according to the Tax Policy Center, and those people tend to be Republicans anyway. So few Democratic votes
would be at stake. And Republicans themselves have been bellyaching about how important it is to start attacking the debt. Republicans counter by arguing that enacting
any tax increase in a weak economy is dangerous, because it could crimp spending just when it's needed most. There's truth to that, but the majority of evidence
suggests that tax increases on the wealthy would cut into what they save, not what they spend. The media will treat this whole issue as a huge drama, but the fact that
a Democratic Congress would have to pass a new law to prevent higher taxes on the wealthy weighs heavily in favor of a tax increase. Call your accountant.
The middle class will get a temporary pass, but it will only defer the inevitable pain. Obama has pledged no new taxes on the middle class, and no matter how
implausible that is, it's hard to see him breaking that promise in his first term. Besides, raising the income tax rates on the majority of taxpayers would be risky in
a lousy economy, so the odds are high that Congress will extend the Bush tax cuts for those who fall below the $200,000/$250,000 thresholds. The Senate, which moves
slower than the House, may not get to that before the November elections, so the action may come in the lame-duck session that follows, leading to plenty of high-volume
gamesmanship right up until the elections. But not much will change for the majority of taxpayers.
The respite, however, will be short-lived. One reasonable guess is that the Bush cuts will be extended by only two years, forcing Washington to deal with them again in
2012—when the economy, presumably, will be stronger. At that point or soon after, Congress will have to get serious about new taxes—and there aren't nearly enough
wealthy Americans to finance a solution, at any tax rate. "We've been selling government services at 80 to 90 percent of their cost," says Clint Stretch, managing
principal for tax policy at Deloitte Tax. "We're going to have to start selling them at a premium to pay for the discounts in the past."
Possibilities include not just higher tax rates on those who already pay, but a host of scaled-back deductions—including the mortgage-interest deduction for home
purchases—and a new value-added tax that could raise the cost of most goods and services. Exemptions for lower-income workers could be narrowed as well, so more people
pay taxes. The tumult will be fascinating, since voters are likely to revolt no matter how bankrupt American becomes or what is fiscally prudent. But for now,
politicians are looking the other way.
The "making work pay" credit has a good chance of being extended for one more year, through 2011. This was part of the 2009 stimulus plan that reduced the tax burden
for individuals by $400 and for couples by $800, up to income thresholds of $95,000 and $195,000. It was initially put into effect for 2009 and 2010; Obama wants to
extend it through 2011, and he'll probably get his wish. The tax credit benefits about three-quarters of all taxpayers, and can plausibly be counted as additional
"stimulus" that will help the economy recover. So it has popular appeal despite an estimated cost of about $60 billion in lost government revenue for each year it's in
effect. It wouldn't be surprising if Obama pushed to extend this into 2012 as well, to claim credit for middle-class tax cuts in an election year.
Estate taxes have nowhere to go but up, especially since they were cut to nothing at all for 2010. There are two basic issues: What the tax rate should be, and what
portion of an estate should be exempt from taxes before the government takes its share. Most proposals are coalescing around an exemption of between $3.5 million and $5
million, and tax rates that range from 35 to 50 percent after that. Conservatives loathe the "death" tax, complaining that it's a second levy on money's that already
been taxed once. Classic Cardy Boots UGG Boots Classic Mini UGG Boots UGG Classic Cardy Boots Ugg Classic Argyle Knit Boots But unbeknownst to them, lean times have turned public opinion squarely against the super-rich, who are the only ones really affected by estate taxes.
After the 2010 holiday, a reinstatement seems inevitable.
Friday, July 30, 2010
unbeknownst to them
It sounds very entertaining. But if you'd rather stick your fingers in your ears until November 3, feel free: For all the shouting that's on the way, it's not hard to
predict what's going to happen.
Tax policy over the last 20 years has swung left and right based on the ideology of the governing party. But America can no longer afford the luxury of a manic tax code
driven by what the party in power thinks is fair. Instead, simple math is now taking over. Revenue from individual income
taxes, for example, was relatively stable between 1970 and 2000, ranging from about 8 to 10 percent of GDP, according to the Congressional Budget Office. After the Bush
tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, that figure fell to a record low of about 7 percent. The late, great recession drove it even lower.
If federal spending had fallen by a similar amount during the last decade, President Obama might be able to extend all those tax cuts once they expire at the end of
this year, and declare America Low-Tax Nation. But of course government spending has gone up and up, thanks to two overseas wars, skyrocketing Medicare and Medicaid
costs, and a brutal recession that drove tax revenue down at the same time the government spent more than $1 trillion in stimulus aid. The resulting federal debt, about
$14 trillion, is now as big as the entire economy. If it continues to mushroom as forecast, the debt will eventually crush us all via rising interest rates, stagnant
growth, and pure shame.
It's the job of Obama and his fellow politicians to make sure that doesn't happen, and they're thinking about getting around to it some day, maybe. Most economists feel
the solution is a combination of tax increases and spending cuts, since doing one or the other alone would be too draconian to disguise with the usual opposite-speak
out of Washington. The first real opportunity to do something arises this fall, since income taxes for most Americans will automatically go up unless Congress and Obama
extend some of the Bush tax cuts. Here's what's likely to happen:
Wealthy taxpayers are going to pay more. Obama wants to raise the top two income brackets from the Bush-era levels, which means the top rate will rise from 35 to 39.6
percent and the rate in the next bracket will rise from 33 to 36 percent. That effectively means that taxes will rise for individuals with income over $200,000 and
couples earning over $250,000 (after accounting for deductions). There will also be new limits (same as the old ones, before the Bush cuts were enacted) on the total
amount of allowable deductions, which will bump a few additional people into these higher brackets. To enact these "tax hikes" on the wealthy, Congress doesn't need to
do anything—it will happen automatically at the end of 2010, once the Bush tax cuts are over.
