陈尧：“彭宇案”不是见死不救的通行证 _新闻中心_新浪网
彭宇如果翻案，涉案法官如果可以绳之以法，大家就不用这么怕见义勇为了。
星期五, 九月 24, 2010
北京涉嫌非法拘禁保安公司董事长被刑拘_新闻中心_新浪网
北京涉嫌非法拘禁保安公司董事长被刑拘_新闻中心_新浪网
之前不承认中国有黑监狱的官员和记者什么时候关起来？
http://www.sina.com.cn 2010年09月25日04:05 南方都市报
南都讯 记者龙志 本报昨日披露北京安元鼎保安公司(以下称安元鼎)在京设立多处“黑监狱”，以关押、押送到京上访者为主业，与地方政府签协议并收取佣金，报道引发巨大反响(详见9月24日18版-21版《安元鼎：北京截访“黑监狱”调查》)。本报从相关部门获悉，目前安元鼎已被北京市公安局以涉嫌“非法拘禁和非法经营”两项罪名立案侦查，安元鼎董事长张军以及总经理张杰被刑拘。
记者昨日从相关渠道获悉，北京警方已传讯安元鼎董事长张军和总经理张杰，随后两人被刑拘；安元鼎公司也以涉嫌“非法拘禁和非法经营”两项罪名被立案侦查。
消息渠道还透露，已经有数十名受害访民前来报案，并接受警方调查。此外，在位于小红门南四环东路上的安元鼎接待中心总部大院的墙外，警方从被丢弃访民衣物中，发现了大量证据，表明这里曾关押了许多访民。在搜查中，警方还查到了安元鼎公司与各地政府签订的《委托书》和《特保护送服务合同》。
在被本报披露后，目前，安元鼎公司除了物业保安，护送部的业务全部被查封。匿名消息源透露，安元鼎公司暂时由北京市保安总公司派人接管。
据悉，北京警方这两天的突破非常大，警方调查的两个方向：一是寻找“黑监狱”中的打手；二是追查非法经营罪中的证据。据本报记者观察，两个方向仍具有一定难度，虽有访民对警方详细描述了安元鼎特保以及黑监狱中的打手相貌，但被舆论曝光后，安元鼎护送部的500多人如今只剩200多人，这给警方取证带来一定难度；此外，本报记者调查得知，安元鼎与各地政府签订《特保护送服务合同》后，绝大多数交易都不通过公司账目，而是直接走现金，账目不明晰。
虽然处在风暴之中，昨日，有媒体致电安元鼎时，对方否认了报道中的事实，并且称安元鼎从来没有关押过访民。
对于安元鼎公司的否认，曾被其关押过两次的前广西女民警张耀春非常愤慨。她说，昨日已经咨询过律师，准备状告安元鼎公司，一是要看到凶手被严惩，绳之以法；二是赔偿人身伤害以及各种精神损失。张耀春自从在安元鼎“黑监狱”遭到殴打后，已落下伤病，至今仍在医院治疗。
之前不承认中国有黑监狱的官员和记者什么时候关起来？
http://www.sina.com.cn 2010年09月25日04:05 南方都市报
南都讯 记者龙志 本报昨日披露北京安元鼎保安公司(以下称安元鼎)在京设立多处“黑监狱”，以关押、押送到京上访者为主业，与地方政府签协议并收取佣金，报道引发巨大反响(详见9月24日18版-21版《安元鼎：北京截访“黑监狱”调查》)。本报从相关部门获悉，目前安元鼎已被北京市公安局以涉嫌“非法拘禁和非法经营”两项罪名立案侦查，安元鼎董事长张军以及总经理张杰被刑拘。
记者昨日从相关渠道获悉，北京警方已传讯安元鼎董事长张军和总经理张杰，随后两人被刑拘；安元鼎公司也以涉嫌“非法拘禁和非法经营”两项罪名被立案侦查。
消息渠道还透露，已经有数十名受害访民前来报案，并接受警方调查。此外，在位于小红门南四环东路上的安元鼎接待中心总部大院的墙外，警方从被丢弃访民衣物中，发现了大量证据，表明这里曾关押了许多访民。在搜查中，警方还查到了安元鼎公司与各地政府签订的《委托书》和《特保护送服务合同》。
在被本报披露后，目前，安元鼎公司除了物业保安，护送部的业务全部被查封。匿名消息源透露，安元鼎公司暂时由北京市保安总公司派人接管。
据悉，北京警方这两天的突破非常大，警方调查的两个方向：一是寻找“黑监狱”中的打手；二是追查非法经营罪中的证据。据本报记者观察，两个方向仍具有一定难度，虽有访民对警方详细描述了安元鼎特保以及黑监狱中的打手相貌，但被舆论曝光后，安元鼎护送部的500多人如今只剩200多人，这给警方取证带来一定难度；此外，本报记者调查得知，安元鼎与各地政府签订《特保护送服务合同》后，绝大多数交易都不通过公司账目，而是直接走现金，账目不明晰。
虽然处在风暴之中，昨日，有媒体致电安元鼎时，对方否认了报道中的事实，并且称安元鼎从来没有关押过访民。
对于安元鼎公司的否认，曾被其关押过两次的前广西女民警张耀春非常愤慨。她说，昨日已经咨询过律师，准备状告安元鼎公司，一是要看到凶手被严惩，绳之以法；二是赔偿人身伤害以及各种精神损失。张耀春自从在安元鼎“黑监狱”遭到殴打后，已落下伤病，至今仍在医院治疗。
U.S. workers pay for undervalued Chinese currency - MarketWatch
U.S. workers pay for undervalued Chinese currency - MarketWatch
Apparently comments make more sense than the propoganda from Ruth Mantell.
uncle.scrooge 16 minutes ago
Apparently comments make more sense than the propoganda from Ruth Mantell.
uncle.scrooge 16 minutes ago
steveforever 13 minutes ago
Who closed the plants here and sent products to be manufactured in China?
Our beloved companies.
