SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: altair19 who wrote (48252)11/11/2005 9:22:27 PM
From: SiouxPal  Respond to of 362769
 
I see no way that we won't get back at least the House next year. They talk about the Dems being unorganized. Yikes! The Wingers can't hit their asses with either hand.
They've fallen, and I don't think they'll get up for November 2006.
Advance that proposition forward. Say we get back Congress in 2006. That would spell anything but RELIEF for George & Co.
It's just our time, and our party will not be dropping their ice cream again.



To: altair19 who wrote (48252)11/11/2005 9:22:40 PM
From: Wharf Rat  Respond to of 362769
 
Rope a dope? Nope. We be a lean mean fighting machine. The prime of our lives; conditioned to go 20 rounds. Bring it on.



To: altair19 who wrote (48252)11/12/2005 2:00:29 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 362769
 
Global: Old Europe's Wake-up Call

By Stephen Roach (New York)

morganstanley.com

Nov 11, 2005

2005 will undoubtedly go down in history as Europe’s annus horribilis. A failed constitutional referendum, a disappointing German election, and now riots in the streets of France -- the fabric of Old Europe is torn and hopes of New Europe may well be meeting their sternest test. As bad as it sounds, the stresses and strains of political and social backlash may be just what the tired and sclerotic Continent needs. They underscore perhaps the only way out -- the heavy lifting of structural change and the concomitant restoration of economic dynamism. The angst of 2005 could well be Europe’s wake-up call.

Europe has spent the past 60 years dealing with the ravages of World War II. There have been three distinct phases of its postwar experience -- reconstruction, division (i.e., the Cold War), and now reunification. Europe’s social contract and the vast public sector welfare state it spawned were critical by-products of the first phase of this continuum -- the ultimate safety net for a war-battered Continent. Over the span of six decades, Europe’s social and economic context has changed dramatically. But the trappings of the welfare state have remained largely unaltered. Therein lies a key source of tension for modern Europe -- in effect, a tug-of-war between the dynamism of economic restructuring and the inertia of social policy. In my view, a unified Europe is a large and potentially powerful economy -- perfectly capable of standing on its own without the life-support promises of another era. That doesn’t mean the European social contract needs to be torn up. But it could mean that a major contract renegotiation is in order. The angst of 2005 leaves Europe with little choice but to finally respond to the critical tradeoff between its new economy and its old social policies. The outcome of this balancing act could well shape its economic prospects for years to come.

I am actually optimistic that Europe will rise to the occasion. This is quite a switch for someone who has been a chronic euro-skeptic for the better part of the past 15 years. But I like what I see on the structural change front -- especially in the core of Old Europe. And I continue to find Germany, by far Europe’s biggest economy and still the third-largest economy in the world, the most interesting story of all. Germany, despite its bad press, is very much on the move. Yes, it still has one of the most expensive and rigid labor markets in the world. But the rigidities are not as severe as they were just a few years ago. For example, German labor unions have lost significant power in recent years -- they no longer bargain across industries but confine their negotiations to individual companies. Moreover, led by the metals sector, Germany is now moving away from the shortened 35-hour work week. And in an effort to avoid the high fixed costs of hiring and firing, Corporate Germany has hired increasingly large numbers of part-time workers and contract temps; collectively, such “flexi workers” currently make up about 39% of the total German workforce -- up sharply from the 29% share a decade ago. At the same time, German businesses are now moving aggressively to increase IT spending -- making up for the shortfall in the late 1990s; the IT share of German capex has increased from 30% to approximately 50% over the past ten years. Last but hardly least, there has been a dramatic recent increase in German corporate restructuring; M&A activity in Germany has increased from $73 billion to $138 billion over the last three years.

The net result of this confluence of forces -- improved labor market flexibility, IT spending, and corporate restructuring -- is a long overdue and meaningful improvement on the German productivity front. Productivity growth is currently running at a 1.6% annual rate -- fully half a percentage point faster than trend increases of 1.0% recorded over the preceding ten years. Reflecting that improvement and in conjunction with a moderation of nominal wage inflation in recent years, labor costs in Germany’s manufacturing sector have fallen by a total of 10% over the past 10 years. Slowly but surely, an uncompetitive, high-cost German economy is turning the corner in dealing with its structural problems. This conclusion is very much at odds with popular impressions of Germany. The nation is far from becoming the “next Japan” that many have feared would be the case. Nor should Angela Merkel’s disappointing showing in the recent national elections be construed as a “no” to reforms and restructuring. Her narrow victory may, instead, be more of an outgrowth of her deficient campaign style -- especially when compared with Gerhard Schroeder’s long-standing strengths as a campaigner. There will undoubtedly be more bumps in the road. Upcoming fiscal consolidation on the back of a proposed VAT hike may be seen as a setback for cyclical recovery prospects. But as long as Germany stays the course of an Anglo-Saxon style productivity-led recovery, the tailwinds of structural revival should prevail. This is the key lesson from every successful macro restructuring story of the past 25 years.

