21 Dec 2017

India’s Sick Health Care

Moin Qazi 

India’s economy is soaring but its healthcare system remains an Achilles’ heel. For millions of people, the high cost of treating illness continues to undermine economic progress. This is largely on account of the abysmal and chaotic healthcare system owing to the declining budgetary healthcare support by the government. India now ranks close to the bottom of the pile in international rankings on most health indices.
With an investment of 1.3% of GDP in health services— which has remained at the same level for a decade—India ranked 187th out of 194 countries according to the World Health Organization (WHO), while accounting for a full 20% of the global healthcare burden. Comparable rates are 1.5% in Sri Lanka, 2.7% in China, and 3% in Thailand. In order to remedy this, the National Health Policy 2017 has proposed an increase in public spending on health care from the current dismal rate of 1% to a meagre 2.5% of GDP by 2020. This would still leave India well below the world average of 5.99% of GDP.
Compared to its spending on health, India spends around 2.4% of its GDP on defence. Global evidence shows that, unless a country spends at least 5-6% of its GDP on health with most of that coming from public funds, basic healthcare needs are unlikely to be met.
Illnesses are a severe risk and can shave off most of the hard-earned savings in low income communities. They are the No. One route to bankruptcy. The Ministry of Health found that a quarter of all people hospitalised were driven to penury by their hospital costs ~ not including the cost of missed work.
Universal healthcare in India remains a distant reality because healthcare still continues to rank very low on the government’s priority card. Nobody wants to talk about the elephant in the room. While facilities in Indian metros are competing with the world’s best medical centres, the scenario beyond the urban conglomerates is quite distressing. The demand and supply in healthcare services still show a significant disparity in urban and rural areas as also regional imbalances. Here’s a snapshot:
  • 30% of Indians do not have access to primary healthcare facilities.
  • About 39 million Indians fall below the poverty line each year because of healthcare expenses.
  • Around 30% of people in rural India do not visit hospitals due to fear of the expenses.
  • 47% of healthcare needs in rural India and 31% of the need in urban areas are financed by loans or the one-off sale of assets
  • About 70% of Indians spend all their income on healthcare and drugs.
  • Out-of-pocket spending on healthcare in India—which makes up 69% of the total expenditure on health—is among the highest in the world, and is much more than the rates in Thailand (25%), China (44%), and Sri Lanka (55%).
Nearly 30,000 doctors, 20,000 dentists and 45,000 nurses graduate from medical colleges across India every year. However, the doctor-to-patient ratio in India is only six for every 10,000 people. This is far below the rate in Australia (1 for every 249), the UK (5 for every 1,665) and the US (9 for every 548). The global ratio stands at 15 doctors for every 10,000 people.
The distribution of doctors is also uneven across the country, with a low ratio in states like Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand—just two doctors for every 1, 00,000 people. And there are only six hospital beds and two surgeons per lakh of population. There is one government doctor for every 10,189 people, one government hospital bed for every 2,046 people and one state-run hospital for every 90,343 people. In comparison to these dismal numbers, the US has 24.5 doctors for every 10,000 people and one hospital bed for every 345 citizens.
India has a laggardly record in updating its healthcare coverage. In per capita terms, adjusted for purchasing power, India’s public expenditure on health is $43 a year, compared to $85 in Sri Lanka, $240 in China, and $265 in Thailand. European nations spend 10 times and the US 20 times. According to the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA), the Indian government’s contribution to health insurance stands at roughly 32%, as opposed to 83.5% in the UK. India’s high rate of out-of-pocket expenses for health in stems from the fact that 76% of Indians do not have any health insurance.
The recently released National Health Accounts (NHA) for 2014-15 show that the average amount spent by the government for each citizen per year was just Rs 1,108. This is against nearly Rs 6,300 spent on each central government employee. According to the NHA, India’s total health expenditure in 2014-15 worked out to Rs 3,826 per person. Of this, people had to spend Rs 2,394 (63%) out of their own pockets. In 2014-15, the Union government’s expenditure on the National Health Mission was Rs 20,199 crore. Spread this cash injection over a population of roughly 1.25 billion and it comes out to a paltry Rs 162 per head.
The apathy of the government is reflected in a rather poor prognosis for the health system. Primary health centres (PHC) in villages are supposed to screen and feed medical cases to specialised hospitals in districts and further on to state-level specialised hospitals. PHCs do not exist in many villages (about 1 for every 20 villages), and where present are so acutely undermanned that the “access” system is broken at the first mile. As many as 18 per cent of PHCs were entirely without doctors, This impacts not only the filtering of patients but also deeply impairs prevention and early detection which is a must if costs in the whole system are to be contained. The only redeeming feature is the committed cadre of Auxiliary Nurse Midwife (ANM) at PHCs and their sub-centres and accredited social health activists (ASHAs).
Our healthcare facilities have grown significantly in terms of numbers and expertise of our professionals, but this has largely been in the private sector. The government’s failure to deliver quality care has led to a rapid expansion of private hospitals, which today account for 93 per cent of all hospitals (up from 8 per cent in 1947), 64 per cent of all beds, and 80 to 85 per cent of all doctors. But mass access continues to remain a challenge. For the private sector, affordability in Tier 3 cities and rural areas is a critical limiting factor for further expansion.
The health infrastructure is heavily skewed in favour of urban areas. Nearly 75 per cent of dispensaries, 60 per cent of hospitals and 80 per cent of doctors are located in urban centres. Doctors cater to a third of the urban population, or no more than 442 million people.
There are around 734 district hospitals across the country which provide secondary healthcare facilities to people. In addition, there are around 300 other hospitals, such as women’s hospitals at the district level. They are powerful nodes in India’s healthcare network and can be revitalized to boost the health infrastructure.
India needs to reform the public health care sector’s governance and management systems. The approach to service delivery has to be a functional referral linkage and establishing a ‘continuum of care’ across the spectrum from village to sub-health centre to primary health care, sub-district hospital and the district hospitals. The challenge remains to reform the health system and its workforce in particular, so that practitioners, administrators and others have the skills, knowledge and professional attributes to meet the emerging health-care needs of our community.
Several laudatory policies are already in place. The direction of travel, so to speak, is right but we have to accelerate the pace of the journey. For reforms to be successful we need hard-coded timelines and accountability of those tasked with the administration. It is now for the policy doctors to collaborate with the professional doctors to use their ingenuity to come up with radical solutions that can cope with the mounting challenges of healthcare.

