Archive for the ‘US’ Category

Too many coincidences? 70 feared dead in Waco explosion after Boston marathon bombs

April 18, 2013

April 18th today.

Update 2! The Waco blast is more likely to have resulted from an industrial fire. Coincidences do happen.

A case of cum hoc ergo propter hoc perhaps.

Update! Upto 70 15 feared dead

=============================

The name “Waco” had not entered my consciousness for many, many years until a TV commentator brought it up after the Boston Marathon bombs on April 15th. He pointed out that it was close to the 20th anniversary of  the Waco siege ending (April 19th  1993) and the 18th anniversary of the Oklahoma bombing (April 19th, 1995) and that it was Patriots Day and Income Tax day and that some form of anti-government, domestic, fanatic, loony-right group could be implicated.

Two letters containing ricin have also been intercepted (one to a Senator and one to the President) but the previous ricin laters were sent in 2003 and 2004 by a “Fallen Angel” – but not in April. Fallen Angel was never caught.

It was all pure speculation  and I dismissed it as yet another “conspiracy theory” (though there are so many of these, that statistics says that some few of these probably must be true).

But I woke up this morning to news reports about a massive explosion at a fertiliser factory in (or near) Waco and that another explosion was expected and that 70 people were feared dead. Fertiliser plants are no strangers to explosions  and “powder” borne explosions can be particularly devastating, and yet … .

To have “Waco” enter my consciousness twice in just 3 days seems weird – and my clear perception is that this is too much of a coincidence:

News.com.au: 

  • Explosion at fertiliser plant north of Waco,Texas
  • Up to 70 people believed to have died  
  • Several people, including children, trapped in buildings

The grim death toll was given by a senior doctor at West hospital following the blast, and reported by local station KHTX, but has yet to be confirmed by other officials.

While West’s Emergency Medical Services Director Dr George Smith was cited as saying as many as 60 or 70 people died, doctors at Hillcrest Medical Centre in Waco said none of the 66 injured taken there had died.

Babies and the elderly are among those injured in the blast, with homes within a four-block radius of the fertiliser plant flattened and several more on fire.

US Interior Department clears itself of misconduct

April 11, 2013

Internal inquiries set up to look into alleged misdeeds of any organisation always have a vested interest in protecting the organisation. Even those which have “independent members” but who are “hired” by the organisation are never truly independent. But what is often forgotten is that no internal inquiry about wrong-doing can ever in fact prove innocence by proving the negative – that wrong-doing did not take place. The only two options that are open as conclusions are that “wrong-doing did take place” or “no evidence of wrong-doing was found”. The latter is not a declaration of innocence.

Internal inquiries are usually the result of specific allegations and such inquiries are established mainly as a political ploy and to deflect criticism. Most such inquiries take the default position as being that no wrong-doing has occurred and require wrong-doing to be proven. But this is exactly the opposite of what they ought to be doing. They should – and maybe this should be mandatory for all internal inquiries – use the null hypothesis “that the alleged wrong-doing did take place” and the task is to see if there is evidence that this hypothesis is false. The presumption, I think must be that of guilt and cannot take the comfortable and rather cozy position of presumed innocence. Especially so in cases of alleged scientific misconduct. The onus should be on the impugned researcher to demonstrate the integrity of his evidence or data or images and not the other way around.

And therefore I take the findings of this internal inquiry conducted by the US Department of the Interior about alleged misconduct with a very large bushel of salt. Ironically the complaint was made by their own Integrity Officer. And considering that they have introduced new policies about integrity and have thereafter rejected all allegations of misconduct, it could be thought that the new standards are more about protecting the organisation rather than of protecting integrity.

The Record Searchlight:  

The U.S. Department of the Interior has rejected complaints of scientific misconduct made by its former scientific integrity officer, who accused the department of skewing information in favor removing dams on the Klamath River.

A panel hired by the department did not agree with Paul Houser’s claims that officials falsified scientific materials and circumvented policy on scientific integrity to garner public support for dam removal.

Houser filed a complaint last year, claiming a press release announcing the release of a draft environmental analysis cherry-picked facts to garner public support for removing four dams on the Klamath River. The press release also included a summary of key findings in the report that Houser said failed to include possible uncertainties about the information.

The panel’s report, titled “Independent evaluation of the scientific record pertaining to the allegations of Dr. Paul Houser,” says there was nothing unusual about the press release and key findings.

“It (the press release) was not intended as document on which to base a secretarial decision or to announce to the public such a decision,” says the report, which was written in August 2012, but not released to the public until this month.