A German turnaround could be a very big deal for the rest of Europe. Most significantly, Germany is the engine of intra-European trade -- accounting for 50% of the combined sum of intra Euro-zone exports and imports. As the German engine shifts gears, the rest of the Euro train could follow. There are signs that is already happening. Notwithstanding the undercurrent of social tensions, France is also making good progress on the structural reform front. Michelin, Schneider, and HP have led the charge in the dismantling of the 35-hour workweek -- a trend that is now spreading to the French public sector in the form of overtime allowances for hospital workers. Pension reform is progressively raising the retirement age of French workers from 60 to 65, and a new legal work contract was introduced last July that makes layoffs much easier. And France is holding its own in the developed world restructuring sweepstakes, having taken the manufacturing share of total employment down from 18.3% in 1990 to an estimated 12.5% in 2005. At the same time, since Italy’s new “job contract” was put into law in 2003, some 600,000 new jobs have been created in the Italian economy (see Vincenzo Guzzo’s 7 November research note, “Italian Labor Market -- How Much of a Miracle?”). The decline of Italy’s unemployment rate is now the fastest of any country in the euro zone. Europe’s social and political problems make great front-page material, but behind the sclerotic headlines is meaningful progress in the restructuring of Germany, France, and Italy -- countries which collectively account for 69% of euro-zone GDP.

This debate is not lost on financial markets. As the angst of 2005 has deepened, foreign exchange markets have become increasingly priced for euro-sclerosis. To the extent these fears are overblown, a euro rally is a distinct possibility. There are equally important implications for global growth. In particular, structural improvement in the European economy could fill an important void for the global economy in the event of a slowing of the US consumer. The greater the growth contribution from Europe, the smaller the risk of a disruptive strain of global rebalancing.

Ultimately, the case for Europe boils down to a resolution of the tension between corporate and social productivity. A social model that was essential for postwar reconstruction has lost its relevance for a rebuilt and reunified Europe that must now find its own way in an era of globalization. This is not the first time the heavy lifting of restructuring has challenged deeply entrenched social contracts. Nor will it be the last. But now it’s Europe’s turn to face this trade-off head-on. There is always the risk that Europe turns back the clock. But to do so, it would have to look inward -- in effect, shielding its workers from globalization. I think the odds of that are low. Unless Europe is prepared to go down a protectionist route, its social contract will undoubtedly become part of the global labor arbitrage. The angst of 2005 is Old Europe’s wake-up call that a New Europe is at hand.



To: altair19 who wrote (48252)11/12/2005 2:29:34 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 362769
 
The Wedge Strategy

msnbc.msn.com



To: altair19 who wrote (48252)11/12/2005 2:47:31 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 362769
 
Peter F. Drucker, Management Guru, Dies at 95
___________________________________________________________

Prolific Father of Modern Management
By James Flanigan and Thomas S. Mulligan
Special to The Los Angeles Times
November 12, 2005

Peter F. Drucker, the down-to-earth business thinker who defined the role of management guru, died Friday at his home in Claremont. He was 95.

During more than 60 years as an author, professor and consultant to some of America's biggest corporations, Drucker challenged people's thinking about organizations and popularized the notion of the postindustrial "knowledge worker."

"Peter could look around corners," philanthropist Eli Broad, who knew Drucker for 30 years, said Friday. "He would say things that seemed rather simple but in fact were very profound. He saw the future."

Former General Electric Co. Chairman Jack Welch credited a pithy question from Drucker with helping him understand how to restructure the far-flung GE empire, a sometimes-wrenching process that turned the company into a stock market dynamo and made Welch one of America's most celebrated managers.

"Drucker said: 'If you weren't already in this business, would you enter it today? And if not, what are you going to do about it?' " Welch recalled Friday night. "Simple, right? But incredibly powerful."

Drucker's simple question ultimately led to Welch's operating maxim that if a GE unit could not be No. 1 or No. 2 in its field, it should be jettisoned.

Claremont Graduate University said Drucker died of natural causes. He was the Marie Rankin Clarke professor of social sciences and management at Claremont from 1971 to 2003, and he continued to write and consult from the campus until his death.

Drucker was often called the "father of modern management." But on the occasion of his 90th birthday, he described his life work much more simply:

"I looked at people, not at machines or buildings," he said. That approach led to nearly three dozen books and thousands of articles that formed nothing less than a guide to the 20th century economy.

The former newspaperman did not think up economic theories or elaborate systems of business operation. Rather he looked at people working, put them in historical context and saw a new liberal art: management.

"Unlike many philosophers, he spoke in plain language that resonated with ordinary managers," Intel Corp. co-founder Andrew S. Grove said in a statement. "Consequently, simple statements from him have influenced untold numbers of daily actions; they did mine over decades."

General Motors Corp., which invited Drucker to study its corporate structure in 1943, provided his laboratory and his epiphany. He was then a professor at Bennington College in Vermont and author of two books on society and industry.