Haitian audit report on PetroCaribe corruption deepens crisis of Moïse goverment

John Marion

In October, an audit commissioned by five members of the Haitian senate—led by Senator Evallière Beauplan—was released to the public. It detailed years of corruption and no-bid contracts through which private corporations profited from the PetroCaribe program. Those implicated include Laurent Lamothe, prime minister under former President Michel Martelly, whose handpicked successor Jovenel Moïse is now President.
PetroCaribe consists of a set of agreements between the Venezuelan government and individual Latin American and Caribbean governments, providing oil under a long-term payment plan. In Haiti’s case, the government has up to 90 days from the date of each delivery to pay Venezuela a small amount of the bill, but can pay the remainder over 25 years with only 1 percent interest. The plan is structured so that the Haitian government can take in revenues quickly by selling the oil domestically, and then have use of the money for public works projects because of the long repayment repayment schedule. The priorities are supposed to include agriculture, education, public works, sanitation and the environment.
Haiti signed its agreement with Venezuela in May 2006, two years before a series of hurricanes (Gustav, Hanna, and Ike) wracked the country in 2008. The audit—conducted by 50 professional auditors in nine teams, assisted by two engineers and a lawyer specializing in financial crimes—looked at the results of dozens of public works projects undertaken after those storms and the 2010 earthquake. The audit period was from September 2006 to September 2016, ending before Hurricane Matthew.
During that 10-year period, the Haitian parliament voted two laws declaring states of emergency, successive presidents issued three state of emergency decrees covering the whole country and 13 resolutions were passed to either begin or continue specific programs.
The first emergency law, passed on September 9 2008, suspended all legal requirements about public bidding processes, allowing the government to issue no-bid contracts “which it judges necessary.” It also eliminated the requirement that all contracts be submitted for prior review by the Superior Court for Accounting and Administrative Disputes (CSC/CA). A law passed in April 2010, after the earthquake, purported to reform these measures by allowing for after-the-fact CSC/CA review and “expeditious” public bidding processes.
Because the Haitian government controls both the sale of the imported oil and the issuance of funds for public works projects, avenues for corruption exist in both directions. The audit shows, for example, how accounts receivable for the PetroCaribe program went from 29 billion Haitian gourdes in 2015 to 43.7 billion in 2016.
Nearly one-fourth of the money (12.2 billion gourdes) owed to the Haitian government by private fuel companies in 2016 was in the hands of Sogener (Société Générale d’Energie), part of a corporate group which deals in real estate, construction, auto parts and electricity. The group’s CEO, Jean Marie Vorbe, is one of the founders of the Haitian Stock Exchange.
The audit encountered confusion because the Haitian government valued some accounts in dollars and some in gourdes, and because it used wildly inaccurate exchange rates (ranging from 70.35 and 107.35 gourdes to the dollar on 9/30/16, compared to the official rate of 65.5368). Nonetheless, the auditors valued Sogener’s outstanding debt—essentially, free money for the company to use elsewhere—at US174 million. The PetroCaribe agreement stipulates that companies are supposed to pay such debt within 30 days.
The second-in-command of the Vorbe Group, Réginald, accompanied Moïse on a trip to Europe last week, during which the president boasted to the French business federation MEDEF that Haiti is “27,750 square kilometers of opportunities to invest and make money.” He promised French investors a period of 15 tax-free years of revenues, along with the possibility of not having to pay payroll taxes.
During the audit period, Haitian government debt doubled because money due to the Venezuelan government is treated as debt, despite the program’s intended purpose of using the funds for public works. As of 9/30/16, Haiti owed Venezuela US$80,633,024.
In another case, the Dominican corporation Ingeniería ESTRELLA was given a contract of nearly US$20 million by the Martelly/Lamothe government to build an airport on Ile-à-Vache, which it was trying to develop as a resort for rich tourists. Le Nouvelliste visited the island recently and found that, although the company had pocketed more than $5.2 million in revenue, work on the project ended more than two years ago and left behind an unpaved landing strip half the size contracted for. No planes have been able to land on it.
In 2014, Lamothe gloated about such projects: “as far as the future tourists are concerned, it is worth it to know that the money that you are spending while having fun is helping someone to get out of poverty … This should be very rewarding, and that is what I call a tourism of solidarity.”
In an even more blatant crime, the government spent US$3.6 million worth of funds earmarked for earthquake relief on 100 Haitian National Police (PNH) vehicles in 2010.
The audit also found that the public electricity utility EDH (L’Electricité d’Haïti) awarded a contract worth a total of US $72.9 million to a company called ESD Engineering and Services SRL without approval from the CSC/CA, the Commission Nationale des Marchés Publics (CNMP), or the Administrative Council of the Office of Monetization of Programs of Aid and Development (BMPAD).
ESD was part of Hillary Clinton’s Caricol industrial park boondoggle in northern Haiti; its web site displays a 2012 letter from then-US Ambassador to Haiti Pamela White, thanking the company for “the fascinating visit to the Caracol Industrial Park electricity-generating site during Secretary Clinton’s recent visit.”
The release of the audit has provoked bitter infighting among Haiti’s ruling elite.
In Europe last week for the Paris climate summit and subsequent meetings with the European Investment Bank, Moïse made a public statement complaining of “political persecution” and claiming that the Haitian judiciary had recently forced him to renew the appointments of 50 corrupt judges. Haiti’s Superior Judiciary Council (Cspj) responded with a statement accusing Moïse of “putting in peril the independence of the judiciary power,” of “discrediting … the principal of the separation of powers” and of making a statement that was “incompetent and irresponsible.”
For his part, Senate President Latortue is posing as an opponent of corruption but has a sordid history. A former death squad leader implicated in drug smuggling, he was described in a US State Department cable released by Wikileaks as “the most brazenly corrupt of leading Haitian politicians.” According to Haiti Liberte, Latortue launched his first run for elected office in order to gain immunity from criminal prosecution.
Senator Beauplan is part of a group of ten senators whose terms would normally end in January, but whose absence would reduce the size of the Senate by one-third. Nineteen senators are required for a quorum, and only 20 would be available if Moïse unseats the ten in revenge for the report. No new Senate elections are scheduled until the fall of 2019.
At a time when street protests and the judiciary are calling for Moïse’s ouster, the US government is taking up the issue as well. Section III of the audit admits that it was conducted because of public anger at and press reports of corruption. At a cocktail party attended by Latortue this month, US Chargée d’Affaires Robin Diallo told Le Nouvelliste that “concrete actions are needed to have a Haiti without corruption. One has to have a program, a vision.” This scolding of Moïse is in line with the US government’s “vision” of keeping the Haitian bourgeoisie in power.