Who fired a lot of white collars here and opened call-centres in India?
Our beloved companies.
Japan too has a lot of plants in China. Can we do differently?
Yeah,opening plants in Vietnam and Bangladesh.
Cheaper countries will always exist.
We want high profits and full employment.
Very difficult.
Our beloved companies.
Who fired a lot of white collars here and opened call-centres in India?
Our beloved companies.
Japan too has a lot of plants in China. Can we do differently?
Yeah,opening plants in Vietnam and Bangladesh.
Cheaper countries will always exist.
We want high profits and full employment.
Very difficult.
OldYeller 10 minutes ago
When it would have done the most good to try to limit Yuan influence was 20yrs ago before that cheap Yuan policy started stripping every manufacturing job out of America. But no.. it wasn't an issue with Greenspan....
Most jobs now because of our past monetary policies are NOT manufacturing. In fact, our economy is 70% consumer consumption with a staggering amount of those consumed goods coming from the PRC including foods, medical devices and prescription drugs.
A move toward a stronger Yuan now means much higher prices for all American consumers again I say of which 70% of our economy is related to which will destroy more jobs than it helps and further weaken ALL of us going forward.
Fact is that Bernanke wants a weak dollar to weaken the debts this Government has created at the expense of every American. The Gov gets breathing room as the citizens get slaughtered.
We are essentially so deep in debt we are painted into a corner with no place to go thanks to our Government's policies.
Most jobs now because of our past monetary policies are NOT manufacturing. In fact, our economy is 70% consumer consumption with a staggering amount of those consumed goods coming from the PRC including foods, medical devices and prescription drugs.
A move toward a stronger Yuan now means much higher prices for all American consumers again I say of which 70% of our economy is related to which will destroy more jobs than it helps and further weaken ALL of us going forward.
Fact is that Bernanke wants a weak dollar to weaken the debts this Government has created at the expense of every American. The Gov gets breathing room as the citizens get slaughtered.
We are essentially so deep in debt we are painted into a corner with no place to go thanks to our Government's policies.
