A lil' fear

A bubble - however little we may know about its very intrisic and chemical composition - certainly bursts. It is first born, develops itself with the help of our fellow men (and their respective lungs), and then explodes, showing us something that we should already know, that is, that they are empty on the inside.

No one knows for sure what caused the Great Depression. Some say that it was because of the stock market crash, some argued that a draught in Mississipi had something to do with it. We could go to a many different economists and get as many different answers as there are to deep philosophical questions such as "Why did the chicken cross the road?" What we might be able to say, and - have - an answer in common from all of those economists might be the lack of regulation and a contraction of the money supply by the US Federal Reserve. Right after the Great Depression, banks were tightly regulated, and both parties were happy, the free marketeers and the 'regulatories'. However, as the years passed and the country got richer and richer, the leashes were let loose, and any bubble, monetary bubbles, I say, that were accompanied by unending equations to justify them, weren't taken too seriously. Internet, Real State, War, and so forth. And History rhymed, as Mark Twain told us.

In the XIX century, Great Britain was the great superpower, and many, like us, believed that their empire would last forever. To their disdain, the U.S. rose as the great and massive power of comsumption that we know today. Sooner than we think, the unfortunate might happen, and the batoon could be easily passed to China, not as a power of consumption, but as a power of production, giving them not only more stability, but also longevity.

Let there be light.

A humble homage

"We need to be contemporary, not only survivors, of our own selves" -- Murilo Mendes.


A sometimes obscure, sometimes humble, at all times admired J. G. Merquior, perhaps one of the greatest intellectuals of the XX century. Born in Brazil, under the sign of Taurus, in April 22 of 1941, he was robust in his intellect, powerful in his criticism, and humane as a person. As a diplomat, he served in Paris (1966), Bonn (1973), London(1975/79), and Montevideu (1980/82). Academically, he possessed a degree in Law, two doctorates from the London School of Economics, and Sorbonne, in letters, and post-studies from the Rio Branco Institute.
Acclaimed wherever he went, he made connections with some of the most respected intellectuals of his time. Octavio Paz, the notable poet, and also a good friend, gave a few lectures together with Merquior entitled "The XX Century: The Experience of Liberty". Powerful and touchy lectures, I must say, that would leave his audience asking for more, however recognizing that all that was said, was all that had to be said. A paradox, with a sense of completeness and nakedness.

J. G. Merquior is mostly known for his treatise on Focault, and a prodigious thesis on Rosseau and Weber, which would render him that which he had never asked for: Fame. Always obscure, he more than often wrote articles for newspapers in pieaces of napkins at airports in the midst of his travels. His intinerary which was very much open, starting with his efforts to understand the literary phenomena which starts with its internal reason. In Frankfurt, he wrote on the Marcuse society, Adorno and Benjamin. In Paris, he found the structuralism of its days, and wrote a not-so-structuralist thesis on the aesthetics of Levi-Strauss. In England, he established a diologue, and problably a pact with their popperian rationalism. And so went he, in his journey, progressively advancing in his wide comprehension of books, and lines, and life.

After receiving the news about the desease that would take him, he went,as if nothing had happened, to his favorite place, his publishing company. There he verified articles for publication, gave suggestions for the cover of the book that had given him so much hapiness, knowing that he's never live to see it published. He said farewell without anyone knowing that he would, soon, go to the other sphere of time.

An except from the Discourse on the Method

"My third maxim was to endeavor always to conquer myself rather than fortune, and change my desires rather than the order of the world, and in general, accustom myself to the persuasion that, except our own thoughts, there is nothing absolutely in our power; so that when we have done our best in things external to us, all wherein we fail of success is to be held, as regards us, absolutely impossible: and this single principle seemed to me sufficient to prevent me from desiring for the future anything which I could not obtain, and thus render me contented; for since our will naturally seeks those objects alone which the understanding represents as in some way possible of attainment, it is plain, that if we consider all external goods as equally beyond our power, we shall no more regret the absence of such goods as seem due to our birth, when deprived of them without any fault of ours, than our not possessing the kingdoms of China or Mexico, and thus making, so to speak, a virtue of necessity, we shall no more desire health in disease, or freedom in imprisonment, than we now do bodies incorruptible as diamonds, or the wings of birds to fly with. But I confess there is need of prolonged discipline and frequently repeated meditation to accustom the mind to view all objects in this light; and I believe that in this chiefly consisted the secret of the power of such philosophers as in former times were enabled to rise superior to the influence of fortune, and, amid suffering and poverty, enjoy a happiness which their gods might have envied. For, occupied incessantly with the consideration of the limits prescribed to their power by nature, they became so entirely convinced that nothing was at their disposal except their own thoughts, that this conviction was of itself sufficient to prevent their entertaining any desire of other objects; and over their thoughts they acquired a sway so absolute, that they had some ground on this account for esteeming themselves more rich and more powerful, more free and more happy, than other men who, whatever be the favors heaped on them by nature and fortune, if destitute of this philosophy, can never command the realization of all their desires.

"Rene Descartes, "Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting the Reason, and Seeking Truth in the Sciences."

The US will shine, says Nobel Laureate

Despite being the epicenter of the current world crisis, considered by many the biggest since the Great Depression, the USA shall get out of the economic turbulence before Europe, defended economist Gary Becker, economics Nobel Prize laureate in 1992.

For Becker, the main reason for this lies in the economic model adopted by these countries. The American, more liberal, and the European, with more public interference."It is true that the capital markets in the US will not behave well, but the flexibility in the US economy will bring us out of this crisis faster than in other countries, like France and Germany," argues Becker, and goes further, "The US will still be the main global economy."

The recovery of the US, for Becker, will start slowly in this year's fourth trimester and will pick up throughout 2010. A opinion that is seen as full of optimism by Becker himself. Usually in this sector predictions of respected analysts are more somber.

The Nobel laureate relies on four main forces, as known as METT: Markets, Education, Technology and Commerce. He cites that the combination of those is essential. "Take away one of them and you have problems. With them all together, you have a diamond."

There are still bad problems facing stabilization, admits Becker. "I believe that we will have a little bit on inflation. The quantity of resources injected by the FED in the economy was huge. "But still, I see a brilliant future and a recuperation that won't take long, like a long stagnation that some think."

The secret of success is to know how to listen

Listen, listen and (one more time) listen. It is there that lies the secret of success and good tenure. The opinion belongs to Tom Peters, specialist and author of In Search of Excellence. "Companies don't do bad because they don't dominate equations, but simply because they don't listen." It is necessary to listen to employees, clients and suppliers", said Peters while lecturing in Brazil this Friday.

Mainly in an epoch of crisis, this ability becomes more fundamental. According to him, not only executives are the ones who talk more than hear, a conception that is generalized among our society. A good example are doctors, who, according to researches, interrupt their patients usually after the first 18 seconds of a visit. "And who would be the best resource to speak of your sickness?"

"Nobody disagrees that listening is one of the most fundamental characteristic in business, but nobody does it. I met a few business schools and even companies who actually teach it. The four most important words for any company are: 'What do you think?'".

Peter recalls the difference between hearing and listening. "When you speak, everybody listens, simply because you are the boss", says P. "Execution. Companies tend to worry too much about planning. They think that is the plan is right, the execution will do well, which is not true. I would say that is the execution is right, the plan is makes no difference. Both things are true, but the second is closer to reality."

Human Capital
Known for valuing the role of his employees within big organizations, Peter speaks of human capital. "People matter. If everyone understood this, we would not had been in this situation. Nine in ten times, GE's business's don't fail because they don't have good engines, but because of a series of mistakes in human relations."

P. assumes the point-of-view that professionals want to belong to something bigger and seek, in the corporate world, develop themselves. Companies, on the other hand, invest in that. "When developing employees, companies could serve clients better. And it is for that that they exist, to serve. Leaders, as well, live to serve."

Economic Engine
Always polemic, Peter provokes, attacking big corporations and praising the power of small and mid-sized companies, since "big ones offer us nothing. Small and mid corps. are the ones that truly move the economy. It is not GM", says. "What we need are entrepreneurs. We need to stop thinking about the which company should we copy now."

Mr. Orwell.

It's been 60 years since Orwell wrote 1984, the classic which showed us the Big Brother, ubiquitous oppressor of a totalitarian society with cameras controlling everyone's moves.

Orwell, a pseudonym that Eric Blair adopted as a writer, died because he couldn't contain the love for his work. He was sick, with a tuberculosis that in his days was fatal, and went find isolation to finish writing 1984. As soon as he was done, the recognition was immediate, public and critics. However, the efforts killed him at 46. The first lines are classic, often quoted, It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking 13.

One of the first ones to recognize his talent was V.S. Pritchett, a NY Times writer, who classified Orwell as the best man of letters of his time. The first paragraph of his criticism, published in June 1949, goes something like "1984 goes through the reader like an east wind, cracking the skin, opening the sores; hope has died in Mr Orwell’s wintry mind, and only pain is known. I do not think I have ever read a novel more frightening and depressing; and yet, such are the originality, the suspense, the speed of writing and withering indignation that it is impossible to put down"

Orwell was a versatile intellectual. In his work, abbreviated by his early death, fulgurates a notorious essay regarding the art of writing. He condensed his points in 6 advices:

- Never use a metaphor - like Ill shine like the sun - that you are used to reading;

- Never use a big word when a small one can substitute it;

- If it is possible to cut a word in your text, do it;

- Never use passive form when you can use active;

- Never write a sentence in other language, or a scientific expression, jargon, when you can express it simply.