Report finds steady increase in UK child and pensioner poverty

Margot Miller

The latest “state of the nation” report by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF)—UK Poverty 2017—reveals an alarming 700,000 more people have been plunged into poverty over the past four years.
This figure comprises 400,000 more children, and a rise of 300,000 pensioners, compared with 2012-13. The JRF concludes that the figures represent the first sustained increase in child and pensioner poverty in 20 years, and a trend that is likely to continue. These groups had experienced a marginal improvement in previous years.
Overall there are 14 million people living in poverty in the UK today—one in five of the population—including eight million working age adults, four million children and 1.9 million pensioners.
Relative poverty in the UK is defined as living at or below 60 percent of the median income.
This report follows on the heels of an Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) report, predicting the total number of UK children in poverty would rise to 5.2 million by 2022, and a report by the Resolution Foundation that the UK faces the longest decline in living standards for 60 years.
As terrible as these figures are, they don’t tell the whole story. An increasing number of adults and even entire families are living in destitution in the UK today. The JRF report explains that destitution means that over any month, “people have: slept rough, had one or no meals a day for two or more days, been unable to heat or to light their home for five or more days, gone without weather-appropriate clothes or gone without basic toiletries.”
According to research, 1,252,000 people—including 312,000 children—were destitute at some point in 2015. The vast majority were born in the UK. This is the state of the nation in one of the richest capitalist countries in the world!
The report points out that the rise in inflation following last June’s Brexit vote has had a greater impact on the poor. It notes, “people on low incomes have ... experienced consistently higher inflation than those with higher incomes.” This is because they spend proportionally more on food and fuel rather than luxury goods, and fuel prices have increased faster than the overall rate of inflation.
The poorest fifth of the population are also hit with rising housing costs in the rental market, whether they rent from the local council or privately. Forty-seven percent now spend a third of their income on housing—up from 39 percent in 1994/95.
The report explains that this is due to rising rents in the private and social sector, more people being driven to rent privately due to the lack of social housing, and housing benefit restrictions.
Underlining the chronic shortage of affordable housing, JRF Chief Executive Campbell Robb criticised the pledge made by the Theresa May government at the Conservative Party conference to address this issue by building more, cheaper council homes. He said, “[I]t later emerged this would amount to 5,000 [new council houses] a year. What we needed was more to the tune of 80,000 a year.”
After housing, the biggest expense for families is childcare, which has risen faster than inflation.
Growing up in poverty has an overall detrimental effect on all aspects of life, says the JRF. Children in poor families continue to perform less well than their better-off contemporaries, despite decades of government initiatives to “raise standards” through rigorous testing regimes.
The poorest fifth of the population also experience worse health outcomes than those with higher incomes. If a person is disabled, they are more likely to be living in poverty.
There is a strong link between mental illness and poverty—twice the number in the poorest fifth of the population suffer from depression or anxiety, compared to the richest two fifths. Six in 10 of the poorest fifth of households have no savings, while one in 10 report having problem debt—major stress precipitators of mental ill health.
Poverty even affects relationships. According to the evidence, couples living in poverty are more likely to separate than their better-off counterparts.
Pensioner poverty, which saw a drop from 1995 to 2013 from 29 percent to 13 percent, is once again on the rise, back up to 16 percent as of 2015/16.
Noting that falling official unemployment rates have not alleviated rising poverty, the report explains this is due to the mushrooming of low-paid, casual, zero hours and contract jobs.
The JRF report concludes that the “prospects for solving UK poverty are worrying.”
The framework for a low-wage economy was put in place by the Blair Labour government, with its welfare-to-work programme, introduced in 1997 to end the so-called “dependency culture.” Labour also introduced a low minimum wage rate in 1999, which was set at just £3.60 per hour (£3.00 for 18- to 21-year-olds).
In 2003, Labour introduced tax credits to subsidise low wages, in effect a subsidy for employers. Research by Citizens UK found that in 2015 taxpayers paid £11 billion topping up the low pay levels set by companies.
In 2009, Labour’s Welfare Reform Act introduced work capability tests to force the sick and disabled into low paid work.
The JRF report points out that rising employment is “no longer leading to lower poverty” because “[c]hanges to benefits and tax credits for working age families are reducing incomes of many of those on low incomes ... Poverty in the UK today is fairly evenly split between workless households and those in work.”
The Conservatives’ Welfare Reform Act 2012 further eroded the incomes of the poorest with the introduction of the hated “bedroom tax,” which financially penalises social housing tenants with more than one bedroom through reductions in their Housing Benefit.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies estimates that the present roll-out of Universal Credit—a new benefit which replaces six other in-work benefits—will lead to 2.1 million families losing £1,600 a year, while more than a million out-of-work families will lose on average £2,300. Particularly hard hit will be families with more than two children.
As a result of the Child Poverty Act 2010, the Social Mobility Commission was set up by the Tories as a cynical gesture to appease concern about entrenched child poverty in the UK. Alan Milburn, an ex-Labour cabinet member who was the head of the government’s four-strong Social Mobility team recently resigned, adding further problems to May’s crisis-ridden government. In his letter to May, Milburn warned that “the growing sense that we have become a ‘them’ and ‘us’ society is deeply corrosive of our cohesion as a nation.”
Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn reacted to the JRF report by saying, “These figures shame the Tories.” There was no mention from Milburn or Corbyn on Labour’s role in laying the basis for the escalation of poverty. Moreover, Corbyn and his Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell are on record instructing Labour-run local authorities to continue to impose austerity cuts and not set “illegal” budgets, further reducing living standards.
The role of the unions in facilitating every demand of corporations for job losses, wage cuts and speed-up has been integral to Britain becoming a low wage economy. Trades Union Congress leader Frances O’Grady reiterated Labour’s call for the minimum wage to rise to £10 an hour. However, this would hardly make a difference. For a couple with two children below 14 years and one adult working, this minimum wage would leave the family below the poverty threshold, determined at £401 a week.
While JRF Chief Campbell Rob expressed disquiet that “we are at a turning point in our fight against poverty,” he suggested a possible policy reversal bound up with government “political choices.” The reality is that the exponential rise in wealth of the richest in society is premised on their political representatives in government continuing to impose policies that deepen the immiseration of the working class.

Australian cabinet reshuffle highlights underlying political turmoil

Mike Head

Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull yesterday unveiled an end-of-the-year restructuring of his ministry, pointing to the increasing pressure on his Liberal-National Coalition government on both the geo-strategic and economic fronts.
Having barely survived the past 18 months, since being reduced to a one-seat parliamentary majority at the July 2016 double dissolution election, the government is desperately attempting to shore up its position.
The Coalition faces ongoing political uncertainty and the possibility of being forced into an early election during 2018. There is the continuing prospect of members of parliament, both government and opposition, being disqualified on the basis of a nationalist purge of MPs entitled to dual citizenship.
Turnbull has created three new super-ministries that point to the agenda of war preparations, social spending cuts and attacks on working conditions that the government intends to pursue.
Already deeply unpopular and facing potential electoral oblivion at the next federal election, the government is also seeking to fend off internal rifts. Turnbull enhanced the powers of the most right-wing, socially conservative members of the cabinet, underscoring his reliance on these layers.
Immigration and Border Protection Minister Peter Dutton, who has spearheaded the government’s anti-refugee policies, becomes Home Affairs Minister. In effect, he will be a “national security” supremo in charge of the country’s main intelligence and immigration agencies. He will also supervise two more junior ministers overseeing the Australian Federal Police (AFP), “cyber security” and citizenship laws.
As well as the AFP, the new Home Affairs super-ministry covers the domestic spy agency, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO), the Australian Border Force, the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission and the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre. Over the past decade and a half, these agencies have been handed greater resources and far-reaching powers of surveillance, compulsory questioning and detention.
Finance Minister Mathias Cormann has been handed extra authority as minister of state and leader of the government in the Senate. Together with Treasurer Scott Morrison, another key right-wing figure, Cormann will supervise the work of a team of ministers tasked with inflicting further budget cuts, particularly in welfare, health and education, where billions of dollars have already been slashed in successive budgets over the past decade.
Workplace Relations Minister Michaelia Cash takes charge of a new overarching “jobs and innovation” portfolio and gains a position on cabinet’s expenditure review committee, commonly referred to as the “razor gang”. Together with several junior ministers, Cash’s brief is to step up the assault on full-time jobs, wages, penalty rates and other basic working conditions.
These three super-ministries are in addition to one other, covering the military, which was established last year after the government narrowly survived the 2016 election. Two senior ministers, Defence Minister Marise Payne and Defence Industry Minister Christopher Pyne, head a group of ministers focussed on a multi-billion dollar expansion of the armed forces.
To make way for Dutton’s expanded powers, Attorney-General George Brandis, who was in charge of ASIO, has been handed the diplomatic post of high commissioner to Britain. The new attorney-general, with reduced powers, will be another social conservative, Christian Porter.
A parallel shift occurred within the rural-based National Party, which retained five cabinet posts under its coalition agreement with Turnbull’s Liberal Party. National Party leader, Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce, dumped Infrastructure and Transport Minister Darren Chester and a junior minister, Keith Pitt, to allow two new members of parliament from the state of Queensland to be elevated straight into the cabinet.
Chester apparently earned the ire of social conservatives by supporting the recognition of same sex marriages, and by backing a fellow MP from the state of Victoria, Bridget McKenzie, to become deputy National Party leader.
The reshuffle has triggered rifts, with Pitt and others reportedly threatening to split away from the Joyce-led National Party. The threat could bust apart a formation that has been a linchpin of the Coalition and the two-party parliamentary system since the formation of the Country Party, the Nationals’ forerunner, in 1920. An editorial in today’s Australian denounced the dissidents, urging them not to “destabilise” the Coalition.
The same editorial backed Turnbull’s ministerial restructuring, saying: “The most important feature of the reshuffle announced by Malcolm Turnbull is that it has elevated competent, conservative ministers into super portfolios where they will oversee the government’s main agenda for next year: job creation, security and tax cuts.”
“Job creation” means accelerating the corporate destruction of permanent jobs, forcing growing numbers of workers into poorly-paid, insecure casual or part-time employment, and further driving down average wage levels, which have already fallen in real terms for the past four years.
“Security” means ramping up the resources and powers of the intelligence, police and military apparatus, both for looming military conflicts and to deal with the heightened social and political unrest. It also means stepping up the use of nationalism and xenophobia, directed against refugees, immigrants and alleged “foreign influence,” to divert social tensions outward.
“Tax cuts” means matching the Trump administration in providing historic tax breaks for the corporate elite in order to boost profits. This would mean going far beyond the $50 billion cut to company taxes over the next decade that the Coalition is already seeking to deliver to the financial markets.
This agenda underscores the intense pressure being placed on the Australian political establishment by US President Donald Trump’s “America First” program.
In today’s Australian, Treasurer Morrison declared that, unless matched by Australia, Trump’s tax cuts would drain billions of dollars in investment from the country. Based on an International Monetary Fund report, Morrison said capital outflow from Australia caused by the US tax cuts, combined with lower rates in Germany and France, would reduce Australia’s gross domestic product by 1 percent over the next decade.
At the same time, the escalating US military threats against North Korea, which are bound up with Washington’s open drive toward a confrontation with China, have seen both the Coalition government and the opposition Labor Party commit themselves to backing the US in any conflict. Successive governments have aligned themselves ever-more behind the US alliance, despite China being Australia’s largest export market.
The rising danger of war compounds the deepening social and class tensions wracking the government and the political establishment as a whole. Turnbull’s reshuffle is a warning that its response will be to escalate the offensive against social and democratic rights of the working class.

