections.

Why is it we have Finite Resources for Health Care but Unlimited Money for War?

Following a statement on the Floor of the House of Representative, Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) today made the following statement:

“Why is it we have finite resources for health care but unlimited money for war?

“The inequities in our economy are piling up: trillions for war, trillions for Wall Street and tens of billions for the insurance companies. Banks and other corporations are sitting on piles of cash of taxpayer’s money while firing workers, cutting pay and denying small businesses money to survive.

“People are losing their homes, their jobs, their health, their investments, their retirement security; yet there is unlimited money for war, Wall Street and insurance companies, but very little money for jobs on Main Street.

“Unlimited money to blow up things in Iraq and Afghanistan, and relatively little money to build things in the US.

“The Administration may soon bring to Congress a request for an additional $50 billion for war. I can tell you that a Democratic version of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is no more acceptable than a Republican version of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“Trillions for war and Wall Street, billions for insurance companies... When we were promised change, we weren’t thinking that we give a dollar and get back two cents.”

WALL STREET CRIME SYNDICATE / GOLDMAN SACHS EXPOSED

Greg Gordon, McClatchy News Investigative reporter, reveals how Goldman Sachs didn't tell buyers of 40 Billion in toxic Mortgage securities that it was secretly betting the other way ~ standard fare for a Wall Street crime syndicate that is about to become exposed:

As I have said for some time, it's an Oligarchy, folks ~ the tyranny of the elites with government and Wall Street ruled by the powerful few ~ and the Obama administration is part of it.

In other words, Wall Street is the only game in town and it's crooked ! Ben Bernanke is a stooge for the Oligarchy along with former NY Fed chief and present Sec of the Treasury ~ Tim Geithner. http://blogs.salon.com/0002255/2009/09/21.html

Here is Greg Gordon's, McClatchy News, detailed article on how Goldman Sach's scammed the system by selling toxic mortgages that they knew were not being reviewed ~ and then secretly bet the other way with high flying derivatives. http://www.truthout.org/1101095

But better yet listen to the highly respected Gerald Celente, who pulls no punches, announce that the political system is failing the America people and that the Banks ( Oligarchy ) are robbing us blind " Worldwide we are being set up for the greatest Depression and here, in the United States, it will be called Obamageddon."

Here is Celente's must see video interview ~
Gerald Celente on King World News | Part 1/4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNiAAiSMu9Y&;feature=player_embedded

If you're not outraged, you're on life support. As Celente predicts ~ watch for the formation of an angry Progressive / Libertarian third party before the mid-term elections in 2010 and I'll be an active participant.

-###-

Allen L Roland http://blogs.salon.com/0002255/2009/11/02.html

Freelance Online columnist Allen L Roland is available for comments, interviews and speaking engagements (allen@allenroland.com)

Allen L Roland is a practicing psychotherapist, author and lecturer who also shares a daily political and social commentary on his weblog and website allenroland.com He also guest hosts a monthly national radio show TRUTHTALK on www.conscioustalk.net

We Rescued The Top Of The System, Left The Bottom To Fend For Itself (VIDEO)

Elizabeth Warren, the chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel charged with monitoring the bank bailout, was on Morning Joe Friday morning to dig in to the newly released unemployment report. The numbers are bleak -- unemployment has surpassed 10 percent for the first time since 1983 -- and Warren is not surprised.

"Let's face it," Warren said, "This is sort of how we went about the rescue -- we rescued at the top and we left the bottom to kind of fend for itself -- and that's showing up in the unemployment numbers."

Warren went on to explain that the report is really about the guarantees the Government made to protect banks' assets while leaving the public out to dry.

"Look, it saved the top of the system," Warren acknowledged. "It helped stabilize it, but not so much for families who are hard hit down on the ground, the real economy." There's always the question, Warren explains, about how you save the top -- in this case, the public pays for the banks' guarantees and the top executives benefit. "We said, in effect, at the top, there's really not any pain in return for taxpayer support. Not so much so when it comes to folks at the bottom. We said wait a year, we'll get there, we'll do what we can."

Morning Joe host Joe Scarborough suggested that it was the old "socialize the profits, privatize the gains" scenario, but Warren took it one step further.

"The way I think of it is: they say something like 'Give me your money, investors and I'm going to Las Vegas and put it all on red 22. And if red 22 comes in -- woo! we are RICH. If red 22 doesn't come in, don't worry because the tax payers will pay you back the money you invested."

