European Defence Union: EU needs own independent military power and leave NATO and Middle East mess

European Defence Force

Daniel Mützel writesin EurActiv.de: "The EU is stepping up its efforts on common defence policy and a “coalition of the willing” could quickly deploy EU troops and promote common defence projects. EurActiv Germany reports.

How under threat is Europe? The question has worried European security policy lawmakers for some time and the events of 2016 have escalated concerns.

Back in June, EU High Representative Federica Mogherini presented her Global Strategy, which called for an EU-wide integrated security community to tackle instability on Europe’s doorstep.

Another white paper produced by the German and French foreign ministers a few months later warned against an “erosion” of the EU and called for stronger military cooperation between member states".

Many people feel that NATO has in fact outlived its purpose of a combined US - European Defence force to protect Europe during the cold war. Instead NATO has dragged most if not all of its European member states into costly US "military advetures" in Afghanistan and the Middle East, which all have been basically total failures and created an incredible Refugees problem for both the EU and Turkey.

As to the present military situation in Syria and the NATO's effectiveness there, one can only qualify that as a total disaster.
.
A report recently discussed in the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee shows how far Brussels has moved forward with the idea.

Hardly any other EU document better describes how the perception of European security politicians has changed in reaction to global events.

It alleges that the EU is now “surrounded by an arc of instability”, which includes “terrorism, massive refugee flows, or disinformation campaigns”.

The report also adds that since international relations are now dominated by power politics again, “defence and deterrence capabilities” are crucial when it comes to diplomacy. It concludes that the EU has to use its “unrivalled soft power with hard power.

EU-Digest

Greece: Debt relief deal possible by the end of the year

Greece potential for additional debt relief lloks good.

For the complete report click here

US Economy -Trumpanomics: Donald Trump's economic policies could go badly wrong – but not soon enough

November 2020: the results of the US presidential election are in. The Democrat candidate, Elizabeth Warren, fought bravely but the outcome was never really in doubt. With the economy booming, Donald Trump is returned to the White House in a landslide. His pitch to voters has been simple: I kept my promise. America is great again.

For Trump’s opponents, this is the nightmare scenario. Still stunned by Hillary Clinton’s defeat, they have taken comfort from their belief that the billionaire property tycoon will prove to be a one-term president – exposed as a dangerous charlatan as soon as he takes office. This may, indeed, prove to be the case. Trumponomics is by no means a fully thought-through programme. The inconsistencies are obvious, as are the dangers. It could all go horribly wrong. But Trump may well have won a second term by the time it does.

Paul Krugman, the Nobel prize-winning economist and one of Trump’s most vociferous critics, suggested in the immediate aftermath of “that horrible election night” that a global recession was imminent.

Now the dust has had time to settle, Krugman admits that his disappointment got the better of him. “Trumpism will have dire effects, but they will take time to become manifest. In fact, don’t be surprised if economic growth actually accelerates for a couple of years.”

Steve Keen, economics professor at Kingston University, thinks Trump’s first term will see a sharp acceleration in US growth – to perhaps 4% a year. By the time any of the nasty side-effects become apparent, he says, Trump will have been safely re-elected.

Read more: Donald Trump's economic policies could go badly wrong – but not soon enough | Business | The Guardian

Italy: The Italian referendum and what else to look out for in the economy this week

Is everyone too gloomy about the world economy, and indeed the British one too? After a tumultuous week, with the US coming to terms with a shift in economic policy (and much more) and the UK counting the potential cost of Brexit, this should be a week for reflection. Second thoughts are usually better than first ones.

As far as the UK is concerned, the most interesting thing to look for will be how the economic forecasts for 2017 are shaping up. The official view, that of both the Bank of England and the Office for Budget Responsibility, is that growth will be around 1.4 per cent. The OBR took some stick for that last week, unfairly because the whole point of having an independent office is that it should be independent of political pressure, and it was doing just that. In any case that forecast was at the top end of the present expected scale.

The question now is whether other forecasters will start to revise their forecasts upwards, given the loosening of policy in the US (which should, in the short term, boost growth there). At the margin that should benefit the UK. A bigger influence, however, will be a more general rethinking of the behaviour of UK consumers, which have kept the economy growing solidly though the second half of this year. If they keep going next year, maybe growth forecasts should be revised up for 2017, just as they have for 2016. We should start to see the new private sector forecasts for 2017 starting to come through in the next few days.

Next, there are some purchasing managers’ indices or PMIs, coming out this week. These, you will remember, give an indication of the optimism/pessimism of the business community and hence of future growth. On Thursday we get the UK ones for manufacturing and on Friday for construction. We have to wait until the following Monday for the all-important services sector. Expect a gradual, cautious recovery. But – more important – on Thursday we get world-wide PMIs for manufacturing. That will tell us about the world, which is of course matters vastly more. Global recession next year? Not if global PMIs remain positive.

The Italian referendum and what else to look out for in the economy this week | The Independent

US Economy: Wall Street Is Suddenly in Love with Trump, now they think he is one of them - but will it last?

What is next?

Few people thought Trump could win, and for Wall Street, being caught backing a losing investment is tantamount to death. Plus, his opponent was actually quite friendly if not downright buddy-buddy with the industry.

There was also the matter of Trump saying things on the trail like: ”hedge-fund guys are getting away with murder” and ”Wall Street has caused tremendous problems for us” and ”I’m not going to let Wall Street get away with murder”.

But after a brief moment of panic, wherein it became clear Donald J. Trump, he of ”grab them by the p---y” and “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody” fame, would be the next president of the United States of America,

Wall Street quickly adjusted to the new reality. In fact, a lot of people are downright giddy about Trump living in the White House (during the week, anyway).

All the usual Wall Street cronies were happy: “Regulatory overreach probably peaked,” said Robert McTamaney, a former Goldman Sachs partner who helped run the firm’s equities-trading business in Asia until 2011 and now manages his own money. “It’s going to come off the boil, and you can probably cut back on the legal team and compliance.”

The impact of the rapidly changing tide in consumer confidence, though, won't be limited to just Trump and Republicans. Already, we have seen the consequence of falling Democratic voter confidence foster spontaneous, peaceful protests. Should Democrats' moods fall further, those protests will become angrier; and we will see the same divisiveness and and extremism seen recently within the Republican Party.