Polls shows mass opposition to net neutrality repeal

Kevin Reed

In the week since the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted to overturn net neutrality—against overwhelming public opposition—the political motivation for the deregulation of the broadband internet service providers (ISPs) is becoming clearer.
An opinion poll conducted by the University of Maryland on the eve of the FCC decision showed that 83 percent of Americans opposed repealing net neutrality. Poll respondents rejected the arguments of FCC Chairman Ajit Pai and, according to the director of the school’s Program for Public Consultation Steve Kull, American public opinion is “blowing in the opposite direction” from government policy.
The Maryland poll results showed an increase in support for net neutrality over the past several months with surveys over the summer and fall showing opposition to the repeal plan at around 75 percent. In a Mozilla-sponsored poll last May, for example, three-quarters of the population expressed no confidence that either the Trump administration or Congress would defend their right to internet access.
Net neutrality is the principle that the owners of the cable and wireless infrastructure of the internet must treat all information and data equally and deliver it to the public without regard to content or source. In 2015, the FCC voted to formalize net neutrality and blocked the ISPs from implementing paid prioritization, “throttling” download speeds and alternately restricting or promoting web sites that their customers access.
The strength of public support for a genuinely free and open internet was illustrated in a New York Times article entitled “In Protests of Net Neutrality Repeal, Teenage Voices Stood Out.” The Times reported that protests were organized by young people in Sioux Falls, South Dakota and Keene, New Hampshire and a group of students drove from Centerville, Maryland to Washington, DC to protest the end of net neutrality.
The Times also cited an Associated Press study that showed 94 percent of 13- to 17-year-olds use social media and 98 percent of children through age eight access a mobile device at home, up from 52 percent in 2011.
As with the present “Tax Cut and Jobs Act” being signed into law by President Trump, the repeal of net neutrality was accompanied by an unprecedented level of hypocrisy and lying. As is apparent to everyone, the end of net neutrality—which goes officially into effect within several weeks—was implemented to further the interests of the giant telecom corporations in blatant disregard for the public interest.
That the telecoms are moving to capitalize on the net neutrality overthrow was revealed in a query by the Associated Press of the top seven ISPs. Among those asked—Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, Charter, Cox, Sprint and T-Mobile—none of them were willing to rule out the possibility of paid prioritization or the creation of internet “fast lanes.” Paid prioritization is a practice whereby content providers such as YouTube or Netflix must pay the ISPs to make faster access available to consumers.
The response of the US Congress to the FCC decision has shed further light on the political impulse and deception behind ending the 2015 regulations. Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn), chair of the House Energy Subcommittee on Communications and Technology and outspoken advocate of FCC Chairman Pai, stepped forward on Tuesday with a bill called the “Open Internet Preservation Act” that will prevent efforts by state and local governments to defend net neutrality. Blackburn’s bill officially legalizes the creation of internet “fast lanes.”
One year ago, Blackburn—who has accepted major campaign contributions from the telecom industry—distinguished herself by calling on the ISPs to censor internet content. During a CNN interview to discuss the 2016 elections, Blackburn said, “If anyone is putting fake news out there, the ISPs have the obligation to, in some way, get that off the web. And maybe it’s time for these information systems to look to have some type of news editor doing some vetting on that.”
Meanwhile, a group of Congressional Democrats headed by Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) have announced a “pledge” to introduce legislation to invalidate the FCC’s net neutrality decision under the terms of the Congressional Review Act. According to the rules of the act, Congress has 60 days to block the agency’s decision. No one is taking this charade seriously, since it requires all Democrats and some Republicans to move it forward.
The dismantling of net neutrality is an attack on the basic democratic rights of the working class. No confidence can be placed in Congress or the US courts to defend the right to free and open access to online news and information. Genuine freedom of expression on the internet can only be guaranteed through public ownership of the hardware and software of the internet—as a critical part of the infrastructure of society like electricity, gas and water. The struggle to defend the most basic democratic rights is thus inseparably bound up with the fight for socialism.