- Break any of these rules when you find it necessary.

The amazon is getting naked.

The Amazon had 102 thousand acres of vegetation destroyed from 2005 to 2008, showed the Brazilian foundation SOS Mata Atlantica and INPE. The area devastated corresponds to the size of Spain and France combined.

The rhythm of deforestation kept nearly the same in comparison to the numbers from 2000 to 2005, when 35 thousand acres were devastated before. Before that, however, the amount being deforested was slightly lower.

The results are disastrous, and only 11%, or 147 thousand kilometers of the original vegetation is left. Minas Gerais, in Brazil, was the state affected the most, with over 32 thousand acres practically destroyed by heavy machinery. Flavio Ponzoni, coordinator of the study, classifies the state as the "biggest 'deforestator'." "The reasons are sometimes agropecuary, and sometimes because of imobiliary speculation." The other reason, he points out, is the illegal extraction of coal.

Deforestation, besides nearly destroying species, also unbalances the ecosystem, reducing the dynamics of our planet. In truth, we have never abandoned the condition of mere parasites inhabiting an orb that - we are not so sure - belongs to us. "Let there be light", He said, but the light hasn't touched many os uf, especially government officials in deloping countries who methodically ignore what is taking place under their noses.

Recession? Crisis? Nah, it's just a transition.

Who now speaks is Cambridge economist Carlota Perez, whose book Technological Revolutions and Finantial Capital has almost acquired the dimensions of a classic, placing our present economic situation in the context of the big shifts that take place every 50 years or so in the technological field.

For her, we have reached puberty in the Information Age, which started in 1971with the production of computer chips and its universalization in the following decades, which she calls "Installation phase", that is, adaptation phase. What the world is now experiencing might take 20 to 30 years until those new technologies start generating big steps in our quality and standards of living. "Times of Deployment", she says. This actual period in which we live is nothing more than a painful transition between both phases.

"At the top, we sin for our excesses. At the bottom, we self-correct", she says, and complements, "Today's economic crisis, along with the internet bubble in 2000, belong to a distinct nature." We are experiencing a collapse bigger than usual, equivalent to the investment in rail roads in the XIX century and the dark days in 1929. This sort of collapses only occur each half of a century, before big technological revolutions.

In correlating the market crash to the internet bubble, Perez tells us that "finantial excesses were inducted by the existance of easy and abundant credit, while the internet attracted investments under the presumption that the new technologies would generate extraordinary profits." The difference is that in 1929 everything collapse at once. This time, it happened in two different times, it had two different chapters.

Perez, in my opinion, seems to be one of the few economists to have actually any clue about our future in a globalized world. This recession, or transition, might last from 2 to 15 years, and it only depends on our capacity to analyze and recognize what it exactly is in order to take the necessary steps towards its solution. If we believe that this crisis is only a problem generated from the lack of trust in the finantial market, we will keep on applying superficial policies and injecting money into the system in order to ressuscitate Real State and Wall Street. In this case, she says, "this recession will be longer and another bubble will appear and the colapse will be even bigger." The ideal would be to formulate a "finantial market with fiscal policies of control." Public money should be directed to the support of productive and innovative investments.

The essential is, she tells us, "to promote expansion and innovation in production." Just make sure you recognize your resources and limitations, dear Earth, I reply. Refresh, refresh, refresh.

Heading for the 11th chapter.

The reality is simple, California is broke with less money than pop corn factories. In other words, it is going down fast and we'll all become soon debtors in possession.

Chapter 11 is, for those in need, a chapter in the bakrupcity code that lets debtors remain in control of their business operations, opposing to the 7th chapter, which liquidates - sells - everything.

Well, it is true that the Chapter 11 itself is directed towards businesses and some individuals, but nothing that Mr. Exterminator can't fix [even if Obama doesn't agree].

One of the senior advisors to the president, David Axelrod, told the L.A. Times a few days ago that the reason why no extra funds will be given to California is because whatever they do for one state, "there will be other states who also will want to do that. And there's a limit to what the government can do." Reasonable since AIG follows Bank of America, which follows CitiGroup, which follows JPMorgan Chase, which creates a big train of happiness in the railroads of the United States. Raise taxes and decrease spending also seemed reasonable, but not for the anything-goes-community-of-California, which denied most of the propositions last week, leaving the Exterminator with a brave response, summarized as follows:

- Cut wellfare
- Cut health insurances for low-income families
- Cut cash grants for education
- Cuts in home-care benefits for the elderly, the disabled and people with special needs
- Borrow 5 billion
- Owe about 25 billion

Scarry numbers that might raise some revolts and coup d'etats against his majesty, as seen yesterday, May 22nd, when Members of the United Long-Term Care Workers union gathered outside the Ronald Reagan State Office Building in Los Angeles to protest against all the above cited cuts.