As mood falls, rising self-interest challenges the cohesiveness of even the strongest organizations.

Throughout the 2016 campaign, one could watch as falling confidence split support between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. If Democrats' confidence remains low, it would not be at all surprising to see even greater divisions form. Based on what I see, a young, leftward leaning, heretofore unknown leader could easily emerge as the new hope of the party — an anti-Hillary Clinton Democrat, as it were.

While Elizabeth Warren is receiving all the media attention now, if mood stays low, the spotlight will almost certainly move on to a true outsider. For the Democratic Party, the outcome of the 2020 election will rest squarely on the party’s ability to pull together young voters in opposition to the Trump presidency.

While admittedly very early, one can expect anti-Wall Street/anti-capitalism sentiment to play a major part, particularly given Trump’s business pedigree. While economists will likely look at the post-election surge in confidence as a reason to expect strong holiday sales,  don’t count on that.

Rather than reflecting the improving financial condition of American consumer, the latest Gallup figures are expressing a return of hopefulness to Republican voters, offset by a mild decline in optimism among Democrats — a change in the political tide. Nothing, however, has changed in the wallets and pocketbooks of voters.

For Trump, he must now translate the "Evengelical tent revival" resurgence in confidence among Republicans into higher confidence for all Americans.

As rising confidence is the critical input to economic growth, financial prosperity and social cohesion, what happens to Americans’ mood over the next several months will drive the trajectory of the next four years. While many Americans feel better today than they did last week, many, many more need to feel good.

Right now, looking closely at the  Presidential election results one can only ask: "has the Trump election win been a silent coup of Corporate America and the Republican party, or have they been just as surprised as the rest of us"

It seems more likely Wall Street could be in for a big surprise and possibly a total meltdown of the US economy. Only time will tell. 

 EU-Digest

EU Healthcare: Bad health: EU buries billions with 550,000 premature deaths due to chronic disease

A joint OECD/European Commission report says chronic diseases and premature deaths cost the EU billions every year. It calls for better prevention policies and improved health care. So what else is new?

Health reports seldom say anything new. There's the obligatory risk factors - smoking, alcohol and obesity - and an equally standard call for better prevention policies and improved healthcare systems. Let's face it: We could all live a bit more healthily.

Such is the mainline in "Health at a Glance: Europe 2016," a joint report launched Wednesday (23.11.2016) by the OECD and the European Commission in Brussels.

But what's striking about this report is the human cost of Europe's failing health.

The report estimates that about 550,065 people of working-age (25-64 years) in the European Union die prematurely from chronic diseases. It could be a heart attack, stroke, diabetes, or a form of cancer. And their dying early, says the report, costs the EU 115 billion euros annually.

Note EU-Digest: another issue not discussed in this report, which certainly must be seen as a part of the problem, is that in some countries, like the Netherlands, where insurance programs have been  privatized and the insurance premium costs have continuously been on the rise for the consumer, people have not been going to the Dr. or hospital for preventive care, mainly because of personal economic reasons.

For the complete report Read more: Bad health: EU buries billions with 550,000 premature deaths due to chronic disease | Science | DW.COM | 23.11.2016

EU Banking Reform: Strong banks to support growth and restore confidence

The Commission is presenting today a comprehensive package of reforms to further strengthen the resilience of EU banks.

This proposal builds on existing EU banking rules and aims to complete the post-crisis regulatory agenda by making sure that the regulatory framework addresses any outstanding challenges to financial stability, while ensuring that banks can continue to support the real economy.

Banks have a central role in financing the economy and for promoting growth and jobs. They are a key source of funding for households and businesses. In the wake of the financial crisis, the EU pursued an ambitious reform of the financial regulatory system to bring back financial stability and market confidence. Today's proposals aim to complete this reform agenda by implementing some outstanding elements, which are essential to further reinforce banks' ability to withstand potential shocks. The proposals also fine-tune some aspects of the new regulatory framework where necessary to make it more growth-friendly and proportionate to banks' complexity, size and business profile. It also includes measures that will support SMEs and investment in infrastructure.

Commission Vice-President Valdis Dombrovskis, responsible for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union, said: "Europe needs a strong and diverse banking sector to finance the economy. We need bank lending for companies to invest, remain competitive and sell into bigger markets and for households to plan ahead. Today, we have put forward new risk reduction proposals that build on the agreed global standards while taking into account the specificities of the European banking sector."


Read more: European Commission - PRESS RELEASES - Press release - EU Banking Reform: Strong banks to support growth and restore confidence

Global Economy: Wall Street worried Trump 1970s stagflation - by Bob Bryan

One of the dirtiest words to come out of the 1970s, at least in economic circles, is stagflation.

The decade saw a combination of increasing inflation and lackluster economic growth that hurt everything from consumers to stocks prices.

Since the election of Donald Trump, economists and analysts have once again begun to bring up the idea of stagflation hitting the US economy. The combination of government spending and trade policies, coupled with an uncertain growth picture, have brought the disastrous specter of the late 1970s back into the economic discussion.

Read more: Wall Street worried Trump 1970s stagflation - Business Insider

European Banking Industry: The next big short’? Eisman warns that Europe and its banks ‘are still screwed’ - Silvia Amaro

Eight years after the 2008 financial crisis, European banks remain in trouble as their balance sheets continue to feature a high level of non-performing loans, Steve Eisman, the hedge fund manager who famously predicted the crash,has told the U.K.'s Guardian newspaper.

The state of Italian banks is one of the main problems, but the German lender Deutsche Bank, which is seen as one of the most important institutions in Europe, also raises concerns, Eisman added.

"Europe is screwed. You guys are still screwed," Eisman told the newspaper in an interview published over the weekend.

"In the Italian system, the banks say they are worth 45-50 cents in the dollar. But the bid price is 20 cents. If they were to mark them down, they would be insolvent," he added.

Italian banking stocks have been under pressure for months. Last week, the Italian banking index dropped as much as 4.2 percent to the lowest level since early October, according to Reuters, with investors worried over the upcoming constitutional referendum.

Monte dei Paschi di Siena, the world's oldest bank, was singled out in stress tests conducted by the European Banking Authority earlier this year. The institution indicated it was the lender with the least capacity to sustain any potential economic shocks. Unicredit, another Italian lender, was also among the 10 of 51 borrowers with the shortest capital ratio.