星期四, 九月 23, 2010
星期三, 九月 22, 2010
李华芳：在中国“裸捐”可行吗_新闻中心_新浪网
李华芳：在中国“裸捐”可行吗_新闻中心_新浪网
盖茨和巴菲特才不是什么大善人，他们的所谓“慈善”主要也使自己投资发展，真正用于“慈善”的部分少之又少，挂了慈善的牌子就很少被监管，而且收益也不缴税。
盖茨和巴菲特才不是什么大善人，他们的所谓“慈善”主要也使自己投资发展，真正用于“慈善”的部分少之又少，挂了慈善的牌子就很少被监管，而且收益也不缴税。
星期二, 九月 21, 2010
星期一, 九月 20, 2010
星期五, 九月 17, 2010
星期三, 九月 15, 2010
在美胜诉中企曾遭轮番官司 诉讼费达1200万美元_新闻中心_新浪网
在美胜诉中企曾遭轮番官司 诉讼费达1200万美元_新闻中心_新浪网
有没有可能搞专利保险？如果专利遭到诉讼，保险公司出钱打官司要赔偿？
有没有可能搞专利保险？如果专利遭到诉讼，保险公司出钱打官司要赔偿？
星期一, 九月 13, 2010
星期四, 九月 09, 2010
美公司以侵犯专利为由对数十家中企提起诉讼_新闻中心_新浪网
美公司以侵犯专利为由对数十家中企提起诉讼_新闻中心_新浪网
“历时3年诉讼，通领科技集团最终胜诉，这是中国企业在美首次赢得专利诉讼，但代价是高达700万美元诉讼费用。” -胜诉都没有让对方付诉讼费用？
“历时3年诉讼，通领科技集团最终胜诉，这是中国企业在美首次赢得专利诉讼，但代价是高达700万美元诉讼费用。” -胜诉都没有让对方付诉讼费用？
星期三, 九月 08, 2010
Full text of President Obama's speech in Ohio - MarketWatch
Full text of President Obama's speech in Ohio - MarketWatch
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Following is the full text, as prepared for delivery, of President Barack Obama's speech about the economy in Ohio on Wednesday:
Good afternoon, Ohio. It's good to be back.
In the fall of 2008, one of the last rallies of my presidential campaign was here in the Cleveland area. It was a hopeful time, just two days before the election. We knew that if we pulled it off, we'd have the chance to tackle some big and difficult challenges that had been facing this country for a long time.
We also hoped for a chance to get beyond some of the old political divides -- between Democrats and Republicans, Red states and Blue states -- that had prevented us from making progress. Because although we are proud to be Democrats, we are prouder to be Americans -- and we believed that no single party has a monopoly on wisdom.
That's not to say that the election didn't expose deep differences between the parties. I ran for president because for much of the last decade, a very specific governing philosophy had reigned about how America should work:
Cut taxes, especially for millionaires and billionaires. Cut regulations for special interests. Cut trade deals even if they didn't benefit our workers. Cut back on investments in our people and our future -- in education and clean energy; in research and technology. The idea was that if we had blind faith in the market; if we let corporations play by their own rules; if we left everyone else to fend for themselves, America would grow and prosper.
For a time, this idea gave us the illusion of prosperity. We saw financial firms and CEOs take in record profits and record bonuses. We saw a housing boom that led to new homeowners and new jobs in construction. Consumers bought more condos and bigger cars and better televisions.
But while all this was happening, the broader economy was becoming weaker. Job growth between 2000 and 2008 was slower than it had been in any economic expansion since World War II -- even slower than it's been over the past year. The wages and incomes of middle-class families kept falling while the cost of everything from tuition to health care kept rising. Folks were forced to put more debt on their credit cards and borrow against homes that many couldn't afford in the first place. Meanwhile, a failure to pay for two wars and two tax cuts for the wealthy helped turn a record surplus into a record deficit.
I ran for president because I believed that this kind of economy was unsustainable -- for the middle-class and for our nation's future. I ran because I had a different idea about how America was built -- an idea rooted in my own family's story.
You see, Michelle and I are where we are today because even though our families didn't have much, they worked tirelessly -- without complaint -- so that we might have a better life. My grandfather marched off to Europe in World War II and my grandmother worked in factories on the home front. I had a single mom who put herself through school, and would wake before dawn to make sure I got a decent education. Michelle can still remember her father heading out to his job as a city worker long after multiple sclerosis had made it impossible for him to walk without crutches.
Yes, our families believed in the American values of self-reliance and individual responsibility, and they instilled those values in their children. But they also believed in a country that rewards responsibility. A country that rewards hard work. A country built upon the promise of opportunity and upward mobility.
They believed in an America that gave my grandfather the chance to go to college because of the GI Bill. An America that gave my grandparents the chance to buy a home because of the Federal Housing Authority. An America that gave their children and grandchildren the chance to fulfill our dreams thanks to college loans and college scholarships.
It was an America where you didn't buy things you couldn't afford; where we didn't just think about today -- we thought about tomorrow. An America that took pride in the goods it made, not just in the things it consumed. An America where a rising tide really did lift all boats, from the company CEO to the guy on the assembly line.