Watch it here:

Five more banks fail - 120 for the year

Banks in California, Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota and Missouri were shuttered, costing the FDIC a total of $1.5 billion.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Five banks failed late Friday, bringing the 2009 tally to 120.

The biggest to fall was United Commercial Bank of San Francisco, which had 63 U.S. branches as well as operations in Hong Kong and Shanghai. The bank held deposits totaling $7.5 billion.

East West Bank of Pasadena, Calif., agreed to assume all of United Commercial's domestic branches, as well as its international subsidiaries.

United Security Bank of Sparta, Ga., closed its doors for the last time on Friday. Moultrie, Ga.-based Ameris Bank will assume control of all United Security's deposits.

Home Federal Savings Bank of Detroit also failed late friday. New Orleans-based Liberty Bank and Trust Co. will assume control of its deposits.

Prosperan Bank of Oakdale, Minn., failed and will be taken over by Grand Forks, N.D.-based Alerus Financial.

Gateway Bank of St. Louis, Mo., also failed. Central Bank of Kansas City will take over its deposits.

Customers of the failed banks are protected, however. The FDIC., which has insured bank deposits since the Great Depression, currently covers customer accounts up to $250,000.

Customers can access their money over the weekend by writing checks or using ATMs or debit cards. Checks will continue to be processed, and borrowers should make mortgage and loan payments as usual.

What happens to the banks. United Commercial's failure will cost the FDIC's Deposit Insurance Fund an estimated $1.4 billion. East West Bank paid the FDIC a premium of 1.1% for the right to assume United Commercial's deposits, and the two organizations agreed to share losses on around $7.7 billion of the failed bank's assets.

An average of 11 banks have failed per month this year, and the federal coffer is thinning under the massive strain. The fund now stands below $10 billion, down significantly from $45 billion a year ago.

When the FDIC factors in expected closures, the agency says the fund is in the red and will likely remain there through 2012. Bank failure costs are expected to total $100 billion over the next four years.

So far 2009 has seen more than four times the number that were closed in 2008. It's the highest total since 1992, when 181 banks failed.

Ameris Bank will pay the FDIC a premium of 0.36% to take control of American United's $150 million in deposits.

United Security had $157 million in assets, and the FDIC and Ameris entered into a loss-share transaction on $123 million of those assets. The agreement means Ameris will share in the losses on the assets covered.

The failure is expected to cost the Deposit Insurance Fund an estimated $58 million. The two branches of United Security will reopen Saturday as branches of Ameris.

Liberty Bank and Trust will assume Home Federal Savings Bank's $14.9 million in assets and $12.8 million in deposits. The failure cost the FDIC fund $5.4 million. The two branches of Home Federal will reopen Saturday as branches of Liberty.

Alerus Financial will pay the FDIC a premium of 1.02% to take control of Prosperan's $175.6 million in deposits. Prosperan had $199.5 million in assets, and the FDIC and Alerus entered into a loss-share transaction on $173.9 million of those assets.

The failure will cost the FDIC $60.1 million. The three branches of Prosperan will reopen Saturday as branches of Alerus.

Central Bank will assume Gateway Bank's $27.7 million in assets and $27.9 million in deposits. The failure cost the FDIC fund $9.2 million. The single branch of Gateway will reopen Saturday as a branch of Central.

By Julianne Pepitone,

The Pillage People

One year after the Wall Street bailout, real reform of the financial sector is still a dream.

It’s as if last year’s meltdown—causing a $16 trillion bailout of the financial industry, the doubling of America’s unemployment rate and the loss of 2 million manufacturing jobs in 2008—had never taken place. Two of the five biggest investment banks, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, have bitten the dust, but the survivors intend to party on, federal dollars in hand.

The Obama administration’s passive attitude creates despair for observers like Wall Street veteran Nomi Prins, a former managing director of Bear Stearns and Goldman Sachs and author of It Takes a Pillage: Behind the Bailouts, Bonuses, and Backroom Deals from Washington to Wall Street (John Wiley & Sons, September). Whereas “the New Deal meshed government rescue with economic restructuring,” Prins sees few signs that the Obama team is going to insist that the big bailout be coupled with serious re-regulation of the financial sector.

“I think we are less stable now,” Prins told In These Times. “There are fewer banks and they are more concentrated and more influential than before. We might not have a crisis on subprime loans in five years, but it might turn out to be the financial sector not fully paying back their loans that causes a new crisis.”

Thus far, Obama seems unwilling to engage in an all-out fight with Wall Street or even fundamentally break from the trickle-down approach followed by former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson (the former Goldman Sachs chairman and CEO). Paulson argued that major investment banks were “too big to fail” and then unleashed a gusher of federal assistance to Wall Street, starting with $787 billion in TARP funds.