Deutsche Bank also featured in that top-10 list. The German-lender has been asked to pay a $14 billion settlement for the miss-selling of U.S. mortgage bonds.

Eisman believes that Deutsche Bank is a long way off from returning to profit as it is too dependent on leverage to improve its performance. Meanwhile, Credit Suisse said in a note last week that banks are "not clear winners" from Donald Trump's election victory. Despite expectations of less regulatory pressure under a Trump presidency compared to a Clinton win, there are concerns that his policies will negatively impact the economy.

"I think the regulators did a horrendous, just horrendous job pre-crisis. But under the (Federal Reserve), the banks have been enormously deleveraged and de-risked. There are no sub-prime mortgages any more ... the European regulators have been much more lenient than the U.S. regulators," Eisman told The Guardian.

Apart from non-performing loans and regulation issues, sovereign bonds are another concern in Europe, Eisman warned. "What is very negative is that in every country in Europe, the largest owner of that country's sovereign bonds are that country's banks," Eisman also said. This means that if the price of those bonds goes down, the balance sheet of the bank deteriorates.

Read more: The next big short’? Eisman warns that Europe and its banks ‘are still screwed’

Morocco - Ethiopia: signs over $2 billion investment deal in Ethiopia

Morocco signed an agreement on Saturday to invest over two billiondollars in Ethiopia over a five year period to build a fertilizer factory.

The $2.4 billion to be invested between 2017 and 2022 in the 100 acre factory near the eastern city of Dire Daoua is expected to make Ethiopia self-sufficient by 2025.

The deal was signed during the official visit of Moroccan,King Mohammed VI to Ethiopia to strengthen its political and South/South partnership.

Read more: Morocco signs over $2 billion investment deal in Ethiopia | Africanews

Britain: Brexit: They can't have their cake and eat it too: Europe’s leaders must force Britain into hard Brexit

Britain can't have it's cake and eat it too

European leaders have come to a 27-nation consensus that a “hard Brexit” is likely to be the only way to see off future populist insurgencies, which could lead to the break-up of the European Union.

The hardening line in EU capitals comes as Nigel Farage warns European leaders that Marine Le Pen, leader of the Front National, could deliver a political sensation bigger than Brexit and win France’s presidential election next spring – a result that would mean it was “game over” for 60 years of EU integration.

According to senior officials at the highest levels of European governments, allowing Britain favourable terms of exit could represent an existential danger to the EU, since it would encourage similar demands from other countries with significant Eurosceptic movements.

One top EU diplomat told the Observer: “If you British are not prepared to compromise on free movement, the only way to deal with Brexit is hard Brexit. Otherwise we would be seen to be giving in to a country that is leaving. That would be fatal.”

The latest intervention by Farage will only serve to fuel fears in Europe that anti-EU movements have acquired a dangerous momentum in countries such as France and the Netherlands, following the precedent set by the Brexit vote. Ukip’s interim leader, who predicted both the vote for Brexit and Donald Trump’s US victory, told the Observer that while Le Pen was still more likely to be runner-up to an establishment candidate next May, she now had to be taken seriously as a potential head of state.

“She will clearly win through to the second round. And after what has happened elsewhere, only a fool would say she would have no chance of winning overall. France is a deeply, deeply unhappy country. If she were to win, it would be game over for the EU.”

Le Pen has made clear she wants to take France out of the euro and the EU. The prospective hardline approach has been agreed by the 27 member states as a bloc. Acting in concert, the remaining EU states will refuse to grant the UK access to the single market unless London agrees to sign up to its rules, including free movement of people, capital, services and labour.

Norbert Röttgen, chairman of the foreign affairs committee in the German Bundestag, told the Observer that he wanted to help the UK but, if there were no willingness to accept EU rules, there was no hope. “I am really ready to come to a result but if [the British position is] no, no, no, then even I would have to say that there is no common ground.”

Note EU-Digest: If the EU Commission does not play hard ball with Britain it will be game over for the EU. No concessions at all. Britain can't have it's cake and eat it too. 

Read more: Europe’s leaders to force Britain into hard Brexit | Politics | The Guardian

TTIP - US-EU TTIP trade deal 'frozen' after Trump vote: commissioner

Talks on a vast free-trade deal between the EU and US are likely to be "frozen" for years after the stunning election victory of Donald Trump, the EU said on Friday.

US president-elect Trump campaigned furiously on a promise to scrap international trade deals, throwing the ambitious pact with the European Union into serious doubt.

Brussels and Washington tried to get the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) through by the time Barack Obama left office but fell short.

"TTIP will probably be in the freezer for quite some time and then what will happen when it is defrosted, I think we will need to wait and see," EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstroem said after trade ministers held talks in Brussels.

"We don't know what he thinks about TTIP," Malmstroem said, referring to Trump, although she acknowledged that the brash billionaire was clearly opposed to big trade deals.

TTIP has been under negotiation since 2013 and was supposed to be one of the most ambitious free trade accords ever attempted.

Read more: Flash - US-EU TTIP trade deal 'frozen' after Trump vote: commissioner - France 24

US Federal Reserve: Yellen says she won't step down, will serve through 2018

Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen said Thursday that she will fill out her term, regardless of the election results.

Asked during a congressional hearing if she could imagine any circumstances in which she could resign early, Yellen responded, "no, I cannot."

"It is fully my intention to serve out that term," Yellen said of her term that ends in February of 2018.

Read more: Yellen says she won't step down, will serve through 2018 | Washington Examiner

The Netherlands - Dutch pensions sector warns of IORP II impact on uniform statements - by Frank van Alphen

The Dutch pensions industry has expressed concerns it will be forced to revise the uniform pensions statement (UPO) yet again with the introduction of the revised Institutions for Occupational Retirement Provision Directive (IORP II).

The Dutch Pensions Federation and the Association of Insurers (VvV) warned that it may have to expand the statement to include the expected pensions result under three different scenarios, the level of pensions contributions and costs.

The pensions industry revamped the UPO only recently and actually removed scenarios, as it believed this element increased the statement’s complexity.

Neither pension fund costs nor the contributions paid by workers and companies have ever featured on the Dutch UPO, but they do appear in pension funds’ annual reports and on their websites.

Gerard Riemen, the Pension Federation’s director, has previously predicted that the impact of the European legislation would be limited, “as the Netherlands was already a frontrunner on the uniform statement”.