There's a lot of "debate" about this, but for the Democrats who control Congress, the political calculus is irresistible. Those who would fall into the two higher
brackets account for just 3.4 percent of all taxpayers, according to the Tax Policy Center, and those people tend to be Republicans anyway. So few Democratic votes
would be at stake. And Republicans themselves have been bellyaching about how important it is to start attacking the debt. Republicans counter by arguing that enacting
any tax increase in a weak economy is dangerous, because it could crimp spending just when it's needed most. There's truth to that, but the majority of evidence
suggests that tax increases on the wealthy would cut into what they save, not what they spend. The media will treat this whole issue as a huge drama, but the fact that
a Democratic Congress would have to pass a new law to prevent higher taxes on the wealthy weighs heavily in favor of a tax increase. Call your accountant.
The middle class will get a temporary pass, but it will only defer the inevitable pain. Obama has pledged no new taxes on the middle class, and no matter how
implausible that is, it's hard to see him breaking that promise in his first term. Besides, raising the income tax rates on the majority of taxpayers would be risky in
a lousy economy, so the odds are high that Congress will extend the Bush tax cuts for those who fall below the $200,000/$250,000 thresholds. The Senate, which moves
slower than the House, may not get to that before the November elections, so the action may come in the lame-duck session that follows, leading to plenty of high-volume
gamesmanship right up until the elections. But not much will change for the majority of taxpayers.
The respite, however, will be short-lived. One reasonable guess is that the Bush cuts will be extended by only two years, forcing Washington to deal with them again in
2012—when the economy, presumably, will be stronger. At that point or soon after, Congress will have to get serious about new taxes—and there aren't nearly enough
wealthy Americans to finance a solution, at any tax rate. "We've been selling government services at 80 to 90 percent of their cost," says Clint Stretch, managing
principal for tax policy at Deloitte Tax. "We're going to have to start selling them at a premium to pay for the discounts in the past."
Possibilities include not just higher tax rates on those who already pay, but a host of scaled-back deductions—including the mortgage-interest deduction for home
purchases—and a new value-added tax that could raise the cost of most goods and services. Exemptions for lower-income workers could be narrowed as well, so more people
pay taxes. The tumult will be fascinating, since voters are likely to revolt no matter how bankrupt American becomes or what is fiscally prudent. But for now,
politicians are looking the other way.
The "making work pay" credit has a good chance of being extended for one more year, through 2011. This was part of the 2009 stimulus plan that reduced the tax burden
for individuals by $400 and for couples by $800, up to income thresholds of $95,000 and $195,000. It was initially put into effect for 2009 and 2010; Obama wants to
extend it through 2011, and he'll probably get his wish. The tax credit benefits about three-quarters of all taxpayers, and can plausibly be counted as additional
"stimulus" that will help the economy recover. So it has popular appeal despite an estimated cost of about $60 billion in lost government revenue for each year it's in
effect. It wouldn't be surprising if Obama pushed to extend this into 2012 as well, to claim credit for middle-class tax cuts in an election year.
Estate taxes have nowhere to go but up, especially since they were cut to nothing at all for 2010. There are two basic issues: What the tax rate should be, and what
portion of an estate should be exempt from taxes before the government takes its share. Most proposals are coalescing around an exemption of between $3.5 million and $5
million, and tax rates that range from 35 to 50 percent after that. Conservatives loathe the "death" tax, complaining that it's a second levy on money's that already
been taxed once. But unbeknownst to them, lean times have turned public opinion squarely against the super-rich,Classic Cardy Boots UGG Boots Classic Mini UGG Boots UGG Classic Cardy Boots who are the only ones really affected by estate taxes.
After the 2010 holiday, a reinstatement seems inevitable
predict what's going to happen.
Tax policy over the last 20 years has swung left and right based on the ideology of the governing party. But America can no longer afford the luxury of a manic tax code
driven by what the party in power thinks is fair. Instead, simple math is now taking over. Revenue from individual income
taxes, for example, was relatively stable between 1970 and 2000, ranging from about 8 to 10 percent of GDP, according to the Congressional Budget Office. After the Bush
tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, that figure fell to a record low of about 7 percent. The late, great recession drove it even lower.
If federal spending had fallen by a similar amount during the last decade, President Obama might be able to extend all those tax cuts once they expire at the end of
this year, and declare America Low-Tax Nation. But of course government spending has gone up and up, thanks to two overseas wars, skyrocketing Medicare and Medicaid
costs, and a brutal recession that drove tax revenue down at the same time the government spent more than $1 trillion in stimulus aid. The resulting federal debt, about
$14 trillion, is now as big as the entire economy. If it continues to mushroom as forecast, the debt will eventually crush us all via rising interest rates, stagnant
growth, and pure shame.
It's the job of Obama and his fellow politicians to make sure that doesn't happen, and they're thinking about getting around to it some day, maybe. Most economists feel
the solution is a combination of tax increases and spending cuts, since doing one or the other alone would be too draconian to disguise with the usual opposite-speak
out of Washington. The first real opportunity to do something arises this fall, since income taxes for most Americans will automatically go up unless Congress and Obama
extend some of the Bush tax cuts. Here's what's likely to happen:
Wealthy taxpayers are going to pay more. Obama wants to raise the top two income brackets from the Bush-era levels, which means the top rate will rise from 35 to 39.6
percent and the rate in the next bracket will rise from 33 to 36 percent. That effectively means that taxes will rise for individuals with income over $200,000 and
couples earning over $250,000 (after accounting for deductions). There will also be new limits (same as the old ones, before the Bush cuts were enacted) on the total
amount of allowable deductions, which will bump a few additional people into these higher brackets. To enact these "tax hikes" on the wealthy, Congress doesn't need to
do anything—it will happen automatically at the end of 2010, once the Bush tax cuts are over.