A very different, bottom-up approach would have been far less expensive. “A total of about $1.7 trillion would have handled the subprime crisis,” says Prins. With that investment, the government could have bought or subsidized every single house on the verge of foreclosure. That would have been a very cheap fix for subprime loans.

But such an approach was apparently unthinkable to Paulson. On July 8, 2008, Paulson took a free-market stance toward moderate-income families facing foreclosure, many of whom had been victimized by deceptive practices associated with subprime loans. Acknowledging that these families “will lose their homes,” Paulson nonetheless said, “There is little public policymakers can or should do to compensate for untenable financial decisions.”

However, in the fall of 2008, just two months after his speech about holding homeowners responsible for their “untenable financial decisions,” Paulson came up with a relief strategy for these “too big to fail” banks and insurers.

Proposed reforms by the Obama administration have been disappointing, says Prins. “They’re using the same approach [as the Bush Administration] of giving money to the banks and assuming that they’ll lend it to the people. There’s never been an independent drill-down to discover banks’ real assets and liabilities like the 1930’s. The ‘stress tests’ were valued by traders who sold them in the first place, so it becomes kind of circular and meaningless.”

“Instead of instituting reform, Obama and Co. merely calls their ideas ‘reform’,” Prins writes.

Even some progressive Democrats like House Financial Services Committee Chair Barney Frank (D-Mass.) have expressed worries that too-stringent legislation could curtail “financial innovation.” “That was the argument behind repealing the Glass-Steagall Act,” says Prins. Glass-Steagall was a crucial New Deal banking regulation enacted to prevent a replay of the speculation-induced 1929 crash. It was repealed by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 on a 92-8 vote.

The Treasury Department’s call for more transparency so all financial transactions—including derivatives and credit default obligations—are recorded is a good step, but enforcement procedures are vague. “The industry should be dissected and cut into parts that can be regulated,” instead of being permanently positioned for government handouts in the name of being “too big to fail.” The federal government needs to “take away the ability for the financial system to leverage and trade itself beyond its capacity to absorb the risk,” says Prins.

Particularly vital, she says, is re-instituting the Glass-Steagall Act, which separated banks into operations making conventional loans (mortgages, car loans, commercial lending, etc.) and those allowed to engage in speculation. “There can be a role for speculation—that is, any investment with risk—but not a role for government subsidizing that speculation.”

One particularly useful idea to emerge from the Obama Administration is establishing a Consumer Financial Protection Agency. “Having a real enforcement agency would make a difference; but certainly it would encounter pushback from Wall Street,” she says. “Even if the agency comes to fruition, it will be hard to do its stated job.”

Overall, the diversion of federal resources to bailing out the financial sector has created a far more polarized society, with spreading conditions of poverty and deprivation across America, Prins argues.

“We’re creating cuts at the police station, the fire station, the public parks, the libraries,” she says. “We’re seeing much more of a Dickensian society, and these effects will be long-lasting.”

Despite her exhaustive research in documenting the size of the ever-ballooning government bailout of the financial sector, Prins is still stunned by how quickly the federal government jumped to bail out bankers. “It’s amazing how much money the government can come up with… without asking any questions or putting any new rules in place,” she sighs. 

By Roger Bybee

Roger Bybee is a Milwaukee-based freelance writer and progressive publicity consultant whose work has appeared in numerous national publications and websites, including Z magazine, Dollars & Sense, Yes!, The Progressive, Multinational Monitor, The American Prospect and Foreign Policy in Focus. Bybee edited The Racine Labor weekly newspaper for 14 years in his hometown of Racine, Wis., where his grandfathers and father were socialist and labor activists. His website can be found here.

Recovery? The 10.2 percent without jobs might beg to differ

WASHINGTON — As bad as Friday's jobs report was, showing October's unemployment rate jumping sharply to 10.2 percent, the outlook is likely to worsen for American workers well into next year. Economists expect the jobless rate to keep climbing, perhaps above 11 percent, as employers produce more with fewer workers and shy away from hiring.

The nation's unemployment rate leapt by a larger-than-expected four-tenths of a percentage point in October to its highest level since April 1983, even as the pace of job losses slowed sharply, the Labor Department said Friday.

Employers shed 190,000 jobs in October, the slowest pace nearly since the devastating recession began in December 2007. The Bureau of Labor Statistics also revised its August and September unemployment numbers to reflect that 91,000 fewer jobs were lost over those two months than first reported.