South Korean and Chinese leaders meet over North Korea, economic ties

Ben McGrath

South Korean President Moon Jae-in concluded a four-day trip to China on Saturday, his first since becoming president in May. He met with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping and other senior officials to discuss North Korea and attempt to mend the relationship between Seoul and Beijing.
Meeting with Xi last Thursday, Moon called for a “new start” in South Korean-Chinese relations while blaming North Korea for the rapidly rising tensions in the region. “I hope we will reaffirm our countries’ joint stance to peacefully resolve the North Korean nuclear problem that threatens peace and security not only in Northeast Asia but the entire world, and discuss specific ways to cooperate,” Moon told Xi.
Relations between Seoul and Beijing soured quickly in July 2016 when the previous South Korean administration of Park Geun-hye agreed to the deployment of an American Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) battery. Ostensibly aimed at protecting the South from a North Korean missile attack, THAAD is in fact an integral part of Washington’s war plans against China. The battery utilizes a radar system that can peer far into Chinese territory and obtain intelligence that would be otherwise unavailable.
“China-South Korea relations experienced a setback due to the reason we all know,” said Xi, who avoided using the term THAAD during the public portion of the summit. “I am confident the president’s [Moon’s] visit will be an important opportunity for us to improve our relationship by paving a better way based on mutual respect and trust.”
Before the summit began, Seoul and Beijing had agreed not to release a joint statement—a reflection of continuing tensions. However, the two presidents did agree to four basic principles: war on the Korean Peninsula is unacceptable; dialogue and negotiations for dealing with North Korea; denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula; and improved inter-Korean relations.
The reality is, however, that neither Moon nor Xi has any influence over Washington’s militaristic stance towards North Korea. The Trump administration in particular faces a worsening political crisis that encourages it to launch a catastrophic war in the desperate attempt to deflect acute internal tensions outwards.
A South Korean presidential official sought to assuage fears about conflict. “The military option is meant to shore up diplomatic and peaceful means. The US is officially in favor of a peaceful, diplomatic resolution, and the four principles agreed upon with China are not that different from the US’s position,” the official claimed.
In fact, Trump has threatened to “totally destroy” North Korea and ruled out any talks to end the confrontation unless Pyongyang capitulates to the US demand. South Korea is closely integrated into the US war plans.
This does not mean Seoul blindly follows Washington ignoring its own interests, which were at the heart of Moon’s trip. South Korean diplomatic sources quoted in Joongang Ilbo, for example, stated that the US wanted Moon to pressure Xi to impose an oil embargo on North Korea. This did not occur.
For Moon, the trip was aimed at convincing China to end its punitive economic measures against South Korea after Seoul’s decision to allow the US to deploy a THAAD battery. The sanctions caused a sharp decline in sales for South Korean companies doing business in China. Tourism also took a hit when Beijing banned group travel packages to South Korea, resulting in lost revenue of as much as $15.9 billion.
Beijing and Seoul had already agreed on October 31 to improve relations so long as South Korea accepted China’s so-called “three no’s:” No new THAAD deployments, no participation in a US missile defense system, and no trilateral military alliance with the US and Japan.
During Moon’s trip, the two countries agreed to begin talks on adding service industries to their free trade agreement that took effect in December 2015. The South Korean president also met with Chinese Premier Li Keqiang last Friday and both pledged to reopen communication channels on trade and to resume bilateral economic projects.
For its part, Beijing is attempting to undermine US efforts to strengthen ties with South Korea and throughout Asia against China. Christopher Hill, a former US ambassador to South Korea, commented: “The hope is that South Korea can play the kind of role that the [UK] has played in European politics, that is, South Korea can somehow deliver—in the Chinese view—a more reasonable US [foreign] policy.”
China pressed Moon to stand by the “three no’s,” which have already been called into question by Washington. US National Security Advisor H. R. McMaster in early November dismissed the “three no’s” out of hand. Moon’s office stated around the same time: “The principle of the ‘three no’s’ is not a promise we made to China, but more of a statement that this has been our position thus far.”
South Korea, Japan, and the US conducted joint war games this month aimed at preparing for a massive bombing campaign against North Korea. Despite Moon’s criticisms of Japanese imperialism in China, his administration has moved to thaw relations with Tokyo that were damaged during the previous Park government.
Seoul is conducting a precarious balancing act between Washington and Beijing as the US ramps up the threats of war against North Korea. Moon and his ruling Democratic Party of Korea may want better economic relations with China, but his government is committed to the US military alliance and will fall into line with Washington’s war drive against North Korea.

20 Dec 2017

American University Cairo (AUC) African Graduate Fellowships for Masters Students in Africa 2018/2019

Application Deadline: 1st February, 2018
Offered annually? Yes
Eligible Countries: African countries except Egypt
To be taken at (country): Egypt
Type: Masters, Fellowship
Eligibility: 
  • Non-Egyptian African nationals
  • Bachelor of Arts or Bachelor of Science degree with a minimum overall rating of very good, an overall grade point average of 3.0 on a 4.0 scale, or the equivalent
  • Satisfy AUC graduate admissions requirements, including submission of AUC graduate application, additional documents and any required test scores (GMAT for MBA applicants, GRE for economics, economics in international development, and GRE or GMAT for the finance program applicants)
  • Submit an International TOEFL iBT exam score or an IELTS exam score meeting the cut-off scores for AUC graduate admissions.
  • To retain the fellowship, the recipient must maintain a GPA of 3.2 or above.
Number of Awardees: Not specified
Value of Scholarship: 
  • Tuition fees coverage
  • Monthly stipend
  • Student services and activities fee
  • Medical service and health insurance fees
  • A monthly housing allowance for non-residents of Cairo or accommodation in University Residences at AUC New Cairo
  • In support of their professional training, fellows are assigned 12 hours per week of related academic or administrative work
Duration of Scholarship: Fellowships are awarded for two academic years and the intervening summer session.
How to Apply: 
  • Applications and all supporting documents should be submitted by February 1.
  • Selection is made in April, fellowships begin the following September.
Award Provider: AUC Cairo