Houser issued a rebuttal to the report blasting the department’s scientific integrity policy and the panel, claiming it was not independent, that its members were not qualified to investigate his claims and that the probe was inadequate. …….

………. 

The Interior Department has a web page listing the findings from all of its closed scientific integrity cases over the past two years. The findings on the 12 complaints say they were without basis.

“We seem to be getting more and more excuses why there was no misconduct,” Ruch said.

Prior to the department’s press release being issued in September 2011, Houser took his complaints to Interior Department officials, who changed it. But two weeks after raising issues over the release, Houser was placed on probation within the department.

Houser’s position was abolished last year and he was told he was “not a good fit” for the job of scientific integrity officer, PEER said. After losing his job, Houser filed a whistleblower complaint with the government.

Houser and the government “resolved” the whistleblower complaint last year. The resolution included an agreement that neither Houser or the department would comment on it. The department’s panel did not consider Houser’s claims of retaliation during its investigation.

“If Interior’s own scientific integrity officers are not shielded from reprisal for doing their jobs, how in heaven’s name could one expect a staff scientist to push back against political shenanigans?” Ruch said.

Doomsayers confounded as Gulf of Mexico heals itself

April 10, 2013

It was touted as the greatest environmental disaster of all time when Deepwater Horizon exploded in the Gulf of Mexico killing 11 and spilling vast quantities of crude oil. But two years later in April 2012 it was clear that the Gulf was recovering much faster than expected. It was soon clear that the effect of oil eating microbes had been grossly underestimated. And now 3 years after the accident an expert in bioremediation reported  at the 245th National Meeting & Exposition of the American Chemical Society (ACS)  that “the Gulf of Mexico may have a much greater natural ability to self-clean oil spills than previously believed”.

“It shows that we may not need the kinds of heroic measures proposed after the Deepwater Horizon spill, like adding nutrients to speed up the growth of bacteria that breakdown oil, or using genetically engineered bacteria. The Gulf has a broad base of natural bacteria, and they respond to the presence of oil by multiplying quite rapidly.”

From ACS: Terry C. Hazen, Ph.D., said that conclusion has emerged from research following the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster, which by some estimates spilled 4.9 million barrels (210 million gallons) of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. His research team used a powerful new approach for identifying microbes in the environment to discover previously unknown bacteria, naturally present in the Gulf water, that consume and break down crude oil.

“The Deepwater Horizon oil provided a new source of nutrients in the deepest waters,” explained Hazen, who is with the University of Tennessee in Knoxville. “With more food present in the water, there was a population explosion among those bacteria already adapted to using oil as a food source. It was surprising how fast they consumed the oil. In some locations, it took only one day for them to reduce a gallon of oil to a half gallon. In others, the half-life for a given quantity of spilled oil was 6 days. This data suggests that a great potential for intrinsic bioremediation of oil plumes exists in the deep sea and other environs in the Gulf of Mexico.” 

Hazen spoke at a symposium, “Environmental Fate of Petroleum Oils and Dispersants in the Marine Environment,” that included other reports relating to the Deepwater Horizon spill. They were among 12,000 reports being presented at the ACS meeting, which continues through Thursday. Abstracts of the oil spill symposium appear at the end of this press release.

Oil-eating bacteria are natural inhabitants of the Gulf because of the constant supply of food. Scientists know that there are more than 600 different areas where oil oozes from rocks underlying the Gulf of Mexico. These oil seeps, much like underwater springs, release 560,000-1.4 million barrels of oil annually, according to the National Research Council.

Hazen’s team used a powerful new approach for identifying previously recognized kinds of oil-eating bacteria that contributed to the natural clean-up of the Deepwater Horizon spill. In the past, scientists identified microbes by putting samples of water into laboratory culture dishes, waiting for microbes to grow and then using a microscope to identify the microbes. The new approach, called “ecogenomics,” uses genetic and other analyses of the DNA, proteins and other footprints of bacteria to provide a more detailed picture of microbial life in the water.

“The bottom line from this research may be that the Gulf of Mexico is more resilient and better able to recover from oil spills than anyone thought,” Hazen said. “It shows that we may not need the kinds of heroic measures proposed after the Deepwater Horizon spill, like adding nutrients to speed up the growth of bacteria that breakdown oil, or using genetically engineered bacteria. The Gulf has a broad base of natural bacteria, and they respond to the presence of oil by multiplying quite rapidly.”