That trend is positive. It shows that the torrid pace of job losses in the first half of the year has slowed dramatically. That supports the recent report that the U.S. economy grew at a 3.5 percent annual rate from July through September.

There are other positive signs. The professional and business services sector added 18,000 jobs in October. Temporary employment, which usually precedes a return to broader hiring, was up by almost 34,000 last month, the third straight month of gains.

Yet the surge in the unemployment rate overshadowed all else.

"History tells us that job growth always lags behind economic growth," President Barack Obama cautioned in a statement from the White House Rose Garden, shortly after he signed a new $24 billion economic stimulus bill into law. The measure provides tax incentives to homebuyers and extends unemployment befits for the longtime unemployed. The House of Representatives passed the measure 403-12 Thursday in a rare bipartisan vote, a day after the Senate passed it unanimously.

Obama called the October jobless report "a sobering number that underscores the economic challenges that lie ahead. ... I won't let up until the Americans who want to find work can find work and until all Americans can earn enough to raise their families and keep their businesses open."

When discouraged workers and underemployed ones are factored in, a more broadly defined unemployment rate stands at 17.5 percent. Some 35 percent of the jobless, about 5.6 million Americans, have unable to find work for more than six months.

Many economists had expected unemployment to hit 10 percent this year, but few thought the rate would reach that by October. After Friday's sharp jump, they began revising job forecasts down.

Mark Zandi, the chief economist for Moody's Economy.com, thinks that the jobless rate could hit 11 percent by mid-2010.

"Unemployment is rising while labor force is declining. Once labor force begins to rise, this will add to unemployment, as many coming back in will be unemployed," Zandi said.

Smaller firms, which provide the most jobs, remain cash poor and credit starved. They're expected to continue shedding workers or at best holding the line.

"The job market isn't deteriorating as fast as it was earlier in the year, but it isn't going to improve until next spring at the earliest," Zandi said.

Sageworks Inc., a financial firm that specializes in data about privately held companies, reported that small firms will keep cutting payrolls.

"They're going to reduce their overhead. They're going to reduce their payroll. They represent at least 50 percent of the employment in the United States, and that doesn't look like it's coming back anytime soon," Drew White, the group's chief financial officer, told McClatchy.

Only four sectors of privately held companies are showing revenue growth before expenses this year, he said: health care, utilities, education and information.

Still, some analysts found grounds for optimism.

"What people aren't talking about today and won't talk about for a couple of days is that if you take the peak of job losses and plot the trend, we still get to zero jobs lost sometime in the first quarter of 2010. That means we start adding jobs the next month after we hit zero," Fred Fraenkel, the vice chairman of investment manager The Beacon Trust Co., said in a research note. "Most people are talking about the U.S. starting to add jobs back in the second half of next year. It looks like that will start in the first half of the year, not the second half."

October was the 22nd consecutive month that employers shed jobs, the longest such losing streak since the Great Depression. Nine of those months were under the Obama administration, 13 under the Bush administration.

Last month's job losses followed a familiar script as construction, manufacturing, hospitality and leisure, and the retail sector reduced jobs. Government hiring was flat. Health and education showed some positive growth, and in a pleasant surprise, professional and business services added jobs.

Employers shed an average of 188,000 jobs in each of the past three months, the Labor Department said. That's better than the 357,000 jobs lost on average in each of the three preceding months.

"The payroll change, with the significant upward revisions to August and September, provide further confirmation that economic activity is expanding at a fairly solid pace once the brisk rate of productivity growth is factored in," RDQ Economics, a New York forecaster, said in a research note.

Productivity surged at an annualized rate of 9.5 percent from July to September, the Labor Department reported Thursday. Productivity measures hourly output per worker, so the new number showed that companies were squeezing more out of their workers. Rising productivity signals rising profits, the key to future investment, growth and jobs.

OCTOBER EMPLOYMENT BY SECTOR

_ Construction, fell by 62,000.

_ Manufacturing, down 61,000.

_ Leisure and hospitality, down 37,000.

_ Retail, off 40,000.

_ Government, unchanged.

_ Professional and business services, plus 18,000.

_ Health care and education, plus 45,000.

ON THE WEB

October jobs report

MORE FROM MCCLATCHY

To ask a question about this story or any economic question, go to McClatchy's economy Q&A

Health care bill's supporters, opponents flock to Capitol

Small banks didn't cause the mess, but no bailout for them

McClatchy investigates Goldman Sachs