Living in California is funny, and the people doesn't seem to care too much about politics more than they care about their dogs and organic food, but I am just here to give my few readers the bad news, since we all like boring stuff. I am just not really sure wether Mr. Schwarzenegger needs a new pair of sharp scissors for the new cuts or a new machine gun for when his friends come back from the future looking for him. The Mexican estate is for sale. The smallest bids wil problably have better chances. And, most importantly, he'll be back.

IPOs, IPOs, IPOs

Venture Captalist Tim Draper, along with other notorious investors, are on the way to fund a private exchange that would allow them (net worth > 100million) to trade stocks at early stages of the companies they fund.

In his own words, "it would allow enterpreneurs to get a little bit of liquidity" and show that the companies have value, ultimately aiming at an IPO (Initial Public Offering).

For those who do not know, in simple terms an Initial Public Offering is what investors are able to do in order to raise money and make 'huge' returns in relation to their initial investment. In other words, the company would be on Wall Street and their stocks would be open to the public.

In order to execute his plans, Draper will launch www.xchanged.com in September only allowing start-ups with at least $20 million in revenue to participate.

His strategy and plans make a little bit of sense, since any company with $30 million in revenue and $4 million in profit can go public. But ultimately Draper is finding ways of getting out of a frozen IPO market, which had no no U.S. venture capital backed company going public for six months until April. Some blame Sarbanes Oxley's guidelines, some the economy, some... well, who knows, but the truth is that the juntion of allt hese things have created a stagnant market that scarres people away from Wall Street and make old-school VCs from Silicon Valley struggle, difficulting their exit from those business and driving companies out of the country to other [easier] markets. As Henry Blodget put it at its best, "Why spend millions of extra dollars a year complying with a law that won't make your investors the tiniest bit safer and might get you thrown in jail for life if you blow a quarter?"

The solution? Well, we know but we don't know. We all have our own views and solutions, but rewriting the Sarbox law would definately help, allowing and increasing freedom in Wall Street, so as to make Investors safer and, consequently, buyers and enterpreneurs.

Well, well, inumerous companies have held their IPOs because of inhospitable markets, just like a record label holds and postpones a CD release... In this case, what is left for us is to hope for better days, or, better still, to take action for better ones.

The culture of blame

The real Obamas please stand up.

I just read Mike Murphy's article on TIME magazine and, well, the first thing I might ask for is higher taxes on gasoline so we can increase the demand and become more proactive about alternative sources of energy instead of buying oceans and dreams in search for oil. The oil rush. Derivatives, derivatives, derivatives. In sum, a 14 trillion dollar debt never leaves and we are borrowing to pay the interest.

Social darwinism in its extremes. Society recycles itself. We recycle ourselves and so forth. As brilliant historian Jean Gimpel told us, "The economic depression that struck Europe in the fourteenth century was followed ultimately by economic and technological recovery. But the depression we have moved into will have no end. We can anticipate centuries of decline and exhaustion. There will be no further industrial revolution in the cycles of our Western Civilization."

There is simply no formal ending to this post, neither an acceptable paragraph, but well, would the real Obamas please stand up.

"Facebook Rejects $8 Billion Valuation"

Just heard from TechCrunch's Arrington that Facebook rejected a 200 million dollars round of investment, which would make Facebook theoretically an "8 billion dollars company". The reason why they rejected it is simply because the investors wanted one of the 5-seat board of directors out of which 3 are occupied by Mark Zuck himself.

It sounds relatively funny, let us say, since last week Facebook was raising money, approximately 150 million in order to buy employee stock, 15 million common shares at $10 each. They are hoping FB will go public in the next 24 months, which will be somewhat amazing. I mean, this is what I'd call the beginning of a revolutionary process inside the revolution itself, the internet revolution. The IPO of a social networking engine. Some sources say that FB, however, needs to find a growing revenue stream to match its growing userbase, but, in my opinion, they might do what Google did and come out of nowhere with amazing numbers. The strategy is simple, effective and has worked before. Microsoft and Yahoo! wished they had known the truth... how sad. Inasmuch as the company is private, all we can do is speculate, no matter how many numbers or trusted sources one might have. I still remember big ballers saying that Google didn't have any revenue stream in 2003. I was 13 years-old, I think. Heh... let us do the math, do the math, people.

The abstract.

A poem is a thing among things, a volume lost among the volumes that polulates the indifferent universe through the corridors and palaces of memory. The poetic sentence is indivisible, and the grammatical categories that disarm it are abstractions added onto reality: a mixture of spoken expression and posthumous elaboration whose linguistic beauty is the sentence as an organism expressive of a perfect meaning - sintactial groups corresponding to the unity of a representation, subject to the synthactical continuity of the discourse.

Poetry refutes Time and Space. The poet is the magician of the rational blindness that belies our finality without an end.