Oxfam says era of permanent food crisis will hit poorest people hardest and spark social unrest The average price of staple foods will more than double in the next 20 years, leading to an unprecedented reversal in human development, Oxfam has warned. The world’s poorest people, who spend up to 80% of their income of food, will be hit hardest according to the charity. It said the world is entering an era of permanent food crisis, which is likely to be accompanied by political unrest and will require radical reform of the international food system. Research to be published on Wednesday forecasts international prices of staples such as maize could rise by as much as 180% by 2030, with half of that rise due to the impacts of climate change. After decades of steady decline in the number of hungry people around the world, the numbers are rapidly increasing as demand outpaces food production. The average growth rate in agricultural yields has almost halved since 1990 and is set to decline to a fraction of 1% in the next decade. A devastating combination of factors – climate change, depleting natural resources, a global scramble for land and water, the rush to turn food into biofuels, a growing global population, and changing diets – have created the conditions for an increase in deep poverty. “We are sleepwalking towards an age of avoidable crisis,” Oxfam’s chief executive, Barbara Stocking, said. “One in seven people on the planet go hungry every day despite the fact that the world is capable of feeding everyone. The food system must be overhauled.” Oxfam called on the prime minister, David Cameron, and other G20 leaders to agree new rules to govern food markets. It wants greater regulation of commodities markets to contain volatility in prices. It said global food reserves must be urgently increased and western governments must end biofuels policies that divert food to fuel for cars. It attacked excessive corporate concentration in the food sector, particularly in grain trading and in seed and agrochemicals. The Oxfam report followed warnings from the UN last week that food prices are likely to hit new highs in the next few weeks, triggering unrest in developing countries. The average global price of cereals jumped by 71% to a new record in the year to April last month. Drought in the major crop-growing areas of Europe and intense rain and tornadoes in the US have led to fears of shortfalls in this year’s crops. The World Bank warned last month that rising food prices have pushed 44 million people into poverty since last June. Food Food security Charities Poverty Biofuels Energy Renewable energy Voluntary sector G20 Felicity Lawrence guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Survey shows high prices and hefty deposits means two-thirds of would-be first-time buyers are unlikely to buy a home in the next five years Two-thirds of potential first-time buyers have no realistic prospect of owning their own home in the next five years and lack the long-term saving mentality they need to get onto the housing ladder, according to a report on home ownership by one of the UK’s biggest mortgage lenders. Owning a home has been a priority for most Britons since the 1950s when living standards began to rise, but the Halifax says that the high cost of property, strict lending rules and unwillingness of non-homeowners to save a deposit have fundamentally changed the attitudes of younger people towards home ownership. In a survey of 8,000 people aged between 20 and 45, only 5% of those described by the Halifax as “Generation Rent” (those with no realistic prospect of getting on the housing ladder) are making spending sacrifices to save towards their first home. The remaining 95% have no spare cash, no interest in saving or are trying but failing to save. Almost half the people questioned predicted that Britain would become a nation of renters within the next generation. The report says that such a development would have far reaching consequences for the economy and living standards in Britain. As much of Britain’s wealth is tied up in housing, an increase in the rental sector could widen the wealth gap between homeowners and non-owners. It would also have an impact on retirement living standards, as less people would have the money in their homes to support their retirement and long-term care. A rise in renters would also lead to a more transient population – although good in terms of labour mobility, the phenomenon would not encourage the building of strong communities. However, the most immediate impact would inevitably be on the housing market. The report says: “In order for the market to remain sustainable, homeowners need to be able to move up the housing ladder. Without first-time buyers, there could be a standstill in the market as many people living in their first homes would not be able to move up the ladder without a first-time buyer purchasing their home.” London is the most difficult area for aspiring homeowners to buy in, thanks to the combination of the highest property prices in Britain and increasing rental costs, reducing the amount that can be saved towards a deposit. According to recent analysis by Findaproperty.com, first-time buyers who have no financial assistance from their parents will rent in the capital for an average of 31 years (from the age of 21, based on figures from the National Housing Federation) before buying their own home, spending £308,558 on rent. The average price of a home in London for first-time buyers is £257,249. The average time spent renting