The pensions industry adjusted the uniform statement to the 1-2-3 model, which provides basic information about pension arrangements in a top layer, followed by additional information in a second layer and – in a final layer – relevant documents.

A spokesman for the Federation said aligning European rules on the UPO to match the Dutch approach would be “desirable”.

The Federation and the VvV are awaiting approval by the Social Affairs Ministry before the new models are introduced in 2017.

At the moment, experts at the industry groups are assessing the potential exact impact of IORP II on the UPO.

The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority, which is to oversee the implementation of IORP II, has announced that it will launch proposals to improve comparability of information for pension fund participants in 2018.



Read moreL Dutch pensions sector warns of IORP II impact on uniform statements | News | IPE

EU Privacy Laws: EU questions U.S. over Yahoo email scanning, amid privacy concerns - by Julia Fioretti

Big Brother In The USA Watching Us 

The European Commission has asked the United States about a secret court order Yahoo (YHOO.O) used to scan thousands of customer emails for possible terrorism links, following concerns that may have violated a new data transfer pact.

Under the Privacy Shield agreement that came into force in August, the United States agreed to limit the collection of and access to Europeans' data stored on U.S. servers because of EU concerns about data privacy and mass U.S. surveillance.

The previous deal was thrown out by the EU's top court in October 2015, leaving thousands of firms scrambling for legal ways to provide data on transactions ranging from credit cards to travel and e-commerce that underpin billions of dollars of transatlantic trade.

Reuters reported last month that Yahoo had scanned all incoming customer emails in 2015 for a digital signature linked to a foreign state sponsor of terrorism, at the behest of a secret court order. That raised fresh questions about the scope of U.S. spying.

"The Commission services have contacted the U.S. authorities to ask for a number of clarifications," Commission spokesman Christian Wigand said.

The United States had pledged not to engage in mass, indiscriminate espionage, assuaging Commission concerns about the privacy of Europeans' data stored on U.S. servers following disclosures of intrusive U.S. surveillance programs in 2013 by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden.

Two people familiar with the matter said the Commission had now asked the United States to explain how the Yahoo order fitted with its commitments, even if the program ran before the Privacy Shield was in place.

The Commission was seeking clarifications on the nature of the court order itself and how targeted it was, said one person familiar with the matter. Another said it had also asked if the program was continuing.

"The U.S. will be held accountable to these commitments both through review mechanisms and through redress possibilities, including the newly established Ombudsperson mechanism in the U.S. State Department," Wigand said.

Privacy Shield, which Yahoo has not signed up to, provides for a joint annual review to ensure the United States is respecting its commitment to limit the amount of data hoovered up by U.S. agents.

A senior U.S. government official said he could not confirm or deny the reports about Yahoo, but said if true the surveillance would have been targeted at identifying terrorists while protecting the privacy of others.

That would be "good intelligence work," he said.

Reuters

EU-US Relations: British, French ministers snub EU talks on Trump and future US relations

EU In Panic: "what to do with the bogeyman from the USA"

The British and French foreign ministers are to miss special talks with their EU counterparts on Sunday to discuss Donald Trump's stunning US election win in a sign of divisions over how to deal with the new president.

European Union foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini summoned the ministers for dinner in Brussels after Republican Trump stormed to victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton on a platform which questioned America's commitment to Europe.

But British Foreign Minister Boris Johnson will not attend the meeting which is seen in some quarters as unnecessarily casting doubt on the result of an election in the country that has been closely allied to Europe for decades.

"We do not see the need for an additional meeting on Sunday because the US election timetable is long established," a British Foreign Office spokesman said, adding that Johnson would attend a scheduled full meeting of ministers on Monday.

"An act of democracy has taken place, there is a transition period and we will work with the current and future administrations to ensure the best outcomes for Britain."

Britain will be seeking the incoming Trump administration's backing as it negotiates its exit from the EU following June's Brexit referendum vote.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault will meanwhile be "absent for agenda reasons", a French source told AFP, although his absence from a crucial meeting called by the EU's own foreign policy chief will also raise questions.

Britain and France will instead be represented by their ambassadors to the EU.

Trump's victory has already been greeted coolly by a bloc shaken by Brexit and other crises, with European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker warning the billionaire president-elect he must get up to speed quickly on transatlantic ties.

"Mr Trump, during his campaign, said that Belgium was a village somewhere in Europe," Juncker said Friday. "I believe we'll have two years of wasted time while Mr Trump tours a world he doesn't know."

Note EU-Digest: Why all this panic in Europe about this clown who became president elect of the USA? Maybe this will finally give EU member states the courage to jump off the lap of the US, create its own independent foreign policy and army, get out of the Middle East Political disaster, tell Erdogan to forget about membership witthin the EU, if he does not reestablish Democracy in Turkey, and realize that Russia is not Europe's principal adversary.. That would make most people proud about the EU.   

Read more: Flash - British, French ministers snub EU talks on Trump - France 24

USA: Trump-Led Thaw Between Russia, US to Undermine EU Unanimity Over Sanctions

United States President-elect Donald Trump said he would consider the possibility of lifting anti-Russian sanctions, but provided no further details.

 At the same time, Morgan Stanley estimated a 35 percent chance of Washington lifting sanctions against Moscow in the coming two years.

According to the bank, Trump’s presidency will result in easing sanctions against Russian companies and individuals. Meanwhile, the European Union is now concerned over a possible thaw between Russia and the US because this will create obstacles for Brussels’ policy of sanctions.

During his campaign, Trump repeatedly said he wanted to normalize ties with Russia. After the election, he confirmed he wants a "good relationship" with Moscow. Russian markets reacted to Trump’s victory more positively than other global stocks, on expectations of an improvement in bilateral economic ties between Russia and the US.

Read more: Sputnik

US - EU relations: Europe forced off the US lap and Alone in Trump’s World

Will Trump signal the end of the Trans=Atlantic Alliance

Alone again. Since World War II’s end, Europe has looked at the world through a transatlantic lens.

There have been ups and downs in the alliance with the United States, but it was a family relationship built on a sense that we would be there for each other in a crisis and that we are fundamentally like-minded.