 

Delta Airlines sues US Ex-IM for supporting Boeing sales to foreign airlines

April 4, 2013

I think Delta doth protest too much and is clutching at straws. Loss of jobs at Boeing is of much more consequence to the US economy than Delta’s dubious claim of loss of competitiveness against foreign airlines.

Of course the real problem is that Delta is weak competitively. Its costs are too high and its service is too inferior. By the end of trading session, Delta Air Lines, Inc. shares slumped 8.06% to US$14.94 with more than 41.03 million shares traded, compared to its average volume of 12.11 million shares. Delta Air Lines’s unit revenues increased only 2% in March, and most of it came from its trans-Atlantic and Latin offerings.  Delta were expecting a March growth of 4 – 5%. And they are more than a little worried by the US Air merger with American Airlines.

(Reuters)Delta Air Lines Inc has sued the Export-Import Bank of the United States over loan guarantees given to support purchases of Boeing Co’s widebody planes by certain foreign airlines, according to a court filing.

Delta are claiming that Ex-Im bank’s guarantees (to Boeing) and/or buyers credits (to foreign airlines) for aircraft sales to foreign airlines, including Emirates Airlines, Etihad Airways and Korean Air Co Ltd, amount to subsidies and would cause a loss of competitiveness and adverse economic effects on Delta and its employees.

Ex-Im Bank, a government agency, provides loan guarantees and direct loans to help companies maintain and create jobs.

In a complaint filed in federal court in Washington D.C. late on Wednesday, Delta said one of the types of exports that Ex-Im Bank subsidizes is the export of aircraft by U.S. manufacturers, especially ones made by Boeing.

“In 2012, the bank’s total exposure to outstanding financial commitments was $106.6 billion. About 46 percent of this amount was for air transportation loans and loan guarantees, more than the three next largest industrial sectors combined,” Delta said in the filing.

Delta said the Ex-Im Bank loan guarantees help lower the cost of capital for foreign airline companies.

“These foreign airlines will recoup their investment in their new aircraft faster or reduce ticket prices on competing routes without adversely impacting their relative rate of return on those investments,” Delta said in the filing.

Delta argued that unsubsidized U.S. airlines will be forced to respond by “reducing their prices and reducing or altogether eliminating their capacity to serve those routes where they compete with bank-subsidized foreign airlines.”

I don’t think I will be buying any Delta stock any time soon.

 

Another Clinton, another Bush

March 15, 2013

From across the Atlantic, Hillary Clinton versus Jeb Bush is not only plausible, it now seems to me to be becoming inevitable. It is not so very far away to 2016 in calendar time – though it could be an eternity in political time.

But all those who harbour any pretensions to standing for President of the US in 2016 must already be planning their campaigns – at least in the confines of their own minds. But the crucial need for financing means that they have probably confided their ambitions to a very small and select group who are already sounding out potential donors for a potential campaign.

The energised campaign of 2008 was exciting (to an observer) but it has proven to be extremely divisive for the country. Perhaps campaign energy – if it is at too high a level – actually leads to divisions. But a lack of energy does not correlate with unity or a removal of divisions. This energy of 2008 was certainly missing in 2012 but the parties remain just as far apart and divisions among the electorate are not being bridged. Perhaps there is some optimum level of energy which is desirable for a campaign. It remains to be seen how the legacy of Obama’s Presidency will be seen but I think there is a large risk that the divisiveness during his two terms will mean that he is remembered primarily as the first “black” President. Any other achievements will seem quite mundane. He has proven to very risk-averse and so it is unlikely he will be remembered for any catastrophic blunders either. A Hillary Clinton – Jeb Bush race may actually get the balance right; an energised campaign which captures the imagination of the bulk of the electorate but does not drive them to the extreme positions of the fanatics.

I cannot see Jeb Bush bringing an Obama-style energy into either the Primaries or the Presidential Campaigns but he will not be devoid of energy. From the splinters of the Tea Party and the depths to which the Republicans have sunk, having another Bush scion to call on may seem to provide a “safe”, low-energy, compromise choice for the GOP. But Jeb Bush may actually be the brightest of all the Bushes.

NPR: The former two-term governor of Florida has not run for office since 2002, and has up to now refused to get caught up in public presidential speculation. Widely acknowledged as a power behind the scenes, he is seen as politically savvy and astute. It’s long been thought that had he won his 1994 gubernatorial campaign against Lawton Chiles in Florida, it would have been Jeb — not brother George W. — whom the GOP turned to in 2000. What he says carries great weight, and when he criticized his party last year for its approach to overhauling the nation’s immigration laws, people sat up and paid attention. You’re not going to win over the hearts of Latino voters, Bush said over and over, by talking about self-deportation and blocking paths to citizenship for those who are here illegally.