There's a lot of "debate" about this, but for the Democrats who control Congress, the political calculus is irresistible. Those who would fall into the two higher
brackets account for just 3.4 percent of all taxpayers, according to the Tax Policy Center, and those people tend to be Republicans anyway. So few Democratic votes
would be at stake. And Republicans themselves have been bellyaching about how important it is to start attacking the debt. Republicans counter by arguing that enacting
any tax increase in a weak economy is dangerous, because it could crimp spending just when it's needed most. There's truth to that, but the majority of evidence
suggests that tax increases on the wealthy would cut into what they save, not what they spend. The media will treat this whole issue as a huge drama, but the fact that
a Democratic Congress would have to pass a new law to prevent higher taxes on the wealthy weighs heavily in favor of a tax increase. Call your accountant.
The middle class will get a temporary pass, but it will only defer the inevitable pain. Obama has pledged no new taxes on the middle class, and no matter how
implausible that is, it's hard to see him breaking that promise in his first term. Besides, raising the income tax rates on the majority of taxpayers would be risky in
a lousy economy, so the odds are high that Congress will extend the Bush tax cuts for those who fall below the $200,000/$250,000 thresholds. The Senate, which moves
slower than the House, may not get to that before the November elections, so the action may come in the lame-duck session that follows, leading to plenty of high-volume
gamesmanship right up until the elections. But not much will change for the majority of taxpayers.
The respite, however, will be short-lived. One reasonable guess is that the Bush cuts will be extended by only two years, forcing Washington to deal with them again in
2012—when the economy, presumably, will be stronger. At that point or soon after, Congress will have to get serious about new taxes—and there aren't nearly enough
wealthy Americans to finance a solution, at any tax rate. "We've been selling government services at 80 to 90 percent of their cost," says Clint Stretch, managing
principal for tax policy at Deloitte Tax. "We're going to have to start selling them at a premium to pay for the discounts in the past."
Possibilities include not just higher tax rates on those who already pay, but a host of scaled-back deductions—including the mortgage-interest deduction for home
purchases—and a new value-added tax that could raise the cost of most goods and services. Exemptions for lower-income workers could be narrowed as well, so more people
pay taxes. The tumult will be fascinating, since voters are likely to revolt no matter how bankrupt American becomes or what is fiscally prudent. But for now,
politicians are looking the other way.
The "making work pay" credit has a good chance of being extended for one more year, through 2011. This was part of the 2009 stimulus plan that reduced the tax burden
for individuals by $400 and for couples by $800, up to income thresholds of $95,000 and $195,000. It was initially put into effect for 2009 and 2010; Obama wants to
extend it through 2011, and he'll probably get his wish. The tax credit benefits about three-quarters of all taxpayers, and can plausibly be counted as additional
"stimulus" that will help the economy recover. So it has popular appeal despite an estimated cost of about $60 billion in lost government revenue for each year it's in
effect. It wouldn't be surprising if Obama pushed to extend this into 2012 as well, to claim credit for middle-class tax cuts in an election year.
Estate taxes have nowhere to go but up, especially since they were cut to nothing at all for 2010. There are two basic issues: What the tax rate should be, and what
portion of an estate should be exempt from taxes before the government takes its share. Most proposals are coalescing around an exemption of between $3.5 million and $5
million, and tax rates that range from 35 to 50 percent after that. Conservatives loathe the "death" tax, complaining that it's a second levy on money's that already
been taxed once. But unbeknownst to them, lean times have turned public opinion squarely against the super-rich,Classic Cardy Boots UGG Boots Classic Mini UGG Boots UGG Classic Cardy Boots who are the only ones really affected by estate taxes.
After the 2010 holiday, a reinstatement seems inevitable
Cowan says. "Even in this economic environment
DNC chairman Tim Kaine said, "The men in charge of Republican campaigns made it crystal clear what Republican candidates plan to do if elected—take us backward." The DNC followed up with a Web video entitled "Exact Same Agenda." The narrator quotes Sessions and adds: "The exact same agenda that cost 8 million Americans their jobs."
Behind this dustup is a growing realization among Democrats that there is still plenty of mileage in bashing Bush, even though he has been out of office for 18 months. Fifty-three percent of voters blame him for the sad state of today's economy, according to a new survey by Third Way, a self-described moderate think tank. And by 46 percent to 32 percent, Americans say Obama's economic ideas are better than Bush's. Among independents, a key swing vote in many races, the margin is 39 to 30 in Obama's favor. [See photos of the Obamas behind the scenes.]
Republicans say all this is unfair, that Obama needs to take responsibility for current conditions and not blame everything on his predecessor. But each party has a track record of pointing fingers at unpopular past presidents. The GOP did it for years with Democrat Jimmy Carter, who presided over hard times, and the Democrats did it for two generations with Republican Herbert Hoover, who was in office at the start of the Depression. Now the Democrats see an opening to frame the fall election as what one party strategist called "a choice between Obama and Bush, rather than a referendum on the [current] president's policies."