in England is 16 years, taking the average age of the financially unassisted first-time buyer to 37. The National Housing Federation predicts this could soon rise to 43 as more people struggle to raise deposits. Sarrah Laspa, a 29-year-old who has lived in London for seven years, regards rent as “wasted money” and would love to buy her own home, but has no disposable income left at the end of every month with which to save a deposit. She lives in Borough, a central area of south London, which is within walking distance of her legal publishing job and spends half her monthly income on rent. “I could live further out, but then I would have to pay for public transport which would negate the benefits of cheaper housing,” she said. “And being single, it would be pointless living in the middle of nowhere.” While the main barriers to home ownership are financial, the study found that many non-homeowners are deterred by fear of the mortgage application process, with 84% believing that banks do not want to lend to first-time buyers. Many worry that if their application for a mortgage is rejected by one bank, this would stay on their credit record and hinder further attempts to borrow. Stephen Noakes, commercial director of mortgages at the Halifax, says the bank will publish more information about the criteria used to assess applications and explain that failed applications do not have a long-term negative impact. Home ownership rates have remained virtually static at 70% since the 1990′s, but the number of first-time buyers has slumped in the last few years as property prices increased and lenders began to demand much bigger deposits. According to figures produced by the Council of Mortgage Lenders, 36,200 first-time buyers bought a home in the first quarter of this year compared to 43,600 in the first three months of 2010. But both figures are dwarfed by the 167,400 people who became homeowners at the peak of the market in the third quarter of 2001. The size of deposit required to buy a first home has soared. In 2000, a first-time buyer needed an average deposit of £9,865 or 14% of the property price, but this grew to an average of £28,770 or 21% of the property price by last year. Property Renting property Housing Housing market London Banks and building societies Banking Mortgage lending figures Mortgages First-time buyers House prices Jill Insley guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Survey shows high prices and hefty deposits means two-thirds of would-be first-time buyers are unlikely to buy a home in the next five years Two-thirds of potential first-time buyers have no realistic prospect of owning their own home in the next five years and lack the long-term saving mentality they need to get onto the housing ladder, according to a report on home ownership by one of the UK’s biggest mortgage lenders. Owning a home has been a priority for most Britons since the 1950s when living standards began to rise, but the Halifax says that the high cost of property, strict lending rules and unwillingness of non-homeowners to save a deposit have fundamentally changed the attitudes of younger people towards home ownership. In a survey of 8,000 people aged between 20 and 45, only 5% of those described by the Halifax as “Generation Rent” (those with no realistic prospect of getting on the housing ladder) are making spending sacrifices to save towards their first home. The remaining 95% have no spare cash, no interest in saving or are trying but failing to save. Almost half the people questioned predicted that Britain would become a nation of renters within the next generation. The report says that such a development would have far reaching consequences for the economy and living standards in Britain. As much of Britain’s wealth is tied up in housing, an increase in the rental sector could widen the wealth gap between homeowners and non-owners. It would also have an impact on retirement living standards, as less people would have the money in their homes to support their retirement and long-term care. A rise in renters would also lead to a more transient population – although good in terms of labour mobility, the phenomenon would not encourage the building of strong communities. However, the most immediate impact would inevitably be on the housing market. The report says: “In order for the market to remain sustainable, homeowners need to be able to move up the housing ladder. Without first-time buyers, there could be a standstill in the market as many people living in their first homes would not be able to move up the ladder without a first-time buyer purchasing their home.” London is the most difficult area for aspiring homeowners to buy in, thanks to the combination of the highest property prices in Britain and increasing rental costs, reducing the amount that can be saved towards a deposit. According to recent analysis by Findaproperty.com, first-time buyers who have no financial assistance from their parents will rent in the capital for an average of 31 years (from the age of 21, based on figures from the National Housing Federation) before buying their own home, spending £308,558 on rent. The average price of a home in London for first-time buyers is £257,249. The average time spent renting in England is 16 years, taking the average age of the financially unassisted first-time buyer to 37. The National Housing Federation predicts this could soon rise to 43 as more people struggle to raise deposits. Sarrah Laspa, a 29-year-old who has lived in London for seven years, regards