But in his new book, Immigration Wars: Forging an American Solution (co-authored with Clint Bolick), Bush is no longer focusing on a path to citizenship. Let’s talk instead about residency rights. “A grant of citizenship,” Bush now says, “is an undeserving reward for conduct we cannot afford to encourage.” Pay a fee, he says of those 11 million people here illegally. Pay back taxes. Do community service. Learn English. But the end would be residency, not citizenship. For many, however, the headline was about 2016.

Hillary Clinton is the heir apparent.  She is uniquely qualified of course. If  her health is up to it and she runs, it is unlikely that any other Democratic candidate will challenge her seriously except to get some exposure and her attention. She cannot any longer be held responsible for any blunders the administration now makes. As potentially the first woman President she will arouse much of the same energy that Obama did in 2008 but perhaps without the same divisiveness and with a reach that – unlike Obama’s – could cut across party lines.

Politico: The ranks of Democratic governors are filled with ambitious politicians boasting records that would probably play well with primary voters in 2016.

But even as they eye a move from the statehouse to the White House, there’s broad recognition among the chief executives that the next generation of Democrats may have to wait longer than four more years to take their place as President Barack Obama’s heir.

Nowhere is The Hillary Factor felt more acutely, and painfully, than in the same elite club of policy innovators and budget balancers that vaulted her husband onto the national political scene in the 1980s. ….

“It’s just a very unique situation in which an extremely qualified candidate with a long history of public service who has been fully vetted is considering running for the presidency,” noted Nixon, who easily won reelection last year to his second term in conservative-leaning Missouri. “She’s entitled to her time of analysis. It does, I think, in many ways freeze the field until she more clearly states what she wants to do with the rest of her life”. ….

So Clinton-Bush in 2016 may not be such a bad thing. Bush may actually be able to bring the Republican Party together again and repair the self-inflicted damage wrought by the loony right. Clinton would energise – for or against – every woman in the US and that energy will spread to others. The winner would have a much less divided country to contend with. I think Hillary Clinton would win such a race but with Jeb Bush as her opponent it will not be a walk-over. She will provide the US – at long-last – with a female head of state. And the Democrats will have been in power for 16 years in 2024 when she leaves office after her second term.

Obama’s sequester

March 1, 2013

From this side of the Atlantic, it looks like the sequester in the US is going to come into effect and some $85 billion of public spending will – eventually – be avoided. Last minute chit-chat at the White House has not led to any agreement.

I read that President Obama was blaming Congress and warning of the pain ahead.

Somehow this does not ring true.

The President of the US has or controls all the cards and it is he who sets the agenda. He could – I think –  have reached a compromise with Congress whenever he wanted – if he wanted to. But any compromise he could have reached would have contained spending cuts which he may well know is absolutely necessary but which would not have gone down well with his supporters. I note that the markets are not very perturbed and this also suggests that the pill may be bitter but it may well be the correct thing to do.

It seems to me – albeit from very far away – that Obama is actually using the sequester to do some of what is absolutely necessary but where he can – perhaps – avoid blame for the necessary and unavoidable pain.  The US has been more profligate even than Italy for far too long and the public debt cannot be sustained. But nobody wants to be seen as being responsible for the pain that must be borne. It does not seem to me that Obama wanted a compromise to be reached at all. Hence the almost intransigent positions taken by the White House in discussions with Congress. They were intended to fail.

Nothing is as what it seems. This sequester is actually Obama’s opportunity of getting the US to swallow some very bitter medicine without having to take the blame – and he knows it.

If he signs off on it later today it will be because it is his sequester.

Mississippi abolishes slavery!

February 19, 2013
Dr. Ranjan Batra

Dr. Ranjan Batra

I am not sure if this means that it would have been perfectly legal – until now – to have kept slaves in Mississippi.  A clerical error in 1995 is blamed for this “oversight”. The wheels of bureaucracy grind exceedingly slow but I cannot believe that such an “error” was not without motive. I also suspect that this was not addressed till as late as 1995 because – deep down – Mississippi still hankered for the “good old days”.

NY Daily News: Mississippi ratifies 13th Amendment abolishing slavery almost 150 years after its adoption.