Of course, there are still positive signs for the GOP. Republicans hold a 3-point edge in the generic congressional ballot that offers a general choice between Democrats or Republicans, according to Third Way polling. And most voters believe in the private sector rather than government as the engine to best generate a recovery, which is considered a GOP article of faith. Perhaps most important, two thirds of Americans see congressional Republicans and their economic ideas as "new and completely separate from those of the former president," according to the analysis by Third Way.
But Jon Cowan, the think tank's president, says this might be a tentative conclusion, and that if Democrats can tether the GOP to Bush, they can maintain control of Congress. "The November elections could completely turn on whether voters believe that Republican ideas are new or a return to the Bush policies," Cowan says. "Even in this economic environment, Republicans cannot win if they are associated with the economic policies of the former president." And that's just what the Democrats are trying to do. Making the elections a contest between Obama and Bush may be the Democrats' only hope of hanging onto their majorities.
There's one other presidential factor christian louboutin sale MBT shoes Christian Louboutin shoes Christian Louboutin Shoes replica bags at work. It turns out that former President Bill Clinton, who left office in January 2001 with the country at peace and the budget in surplus, is more well-liked than either Obama or Bush. Sixty-one percent of Americans view him favorably, compared to 52 percent
Behind this dustup is a growing realization among Democrats that there is still plenty of mileage in bashing Bush, even though he has been out of office for 18 months. Fifty-three percent of voters blame him for the sad state of today's economy, according to a new survey by Third Way, a self-described moderate think tank. And by 46 percent to 32 percent, Americans say Obama's economic ideas are better than Bush's. Among independents, a key swing vote in many races, the margin is 39 to 30 in Obama's favor. [See photos of the Obamas behind the scenes.]
Republicans say all this is unfair, that Obama needs to take responsibility for current conditions and not blame everything on his predecessor. But each party has a track record of pointing fingers at unpopular past presidents. The GOP did it for years with Democrat Jimmy Carter, who presided over hard times, and the Democrats did it for two generations with Republican Herbert Hoover, who was in office at the start of the Depression. Now the Democrats see an opening to frame the fall election as what one party strategist called "a choice between Obama and Bush, rather than a referendum on the [current] president's policies."
Of course, there are still positive signs for the GOP. Republicans hold a 3-point edge in the generic congressional ballot that offers a general choice between Democrats or Republicans, according to Third Way polling. And most voters believe in the private sector rather than government as the engine to best generate a recovery, which is considered a GOP article of faith. Perhaps most important, two thirds of Americans see congressional Republicans and their economic ideas as "new and completely separate from those of the former president," according to the analysis by Third Way.
But Jon Cowan, the think tank's president, says this might be a tentative conclusion, and that if Democrats can tether the GOP to Bush, they can maintain control of Congress. "The November elections could completely turn on whether voters believe that Republican ideas are new or a return to the Bush policies," Cowan says. "Even in this economic environment, Republicans cannot win if they are associated with the economic policies of the former president." And that's just what the Democrats are trying to do. Making the elections a contest between Obama and Bush may be the Democrats' only hope of hanging onto their majorities.
There's one other presidential factor christian louboutin sale MBT shoes Christian Louboutin shoes Christian Louboutin Shoes replica bags at work. It turns out that former President Bill Clinton, who left office in January 2001 with the country at peace and the budget in surplus, is more well-liked than either Obama or Bush. Sixty-one percent of Americans view him favorably, compared to 52 percent
there would have been no revolution
Who were the real heroes of the American Revolution?
Of course, the Founding Fathers, George Washington in particular, were marvelous leaders and deserve a great deal of credit. But they get a lot of credit. The people that go missing from the story are often anonymous, the kinds of people that showed up in Lexington and Concord, insurgents in little towns. They're just people who were caught up in one of the great events of our history.
How did these people come together?
Without newspapers or weekly journals, there would have been no revolution. Little communities published reports of their own revolutionary activities that were picked up and reprinted in distant places. And the effect of this was to give individuals a sense of solidarity with distant strangers, largely without the help or even the interest of the famous Founding Fathers.
What relationship did these "founding farmers" have with the Founding Fathers?
The Founding Fathers went to the Congress that first met in 1774, and they passed statutes that affected these little communities, the most famous being the [Continental] Association. What this did was to invite every community to create a local Committee of Safety to monitor revolutionary activities, and these were entirely elected. It's estimated that over 15,000 men served on these committees in the first year, and they had never held political office or seen it as their social role to serve in a political office before this. The Congress and the Founding Fathers issued the invitation, but the people took it and ran with it. They created, in their own communities, an infrastructure of revolution that perhaps the Founding Fathers had not anticipated.
What did the founders think of this result?
By and large, the Founding Fathers were a little uneasy that perhaps they had released popular democracy in ways they feared occasionally would get out of control.
Are there any key figures who should be added to the canon of Founding Fathers?
I suspect these people would be embarrassed to be put in the same group as the Founding Fathers, but one was Samuel Thompson, who lived in Brunswick, Maine, which was then Massachusetts. He was a tough-minded, Scotch-Irish person who was a fierce insurgent, and he was ready to start the revolution long before anyone else. He kidnapped British officers; he tried to capturebuy ugg boots Classic Argyle Knit UGG Boots Ugg Stripe Cable Knit Boots a British ship. This was before the Declaration of Independence.
Of course, the Founding Fathers, George Washington in particular, were marvelous leaders and deserve a great deal of credit. But they get a lot of credit. The people that go missing from the story are often anonymous, the kinds of people that showed up in Lexington and Concord, insurgents in little towns. They're just people who were caught up in one of the great events of our history.
How did these people come together?