rent as “wasted money” and would love to buy her own home, but has no disposable income left at the end of every month with which to save a deposit. She lives in Borough, a central area of south London, which is within walking distance of her legal publishing job and spends half her monthly income on rent. “I could live further out, but then I would have to pay for public transport which would negate the benefits of cheaper housing,” she said. “And being single, it would be pointless living in the middle of nowhere.” While the main barriers to home ownership are financial, the study found that many non-homeowners are deterred by fear of the mortgage application process, with 84% believing that banks do not want to lend to first-time buyers. Many worry that if their application for a mortgage is rejected by one bank, this would stay on their credit record and hinder further attempts to borrow. Stephen Noakes, commercial director of mortgages at the Halifax, says the bank will publish more information about the criteria used to assess applications and explain that failed applications do not have a long-term negative impact. Home ownership rates have remained virtually static at 70% since the 1990′s, but the number of first-time buyers has slumped in the last few years as property prices increased and lenders began to demand much bigger deposits. According to figures produced by the Council of Mortgage Lenders, 36,200 first-time buyers bought a home in the first quarter of this year compared to 43,600 in the first three months of 2010. But both figures are dwarfed by the 167,400 people who became homeowners at the peak of the market in the third quarter of 2001. The size of deposit required to buy a first home has soared. In 2000, a first-time buyer needed an average deposit of £9,865 or 14% of the property price, but this grew to an average of £28,770 or 21% of the property price by last year. Property Renting property Housing Housing market London Banks and building societies Banking Mortgage lending figures Mortgages First-time buyers House prices Jill Insley guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Survey shows high prices and hefty deposits means two-thirds of would-be first-time buyers are unlikely to buy a home in the next five years Two-thirds of potential first-time buyers have no realistic prospect of owning their own home in the next five years and lack the long-term saving mentality they need to get onto the housing ladder, according to a report on home ownership by one of the UK’s biggest mortgage lenders. Owning a home has been a priority for most Britons since the 1950s when living standards began to rise, but the Halifax says that the high cost of property, strict lending rules and unwillingness of non-homeowners to save a deposit have fundamentally changed the attitudes of younger people towards home ownership. In a survey of 8,000 people aged between 20 and 45, only 5% of those described by the Halifax as “Generation Rent” (those with no realistic prospect of getting on the housing ladder) are making spending sacrifices to save towards their first home. The remaining 95% have no spare cash, no interest in saving or are trying but failing to save. Almost half the people questioned predicted that Britain would become a nation of renters within the next generation. The report says that such a development would have far reaching consequences for the economy and living standards in Britain. As much of Britain’s wealth is tied up in housing, an increase in the rental sector could widen the wealth gap between homeowners and non-owners. It would also have an impact on retirement living standards, as less people would have the money in their homes to support their retirement and long-term care. A rise in renters would also lead to a more transient population – although good in terms of labour mobility, the phenomenon would not encourage the building of strong communities. However, the most immediate impact would inevitably be on the housing market. The report says: “In order for the market to remain sustainable, homeowners need to be able to move up the housing ladder. Without first-time buyers, there could be a standstill in the market as many people living in their first homes would not be able to move up the ladder without a first-time buyer purchasing their home.” London is the most difficult area for aspiring homeowners to buy in, thanks to the combination of the highest property prices in Britain and increasing rental costs, reducing the amount that can be saved towards a deposit. According to recent analysis by Findaproperty.com, first-time buyers who have no financial assistance from their parents will rent in the capital for an average of 31 years (from the age of 21, based on figures from the National Housing Federation) before buying their own home, spending £308,558 on rent. The average price of a home in London for first-time buyers is £257,249. The average time spent renting in England is 16 years, taking the average age of the financially unassisted first-time buyer to 37. The National Housing Federation predicts this could soon rise to 43 as more people struggle to raise deposits. Sarrah Laspa, a 29-year-old who has lived in London for seven years, regards rent as “wasted money” and would love to buy her own home, but has no disposable income left at the end of every month with which to save a deposit. She lives in Borough, a central area of south London, which is within walking distance of her legal publishing job and spends half her monthly