The state thought it had approved the amendment in 1995, but a clerical error left the ratification unresolved, learned Dr. Ranjan Batra of Ole Miss, who was inspired by the film ‘Lincoln.’ The state took action, and its support for the amendment became official this month

The State of Mississippi officially ratified the 13th Amendment, which outlawed slavery … nearly 150 years after most of the states in the union did.

The gross delay, fixed earlier this month, was the result of a clerical error that left unrecorded what many state officials thought was its official ratification nearly 20 years ago.

The Mississippi Legislature had actually formally ratified the historic amendment in 1995, which even then was more than a century late, but because the ratification document was never presented to the U.S. archivist, it was never considered official.

According to The Clarion-Ledger, the bizarre error was discovered by a pair of patriotic Mississippians, who, after seeing the movie “Lincoln,” looked up historical accounts of Mississippi’s action and brought to the attention of state officials that they had never, in fact, ratified one of the most important documents in modern history.

The 13th Amendment, which outlawed all slavery and involuntary servitude except as punishment for a crime, was passed by the U.S. Senate on April 8, 1864, and by the House of Representatives on Jan. 31, 1865. …… 

US approves sale of taxpayer subsidised battery maker to China

January 30, 2013
Image representing A123 Systems as depicted in...

Image via CrunchBase

Not just irony but also further evidence that subsidies are fundamentally unsound.

Back in October last year the US lithium-ion battery maker, A123 Systems, filed for bankruptcy.

10/15/2012: A123 Systems, which had received a $249 million grant from the U.S. government, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on Tuesday, giving Republicans fresh ammunition to attack the Obama administration’s subsidies for green energy.

The filing came after the lithium-ion battery maker’s $465 million rescue deal with Chinese auto parts supplier Wanxiang Group collapsed, hobbled by “unanticipated and significant challenges,” A123 said on its website. A123 has agreed to sell its automotive operations, including two factories in Michigan, for $125 million to Johnson Controls Inc, a leading battery supplier and another recipient of federal green subsidies.

….. The U.S. Department of Energy allotted about $90 billion for various clean-energy programs through the administration’s stimulus package. Of that, at least $813 million went to energy companies that eventually filed for bankruptcy, including A123, Solyndra, Beacon, Abound Solar and EnerDel.

But Wanxiang Group persevered and the US Committee on Foreign Investment (CFIUS) has granted its approval for a revised deal to go ahead. In addition to the automotive business divested to Johnson Controls, all government related business was also divested by the bankrupt A123 Systems to Navita Systems (at a fire-sale price of $2.25 million).

Bloomberg: Wanxiang Group Co., China’s biggest auto-parts maker, won approval from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. to buy most of the assets of A123 Systems Inc. (AONEQ), the bankrupt electric-car battery maker backed with U.S. government funds.

Approval from CFIUS, as it is known, was the final hurdle that Wanxiang needed to overcome to complete the deal. The federal interagency group led by the Treasury Department was reviewing the sale after members of Congress expressed national- security concerns over allowing a foreign competitor to obtain the technology developed with government backing. 

…… “Nothing provided by CFIUS has changed my opinion that the core technology developed by A123,” and the related intellectual property, “can be separated along A123’s business lines,” said Representative Bill Huizenga, a Republican representing Michigan’s 2nd Congressional District, in an e- mailed statement. “American taxpayers should not be funding technology that will in turn be used in competition against American companies,” he said, adding that he will look into legislation to prevent sales of taxpayer-funded “sensitive technologies” to foreign companies in the future.

….. “The Energy Department’s Recovery Act grant to A123 was used for the construction of brick and mortar advanced battery manufacturing facilities at two Michigan locations,” Bill Gibbons, a department spokesman, said in an e-mailed statement. The funds weren’t used for the company’s research and development of battery technology, he said.

“The purchase of these assets includes the Energy Department’s requirement that the plants and equipment partially paid for by the Recovery Act stay in Michigan and continue to operate, generating job opportunities for American workers,” Gibbons said.

….. As part of the purchase Wanxiang, based in Hangzhou, China, will get A123’s cathode powder plant in China and its share of a joint venture with Shanghai Automotive Industry Corp., called Shanghai Advanced Traction Battery Systems Co., in addition to the battery technology used in Fisker Automotive Inc.’s Karma sedan. Fisker, A123’s main customer, said it was awaiting the sale of the company’s Michigan plant so it could resume production of the $103,000 plug-in Karma sedan. A123, whose automotive business supplies electric-car batteries to about a dozen customers, has facilities in the Michigan cities of Livonia and Romulus.