At GM in wartime, Drucker saw "the corporation as human effort" — "people of diverse skills and knowledges working together in a large organization," he wrote in "Concept of the Corporation," the 1946 book that emerged from his two years of studying GM.

It was something new in world history, different from the "command and control" methods of organizing labor that had characterized the building of the pyramids or Napoleon's army or even Henry Ford's assembly line.

"The overseer of the unskilled peasants who dragged stone for the pyramids did not concern himself with morale or motivation," Drucker wrote.

But modern management is different, he said. "Its task is to make people capable of joint performance, to make their strengths effective and their weaknesses irrelevant," he said in various ways in his 18 books on the profession of management.

Drucker saw management as a necessity for the society of organizations that existed in the 20th century. It was a discipline vital not only for commercial business, but also for hospitals, churches, labor unions and youth groups.

Drucker "was like the exceptionally insightful anthropologist who visits a remote tribe and understands things about the tribe that the tribe itself doesn't understand," said Michael Useem, management professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.

That was true at Edward Jones, the St. Louis-based stock brokerage, which started a 20-year relationship with Drucker in the early 1980s. At the time, the company thought it had a winning strategy of locating one- or two-person offices in small towns, where it wouldn't attract the competitive attention of such Wall Street giants as Merrill Lynch, managing director Doug Hill recalled Friday.

But Drucker said he suspected that the firm's niche had less to do with geography than with the conservative individual investors who formed the backbone of its clientele. There were plenty of conservative investors in big cities, Drucker said.

The firm did a study and discovered that, yes, its few metropolitan offices were doing as well as its rural ones, Hill said. That led to an expansion into larger cities, which now account for 60% of Edward Jones' business, Hill said.

In a metaphor that he used repeatedly, Drucker likened the society of organizations to an orchestra. "Each institution has to do its own work the way each instrument in an orchestra plays only its own part. But there is also the score, the community. And only if each individual instrument contributes to the score is there music."

Peter Ferdinand Drucker was born Nov. 19, 1909, in Vienna, the son of a civil servant in the Austro-Hungarian Empire. His father, Adolph, was head of the export department in Austria's government, an important post.

Coming from a society of strict class distinctions, Drucker was ever mindful of the social ladders in various countries. In the home of a senior civil servant such as his father, Drucker would remark with irony later in life, "We never had businessmen to the house."

Drucker studied at universities in Hamburg and Frankfurt, Germany, receiving a doctorate in international law in 1931. He never used the title "doctor," often referring to himself instead as a newspaperman, which he was in the early 1930s in Frankfurt.

Drucker's 1933 essay on a leading conservative philosopher angered the new Nazi government, which banned his writing. Drucker moved to London and worked for a merchant bank.

In 1937, Drucker married Doris Schmitz, whom he had known in Frankfurt, and the couple moved to the United States, where he wrote for British newspapers, taught part time at New York's Sarah Lawrence College and published his first book, "The End of Economic Man: The Origins of Totalitarianism."

A favorable review by Winston Churchill in the Times Literary Supplement in London helped launch the book toward bestseller lists in England and the United States. It would be one of 14 books that Drucker wrote on social, economic and political questions, in addition to his books on management.

Drucker in the 1940s advocated the principle of worker responsibility, which caught on in postwar Japan before U.S. business belatedly took it up.

Drucker never made predictions but for almost two decades he called attention to the rise of what he termed "knowledge work" and "knowledge workers."

He taught business management at New York University until 1971, when he headed West to Claremont Graduate School, now Claremont Graduate University, whose business school is now called the Peter F. Drucker and Masatoshi Ito Graduate School of Management.

Drucker was 61 when he went to Claremont. He wrote the majority of his 32 books in the nearly three decades that followed.

He had an acute sense and knowledge of history. In "Management Challenges for the 21st Century," a book published in 1999, Drucker noted that a version of the high-tech entrepreneurs so lionized today appeared before in history, after the invention of the printing press in 1450.

For nearly 100 years, printers were showered with honors and riches, as technology wizards are today. But then printing came to be taken for granted, and the printers' place of honor was taken by publishers, the controllers of "content."

Drucker was precise in teaching business managers what they were to do, such as determining "the purpose of the business," as he put it, and identifying the customer of the company.

"Profit," he taught generations of business leaders, "is not a reward of doing business but a cost" because it must be paid out to those who financed the business or plowed back in to allow the business to continue.

A protean scholar, Drucker also was an expert on Japanese art, which he noted had perfected abstraction and geometric form a century before Monet and Picasso.

Drucker is survived by his wife, Doris; a son, Vincent Drucker, of San Rafael, Calif.; three daughters, Audrey Drucker of Puyallup, Wash., Cecily Drucker of San Francisco and Joan Weinstein of Chicago; and six grandchildren. Details on a pending public memorial will be available at cgu.edu
____________________________________

Flanigan is a former Times Business columnist and Mulligan is a Times staff writer. Staff writers Terril Yue Jones and Claudia Luther contributed to this article.

latimes.com