Donald Trump’s election as US president threatens to bring this to an end – at least for now. He believes more in walls and oceans than solidarity with allies, and has made it clear that he will put America not just first, but second and third as well. “We will no longer surrender this country, or its people,” he declared in his one major foreign-policy speech, “to the false song of globalism.”

Europeans will not only have to get used to Trump; they will have to look at the world through different eyes. There are four reasons to expect that Trump’s America will be the single biggest source of global disorder.

First, American guarantees are no longer reliable. Trump has questioned whether he would defend Eastern European NATO members if they do not do more to defend themselves. He has said that Saudi Arabia should pay for American security. He has encouraged Japan and South Korea to obtain nuclear weapons. In Europe, the Middle East, and Asia, Trump has made it clear that America will no longer play the role of policeman; instead, it will be a private security company open for hire.

Second, global institutions will come under attack. Trump fundamentally rejects the view that the liberal world order that the US built after WWII (and expanded after the Cold War) is the cheapest way of defending American values and interests. Like George W. Bush after September 11, 2001, he views global institutions as placing intolerable constraints on US freedom of action. He has a revisionist agenda for almost all of these bodies, from the World Trade Organization to NATO and the United Nations.

The fact that he wants to put the “Art of the Deal” into practice in all international relationships – renegotiating the terms of every agreement – is likely to provoke a similar backlash among America’s partners.

Third, Trump will turn all US relationships on their head. The crude fear is that he will be kinder to America’s foes than to its allies. Most challenging for Europeans is his admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin. Should Trump, cozying up to Putin in search of a grand bargain, recognize Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea, the EU would be placed in a near-impossible role.

Fourth, there is Trump’s unpredictability. Even during the 18 months of the presidential campaign, Trump has been on both sides of almost every issue. The fact that he will say the opposite today of what he said yesterday, without admitting that he has changed his mind, shows the extent to which capriciousness is his method.

One of the benefits the US political system is that it provides a two-month grace period to prepare for Trump’s world. So what should Europeans do about it?

First, we need to try to increase leverage over the US. We know from Trump’s writings and behavior that he is likely to resemble other strongmen presidents and treat weakness as an invitation to aggression. We saw from the Iraq experience that a divided Europe has little ability to influence the US. But where Europe has worked together – on privacy, competition policy, and taxation – it has dealt with the US from a position of strength.

The same was true with the so-called E3+3 policy on Iran – when the big EU member states shifted the US stance by standing together. To get on the front foot, the EU now needs to launch a process to agree on common policies on security, foreign policy, migration, and the economy. This will be difficult, as Europe is deeply divided, with France fearing terrorism, Poland dreading Russia, Germany inflamed by the refugee issue, and the United Kingdom determined to go it alone.

Second, Europeans should show that they are able to hedge their bets and build alliances with others. The EU must reach out to other powers to help shore up global institutions against Trumpian revisionism. And it also needs to diversify its foreign-policy relationships. Rather than waiting for Trump to marginalize the EU over Russia and China, Europeans should fly some kites of their own. Should they, for example, begin consulting with the Chinese on the EU arms embargo to remind the US of the value of the transatlantic alliance? Could the EU develop a different relationship with Japan? And if Trump wants to cozy up to Russia, maybe he should take over the Normandy process on Ukraine?

Third, Europeans need to start to invest in their own security. From Ukraine to Syria, from cyber attacks to terror attacks, Europe’s security is being probed in different ways. Despite an intellectual understanding that 500 million Europeans can no longer contract out their security to 300 million Americans, the EU has done little to close the gap between its security needs and its capabilities. It is time to put meat on the bones of the Franco-German plan for European defense. And it will be important to find institutionalized ways of binding the UK into Europe’s new security architecture.

In all of these areas, Europeans must keep the door to transatlantic cooperation open. This alliance – which has so often saved Europe from itself – is bigger than any individual. And, in any case, Trump will not last forever. But the transatlantic relationship will be more likely to survive if it is built on two pillars that understand and defend their own interests.

This will be a tough agenda to adopt – not least because Europe is facing its own brand of populist nationalism. France’s far-right National Front leader, Marine Le Pen, was among the first to congratulate Trump on his victory, and Trump has said that he would put the UK at the front of the queue after Brexit. But even Europe’s most Trump-like leaders will find it harder to defend their national interest if they try to go it alone. To survive in Trump’s world, they should try to make Europe great again.

Read more: Europe, Alone in Trump’s World | European Council on Foreign Relations

USA - Donald Trump: The US has elected its most dangerous leader. We all have plenty to fear - by Jonathan Freedland

The thought the United States would step back from the abyss. We believed, and the polls led us to feel sure, that Americans would not, in the end, hand the most powerful office on earth to an unstable bigot, sexual predator and compulsive liar.

People all around the world had watched and waited, through the consecutive horrors of the 2016 election campaign, believing the Trump nightmare would eventually pass. But today the United States – the country that had, from its birth, seen itself as a beacon that would inspire the world, a society that praised itself as “the last best hope of earth”, the nation that had seemed to be bending the arc of history towards justice, as Barack Obama so memorably put it on this same morning eight years ago – has stepped into the abyss.

Today the United States stands not as a source of inspiration to the rest of the world but as a source of fear. Instead of hailing its first female president, it seems poised to hand the awesome power of its highest office to a man who revels in his own ignorance, racism and misogyny. One who knows him well describes him as a dangerous “sociopath”.

And what awesome power he will soon have. Republicans did not just defy almost every projection, prediction and data-rich computer model to win the presidency. They also won the House of Representatives and much of the Senate. Trump will face few checks on his whims. A man with no control of his impulses will be unrestrained, the might of a superpower at the service of his ego and his id.

The most obvious impact will be on the country he will soon rule. Just think of what he has promised. A deportation force to round up and expel the 11 million undocumented migrants who make up 6% of the US workforce. A ban on all Muslims entering the country, later downgraded to a pledge to impose “extreme vetting” on anyone coming from a suspect land. A giant wall to seal off the Mexican border. “Some form of punishment” for women who seek an abortion. And prison for the woman he just defeated.

People will say that all that was just talk. But they said that throughout the campaign, insisting that Trump would “pivot” to a more moderate stance, that he would become more “presidential”. He never did. And surely he will see this victory as proof that he was always right, that his instincts are perfect and never to be challenged. There is no reason for him to moderate at all. The office of Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt and John F Kennedy is now his playpen. He can do what he likes.