That's the America I believe in. That's what led me to work in the shadow of a shuttered steel plant on the South Side of Chicago when I was a community organizer. It's what led me to fight for factory workers at manufacturing plants that were closing across Illinois when I was a senator. It's what led me to run for president -- because I don't believe we can have a strong and growing economy without a strong and growing middle-class.
Now, much has happened since that election. The flawed policies and economic weaknesses of the previous decade culminated in the worst recession of our lifetimes. My hope was that the crisis would cause everyone, Democrats and Republicans, to pull together and tackle our problems in a practical way. But as we all know, things didn't work out that way.
Some Republican leaders figured it was smart politics to sit on the sidelines and let Democrats solve the mess. Others believed on principle that government shouldn't meddle in the markets, even when the markets were broken. But with the nation losing nearly 800,000 jobs the month I was sworn in, my most urgent task was to stop a financial meltdown and prevent this recession from becoming a second depression.
We've done that. The economy is growing again. The financial markets have stabilized. The private sector has created jobs for the last eight months in a row. And there are roughly three million Americans who are working today because of the economic plan we put in place.
But the truth is, progress has been painfully slow. Millions of jobs were lost before our policies even had a chance to take effect -- a hole so deep that even though we've added jobs again, millions of Americans remain unemployed. Hundreds of thousands of families have lost their homes; millions more can barely pay the bills or make the mortgage. The middle-class is still treading water, while those aspiring to reach the middle class are doing everything they can to keep from drowning.
Meanwhile, some of the very steps that were necessary to save the economy -- like temporarily supporting the banks and the auto industry -- fed the perception that Washington is still ignoring the middle class in favor of special interests.
And so people are frustrated and angry and anxious about the future. I understand that. I also understand that in a political campaign, the easiest thing for the other side to do is ride this fear and anger all the way to Election Day.
That's what's happening right now. A few weeks ago, the Republican leader of the House came here to Cleveland and offered his party's answer to our economic challenges. Now, it would be one thing if he admitted his party's mistakes during the eight years they were in power, and was offering a credible new approach to solving our country's problems.
But that's not what happened. There were no new policies from Mr. Boehner. There were no new ideas. There was just the same philosophy we already tried for the last decade -- the same philosophy that led to this mess in the first place: cut more taxes for millionaires and cut more rules for corporations. Instead of coming together like past generations did to build a better country for our children and grandchildren, their argument is that we should let insurance companies go back to denying care to folks who are sick, and let credit card companies go back to raising rates without any reason. Instead of setting our sights higher, they're asking us to settle for a status quo of stagnant growth, eroding competitiveness, and a shrinking middle class.
Cleveland -- that is not the America I know. That is not the America we believe in. A lot has changed since I came here in those final days of the last election, but what hasn't is the choice facing this country. It's still fear versus hope; the past versus the future. It's still a choice between sliding backward and moving forward. That's what this election is about. That's the choice you'll face in November.
I have a different vision for the future. I've never believed that government has all the answers to our problems. I've never believed that government's role is to create jobs or prosperity. I believe it's the drive and ingenuity of our entrepreneurs, the skill and dedication of our workers, that has made us the wealthiest nation on Earth. I believe it's the private sector that must be the main engine of our recovery.
I believe government should be lean, it should be efficient, and it should leave people free to make the choices they think are best for themselves and their families, so long as those choices don't hurt others.
But in the words of the first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln, I also believe that government should do for the people what they cannot do better for themselves.
That means making long-term investments in this country's future that individuals and corporations cannot make on their own: investments in education and clean energy; in basic research, technology, and infrastructure
That means making sure corporations live up to their responsibilities to treat consumers fairly and play by the same rules as everyone else; to look out for their workers and create jobs here at home.
And that means providing a hand up for middle-class families -- so that if they work hard and meet their responsibilities, they can afford to raise their children, send them to college, see a doctor when they get sick, and retire with dignity and respect.
That's what we Democrats believe in -- a vibrant free market, but one that works for everybody. That's our vision for a stronger economy and a growing middle-class. And that's the difference between what we and the Republicans in Congress are offering the American people right now.
They will prefer to stay at home collecting their unemployment checks
this is just another move to stimulate inflation into the economy.
I am just hoping that china sell off all US debt and finds another country to export !
The world is a huge place and there are many takers for it !
RMB is the world currency accept it or not !