income on rent. “I could live further out, but then I would have to pay for public transport which would negate the benefits of cheaper housing,” she said. “And being single, it would be pointless living in the middle of nowhere.” While the main barriers to home ownership are financial, the study found that many non-homeowners are deterred by fear of the mortgage application process, with 84% believing that banks do not want to lend to first-time buyers. Many worry that if their application for a mortgage is rejected by one bank, this would stay on their credit record and hinder further attempts to borrow. Stephen Noakes, commercial director of mortgages at the Halifax, says the bank will publish more information about the criteria used to assess applications and explain that failed applications do not have a long-term negative impact. Home ownership rates have remained virtually static at 70% since the 1990′s, but the number of first-time buyers has slumped in the last few years as property prices increased and lenders began to demand much bigger deposits. According to figures produced by the Council of Mortgage Lenders, 36,200 first-time buyers bought a home in the first quarter of this year compared to 43,600 in the first three months of 2010. But both figures are dwarfed by the 167,400 people who became homeowners at the peak of the market in the third quarter of 2001. The size of deposit required to buy a first home has soared. In 2000, a first-time buyer needed an average deposit of £9,865 or 14% of the property price, but this grew to an average of £28,770 or 21% of the property price by last year. Property Renting property Housing Housing market London Banks and building societies Banking Mortgage lending figures Mortgages First-time buyers House prices Jill Insley guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Specialist CEOP unit arrests more than 500 suspects in most successful year since its creation in 2006 A record number of children have been rescued from immediate danger by a specialist police unit that targets online paedophile rings, it has emerged. More than 1,000 children have been safeguarded or protected, including 414 in the last 12 months, the Child Exploitation and Online Protection centre (CEOP) said as it published its annual review. In the latest case this month, 130 children in the UK were rescued after police smashed an international paedophile ring that distributed millions of indecent images and films to 46 countries. Peter Davies, CEOP’s chief executive, said the unit was making progress but warned the battle was far from over. “Crimes against children are for me the most horrendous crimes and too often the victim suffers in silence,” he said. “We need to encourage ever more reporting and understanding, we need to work to prevent the crime happening in the first place and we need to pursue the offender no matter how complex the methods they use to hide their activity.” Figures released on Monday show CEOP has dismantled more than 394 high-risk sex offender networks since it was set up in 2006 tasked with tracking online paedophiles and bringing them to court. Of these, a record 132 networks have been dismantled in the past year as the unit’s actions led to a record 513 arrests, taking the total number of suspected paedophiles it has helped arrest in the last five years to 1,644. In the latest case four men pleaded guilty at Nottingham crown court to various charges of making, distributing and possessing indecent images of children.The Lincolnshire police force, which led the operation, said it was the biggest paedophile ring of its kind in the UK and that 132 children had been “safeguarded” and a number of paedophiles had been removed from positions of trust, including jobs as teachers, doctors and youth workers. CEOP, which is currently affiliated to the Serious Organised Crime Agency (Soca), will be merged with the new National Crime Agency when it is formed in 2013. The move prompted its former head Jim Gamble to resign over concerns the shakeup was driven not by child protection but by a desire to cut the number of quangos. But, as well as retaining its own budget, Davies said the unit will keep “its own brand, its own approach and its own dedication to putting the safety and wellbeing of children first”. “I think today’s figures show that we are shining light into those dark places, we are bringing this crime more into the open and are working collectively with many others to break down the taboos and obstacles that stop children getting the help and support they need,” he said. “We can do that with confidence.” In her foreword to the report, the home secretary, Theresa May, added that the move will enable CEOP to “draw on wider resources and support to help keep even more children safe from harm in the future”. The unit’s annual review also sets out plans to “address the self-generated risk that children place themselves in, understanding and working in partnership to safeguard technological advances and focusing on specialist areas such as the trafficking of children and young people”, a CEOP spokesman said. Crime Child protection Police Children Theresa May Matthew Taylor guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Title: Blueberry Hill Artist: Fats Domino Harold Dee Allen, my wife’s grandfather, served in the Navy in Okinawa during WWII. He was one of the strongest and greatest men I’ve ever known, and this was his favorite song. Here’s to ‘Sailorman’ and all of the brave others who have sacrificed for this country.