This will be America’s ordeal primarily. But it will affect all of us. A reality TV star with no experience of either politics or the military will have the nuclear button as his toy. This, remember, is the man who reportedly asked several times, during a military briefing, why the US didn’t use nuclear weapons since it had them. This is the man who has said “I love war”. Whose proposed solution to Isis is “to bomb the shit out of them” and steal the oil.

Think of the anxiety this morning in Riga, Vilnius or Tallinn. In the summer, Trump told the New York Times he did not believe in Nato’s core principle: that an attack on one member should be met by a response from all. He seemed to see Nato as a mafia protection racket: unless the little guys paid up, they should be left undefended. Vladimir Putin – Trump’s hero, admired as the very model of a leader by the president-elect of the United States – will not need more of a hint than that. The Russian dictator will surely see his opportunity to invade one or more Baltic states and expand his empire. President Trump would only admire the macho swagger of such a move.

A trade war looms with China, the imposition of tariffs that could imperil the entire global trading system. America is about to turn inward, towards protectionism. The markets have already delivered their verdict on that. They plunged.

And what about our planet? Trump believes climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese. He will do nothing to reduce emissions: he does not believe they exist.

But beyond all that, there is another consequence of this terrifying decision, no less dark. Trump’s success has delighted white nationalists and racists in his own country and beyond. His victories in the key battleground states were hailed by David Duke, a former luminary of the Ku Klux Klan: “God Bless Donald Trump,” he tweeted. “It’s TIME TO TAKE AMERICA BACK.” The Dutch nationalist Geert Wilders was in similarly cheery mood: “The people are taking their country back,” he said, “So will we.” Marine Le Pen will feel the same jubilation, as will every other populist or nationalist who traffics in hate.

For they have seen the power of a message built on fear and loathing. It’s not good enough to say this is all about the economic anxiety of those who have been left behind, though that clearly played a part in winning rustbelt states for Trump. But it’s an incomplete explanation because Trump did not only win those voters. He won 63% of white men and 52% of white women. Not all of those were the left behind. A lot of them were people drawn to a message that was, in part and however thinly coded, about reinstating white privilege.

Who is to blame? The list is so long, from the Republican party to the media, from the pollsters and data nerds who got it so wrong to the Clinton campaign team that took onetime Democratic bastions for granted, including Clinton herself, who for all her strengths was a flawed candidate. You can condemn all of them, but on a day like this who really cares about blame? The most powerful country in the world is to be led by its most dangerous ever leader, a figure who could have walked out of a school textbook narrating the darkest history of the 20th century. The wartime holder of the office that in January will be Trump’s once told Americans they had “nothing to fear but fear itself”. That is not true today. America and the rest of us have plenty to fear – starting with the man who now stands on top of the world.

Note Insure-Digest: Maybe also time to give Trump the benefit of the doubt. Donald Trump - Amazing, and shocking for many, but not unexpected. First Brexit and now Trump. Get ready for Marie Le Pen in France and Geert Wilders in Holland. It will certainly create a chain reaction of popular movements around the world against a totally corrupt political, and corporite establishment who slowly dug their own grave. It will be either the beginning of a new era or the beginning of the end. Will Trump be able to deliver and satisfy this popular movement? One thing is certain, the status-quo has been hit by an earthquake. "Business as usual" is no more. QUE SERA SERA!  

Read more: The US has elected its most dangerous leader. We all have plenty to fear | Jonathan Freedland | Opinion | The Guardian

Turkey - EU Relations: Turkey blasts EU over crackdown criticism

Turkey:A corrupt dictatorship

Turkey protested to EU envoys and branded relations with Brussels as "fragile" on Monday over the bloc's criticism of its crackdown in the wake of the July 15 coup.

In recent days, the European Union has strongly criticised Turkey, a candidate for accession, over the arrests of nine MPs from the pro-Kurdish Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP), including its two co-leaders.

"We made clear our alarm over the positions taken by the EU," Turkish EU Affairs Minister Omer Celik said in televised comments after calling in all EU member state ambassadors for an unusual meeting at his ministry.

"We are in a very fragile period in EU-Turkey relations... Constant opposition to Turkey is not a correct policy," he added.

Celik also lashed out at remarks attributed to an EU minister comparing Turkey's crackdown in the wake of the coup to the methods of the Nazis.

Some 35,000 people have been arrested and tens of thousands more have lost their jobs in the crackdown since the coup bid. The opposition Press was closed down and editors arrested.

Note EU-Digest: Bottom line, if Mr. Erdogan likes it or not: he is now the leader of a Dictatorship without any Freedom of the Press or basic Human Rights and there is no reason whatsoever (except fear)  for the EU to continue dealing with this bully and his puppet government. It is high time the EU shows to have what it takes to put Mr.Erdogan out of business.

Read more: Flash - Turkey blasts EU over crackdown criticism - France 24

European Aircraft Industry: Airbus building flying cars and taxis so that it can become the Uber of the skies - by Danielle Muoio

Airbus working on building flying car

Tech giants are starting to turn their attention to “flying cars.”

Uber released a 98-page white paper last week outlining its plans to bring “flying cars” to commuters by 2026. Google co-founder Larry Page is also funding a “flying car” project through a start-up named Zee.Aero, and its prototype was reportedly seen in action at Hollister Municipal Airport in October.

But Airbus, which offers a legacy of building civil aircrafts and working with the Federal Aviation Administration, is also developing its own “flying car” as part of its Project Vahana – and its aviation experience could give it an edge. Project Vahana is being run under Airbus’ Silicon Valley arm, named A³.

To get this out of the way early, all of these companies aren’t really interested in developing flying cars, hence the quotation marks. That would indicate they were trying to take the same route as Terrafugia, which is building a hybrid car that can drive on the road and also fly.

But A³, along with Uber and what we know of Zee.Aero, isn’t focused on the car portion of a flying car. All three are working on VTOL aircrafts, which is short for Vertical Take-Off and Landing. That means the aircrafts don’t need a runway to ascend, similar to a helicopter.

Read more: Airbus is building flying taxis so that it can become the Uber of the skies

US Presidential Elections & Economy: The tea leaves of the US economy point to a Clinton win

In the run up to the presidential election, Hillary Clinton positioned herself to be a continuation of the economic policies of President Barack Obama. On the other hand, Republican nominee Donald Trump has said that the economy is broken and he’s the only who can fix it.