DStv Eutelsat Award for African Secondary School Students with Interest in Technology (Fully-funded to Paris, France) 2018

Application Deadline: 12th February 2018
Eligible Countries: Awards are open to all countries in Africa where MultiChoice Africa maintains operations.
To be taken at (country): Paris, France
About the Award: The DStv Eutelsat Star Awards are calling all science and technology fans between 14 and 19 to be inspired to write a creative essay or design a poster based on the following topic: “Take yourself into the future as a scientist, tasked with designing a new-age satellite that will help improve the lives of Africans. Tell us what you would call your satellite and describe the different functions and roles that it would play in the Africa of the future.”
MultiChoice Africa and Eutelsat are convinced by the power of science and technology education to encourage young minds to positively change their world. Now in its 6 th year, their joint initiative, the DStv Eutelsat Star Awards, inspires innovative thinking among a new African generation. This pan-African collaboration has created a meaningful engagement with students, the academic community and the scientific world. Since the start of the DStv Eutelsat Star Awards competition in 2011, over 5,000 students have taken part in this unique competition.

TOPIC

It’s sixty years since the first satellite Sputnik was launched, broadcasting a unique and easily captured ‘beep, beep, beep’ signal.
Looking back at this historic moment, write an essay or design a poster depicting how satellites have launched humankind into the 21st century and acted as a unifier.
Offered Since: 2011
Type: Contest
Eligibility: 
  • The Awards are open to students between 14 and 19 years of age in secondary, high or combined schools anywhere in Africa where MultiChoice operates.
  • Entries can be submitted in English, French or Portuguese.
Selection Criteria:  Entries will be judged on the basis of high-standard criteria of accuracy, structure, language, creativity, innovation and referencing.
Criteria for Essay:
  • Language: English, French or Portuguese
  • Length: 1200 – 1400 words
  • Must be typed in Arial 12, 1.5 spacing and pages to be numbered or it must be handwritten, but clearly legible
  • Pages must be numbered
  • Only hardcopy entries will be accepted.
  • Entries may include illustrations, graphics, or diagrams
  • References (all sources consulted during the preparation of the entry)
Criteria for Poster:
  • Design a creative poster by illustrating an idea on the competition topic. The poster must be accompanied by a creative explanation/summary in the following format:
    • Title
    • Summary idea/concept
    • Explanation of idea
    • References (all sources consulted during the preparation of the entry)
  • Language: English, French or Portuguese
Number of Awardees: 4: 1 winner and 3 Runners-up
Value of Award: The overall essay winner will be eligible for a once in a lifetime trip for two to Paris, France to visit Eutelsat satellite facilities, with the essay winner also traveling to see a rocket launch into space. Runners-up will win a trip to South Africa to explore several sites as guests of MultiChoice Africa. The schools attended by the four overall winners also receive a DStv installation, including a dish, TV, decoder and free access to the DStv Education Bouquet.
How to Apply: For an entry form – which will tell you everything you need to know – visit your nearest MultiChoice Office or download it here. South African entrants can collect a copy from MultiChoice Africa, 251 Oak Avenue in Randburg, Johannesburg.
Entries must be:
  • Deposited: in the entry box at MultiChoice Africa country or regional offices (African countries) OR for South Africa at the MultiChoice Africa Building, 251 Oak Avenue in Randburg, Johannesburg (South Africa only).
  • Posted: 
    • To MultiChoice offices listed on the entry form. For South African entries only : To MultiChoice Africa, 251 Oak Avenue in Randburg, Johannesburg. Attention: Lebogang Ramothata
    • All entries must be accompanied by an entry form and in the case of posters an entry form and creative summary.
    • For queries you may email your question to: Dstvstarawards@multichoice.co.za or phone your nearest MultiChoice Office. In the case of South Africa, please contact Mahlatse Sithole on 011 781 9950
Award Provider: MultiChoice Africa Limited (DStv) and Eutelsat
Important Notes: Only entries submitted on the official entry form will be eligible. The winners will be announced at an awards ceremony in February 2017.

Bank of America/Vital Voices Global Ambassadors Program for Women Entrepreneurs (Fully-funded to New York, USA) 2018

Application Deadline: 12th January 2018
Eligible Countries: International
To Be Taken At (Country): New York, USA
About the Award: The program is a partnership between Vital Voices, a leading NGO in women’s leadership and development and Bank of America, based on a shared belief in the need to invest in women who are creating economic and social progress around the world.

Type: Entrepreneurship
Eligibility: 
  • A woman entrepreneur who owns a majority stake in a qualifying business, is the key decision maker in the business and manages it on a day-to-day basis
  • A minimum of 10-20 years of experience in a professional setting.
  • The applicant must have worked in her existing organization / enterprise for at least 5-7 years
  • Proficient in English
  • Demonstrate a commitment to the core principles of the “Vital Voices’ Leadership Model” –   Innovative, collaborative, and driven by a clear sense of mission; engaged in their communities and are committed to advancing the status of women and girls. 
  • Demonstrate high-potential for leadership and a desire to take on leadership roles both within and outside their companies
Selection Criteria: 
  • For profit or social entrepreneur  (for this program, a social enterprise is a for-profit business with a social mission)
  • Should have a minimum annual revenue of at least US$ 250,000 and a maximum annual revenue of US$ 10 million
  • The United States and all other countries (please note that for the US-based mentees, preference will be given to applicants from the New York metropolitan area)
Number of Awards: 10-12 applicants will be chosen to participate and notified in early February, 2018.
Value of Award: All travel, meals and accommodation costs for mentees participating in this program are covered in full by the Global Ambassadors Program
  • One week in-person training program in New York City including:
    • Strategic Planning for Business Growth
    • Human Resource Management
    • Communications workshops including Branding & Marketing, Social Media and Public Speaking
    • Financial Management and Access to Capital
  • A 1:1 mentoring relationship with an established woman executive.  Previous mentors include: Susan Chambers, Executive Vice President, Global People Division Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.; Deborah Dugan, Chief Executive Officer, RED and Donna Langley, Chairman, Universal Pictures.
  • Inclusion in the Vital Voices network of more than 15,000 women from 181 countries and territories around the world.
  • Opportunity for cross-cultural exchange with women from around the globe.
  • Participation in a half-day Global Forum, a thought leadership event and networking opportunity to engage with invited guests including business and community leaders.
  • Opportunities for your business/organization to be profiled via digital channels, social media and in earned media coverage.
  • On-going support and mentorship, specific to your needs,  through the Global Ambassadors Program for 1+ year
How to Apply: Applicants are required to:
  • Complete and submit this online Application Questionnaire
  • Submit a two-minute video  (described in the last section of this application)
This online application process may take up to 1 hour to complete. Applications should be submitted by Friday 12th January 2018. Any incomplete applications, or any applications received after Friday 12th January 2018 will not be considered. Applications submitted without the 2 minute video will not be considered.
Award Providers: Vital Voices, Bank of America.

Tax Cuts, Growth and Debt

Dean Baker

It now appears likely that the Republicans will get their tax cuts through Congress and signed by President Trump. This will be a political accomplishment for congressional Republicans who feel a need to deliver a tax cut to their wealthy campaign contributors. Its economic impact is far less clear.
The line from the Republicans is that the tax cut, most of which takes the form of a reduction in the corporate income tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent, will lead to a huge burst of investment. The logic is that lower tax rates will increase the after‐tax return on capital, causing foreign investment to flood into the country.
This investment will mean more economic growth, and most importantly, higher productivity, which will be passed on to workers in the form of higher wages. President Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers predicts that the gain in wages for an average worker can be as much as $4,000 a year.
There are good reasons for believing that nothing like this will occur. There is a great deal of evidence that investment is not especially responsive to changes in profit rates. For example, there has been a large increase in the after‐tax profit rate over the last fifteen years as a result of a huge redistribution from wages to profits. In spite of this rise in the profit rate, investment has been relatively lackluster over this period.
We did also try this experiment before. In 1986, the corporate income tax rate was lowered from 46 percent to 35 percent. Rather than prompting a flood of new investment, it actually fell for the next two years. It’s not plausible that the tax cut caused this drop, but it is clear that we didn’t get any big burst in investment three decades ago. Why would we expect anything different this time around?
If the story the Republicans are telling about the tax cut doesn’t make much sense, the deficit fears pushed by the Democrats also don’t deserve to be taken seriously. According to the projections from the Congressional Budget Office, the tax plan will add a bit more than $1 trillion to the debt over the next decade.
This is being touted as a huge burden that our children will have to bear. That doesn’t add up. If we assume an average interest rate on government debt of 3.0 percent, this comes to an annual interest burden of $30 billion. In a decade, GDP will be over $25 trillion. This means the additional interest burden from this tax plan will be a bit more than 0.1 percent of GDP.
By comparison, every day of the week the government is granting patent and copyright monopolies that allow the holders to charge prices that are far more than the free market price. This is most notable in the case of prescription drugs where the patent‐protected price can easily be 100 times the free market price.
In the case of prescription drugs alone, government granted patent monopolies add around $370 billion a year to the price of drugs, almost 2.0 percent of GDP. The total cost when we add in sectors like medical equipment, software, and entertainment is certainly at least two or three times as large. It makes no sense to complain about an interest burden of a bit more than 0.1 percent of GDP, while completely ignoring burdens from patent and copyright monopolies that can be 40 or 50 times as large.
While neither the story of an economic boom or economic disaster makes sense, this tax bill is still very bad news. First and foremost, even if deficits are not an economic problem, they are a political problem.
Promoting fear of deficits is one of the major industries in Washington. The larger deficits created by the tax cut will be used as a reason to cut a wide range of social welfare programs, such as Social Security and Medicare. Some of these cuts are actually mandated under current law.
The bill also includes a major hit to the Affordable Care Act, ending the mandate that people have insurance. This is estimated to leave 14 million more people without health care insurance.
In addition, the law was structured to hit more liberal states in every way imaginable. The most important item is ending the deduction for state and local income taxes. This will make it more difficult for relatively liberal states, like California and New York, to fund social services.
The bill also creates huge new opportunities for gaming the tax code. It allows anyone who gets their income through a “pass‐through” corporation to pay 23 percent less in taxes.
Pass‐through corporations are corporations that enjoy the privilege of corporate status but pay zero income tax. This was already hard to justify. If you get the privileges of corporate status, why shouldn’t you be taxed like a corporation?
But the new tax bill makes the inequity enormously worse, giving people who own pass‐through corporations 23 percent off their tax bill. Look for a boom in the creation of pass‐through corporations.
The bottom line is that this tax bill is about giving more money to the richest people in the country. These are the people who have received the bulk of the gains from the last four decades of economic growth. Now the Republicans are determined to give them even more.