The A123 Systems bankruptcy itself raised some questions about who had walked away with all the benefits. In a sense the subsidies have served the purpose of those investors who got away in time! For the US this now appears to be a damage control exercise to stop the bleeding where some local jobs are temporarily “saved” but the long term benefits are all to the account of Wanxiang. If indeed A123 Systems used government funds only for the building of factories and not for R & D, then Wanxiang have – fairly cheaply – bought themselves a foothold into the US market But if the US market develops – which it may not – then some or all of these jobs will eventually move to a low-cost country. Wanxiang has in any case bought themselves a technology cheaply which may address a world-wide market. But the jobs that creates will not be in the US. If the technology fails or the US market does not develop, then Wanxiang can just walk away from the US but they will retain the technology for whatever it is worth.

Paradoxically the only way in which the US taxpayer wins is if the technology is a dud and the deal represents future losses and liabilities being exported to Wanxiang!

US professors have the least stressful jobs

January 8, 2013

Of course many Professors are outraged but I find CareerCast’s list of The 10 Least Stressful Jobs of 2013 quite convincing. The most stressful job according to CareerCast is that of enlisted military personnel having a stress score of 84.72 compared to the 6.45 of University Professors.

The 3 least stressful are given below:

University professor tops the CareerCast.com Jobs Rated report of least stressful careers for 2013. The field’s high growth opportunities, low health risks and substantial pay provide a low-stress environment that’s the envy of many career professionals.

1. University professors are at the pinnacle of the education field. Their students are largely those who choose the classes they attend, and thus want to be in class. Unlike elementary and secondary educators, the performance of college professors isn’t evaluated based on standardized tests. University professors also have the opportunity to earn tenure, which guarantees lifetime employment. 

MEDIAN SALARY: : $62,050  

JOB OUTLOOK: 17%

JOBS RATED STRESS SCORE: 6.45

2. Seamstresses and tailors mend clothing to personal specifications. For that reason, they must show a great attention to detail, but have the ability to work creatively every day. Most tailors work in a peaceful atmosphere, allowing them to focus on the task at hand without distraction.

MEDIAN SALARY: $25,850

JOB OUTLOOK: 1% 

JOBS RATED STRESS SCORE: 6.5

3. Medical Records Technician. A growing profession in the stable healthcare industry is medical records technician. Medical records technicians work in the office side of hospitals, doctors and dentists practices. 

MEDIAN SALARY: $32,350 

JOB OUTLOOK: 21% 

JOBS RATED STRESS SCORE: 7.5

 

Obama – sort-of – wins the “fiscal cliff” and goes the way of Europe

January 2, 2013

Well, Obama got some tax increases for the wealthy and a postponement of the fight for spending cuts. The fiscal cliff was little more than a fiscal bump. Republicans are more upset than Democrats – at least judging by the “squeal index” – and the Democrats actually prevailed over the Republican majority in the House of Representatives. So, the view from across the Atlantic based on the belief that the loser squeals the loudest, is that Obama must have won. (The splits in the Republican Party are particularly interesting since these may completely nullify their majority in the Congress!)

But whatever it was that was agreed to, the US debt will rise by some $4 trillion directly as a consequence of this “deal”. The US follows exactly the same way as Europe in putting off the day when the music must be faced. The fight about spending and debt will come in about two months. Years of profligacy and living beyond available means cannot just be wished away. Just wishing that the economy will rebound – faster than has ever happened before – and will increase revenues so that spending cuts can be avoided is not living in the “land of hope” but is living in a fantasy. It is the same fantasy being played out in Europe. Obama is merely following Francois Hollande’s super-tax on the very rich to postpone the cuts in spending that are desperately needed and must come. The fundamental rule of party politics is being upheld: “Tax the voters for the other party and spend on your own”. The pain to come is inevitable. Of course, those who have been profligate have taken their benefits and gone. The pain will have to be borne by others – in the US as in Greece and Spain and Italy. I can’t help suspecting that the goal – whether for Hollande or for Obama – is to just postpone the evil day of spending cuts long enough so that it happens on someone else’s watch. But both Obama and Hollande are at the start of new terms and neither will be able to avoid facing reality.

The high drama at the end of the year in the US bears a strong resemblance to a Christmas farce. It couldn’t possibly have been a pantomime since any kind of music was notably absent. Obama’s performance on the 31st of December was badly out-of-tune and a little embarrassing to watch. And the other bit-players on display – Biden and Reid and Boehner and Cantor and McConnell – with their self-adulation, self-congratulations and mutual admiration were even worse.