Americans routinely cite the economy as one of their top concerns surrounding an election and academic studies have shown a link between personal economic standing and voting behavior, so it’s not surprising the candidates are highlighting the part of the economy that make their case.

So in the final days before the election, it’s important to look back at just how the economy is performing to see how it may influence the outcome.

Labor market data and broad indicators of economic activity aren’t going gangbusters, but are good enough to tip the scales in a favorable manner towards the incumbent party, and thus, Hillary Clinton.
The labor market is strong

Probably the strongest case for maintaining the so-called status quo with Clinton may be the US jobs markets.

Despite Friday’s jobs report coming in slightly under expectations, the labor market appears to be much stronger than it was four years ago. Gains have been slower in recent months, but steady. Wage growth is at a post-recession high and is spiking for the lowest wage earners; initial jobless claims have been under 300,000 for 85 straight weeks (the longest such streak since 1970); and job openings have recently been at or near all-time highs.

The U-6 measure of employment, which captures unemployed persons as well as those with a part-time job seeking a full-time job, was also at the lowest point since the recession in Friday’s report. Additionally, discouraged workers and median duration of unemployment are also at pre-crisis levels.



Read more: The tea leaves of the US economy point to a Clinton win

Turkey's economy spiraling down as risk indicators growing for the country

Credit default swaps are a major indicator measuring country risks, denoting the insurance premium on money invested in a country’s government bonds. The higher the credit default swaps, the higher the country risk. spiralling

According to economic sources such as Reuters and Bloomberg, Turkey’s credit default swaps reached 250 in October, the second highest among emerging economies after Brazil with 266. South Africa is third, almost neck and neck with Turkey, followed by Russia, whose risk premium has been on the decline, falling to 218 in October.

Turkey’s risk premium has fluctuated over the years. When the global financial crisis erupted in 2008, for instance, it shot up to 321, while falling to 167 in 2010, when economic growth gathered steam. With the recent decline in economic growth, the risk premium has climbed up again, reaching the current level of 250.

Another widely monitored risk indicator is the grade a country receives from credit rating agencies. Two of the top three agencies watched by investors around the world — Standard and Poor’s and Moody’s — cut Turkey’s sovereign credit rating to non-investment grades in July and September respectively, infuriating Ankara and leaving Fitch as the only major agency that keeps Turkey on investment grade.

Downgraded ratings especially sway the movement of “hot money” or short-term investments in stock market shares and government bonds. These types of external funds have become quite important for Turkey, accounting for a portfolio investment stock of between $40 billion and $42 billion.

Pension funds, in particular, heed closely the assessments of credit rating agencies, pulling out from countries downgraded to non-investment level. And indeed, the Turkish Central Bank’s data points to net capital outflows in the wake of the latest downgrades.

The flight of foreign capital was then followed by the Turkish lira tumbling against the dollar. The greenback, which traded for 2.94 liras before the Moody’s move, has climbed up to 3.11 liras in the ensuing weeks, and seems unlikely to retreat from these levels. Given the country’s bulky external debt stock and the significant share of short-term debt it includes, the appreciation of the dollar on such a scale is not something the Turkish economy can easily digest.

 For indebted entities, a more expensive dollar means their debt has now increased in terms of the Turkish lira. And when it comes to imports, which amount to about $200 billion per year, the dollar’s appreciation means an increasing cost for imported inputs, including machinery and equipment, and thus a cost-push inflation.

In its 2017-19 medium-term economic program, the government tacitly estimates the average dollar-lira parity for 2016 at 2.95, but the trend has already surpassed its projection in the first 10 months of the year. The average parity stood at 2.93 in the first half of the year, while reaching 3.00 in the second half so far. A downward trend seems highly unlikely in November and December, meaning the average for the whole year would be no less than 3.00.

This, in turn, would equal to a yearly increase of nearly 10%, given that the average parity was 2.73 in 2015. According to the program, the government projects a consumer inflation rate of 7.5% for 2016, and if this materializes, the increase in the dollar-lira parity would exceed the inflation rate as well.

When it comes to economic growth, the program projects the rate at 3.2% for 2016 and 4.4% for 2017.

The target for next year depends largely on the inflow of foreign capital, something that the program itself admits by projecting that domestic savings would not exceed 13% or 14% of gross domestic product, meaning that the funds needed for investment could be secured only externally. And this brings up the key question: Will the expected inflow of capital materialize? How will Turkey attract foreign funds to stimulate growth while its risk premium is on the rise, coupled with a “non-investment” grade by credit rating agencies?

Turkey’s prevailing conditions and its prospects for 2017 signal heightening rather than easing risks. Economic vulnerabilities are growing, with only a 0.1% increase in investments this year. Atop the investment drought, net external demand falls short of leveraging growth, compounded by rapid declines in domestic demand, the result of growing political and geopolitical risks affecting consumers.

Swelling housing stocks have caused particular concern, leading the government to cut the value added tax on housing sales by 10 percentage points last month at the expense of losing budget revenues. Yet, the construction and housing sector — the driving force of the economy in recent years — appears headed to new bottlenecks in demand.

Rising geopolitical risks are an important factor driving the decline in domestic demand, the backbone of economic growth. Turkey's interventions in Syria and Iraq have painted the picture of a country at war, deterring both foreign tourists and investors. The turmoil in the Middle East and Ankara’s ongoing confrontation with Kurdish actors both at home and abroad represent a major component in the risk factor. The choice of a security-based policy rather than dialogue and negotiations on the Kurdish issue is, no doubt, pushing up the country risk.

In sum, the policies that manage the Turkish economy, already relegated to the “non-investment” league, are bound to heighten rather than lower the risk factors in the coming period. And a meaningful rate hike by the US Federal Reserve in December would intensify the flight of foreign capital from Turkey, further escalating the risks.

Read more: Risk indicators growing for Turkish economy

Brexit on hold?: May Unbowed by Ruling Pledges to Hold to Brexit Timetable - by Thomas Penny and Kit Chellel

U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May pledged to stick to her Brexit timetable after a court ruled that she needs Parliament’s permission to begin negotiations.

The government immediately said it will appeal the decision, adding that it believes the legal process will allow Britain’s exit from the European Union by mid-2019. The prime minister’s spokeswoman, Helen Bower, said plans to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty by the end of March remained unchanged.