Without newspapers or weekly journals, there would have been no revolution. Little communities published reports of their own revolutionary activities that were picked up and reprinted in distant places. And the effect of this was to give individuals a sense of solidarity with distant strangers, largely without the help or even the interest of the famous Founding Fathers.
What relationship did these "founding farmers" have with the Founding Fathers?
The Founding Fathers went to the Congress that first met in 1774, and they passed statutes that affected these little communities, the most famous being the [Continental] Association. What this did was to invite every community to create a local Committee of Safety to monitor revolutionary activities, and these were entirely elected. It's estimated that over 15,000 men served on these committees in the first year, and they had never held political office or seen it as their social role to serve in a political office before this. The Congress and the Founding Fathers issued the invitation, but the people took it and ran with it. They created, in their own communities, an infrastructure of revolution that perhaps the Founding Fathers had not anticipated.
What did the founders think of this result?
By and large, the Founding Fathers were a little uneasy that perhaps they had released popular democracy in ways they feared occasionally would get out of control.
Are there any key figures who should be added to the canon of Founding Fathers?
I suspect these people would be embarrassed to be put in the same group as the Founding Fathers, but one was Samuel Thompson, who lived in Brunswick, Maine, which was then Massachusetts. He was a tough-minded, Scotch-Irish person who was a fierce insurgent, and he was ready to start the revolution long before anyone else. He kidnapped British officers; he tried to capturebuy ugg boots Classic Argyle Knit UGG Boots Ugg Stripe Cable Knit Boots a British ship. This was before the Declaration of Independence.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Tristana Moore says critics
However, the mayor of Duisburg told a press conference that it was too early to blame anyone for the incident.
Related stories
The organiser of the festival said that there would be no more Love Parades.
"The Love Parade has always been a joyful and peaceful party, but in future would always be overshadowed by yesterday's events," , Rainer Schaller said.
"Out of respect for the victims, their families and friends, we are going to discontinue the event in the future, and that means the end of the Love Parade."
German prosecutors have launched a criminal investigation into the disaster.
Foreign nationals
Officials faced angry questions at the hour-long press conference in Duisburg.
Mayor Adolf Sauerland said that although the question of why the disaster had happened was "absolutely justified and must be answered" he insisted that until the investigation was complete, any apportioning of guilt would be "out of order".
Tributes at Love Parade, 25 July A number of tributes have been placed at the site of the tragedy
"That would not serve the victims, nor would it serve the families," he said.
Mr Sauerland said 340 people had been injured.
Sixteen of the dead had been identified, he added, and four of the victims were foreigners: one from the Netherlands, one from Australia, one from Italy and one China. They ranged in age from just over 20 to 40.
Mr Sauerland said that a security plan for the festival had been worked out beforehand "which gave no reason to believe that there would be a problem".
But BBC Berlin correspondent Tristana Moore says critics argued that the organisers and police were not prepared for Replica Handbags Men MBT Shuguli GTX Shoes replica Louis Vuitton handbags Discount Christian Louboutin Sandals Replica Chanel Bags such huge numbers of visitors and the site itself - an old railway yard - was too small and completely unsuitabl
Related stories
The organiser of the festival said that there would be no more Love Parades.
"The Love Parade has always been a joyful and peaceful party, but in future would always be overshadowed by yesterday's events," , Rainer Schaller said.
"Out of respect for the victims, their families and friends, we are going to discontinue the event in the future, and that means the end of the Love Parade."
German prosecutors have launched a criminal investigation into the disaster.
Foreign nationals
Officials faced angry questions at the hour-long press conference in Duisburg.
Mayor Adolf Sauerland said that although the question of why the disaster had happened was "absolutely justified and must be answered" he insisted that until the investigation was complete, any apportioning of guilt would be "out of order".
Tributes at Love Parade, 25 July A number of tributes have been placed at the site of the tragedy
"That would not serve the victims, nor would it serve the families," he said.
Mr Sauerland said 340 people had been injured.
Sixteen of the dead had been identified, he added, and four of the victims were foreigners: one from the Netherlands, one from Australia, one from Italy and one China. They ranged in age from just over 20 to 40.
Mr Sauerland said that a security plan for the festival had been worked out beforehand "which gave no reason to believe that there would be a problem".
But BBC Berlin correspondent Tristana Moore says critics argued that the organisers and police were not prepared for Replica Handbags Men MBT Shuguli GTX Shoes replica Louis Vuitton handbags Discount Christian Louboutin Sandals Replica Chanel Bags such huge numbers of visitors and the site itself - an old railway yard - was too small and completely unsuitabl
defence lawyer Kemp J Kemp
She says the long-awaited trial of the four former students - RC Malherbe, Johnny Roberts, Schalk van der Merwe and Danie Grobler - has attracted widespread media
attention.
Analysis
Continue reading the main story
Pumza Fihlani BBC News, Johannesburg
South Africa's different racial and cultural groups usually live in harmony with each other.
However, while they mix daily in the workplace, at school and sometimes to socialise, they generally lead separate lives.
The World Cup showed that South Africans can unite behind a single cause, but racism is still a sensitive subject here.
It only takes one racially charged incident to drive people to align with those of their own skin colour.
Nelson Mandela's "rainbow nation" has not yet been realised.
This is not least because defence lawyer Kemp J Kemp represented President Jacob Zuma in a rape case four years ago, our reporter says. Mr Zuma was acquitted.
In a statement read out by their lawyer, the men said that the video had been made to demonstrate the traditions of their hall of residence and to protest at plans to
make the university more racially mixed.
They said the food had not been urinated on - that had been an illusion.
They also claim the staff had taken part willingly.
But the men agreed that they would never have performed their actions if they had known the consequences.