Continue reading …Another bipartisan erosion of our liberties, supported by the Chamber of Commerce, was stopped by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR). Thank God someone stands up for internet freedom: A U.S. Senator from Oregon has once again taken a stand against his own party to defend what he sees as the inherent right to free speech on the Internet, placing a hold on a bill that could force search engines and Internet service providers to block websites deemed to be “infringing” on copyrights. The Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act — or “PROTECT IP” for short was part of a second attempt to pass provisions of the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA), which failed to clear Congress during its last session thanks to a parliamentary maneuver by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR). And once again, Wyden has stepped forward to ensure those measures do not pass. “In December of last year I placed a hold on similar legislation, commonly called COICA, because I felt the costs of the legislation far outweighed the benefits,” he said in a prepared statement. “After careful analysis of the Protect IP Act, or PIPA, I am compelled to draw the same conclusion.” “I understand and agree with the goal of the legislation, to protect intellectual property and combat commerce in counterfeit goods, but I am not willing to muzzle speech and stifle innovation and economic growth to achieve this objective,” Wyden added. Internet freedom advocates claim the proposed laws could be used to shut down websites that link to other websites that authorities claim to be carrying out infringing activities. Internet advocacy group Electronic Frontier Foundation said it was “no less dismayed by this most recent incarnation than we were with last year’s draft.”
Continue reading …Eric Cantor Doubles Down on His Hostage Taking of Tornado Victims for Spending Cuts
May 30, 2011 No Comment
Click here to view this media Yashwanth Manjunath at Alan Colmes Liberland summed up House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s hostage taking on Face the Nation very well here — Eric Cantor Doubles Down On Using Disaster Victims As Hostages To Spending Cuts : Last week Alan mentioned how Eric Cantor is denying emergency disaster relief funds to tornado victims in Joplin, MO unless they are first paid for with politically-motivated spending cuts. Today on CBS’ Face the Nation Cantor doubled down on using the tornado victims as political hostages for spending cuts to clean energy. He compared the situation to that of a family facing an unexpected expenditure. “Because families don’t have unlimited money,” Cantor said. “And, really, neither does the federal government.” I could go into all of the different macroeconomic reasons why comparing the budget of the United States federal government to that of a typical American family is one of the most moronic and ignorant analogies ever made, but that is an argument for another day. The much larger issue with Cantor’s comments are the disdain and callousness he is showing towards the Joplin victims, his vile political opportunism, and worst of all, his unbearable hypocrisy. Read on… As Murshed already pointed out here last week , the one word that immediately comes to mind for this — heartless. While they were mourning their dead in Joplin today, Cantor’s on the television still hostage taking before allowing them some help. I’m not sure how much more that party has to do to prove that they hate the working class in America, but they seem determined to make sure everyone knows it with this callousness.
Continue reading …Ironic, isn’t it? Alabama is noted for so many bad things, including poor education. Yet this is the position on which this mayor has decided to take a stand: CORDOVA, Ala. – James Ruston’s house was knocked off its foundation by tornadoes that barreled through town last month and is still uninhabitable. He thought help had finally arrived when a truck pulled up to his property with a mobile home from the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Then he got the call: Single-wide mobile homes, like the FEMA one, are illegal in the city of Cordova. The city’s refusal to let homeless residents occupy temporary housing provided by FEMA has sparked outrage in this central Alabama town of 2,000, with angry citizens filling a meeting last week and circulating petitions to remove the man many blame for the decision, Mayor Jack Scott. Ruston and many others view the city’s decision as heartless, a sign that leaders don’t care that some people are barely surviving in the rubble of a blue-collar town. “People have to live somewhere. What’s it matter if it’s in a trailer?” asked Felicia Boston, standing on the debris-strewn lot where a friend has lived in a tent since a tornado destroyed his home on April 27. Scott has heard all the complaints, and he isn’t apologizing. He said he doesn’t want run-down mobile homes parked all over town years from now .