“The British people made a decision in the referendum and it’s the job of the government to get on with delivering the decision of the British people,” Bower told reporters in London on Thursday. “Parliament will have a role to voice its views through debates.”

The pound -- the worst-performing major currency of 2016 -- rose to a three week high against the dollar on the ruling even as lawmakers said it didn’t call into question the decision to quit the EU.

Read moreMay Unbowed by Ruling Pledges to Hold to Brexit Timetable - Bloomberg

EU Economy: Deluded EU boss blames European nations for economic MELTDOWN NOT Euro in shock outburst - Zoie O'Brien

Nobel Prize winner Professor Joseph Stiglitz has insisted the EU will collapse if the Union makes no significant changes to the common currency policy.

According to the economist, the euro has “failed to bring prosperity, led to economic stagnation and to the erosion of solidarity between member states”.

Professor Stiglitz has been touring the EU with his new book which explains his belief the only way to save the Union would be dropping out of the single currency.

The book caught the world’s attention and red-faced Union bosses have spent months in silence.

Now, they have decided to retaliate - in the form of a letter by Eurogroup President Jeroen Dijsselbloem.

The EU chief insisted Brussels cannot possibly be to blame, despite admitting there are issues to be addressed.

He said: “I would certainly not claim that everything is going smoothly in Europe, but the solution is not to abolish the euro to preserve the EU.

“Rather, the solution is to deal with Europe’s economic problems so our countries continue their recovery.”

Jeroen Dijsselbloem argued the loss of an exchange rate mechanism is not the main risk for the euro - because studies have shown “economic cycles of the eurozone countries are broadly aligned”.

In fact, he sees the issue as belonging entirely to separate member states.

He said: “If we return to the introduction of the euro, we can see that the problem did not stem from the loss of exchange rate levers.

“The problem was that financial markets made no distinction between the member states with regard to risk, even though there were enormous differences in growth potential from country to country.”

Mr Dijsselbloem used examples in Ireland, Spain, Greece and Portugal where he claims “wages rose faster than productivity”.

Read moreL Deluded EU boss blames European nations for economic MELTDOWN NOT Euro in shock outburst | World | News | Daily Express

US Economy: Upward mobility eludes many in US - by Evan Horowitz

To reach the fabled land of opportunity, you may have to move. The odds of a low-income kid clawing his way up are better in Seattle than they are in Boston.

Crossing an ocean might help even more, since the make-your-own-success promise of the American dream turns out to be more true in Denmark than the United States.

But if you really want to find a place of equal opportunity, where hard work brings real rewards and your life prospects aren’t constrained by the size of your parents’ paychecks, leaving home may not be enough. You might have to find a time machine. Research suggests that your chance of success isn’t just determined by your parents, but by the long-forgotten fortunes of your distant ancestors.

Pick yourself up by your bootstraps? Only if your parents, grandparents, and great-great-great-grandparents already did.

Let’s be clear what we’re talking about, because there are several definitions of mobility. I’m talking about relative mobility, or how common it is for people to climb to a higher rung on the income ladder than their parents did (or, less glamorously, fall to a lower one).

Foundational myths aside, there really isn’t a lot of mobility in the United States — at least judging from the work of Stanford University professor Raj Chetty and his team at the Equality of Opportunity project.

Children born into the poorest 20 percent of households have about 33 percent chance of staying there, they calculate, and only a 7.5 percent chance of cracking the top 20 percent.

Among the rich, it’s reversed. In a perfectly mobile world, it wouldn’t matter where you started on the income ladder; even if your parents were among the top 1 percent, you’d still have a 1 in 100 chance of ending up in that rarefied group, just like everyone else. But in reality, Chetty’s research found, your odds are 10 times better than that.

Even within the United States there are some big differences. For instance, kids across the West have a much better shot at improving their lot than those in the South.

Scan the globe and you can do even better. Compared to their US peers, poor kids in Canada are nearly twice as likely to find their way to the top. In Denmark, the numbers aren’t quite so good, but Danish kids still enjoy more upward mobility than ours do.

When scholars from Northwestern University, the University of Michigan, and the Census Bureau added a third generation to their measure of economic mobility, they found that the US economy was even less fluid than presumed. Studies that focus narrowly on parents and children, without attending to grandparents, underestimate social rigidity by a substantial amount.

Pause over that for a second, because it constitutes a huge challenge to our whole conception of economic mobility — more specifically, the idea that ours is not a rigidly hierarchical society because even small changes add up over time.

The argument usually goes something like this: Sure, the children of low-income parents have a reduced chance of moving up the income ladder, but they have some chance. And the ones who don’t make it will have their own children, with a new opportunity to move up. So after a few generations, virtually all scions of those once-poor families should have escaped.

But this won’t happen if grandchildren have a tendency to snap back.

One generation goes up, the next falls back down, and the whole system ends up in the same position as before.

What accounts for these differences? Chetty and his colleagues isolated a number of factors, though they’re careful to insist they don’t yet understand the full causal picture. Among other things, it seems that good schools help to develop essential skills, strong families provide valuable support, low inequality levels the field, and low rates of segregation aid both whites and blacks.

Put a few of these together and you can turn cities and countries into superior engines of opportunity.

The very fact that mobility rates vary from place to place suggests we can probably do something to expand opportunity. By following the example of higher-mobility regions like the Pacific Northwest or Northern Europe, we might be able to widen the avenues for poorer kids. And the better news is that the required changes are already high political priorities, things like improving schools and reducing inequality.

But if Clark is right, and family success persists across centuries, perhaps policy is beside the point. There seems to be a broader law at work, something that keeps the successful on top and the poor close to the bottom — regardless of school funding levels or divorce rates.

Clark raises a genetic argument, suggesting that families like the Pepys have some traits essential for success — grit, ambition, high IQ — that get passed down and provide each generation a substantial advantage.

But even if you don’t accept that claim, it doesn’t change the puzzle. In a world where 21st-century success is bound up with 17th-century happenings, the idea of economic opportunity starts to sound like a farce.

Perhaps the only thing to do is rewrite our economic rules so that everyone can find some real well-being, even if opportunity was mostly closed to them hundreds of years ago.

To read the complete report click here:: Upward mobility eludes many in US - The Boston Globe