In the video, apparently filmed in 2007, the four women and a man were forced to drink full bottles of beer and perform athletic tasks.
But it is the final extractreplica bags Men MBT Casual Shoes Replica Handbags Discount Christian Louboutin Glitter Pumps MBT shoes of the film that most angered members of the public.
attention.
Analysis
Continue reading the main story
Pumza Fihlani BBC News, Johannesburg
South Africa's different racial and cultural groups usually live in harmony with each other.
However, while they mix daily in the workplace, at school and sometimes to socialise, they generally lead separate lives.
The World Cup showed that South Africans can unite behind a single cause, but racism is still a sensitive subject here.
It only takes one racially charged incident to drive people to align with those of their own skin colour.
Nelson Mandela's "rainbow nation" has not yet been realised.
This is not least because defence lawyer Kemp J Kemp represented President Jacob Zuma in a rape case four years ago, our reporter says. Mr Zuma was acquitted.
In a statement read out by their lawyer, the men said that the video had been made to demonstrate the traditions of their hall of residence and to protest at plans to
make the university more racially mixed.
They said the food had not been urinated on - that had been an illusion.
They also claim the staff had taken part willingly.
But the men agreed that they would never have performed their actions if they had known the consequences.
In the video, apparently filmed in 2007, the four women and a man were forced to drink full bottles of beer and perform athletic tasks.
But it is the final extractreplica bags Men MBT Casual Shoes Replica Handbags Discount Christian Louboutin Glitter Pumps MBT shoes of the film that most angered members of the public.
Monday, July 26, 2010
in 2002 after going through
As for Bob Murphy, he had seen all five of his brothers go through ugly divorces, and he wanted none of it.
So when Murphy and his wife decided to split up earlier this year, one of his brothers, hoping to save his little brother from the same bad experience, suggested Murphy call Zarzynski.
"Instead of both of us going out to find the most expensive, meanest lawyer we each could find, we sat down together — on the same side of the table — and figured out what would be best for our kids," Murphy says.
It took four hours.
Together, Murphy and his now ex-wife decided he would keep the house when they divorced and stay there with their four kids, ages 21, 18, 12 and 10.
"After it was all said and done, we agreed that this is a good deal for both of us," he says.
By their agreement, his ex-wife gets the kids three days a week. But he wants her to see them as much as she likes, so they often talk daily to arrange visits. He even made a key to his house available, to make it easier for her to pick up forgotten homework or sports gear while he was at work.
Setting the tone
How parents interact and handle the kids during the initial separation and early in the divorce sets the tone for the years ahead, says Barbara Schaffer, a clinical social worker in Tucson, who is part of the Collaborative Law Group of Southern Arizona. She got involved in the friendly divorce movement in 2002 after going through her own divorce and thinking there had to be a better way.
Research shows that kidsbuy ugg boots Classic Argyle Knit UGG Boots Ugg Stripe Cable Knit Boots who remain close to both parents are less stressed by divorce, and dads who are connected to their kids are more likely to keep up with their obligations, financial and otherwise.
So when Murphy and his wife decided to split up earlier this year, one of his brothers, hoping to save his little brother from the same bad experience, suggested Murphy call Zarzynski.
"Instead of both of us going out to find the most expensive, meanest lawyer we each could find, we sat down together — on the same side of the table — and figured out what would be best for our kids," Murphy says.
It took four hours.
Together, Murphy and his now ex-wife decided he would keep the house when they divorced and stay there with their four kids, ages 21, 18, 12 and 10.
"After it was all said and done, we agreed that this is a good deal for both of us," he says.
By their agreement, his ex-wife gets the kids three days a week. But he wants her to see them as much as she likes, so they often talk daily to arrange visits. He even made a key to his house available, to make it easier for her to pick up forgotten homework or sports gear while he was at work.
Setting the tone
How parents interact and handle the kids during the initial separation and early in the divorce sets the tone for the years ahead, says Barbara Schaffer, a clinical social worker in Tucson, who is part of the Collaborative Law Group of Southern Arizona. She got involved in the friendly divorce movement in 2002 after going through her own divorce and thinking there had to be a better way.
Research shows that kidsbuy ugg boots Classic Argyle Knit UGG Boots Ugg Stripe Cable Knit Boots who remain close to both parents are less stressed by divorce, and dads who are connected to their kids are more likely to keep up with their obligations, financial and otherwise.
Collaboration is another
Most divorce cases still are handled in the traditional way, with lawyers on each side trying to get the best deal for their client, often through nasty disagreements over custody, child support, property settlements and finances. Divorcing couples typically aren't feeling friendly toward each other anyway, and contentious experiences in court can make those feelings even worse.
"It makes it almost impossible to have a civil relationship going forward. You don't forget what it's like to be cross-examined by your spouse's lawyer," says family law attorney John Zarzynski, who co-founded Agreement House. "It sets them up for years and years of not being able to communicate well."
Mediation is one kind of a friendly divorce. Collaboration is another, in which both parties retain their own attorneys but also use experts and work together for a solution for everyone. Couples don't set foot in court in either instance. Proponents say it reduces the emotional costs on everyone; both children and adults start their new lives on relatively stable ground.
No one keeps statistics on the number of mediated and collaborative divorces. But Zarzynski, during 31 years of practice, has seen the trend firsthand. When he started, mediated cases were rare. Ten years ago, he mediated about a dozen a year; last year, that number was 75.
A typical traditional divorce can stretch out for months — even years — and cost both parties $15,000 to $25,000.
Zarzynski says a mediated divorce, on average, costs $1,000 and takes 70 days, including the state's mandatory cooling-off period of 60 days.
A collaborative divorce involves more people — it may add a financial adviser, psychologist or divorce coach to the mix — so it costs a bit more than a mediated divorce. A 2004 study in Texas shows that instead of a typical 18-month, $14,000 process through litigation, a collaborative divorce took an average of 18 weeks and $9,000 to complete.
And a divorce with no kids involved and a do-it-yourself legal kit for $39.95 may run $500 with court fees.
Over the past 30 years, mediation's popularity has grown as an alternative to going to court across the U.S. in all kinds of legal disputes. In California, mediation is mandatory for contested child custody and visitation.buy ugg boots Classic Argyle Knit UGG Boots Ugg Stripe Cable Knit Boots And, in attempts to ease the negative effects of divorce on children, at least 28 states require divorcing couples to attend parenting classes that among other things teach the importance of parenting together.
"It makes it almost impossible to have a civil relationship going forward. You don't forget what it's like to be cross-examined by your spouse's lawyer," says family law attorney John Zarzynski, who co-founded Agreement House. "It sets them up for years and years of not being able to communicate well."
Mediation is one kind of a friendly divorce. Collaboration is another, in which both parties retain their own attorneys but also use experts and work together for a solution for everyone. Couples don't set foot in court in either instance. Proponents say it reduces the emotional costs on everyone; both children and adults start their new lives on relatively stable ground.
No one keeps statistics on the number of mediated and collaborative divorces. But Zarzynski, during 31 years of practice, has seen the trend firsthand. When he started, mediated cases were rare. Ten years ago, he mediated about a dozen a year; last year, that number was 75.
A typical traditional divorce can stretch out for months — even years — and cost both parties $15,000 to $25,000.
Zarzynski says a mediated divorce, on average, costs $1,000 and takes 70 days, including the state's mandatory cooling-off period of 60 days.
A collaborative divorce involves more people — it may add a financial adviser, psychologist or divorce coach to the mix — so it costs a bit more than a mediated divorce. A 2004 study in Texas shows that instead of a typical 18-month, $14,000 process through litigation, a collaborative divorce took an average of 18 weeks and $9,000 to complete.
And a divorce with no kids involved and a do-it-yourself legal kit for $39.95 may run $500 with court fees.
Over the past 30 years, mediation's popularity has grown as an alternative to going to court across the U.S. in all kinds of legal disputes. In California, mediation is mandatory for contested child custody and visitation.buy ugg boots Classic Argyle Knit UGG Boots Ugg Stripe Cable Knit Boots And, in attempts to ease the negative effects of divorce on children, at least 28 states require divorcing couples to attend parenting classes that among other things teach the importance of parenting together.
Friday, July 23, 2010
Coast report falling
The ship then went on to unload its cargo in Ivory Coast.
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote
It is a good thing that they have been found guilty but it would be even better if they were sent to jail”
End Quote Guy Oulla Alleged waste victim
* Guy Oulla's full story
Trafigura employee Naeem Ahmed, who was involved in the ship's operation in Amsterdam, was fined 25,000 euros and the captain of the Probo Koala, 46-year-old Sergiy Chertov, was sentenced to a five-year suspended jail term.
This is the first time Trafigura has faced criminal charges since the toxic waste scandal unfolded in Ivory Coast's commercial capital, Abidjan, in 2006.
Trafigura, an oil trading company, initially tried to clean up low-grade oil by tipping caustic soda into the hold of the Probo Koala. The company tried to unload the waste in Amsterdam for treatment, declaring it as "harmless slops".
When the treatment company came back with a higher price for cleaning the waste, the cargo was shipped to Africa where it ended up in Abidjan to be handled at a much lower rate.
Presiding Judge Frans Bauduin said: "Trafigura - which by that time knew of the exact composition [of the waste] - should never have agreed to its processing at such a price."
Timeline
Continue reading the main story
Sept 2006 - Thousands in Ivory Coast report falling ill from waste in Abidjan
Oct 2006 - buy ugg boots Classic Argyle Knit UGG Boots Ugg Stripe Cable Knit Boots About 1,000 Ivorians sue Trafigura
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote
It is a good thing that they have been found guilty but it would be even better if they were sent to jail”
End Quote Guy Oulla Alleged waste victim
* Guy Oulla's full story
Trafigura employee Naeem Ahmed, who was involved in the ship's operation in Amsterdam, was fined 25,000 euros and the captain of the Probo Koala, 46-year-old Sergiy Chertov, was sentenced to a five-year suspended jail term.
This is the first time Trafigura has faced criminal charges since the toxic waste scandal unfolded in Ivory Coast's commercial capital, Abidjan, in 2006.
Trafigura, an oil trading company, initially tried to clean up low-grade oil by tipping caustic soda into the hold of the Probo Koala. The company tried to unload the waste in Amsterdam for treatment, declaring it as "harmless slops".
When the treatment company came back with a higher price for cleaning the waste, the cargo was shipped to Africa where it ended up in Abidjan to be handled at a much lower rate.
Presiding Judge Frans Bauduin said: "Trafigura - which by that time knew of the exact composition [of the waste] - should never have agreed to its processing at such a price."
Timeline
Continue reading the main story
Sept 2006 - Thousands in Ivory Coast report falling ill from waste in Abidjan
Oct 2006 - buy ugg boots Classic Argyle Knit UGG Boots Ugg Stripe Cable Knit Boots About 1,000 Ivorians sue Trafigura
Coast report falling
The ship then went on to unload its cargo in Ivory Coast.
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote
It is a good thing that they have been found guilty but it would be even better if they were sent to jail”
End Quote Guy Oulla Alleged waste victim
* Guy Oulla's full story
Trafigura employee Naeem Ahmed, who was involved in the ship's operation in Amsterdam, was fined 25,000 euros and the captain of the Probo Koala, 46-year-old Sergiy Chertov, was sentenced to a five-year suspended jail term.
This is the first time Trafigura has faced criminal charges since the toxic waste scandal unfolded in Ivory Coast's commercial capital, Abidjan, in 2006.
Trafigura, an oil trading company, initially tried to clean up low-grade oil by tipping caustic soda into the hold of the Probo Koala. The company tried to unload the waste in Amsterdam for treatment, declaring it as "harmless slops".
When the treatment company came back with a higher price for cleaning the waste, the cargo was shipped to Africa where it ended up in Abidjan to be handled at a much lower rate.
Presiding Judge Frans Bauduin said: "Trafigura - which by that time knew of the exact composition [of the waste] - should never have agreed to its processing at such a price."
Timeline
Continue reading the main story
Sept 2006 - Thousands in Ivory Coast report falling ill from waste in Abidjan
Oct 2006 - buy ugg boots Classic Argyle Knit UGG Boots Ugg Stripe Cable Knit Boots About 1,000 Ivorians sue Trafigura
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote
It is a good thing that they have been found guilty but it would be even better if they were sent to jail”
End Quote Guy Oulla Alleged waste victim
* Guy Oulla's full story
Trafigura employee Naeem Ahmed, who was involved in the ship's operation in Amsterdam, was fined 25,000 euros and the captain of the Probo Koala, 46-year-old Sergiy Chertov, was sentenced to a five-year suspended jail term.
This is the first time Trafigura has faced criminal charges since the toxic waste scandal unfolded in Ivory Coast's commercial capital, Abidjan, in 2006.
Trafigura, an oil trading company, initially tried to clean up low-grade oil by tipping caustic soda into the hold of the Probo Koala. The company tried to unload the waste in Amsterdam for treatment, declaring it as "harmless slops".
When the treatment company came back with a higher price for cleaning the waste, the cargo was shipped to Africa where it ended up in Abidjan to be handled at a much lower rate.
Presiding Judge Frans Bauduin said: "Trafigura - which by that time knew of the exact composition [of the waste] - should never have agreed to its processing at such a price."
Timeline
Continue reading the main story
Sept 2006 - Thousands in Ivory Coast report falling ill from waste in Abidjan
Oct 2006 - buy ugg boots Classic Argyle Knit UGG Boots Ugg Stripe Cable Knit Boots About 1,000 Ivorians sue Trafigura
court in Ivory Coast found
A statement from Trafigura said: "Concerning the delivery of dangerous goods, it is important that the court has noted that there was limited risk to human health from these slops, and indeed no damage occurred in Amsterdam."
Trafigura said it was considering an appeal.
A lawyer representing the company, Robert de Bree, said: "I think it's important to notice that the convictions relate to highly technical, complex legal matters and we will carefully study the judgement to look at the possibility of an appeal."
Another Trafigura lawyer, Michael Wladimiroff, was quoted by Associated Press news agency as saying the company believed the Marine Pollution Treaty applied and that the court had incorrectly applied the terms of another waste management treaty.
The firm also maintained that Mr Ahmed "did nothing wrong".
Out-of-court settlement
Greenpeace, which brought this case, has welcomed the outcome, saying it was a warning to firms not to export waste to developing countries.
Waste site near Abidjan, file picture The risk posed by the waste has been heavily disputed
Greenpeace toxics campaigner, Marietta Harjono, said that further legal action should be taken against Trafigura: "We must also be very clear that justice is not complete yet, because this is only the beginning, because Trafigura has not been brought to trial yet for the deliberate dumping of toxic waste in Africa."
One of those who fell ill after waste was dumped, Ivorian Guy Oulla, told the BBC: "I believe it is a very good decision because people should pay for what they do, you know. So, I agree with that decision. You know,buy ugg boots Classic Argyle Knit UGG Boots Ugg Stripe Cable Knit Boots we live in Africa and it could happen again because in Africa people do everything for money."
In 2008, a court in Ivory Coast found two non-Trafigura employees guilty of illegally dumping the waste.
Trafigura said it was considering an appeal.
A lawyer representing the company, Robert de Bree, said: "I think it's important to notice that the convictions relate to highly technical, complex legal matters and we will carefully study the judgement to look at the possibility of an appeal."
Another Trafigura lawyer, Michael Wladimiroff, was quoted by Associated Press news agency as saying the company believed the Marine Pollution Treaty applied and that the court had incorrectly applied the terms of another waste management treaty.
The firm also maintained that Mr Ahmed "did nothing wrong".
Out-of-court settlement
Greenpeace, which brought this case, has welcomed the outcome, saying it was a warning to firms not to export waste to developing countries.
Waste site near Abidjan, file picture The risk posed by the waste has been heavily disputed
Greenpeace toxics campaigner, Marietta Harjono, said that further legal action should be taken against Trafigura: "We must also be very clear that justice is not complete yet, because this is only the beginning, because Trafigura has not been brought to trial yet for the deliberate dumping of toxic waste in Africa."
One of those who fell ill after waste was dumped, Ivorian Guy Oulla, told the BBC: "I believe it is a very good decision because people should pay for what they do, you know. So, I agree with that decision. You know,buy ugg boots Classic Argyle Knit UGG Boots Ugg Stripe Cable Knit Boots we live in Africa and it could happen again because in Africa people do everything for money."
In 2008, a court in Ivory Coast found two non-Trafigura employees guilty of illegally dumping the waste.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)