Continue reading …
Move prompted by mass protests against nuclear power following Japan’s nuclear disaster Angela Merkel has committed to shutting down all of the country’s nuclear reactors by 2022, a task said by one minister to be as mammoth as the project to reunite East and West Germany in 1990. Monday’s announcement, prompted by Japan’s nuclear disaster, will make Germany the first major industrialised nation to go nuclear-free in decades. It gives the country just over 10 years to find alternative sources for 23% of its energy. The move, hammered out at a mammoth 14-hour overnight sitting at the Bundestag, came amid mass nationwide protests against nuclear power and at a low point for the chancellor’s Christian Democratic party (CDU), support for which has crumbled at the ballot box in five regional elections this year. Although the proposal was welcomed among the general population, who have long been opposed to nuclear power, it was a move derided by one of Merkel’s own MPs as “knee-jerk politics”. The plan is to keep shut eight reactors which were suspended in March in the immediate aftermath of the Fukushima disaster, and to close the rest by 2022. The phase-out must be ratified in parliament and is likely to face strong opposition from utility companies. On Monday a spokesman for the energy giant RWE said that “all legal options” were on the table. Last week, grid operators warned the phase-out could result in winter blackouts – a prospect Merkel scoffed at . She insisted the decision would not lead to Germany simply importing nuclear power. “We will generate our own electricity from other sources,” the chancellor told a press conference in Berlin. She said the plans would give Germany a chance to be a “trailblazer” for renewable energy, suggesting it could eventually earn, rather than cost, the country money. Energy firms warned that the decision – a total policy reversal – would require significant investment in energy infrastructure. Philipp Rösler, new head of the FDP party, which rules in coalition with the CDU, agreed, likening the task ahead to that which faced Germany in 1990 after reunification. A study in 2009 showed that €1.3 trillion (£1.1tn) had been transferred from the West to rebuild the East. This comparison was also made in an editorial by the left-leaning Tageszeitung newspaper on Monday, which said Merkel’s decision was “historic” and “a moment like the fall of the Berlin Wall”. The government’s vocabulary seemed to consciously echo the reunification process, with Merkel heralding an “Energie-Wende” – “die Wende” is the word for change which became shorthand for the fall of communism and reunification. Die Welt, a conservative daily, said the policy U-turn demonstrated a “creeping rejection of the economic model which has transformed Germany into one of the richest countries in the world”. The French poured scorn on Germany’s decision. “Germany will be even more dependent on fossil fuels and imports and its electricity will be more expensive and polluting,” said the French industry minister, Éric Besson. German households pay twice as much for power than homes in France, where 80% of electricity comes from atomic plants, he said. Germany last year was a net exporter of power to France, according to data from the French grid operator, RTE. This trend was reversed last month after the accident at Fukushima and Merkel’s decision to halt Germany’s oldest reactors. “Germany’s energy policy will only work if there are improvements at the same time,” the EU energy commissioner, Günther Oettinger, said on Monday. He said there was a need for better grid infrastructure, storage capacity and forward planning as well as a more pronounced rise in renewable supply. Germany plans to cut electricity usage by 10% and double the share of renewable energy to 25% by 2020. Merkel first mooted an accelerated exit from nuclear power within days of the Fukushima meltdown, ordering a three-month “moratorium” during which nuclear power could be debated. It was a remarkable U-turn. In September 2010, she had committed to extending the lives of Germany’s 17 nuclear plants. Many of her party are unhappy with her handling of the situation. “Knee-jerk politics like the reaction to Fukushima does not pay dividends,” said Mike Mohring, the head of the CDU faction in the Thuringian state parliament, last week. Among other G8 nations, only Italy has abandoned nuclear power. Germany Europe Nuclear power Energy Nuclear waste Japan disaster Helen Pidd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …