Showing posts with label American. Show all posts
Showing posts with label American. Show all posts

Indian girl trapped in life of cigarette rolling

Indian girl trapped in life of cigarette rolling — Sagira Ansari sits on a dusty sack outside her uneven brick home in this poor town in eastern India, her legs folded beneath her. She cracks her knuckles, then rubs charcoal ash between her palms.

With the unthinking swiftness of a movement performed countless times before, she slashes a naked razor blade into a square-cut leaf to trim off the veins. She drops in flakes of tobacco, packs them with her thumbs, rolls the leaf tightly between her fingers and ties it off with two twists of a red thread.

For eight hours a day, Sagira makes bidis — thin brown cigarettes that are as central to Indian life as chai and flat bread.

She is 11 years old.

In this Thursday, Jan. 26, 2012 photo, 11-year-old Sagira Ansari holds up bundles of bidi tobacco cigarettes that she rolled at her house in Dhuliyan, in the eastern Indian state of West Bengal. Sagira is among hundreds of thousands of children toiling in the hidden corners of rural India, many working in hazardous industries crucial to the economy: the fiery brick kilns that underpin the building industry, the pesticide-laden fields that produce its food. Sagira and nearly every other child in the town of Dhuliyan works through the tobacco dust to feed India's near limitless demand for the thin, tight cigarettes. Sagira and her family earn 75 rupees ($1.50) for every 1,000 bidis rolled which brings in about 7,500 rupees ($150) a month. (AP Photo/Rafiq Maqbool)
 
Sagira is among hundreds of thousands of children toiling in the hidden corners of rural India. Many work in hazardous industries crucial to the economy: the fiery brick kilns that underpin the building industry, the pesticide-laden fields that produce its food.

Most of the children in Sagira's town of Dhuliyan in West Bengal state work in the tobacco dust to feed India's near limitless demand for bidis.

Under Indian law, this is legal.
Sagira, who has deep brown eyes and a wide smile, joined her family's bidi work when she was seven. At first she just rolled out thread for her older sisters and brother, then she helped finish off the cigarettes, pushing down the open ends. Last year, she graduated to full-scale rolling.

She is not alone. Her best friend, Amira, also rolls bidis. So do Wasima and Jaminoor and the rest of the girls in a neighborhood that is, at its heart, a giant, open-air bidi factory.

Parents and children roll cigarettes on rooftops, in the alleyways, by the roads. One woman draped in a red shawl in the yard behind Sagira's house breast feeds her baby while rolling. Of the roughly 20,000 families in Dhuliyan, an estimated 95 percent roll bidis to survive.

Sagira is expert enough that even when distracted, her fingers continue to flit blindly through the tobacco shavings in front of her.

She says the work can make her ill, with a cold, a cough, a fever. Her head often aches. So do her fingers.

Sometimes, she takes her woven basket of tendu leaves and tobacco to the banks of the Ganges to roll in a circle with her friends. She stops every so often to splash in the river for a few moments. Then she gets back to work.

"I can't play around," she laments.____
 
Manu Seikh, the bidi king of Sagira's neighborhood, sits on a roadside bench. In front of him lie orderly stacks of rupee bills — tens, fifties, hundreds — large bags filled with one- and two-rupee coins and a small box holding his asthma inhaler.

He and thousands of middlemen like him are the linchpins that provide the veneer of legality to the bidi industry, insulating the powerful companies selling bidis from the families and children rolling them.

Seikh, 66, got his start in a bidi factory when he was 16, back when bidis were rolled on the factory floor.

A 1986 law barred children under 14 from working with bidis and other hazardous industries, but left a huge loophole that allowed children to assist their families with work performed at home.

So now, while the tobacco is threshed, cut and blended in factories, it is then given to Seikh and other middlemen to distribute to families for rolling. The bidis are then brought back to the factory for roasting, packaging and shipping. A pack of 10 to 12 will retail for 6 rupees, or 12 cents.

The informal nature of the work makes it nearly impossible to count how many of India's 7 million bidi rollers are children, but estimates range from 250,000 to 1 million.

Every noon, adults and children carry baskets and tubs filled with bundles of bidis to Seikh's corner stall, where his men scan them for quality, reject those deemed substandard and stack the others in shallow wooden boxes. A bookkeeper makes a note in a ledger and hands over a chit for payment.

Then the rollers receive more tobacco and tendu leaves for another day's work.

Seikh blames poverty for forcing the children to work, and the government for failing to stop it.

"I am very concerned about children not going to school and losing their futures. But we are helpless," Seikh says.

In his nearby factory, Ranjan Choudhary, 37, also distances himself from blame, even as boys aged about 7 or 8 slide bidis into plastic pouches and seal them on a small stove.

Whatever the child labor laws say, he sees the industry as "a lifeline" for the people.

"It affects children, but for them to survive, this is the only industry here. There is no other source of income," he said.

The industry's chief trade group also brushed off responsibility.

"The child has every right to help the mother. As long as we don't recruit the children to roll bidis, I don't think we violate any act," said Umesh Parekh, chief executive of the All India Bidi Industry Federation.

Bidi rollers should "themselves exercise restraint" in using children, he said, adding that his trade group had no plans to fight against child labor.

"The industry is not doing anything for that. It is for the government to do," he said.

The government is reevaluating its child labor policy, said Mrutyunjay Sarangi, India's labor secretary, but had yet to decide on any concrete action.

"We are having discussions," he said.

India has tacitly recognized this Dickensian nightmare with a recent law making education compulsory up to age 14, said Bhavna Mukhopadhya of the Voluntary Health Association of India, an aid group. "Everything has a time, and I think this is the right time to do it ... you have to ban child labor across the board, strictly," she said.

But efforts to change the labor laws are complicated by the bidi industry's clout in government. One company owner even sits in the national Cabinet.

___

Sagira's town was once a textile center where her family for generations wove scarves and sarongs on hand looms.

Mired in poverty, they lived in a mud and thatch hut and could afford only a single meal a day for their 12 children. "We were starving," said Sagira's father, Mahmood Ansari.

Then the Ganges caused flooding that destroyed the family's house — and its loom.

Meanwhile, merchants from other states realized the cheap labor here would be ideal for bidi work.

Sagira's grandfather turned to bidi rolling, then her father when he turned 12.

Now, every day at 8 a.m., Sagira, her 17-year-old brother and sisters aged 18 and 14 begin a four-hour rolling session. They stop to bathe and have lunch, spend a few hours cutting the tendu leaves into neat squares and then roll for a few more hours.

Because of bidis, his seven children are far better off than he was, Ansari said.

The family gets 75 rupees ($1.50) for every 1,000 bidis rolled, totaling about $150 a month. That's enough for three meals a day, with a little fish or egg once a week. A few months ago, Ansari used loans to replace the home of tarps and sticks his family had lived in for two decades with an unfinished two-room house of brick and plaster with dirt floors.

But there is not much hope for Sagira's future.

She's only been to school twice in the past month; she's too busy, her mother, Alea Bibi, said. She only goes when there's a reason, when new books are being handed out or to register for the aid the government gives to bidi rollers as an incentive to educate their children.

When she does show up, she is humiliated for her absences, made to hold her ears with her elbows outstretched and repeatedly sit down and stand up. It doesn't work, yet each year she graduates to the next grade, regardless of her attendance.

She barely knows math, but can at least count to 25, the number of bidis in a finished bundle.

But at night, after the work is done, her brother, who rarely attends school himself, uses her schoolbooks to teach her to read.

She dreams of being a schoolteacher.

Far more likely, she will get faster at rolling bidis, which will improve her marriage prospects. Then, as so often happens here, her husband might stop working, and she — and eventually her own children — will become the bidi-rolling breadwinners.

Her father sees no way to break the cycle.

"We are destined to roll bidis," he said. ( Associated Press )

READ MORE - Indian girl trapped in life of cigarette rolling

How Much the 'Fiscal Cliff' Will Cost You

How Much the 'Fiscal Cliff' Will Cost You - It sounds pretty abstract: If Congress doesn't deal with a bunch of controversial tax and spending decisions by the end of the year, something bad will happen to the economy. But the odds are, negotiators in Washington will come up with some kind of last-minute deal that averts disaster.

That's the general narrative relating to the "fiscal cliff," which means the whole ordeal might come and go with no real effect on ordinary Americans. But there are other worrisome possibilities. Congress could temporarily let a huge set of tax hikes and spending cuts go into effect at the start of 2013, as scheduled, while planning to rescind them later in the year, once the next Congress is seated. Or, Republicans and Democrats could split the difference and allow some of those measures to take effect. There's also the chance that Congress could botch the whole thing--with partisan bickering standing in the way of any kind of deal--and torpedo the entire economy.

The tax hikes and spending cuts due to take effect total more than $600 billion per year--with tax hikes accounting for most of that. So while the policies under debate are somewhat arcane, the outcome could lead to tax hikes for virtually every American if Congress plunges over the fiscal cliff, even temporarily.

The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center says that if all the scheduled tax increases occur, the average household would have to fork over an extra $3,400 to Uncle Sam next year. Here's the average hike taxpayers would face, broken down by income group:
  • Lowest fifth of households (average income: $11,239): $412
  • Second-lowest fifth (average income: $29,204): $1,231
  • Middle fifth (average income: $49,842): $1,984
  • Second-highest fifth (average income: $80,080): $3,540
  • Highest fifth (average income: $178,020): $14,173
  • Top 1 percent (average income: about $1.3 million): $120,537
The biggest hit for most people would come from the expiration of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, which would raise income-tax rates for everybody by 3 to 5 percentage points, depending on the tax bracket. Those changes alone would raise the tax rate for a family earning $80,000 from 25 percent to 28 percent, resulting in about $1,450 worth of new taxes.

But there are at least nine different tax hikes due to go into effect in 2013, which is why few taxpayers would escape the noose. For the lowest fifth of earners, the biggest change would be the expiration of temporary tax cuts that were originally passed as part of the 2009 stimulus plan and then extended through 2012. The end of those breaks would raise the tax bill of the lowest quintile by about $329 per year. Other scheduled tax hikes include higher rates on capital gains and other investment income, a lower threshold for the estate tax, and a new tax on high earners to help pay for the Obama healthcare reforms.

Congress can rescind some or all of those, which will be a big part of the negotiations between Capitol Hill and the White House over the next several weeks. But doing so would perpetuate Washington's huge budget deficits and continue to erode investor confidence in the stability of the government's finances. So it's likely that at least a few of the scheduled tax hikes will actually happen. Taxpayers who aren't paying attention to the fiscal cliff probably will be soon. ( US news )

READ MORE - How Much the 'Fiscal Cliff' Will Cost You

Why Men Like Petraeus Risk It All to Cheat

Why Men Like Petraeus Risk It All to Cheat - An admitted affair has crumbled the career of CIA Director David Petraeus, prompting the evergreen question: Why do people with so much to lose risk it all for sex?

In the last few years alone, several public figures, from former Rep. Anthony Weiner to action star and former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, have admitted to straying from their marital vows. In Petraeus' case, a miscalculation of risk may have contributed to the decision to cheat, psychologists say.


"People tend to underestimate how quickly small risks mount up" because of repeated exposure to those risks, said Baruch Fischhoff, a professor of social and decision science at Carnegie Mellon University. "You do something once and you get away with it — certain things you're probably going to get away with — but you keep doing them often enough, eventually the risk gets pretty high."
 
http://l1.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/sWoQxyUiSMILk4SSw_061Q--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9ZmlsbDtoPTM1OTtweW9mZj0wO3E9NzU7dz01NzU-/http://media.zenfs.com/en_US/News/LiveScience.com/petraeus-121112.jpg1352752599
Now-retired U.S. Army Gen. David Petraeus addresses service members during a reenlistment ceremony at Kandahar Airfield, Afghanistan, July 4, 2011 before he left the military to head the CIA.

Even so, men can become blind to risk at the sight of an attractive woman, and from an evolutionary perspective, cheating can be a positive mechanism for ensuring gene survival, regardless of risk, scientists say.

Military affairs
Petraeus, a retired four-star general, resigned his post as CIA Director on Friday (Nov. 9), admitting to an affair with Paula Broadwell, his biographer. Twenty years the general's junior, Broadwell had close access to Petraeus for several years, but their affair reportedly did not start until after he left the military in 2011.

A West Point graduate, Broadwell is a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army Reserves. She reportedly bonded with Petraeus over physical activity, going on runs with him and remaining a close confidant after Petraeus' military career ended.


That time together likely contributed to the intimacy between Petraeus and Broadwell, said Frank Farley, a Temple University psychologist, just as many people begin affairs after getting close in the workplace.

Petraeus is not the first high-ranking military man to have an affair, said Farley, who is also a past president of the American Psychological Association. Famously gruff World War II general George Patton had an affair with his wife's step-niece. General Douglas MacArthur had a mistress named Isabel Rosario Cooper, whom he met in the Philippines.

And General Dwight D. Eisenhower, later president, may have had an affair with his World War II chauffer, Kay Summersby, according to the woman's memoirs and some suggestive letters left behind after both parties died.

"The nation should not be surprised at Petraeus having an affair," Farley told LiveScience.

Leaders like Petraeus tend to be bold risk-takers, Farley said, a personality trait that is very helpful when leading soldiers into battle. The same trait may make these leaders more likely to take risks in their personal lives, as well.

Broadwell may have some of the same risk-taking traits as the former director. In a January interview with The Charlotte Observer, Broadwell, who is also married, called herself and her husband "adventure junkies."

Risk versus reward
Still, Petraeus' 38-year marriage and his career were at stake in his decision to pursue an affair. Extramarital liaisons are especially risky for CIA employees with access to classified information, because an affair can leave the person open to blackmail.

There are also concerns that Broadwell could have gotten classified information from Petraeus. For example, in a speech in Denver in October, Broadwell brought up details about the U.S. Consulate attack in Benghazi that may not have been public knowledge, according to The Daily Beast.

With risks like that on the line, could an extramarital affair be worth it? As it turns out, men may become blind to risk when an attractive woman enters the picture. One 2008 study found that men who played blackjack after seeing beautiful female faces took more risks than men who played the game after seeing unattractive faces.

This was true if the men were highly motivated in seeking new sexual partners. The blackjack risks seemed calculated to impress potential mates, study researcher Michael Baker, now a professor at Eastern Carolina University, told LiveScience.

More germane to high-profile affairs, Baker said, the risk of losing one's career or reputation is nothing compared with the evolutionary drive to reproduce. In that sense, while embarking on an affair may seem dumb, it actually shows something called "mating intelligence."

"These individuals have these very high-status, high-power positions, and the whole idea behind why people might be motivated to get these positions is because it gives them better access to resources that could be used to increase their reproductive success and attract more mates," Baker said.

Until the last few decades, extramarital affairs wouldn't have put a crimp in the careers of high-profile men, Baker said. It's only recently that men have been subject to the consequences of infidelity. And, of course, monogamy is often a lofty ideal.

"The human race has had thousands of years of problems with monogamy," Farley said. "The problems have not been resolved." ( LiveScience.com )

READ MORE - Why Men Like Petraeus Risk It All to Cheat

Satellite imagery shows NKorea missile activity

This Sept. 17, 2012 satellite image provided by DigitalGlobe and annotated by the U.S.-Korea Institute at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, 38 North, shows a facility in Sohae, North Korea where analysts believe rocket engines have been tested in a sign North Korea continues to develop its long-range ballistic missiles. The analysis provided to The Associated Press is based on satellite images taken as recently as late September of the Sohae site on the secretive country's northwest coast. In April, the North conducted a failed attempt to launch a rocket from there carrying a satellite into space in defiance of a U.N. ban. The website of the U.S.-Korea Institute at SAIS said Monday Nov. 12, 2012 that it remains unclear whether the North is preparing a rocket launch but predicted it may embark on new rocket and nuclear tests in the first half of 2013. (AP Photo/DigitalGlobe/ U.S.-Korea Institute at SAIS)

Satellite imagery shows NKorea missile activity — Satellite imagery indicates North Korea has been testing rocket engines, a sign it continues to develop its long-range ballistic missiles, a U.S. academic institute said Monday.

The analysis provided to The Associated Press is based on satellite images taken as recently as late September of the Sohae site on the secretive country's northwest coast. In April, the North launched a rocket from there in a failed attempt to propel a satellite into space in defiance of a U.N. ban.

The analysis on the website of the U.S.-Korea Institute at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, which is called "38 North," said it remains unclear whether the North is preparing another rocket launch but predicted it may embark on new rocket and nuclear tests in the first half of 2013.

This April 9, 2012 satellite image provided by DigitalGlobe and annotated by the U.S.-Korea Institute at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, 38 North, shows a facility in Sohae, North Korea where analysts believe rocket engines have been tested in a sign North Korea continues to develop its long-range ballistic missiles, The analysis provided to The Associated Press is based on satellite images taken as recently as late September of the Sohae site on the secretive country's northwest coast. In April, the North conducted a failed attempt to launch a rocket from there carrying a satellite into space in defiance of a U.N. ban. The website of the U.S.-Korea Institute at SAIS said Monday Nov. 12, 2012 that it remains unclear whether the North is preparing a rocket launch but predicted it may embark on new rocket and nuclear tests in the first half of 2013. (AP Photo/DigitalGlobe/ U.S.-Korea Institute at SAIS)

The analysis underscores the challenges posed by the North's weapons programs to the United States and its allies as President Barack Obama heads into his second term. Washington's most recent attempt to negotiate a freeze in the North's nuclear program and a test moratorium in exchange for food aid collapsed with the April launch that the U.S. regarded as a cover for testing ballistic missile technology.

In 2009, North Korea tested a long-range missile and its second nuclear weapon within months of Obama taking office, and the 38 North analysis says North Korea may conduct new tests in the aftermath of presidential elections recently completed in U.S. and due in December in South Korea. That could be viewed as a tactic to exert more pressure on the close allies as the North seeks recognition as a nuclear power.

Last month, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said North Korea continues to prepare for such tests, and the North, angered by Washington's recent agreement to let Seoul possess missiles capable of hitting all of its territory, has recently claimed that the U.S. mainland is within range of its missiles.

According to South Korea's Defense Ministry, North Korean missiles are believed to have a range of up to about 4,160 miles, putting parts of Alaska within reach. But the North is not believed to have mastered the technology needed to hit a distant target and miniaturize a nuclear warhead to mount on a missile. The North has a spotty record in test launches, raising doubts about whether it is truly capable of a long-distance attack.

The 38 North analysis concludes that since the failed launch on April 13 of the Unha-3 rocket that disintegrated shortly after takeoff, the North has conducted at least two, and possibly more, tests of large rocket motors at a test site about a half mile away. The tests are critical for the development of new rockets.

"Pyongyang's large motor tests are another clear sign that its missile program is moving forward. Whether there will be another long-range missile test this spring remains unclear but is a distinct possibility," said Joel Wit, a former U.S. State Department official and editor of 38 North.

An April 9 satellite image shows what appear to be dozens of fuel tanks near a stand used for conducting tests of rocket engines. A Sept. 17 image shows the tanks are no longer there, and a flame trench has been stained orange and surrounding vegetation has been burned from the exhaust of an engine. An image from Sept. 28 indicates a further test has taken place.

The analysis was written by Nick Hansen, a retired expert in imagery technology with a 43-year experience in national intelligence.

He concludes the tests were likely of the first-stage engines of the Unha-3 or the new, bigger KN-08 long-range missile first viewed in a military parade in Pyongyang shortly after the April launch attempt.

The capabilities of the KN-08 and whether it could pose a potential threat to the continental United States remains unclear. Some analysts have also questioned whether the half-dozen of KN-08 missiles shown at that parade were genuine or just rigged up for show.

The analysis by 38 North says the Sept. 28 images also show construction work on the upper platform of a launch tower at Sohae to enable it to accommodate even larger rockets than the Unha-3 or KN-08. ( Associated Press )

READ MORE - Satellite imagery shows NKorea missile activity

Insiders Explain How Mitt Romney's Campaign Completely Fell Apart On Election Day

Insiders Explain How Mitt Romney's Campaign Completely Fell Apart On Election DayAs conservatives search for an explanation for Mitt Romney's loss, much of the blame has been directed at the collapse of his campaign's Election Day get out the vote efforts, a massive organizational failure that resulted in lower Republican turnout than even John McCain got in 2008.

A major source of Romney's GOTV problems appears to have been the disastrous Project ORCA, an expensive technological undertaking that was supposed to provide the campaign with real-time poll monitoring that would allow Republicans to target GOTV efforts on Election Day.


In the week leading up to the election, Romney campaign spokesperson Andrea Saul told Business Insider that ORCA was "the Republican Party’s newest, most technologically advanced plan to win the 2012 election," touting it as the game-changer that would blow even the Obama campaign's sophisticated GOTV system out of the water.

But on almost all counts, ORCA failed miserably. In a fascinating piece for Ace of Spades, Romney poll-watcher John Ekdahl describes a perfect storm of technology problems that made the ORCA app unusable and left scores of Republican volunteers " wandering around confused and frustrated" on Election Day. 

Worse still, Ekdahl told Business Insider that the Romney campaign failed to provide poll-watching volunteers in his region — Jacksonville, Florida, a key Republican city in a major swing state — with proper credentials and accurate voter strike lists, rendering them unable to perform their duties even if the ORCA app had worked.

In interviews with Business Insider last week, sources close to the Romney campaign confirmed Ekdahl's account, and described a technological undertaking that failed at every level. According to several of these sources, ORCA was developed by a small, isolated tech team working under Romney's political team. These sources told Business Insider that the product was never properly beta-tested, and wasn't revealed to the rest of the campaign — including the digital team — until the week of the election.

Most people on the campaign "weren't that surprised" by ORCA's failure, said one Republican communications strategist close to the Romney campaign.

"They wouldn't let anyone outside of Romney political circle in on it until basically November 6," the strategist said. "The digital strategy was so incomprehensible — they were playing Super Nintendo while Obama's people had PS3."

"Their priorities were so screwed up — [they were] hypersensitive about information security, but also wanted to use the best technology they could," the strategist continued. "In the end they got neither. They put out a laughable GOTV product." ( Business Insider )

READ MORE - Insiders Explain How Mitt Romney's Campaign Completely Fell Apart On Election Day

CIA and Fox News offer competing claims

Former CIA Director David Petraeus and author Paula Broadwell pose for a photo. (AP)

Did Petraeus mistress leak classified information? CIA and Fox News offer competing claims - A recent University of Denver address by Paula Broadwell has set off a torrent of speculation as to whether her affair with Gen. David Petraeus resulted in a leak of classified national security information.

New York magazine got things started by posting a video of Broadwell, author of Petraeus' biography, "All In," discussing details of the Sept. 11 attack on the American Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, at the Oct. 26 talk.

In the video, since posted by several sources to YouTube, Broadwell states: "Now, I don't know if a lot of you heard this, but the CIA annex had actually, had taken a couple of Libyan militia members prisoner, and they think that the attack on the consulate was an effort to try to get these prisoners back. So that's still being vetted."

That clip has led some to speculate whether Broadwell was exposing previously unreported details about the attack.

Other major media outlets, including CBS News and The Daily Beast, have picked up on the video clip. Wired goes a step further, stating as fact that Broadwell did reveal new information, writing: "It was a surprising disclosure, given the deep classification of the CIA's detention policies—and the enormous political stakes surrounding the Benghazi assault. But in many ways, it was only natural for Broadwell, given her evolution from Petraeus protegee to biographer to paramour and unofficial spokesperson."

And Politico points to a July panel discussion at the Aspen Security Forum during which Broadwell claims to have had access to classified information and to have attended high-level security meetings with Petraeus.

However, Broadwell's sound bite could be entirely innocuous, New York magazine notes: "It's also possible that she just misunderstood something she heard on Fox News."

The Fox News Channel reference concerns a report FNC reporter Jennifer Griffin made earlier the same day as Broadwell's university address, in which Griffin cited sources claiming that the CIA was holding high-value detainees in the Benghazi facility at the time of the attack.

You can watch an excerpt from Broadwell's University of Denver address below:


Griffin has since updated her reporting, noting that a well-placed Washington source confirms that Libyan militiamen were being held at the CIA annex and may have been a possible reason for the attack. Multiple intelligence sources, she also reported, said "there were more than just Libyan militia members who were held and interrogated by CIA contractors at the CIA annex in the days prior to the attack. Other prisoners from additional countries in Africa and the Middle East were brought to this location."

The CIA has denied keeping militants at the facility. CIA spokesman Preston Golson said, "Any suggestion that the agency is still in the detention business is uninformed and baseless."

Basically, so far we have a lot of speculation, with individuals commenting on a potential national security leak concerning details of a situation the government says never took place. Stay tuned. ( The Lookout )

READ MORE - CIA and Fox News offer competing claims

America's Generation Y not driven to drive

America's Generation Y not driven to drive -- To Shoshana Gurian-Sherman, driving seemed like a huge hassle.

"Part of it was laziness," the 23-year-old Minneapolis resident recalled. "I didn't really want to put in the effort to learn how to drive ... I knew how to ride the buses, so it was not necessary.

"And the other thing was, it was just scary, the idea of being in charge of a vehicle that potentially could kill me or other people," Gurian-Sherman said.

She eventually got her license at 18, two years later than she could have, after her parents threatened not to pay for college if she did not learn to drive, a skill they considered to be important.

In her reluctance to drive or own a car, Gurian-Sherman is typical of a certain segment of Generation Y, the coveted marketing demographic encompassing the 80 million U.S. residents between the ages of 16 and 34.


http://l3.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/G.HPIhzhye_zRkzgVHNwrQ--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9aW5zZXQ7aD0zNTU7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/gma/us.abcnews.gma.com/gty_distracted_driving_tk_120326_wmain.jpg
Electronic Devices a Leading Distraction for Teen Drivers (ABC News)


Bigger than the post-World War Two baby-boom generation but without the middle-class expansion that drove the earlier group's consumer habits, Generation Y includes an increasing number of people for whom driving is less an American rite of passage than an unnecessary chore.

"That moment of realizing that you're a grown-up - for my generation, that was when you got your driver's license or car," said Tony Dudzik, a senior policy analyst of the Frontier Group, a California-based think tank that has studied this phenomenon. "For young people now, that moment comes when you get your first cellphone."

U.S. residents started driving less around the turn of the 21st century, and young people have propelled this trend, according to the federal government's National Household Travel Survey.

From 2001 to 2009, the average annual number of vehicle-miles traveled by people ages 16-34 dropped 23 percent, from 10,300 to 7,900, the survey found. Gen Y-ers, also known as Millennials, tend to ride bicycles, take public transit and rely on virtual media.

More than a quarter of Millennials - 26 percent - lacked a driver's license in 2010, up 5 percentage points from 2000, the Federal Highway Administration reported.

THE HIGH COST OF DRIVING


At the same time, older people are driving more, researchers at the University of Michigan found. In 2008, those age 70 and older made up the largest group of drivers on the road, more than 10 percent, which was slightly higher than those in their 40s or 50s.

The Michigan researchers offered a few reasons why some younger drivers hesitate to get behind the wheel: the high cost of owning, fueling and maintaining a car and the convenience of electronic communication.

The Frontier Group's Dudzik suggested a related cause: computer and smartphone applications that make taking public transportation easier, with minute-by-minute tracking of buses and trains and simple online maps and travel directions.

Whether Gen Y-ers will eventually drive more than they do now will affect transportation infrastructure costs, Dudzik said.

Bikes and car-sharing services make it easier to avoid the expense of owning a fossil-fueled vehicle. Environmental concerns are another reason, said David Jacobs of the Tombras Group, a marketing firm based in Knoxville, Tennessee.

"It's not the main reason, but it is a compelling reason," Jacobs said.

More central is the group's general anxiety over finances and the economy, he said.

"They're shouldering higher mortgage costs, rent; their insurance costs are higher than previous generation's," Jacobs said. "And all that's happening after a couple of recessions, so they've really never, as young adults, seen a very healthy, stable economy. They're worried about a lot of things."

To sell cars or anything else to Generation Y, he said, "you have to talk to them at their level and make them interested and show them you are a valuable, reputable company with a quality product and you do care about the environment, the economy."
That fits with Gurian-Sherman's thoughts on the environment in her decision not to own a car: "I don't know if I consider myself an environmentalist, but I care about the impact that I have." ( Reuters )

READ MORE - America's Generation Y not driven to drive

Marijuana questions dominate White House online chat -- again

Marijuana questions dominate White House online chat - again -- President Obama's live, online chat slated for Monday afternoon is intended to focus on issues raised during last week's State of the Union address -- but his online audience seems to be much more interested in marijuana policy.

Following Mr. Obama's State of the Union address, the White House invited voters to submit questions to the president via YouTube. The president plans on answering some of those questions during a 45-minute "hangout" session on on Google's social networking site Google Plus. In the "hangout" session, Mr. Obama will chat from the West Wing with some of the voters who submitted questions. The chat will be streamed live on YouTube and WhiteHouse.gov at 5:30 p.m. ET.

According to the White House's YouTube page, 133,216 questions were submitted for the discussion (voting is now closed). YouTube visitors could give the questions a "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" rating, and more than 1.6 million votes were cast.


http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2011/11/17/marijuana_generic_111117_244x183.jpg


Sorting the questions by popularity reveals that 18 of the 20 most popular questions, according to YouTube, have something to do with marijuana policy, including the legalization of marijuana use, the cost of the war on drugs and other related issues.

Questions about marijuana policy have dominated multiple online engagement efforts from the Obama White House. In fact, the second-most popular question for today's "hangout" comes from a retired police officer with the group Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) -- just as it did in Mr. Obama's 2011 YouTube chat.

Tom Angell, media relations director for LEAP, says that his organization took simple steps to mobilize support for this year's video question.

"We recorded the video, put it up online... sent the link to our supporters on Faceook and Twitter, and from there people took it into their own hands," Angell told Hotsheet. "All told, the whole thing consisted of three Facebook posts and three tweets -- that's it."

Angell said he's surprised he hasn't witnessed similar mobilization efforts from other advocacy groups.

"It only takes a few thousand votes from supporters to get something to the top in these competitions," he said. "I'm sure PETA has a much bigger email list than we have."

That said, he thinks marijuana policy questions resonate more for a couple of different reasons. For one thing, young people tend to support marijuana legalization more than other age groups and are also more familiar with social media use.

Secondly, drug policy certainly isn't the top issue on voters' minds, Angell said, but it is "the number one concern which is not being addressed at all in any serious way by policy makers."

In the 2011 YouTube discussion, Mr. Obama said he is not in favor of drug legalization. However, acknowledging that the "war on drugs" has not been effective, he said he thinks of drugs as "more of a public health problem." In a 2010 online discussion, he ignored the question. In 2009, Mr. Obama seemed to laugh off the question after stating his opposition to marijuana legalization.

Angell said LEAP was "somewhat pleased" with the president's answer last year. "He basically said legalization is an entirely legitimate topic," Angell said, in what was perhaps the "first time a sitting president has said we can talk about this."

While the president opposes the legalization of marijuana, half of all Americans said it should be made legal in an October Gallup poll while 46 percent said it should stay illegal.

Though most of the popular questions submitted for today's discussion related to marijuana policy, the top question is about copyright infringement -- another hot topic on the Internet. The top question asks the president, "Why are you personally supporting the extradition UK Citizen Richard O'Dwyer for solely linking to copyright infringing works using an Extradition Treaty designed to combat terrorism and to bring terrorists to Judgement in the USA?" ( cbsnews.com )

READ MORE - Marijuana questions dominate White House online chat -- again

Why doesn’t anyone in Washington take marijuana legalization seriously?

Not That Kind of Smoke-Filled Room - Why doesn’t anyone in Washington take marijuana legalization seriously? - Potheads had high hopes for President Obama’s Google+ hangout on Monday. The Web superpower had invited citizens to submit questions for the president via YouTube, and it encouraged people to vote on the questions they’d like Obama to answer in a live video chat. The results: 18 of the 20 most popular questions were about marijuana policy.

The top vote-getter came from retired LAPD officer Stephen Downing, who said he’s come to see the country’s drug policies as “a failure and a complete waste of criminal justice resources.” Pointing to a recent Gallup poll that showed, for the first time, a majority of Americans in support of marijuana legalization, he asked Obama, “What do you say to this growing voter constituency that wants more changes to drug policy than you’ve delivered in your first term?”

Nothing, as it turned out. The question wasn’t among those selected by Google.


http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/02/120201_POLITICS_marijuanaLegalization.jpg.CROP.article250-medium.jpg


That’s a bummer for the weed lobby but par for the course in Washington, where legalization remains a nonstarter despite fast-growing public support. In 1969, 12 percent of Americans thought pot should be legal. That percentage grew to the mid-20s by the late 1970s, passed 30 percent in 2000, and hit 40 percent in 2009, according to Gallup. A surprising October poll showed support at 50 percent, with just 46 percent against.

While voters have mellowed out, their representatives in Congress haven’t. A legalization bill was introduced in Congress last year for the first time, but few expect it to even come up for a vote. Its sponsors are Barney Frank and Ron Paul, legislators who have built their reputations by taking unpopular stands. Those with something to lose—like, say, an election—still won’t touch the issue. When Obama did field a marijuana question in a YouTube chat last year, he laughed at it. “I don’t know what this says about the online audience,” he chortled. Why won’t the president, or anyone else in Washington, take marijuana policy seriously?

Pro-legalization types see it as a mere matter of time before the government catches up to the rest of the country. “The conventional wisdom for decades has been that this is a dangerous issue,” activist Tom Angell told me. “Behind the scenes people will say, ‘I agree, you’re totally right, we need to change these laws, but I’m afraid to say so.’ For some reason it’s still perceived as a political third rail.”

A primary reason for lawmakers’ reticence is that, for decades, the most visible advocates of looser weed laws have been, well, weed smokers—and what serious politician wants to be associated with a bunch of stoners, man? Earlier this decade, wealthy liberals like George Soros and Peter Lewis (once busted for pot-smoking himself) recognized that problem and shifted the debate to medical marijuana, giving the movement a more sympathetic public face: an ailing grandmother rather than a dreadlocked coach potato. Several states have since passed medical marijuana laws, but they don’t address the bigger issue at play here. It’s recreational users, not glaucoma patients, whose money fuels the illicit drug trade that finances criminal gangs.

That’s why Angell’s group, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, has taken a different approach. It enlists cops and ex-cops to testify to the societal impacts of the failed drug war, pushing decriminalization and legalization as prudent policy solutions. It’s an appeal to reason, not compassion. Downing, the former LAPD cop who asked the YouTube question, is a LEAP board member. The support his video got, from the public if not from Google, testifies to his message’s broad appeal.

While the tactic seems to be working in some liberal states, it has yet to make pot legalization safe for lawmakers in Washington. Anti-drug leaders see that as evidence that Angell is wrong when he argues that it’s just a matter of time. Asa Hutchinson, the former Arkansas congressman who led the Drug Enforcement Administration under George W. Bush, told me he doesn’t see a big difference in how the debate is playing out in Washington today as compared to 10 years ago.

That may be partly a function of congressional demographics and partly a matter of incentives. Even if 50 percent of the public supports legalization, a pro-pot bill will never pass the Senate if those people are concentrated on the coasts. There’s also the fact that potheads tend to be less likely to vote than senior citizens, who came of age in the pre-hippie era and have never inhaled. If legalization opponents are willing to back up their conviction at the ballot box, there’s a lot of risk and little reward for a congressman to assume the marijuana mantle.

Hutchinson proposed a different explanation for the perceived disconnect between Washington and public opinion: There’s not actually a disconnect.

Asked by a pollster whether they support legalization, Hutchinson says, voters may shrug and say, “Why not?” But ask them just how legalized marijuana should be regulated, how it should be taxed, and whether it should be sold at the corner store in their neighborhood, and they’ll quickly change their tune. That seemed to happen even in liberal California, where a referendum on legalized marijuana failed in 2010 in part because voters worried about the mechanisms for ensuring proper oversight.

There may be something to that. It’s extremely rational to oppose the excesses of the drug war. Harsh sentences for marijuana possession are a big reason that U.S. prisons are teeming with poor, young blacks (who are far more likely to be arrested for marijuana use than middle-class whites). Decriminalizing possession, or at least lightening sentences, seems to be an idea whose time is coming.

But legalizing marijuana? That may still be further than the average American, upon reflection, wants to go. A 2010 study by the nonprofit RAND Corporation suggested that legalizing marijuana in California would send pot prices plummeting and consumption soaring. The impact on the state budget would likely be a net positive, but not enough to make a big dent in the Golden State’s financial crisis.

And for all the efforts of groups like LEAP, there’s still the Cheech and Chong factor. One of the RAND paper’s authors, psychologist and U.C.–Berkeley law professor Robert MacCoun, argued that pot’s place in pop culture makes it hard for even generally supportive people to take the issue seriously. (As a marijuana policy researcher, MacCoun says, he can’t grab a snack at a party without someone joking about the munchies.) That sets marijuana legalization apart from other socially liberal causes, such as gay marriage, with which an impassioned moral appeal can resonate deeply even with those inclined to oppose it.

All that said, it’s clear time is on the smokers’ side. The pre-baby boom generation—the country’s last to grow up believing that marijuana was more likely to cause rape, insanity, and suicide than it was to promote passing out on the couch—won’t be a political factor much longer. Today’s middle-aged voters came of age in the 1970s, when marijuana use was even more common than it is today. Some may harbor reservations about laws that allow their kids and grandkids to follow their lead as tokers, but they’re far less likely than their parents to lump weed in the same category as more destructive drugs like heroin and cocaine. It won’t happen today, and it won’t happen in the next four years. Eventually, though, we’ll have our first weed-legalization president. ( slate.com )

READ MORE - Why doesn’t anyone in Washington take marijuana legalization seriously?

Want to win the battle of the bulge? A good night's sleep will help you stick to your diet

Want to win the battle of the bulge? A good night's sleep will help you stick to your diet - Forget punishing gym sessions and miserable meals. The best way to trim a tubby tummy could be to sleep on it.
A study has found that a good night’s rest is a key factor in the battle of the bulge.

Men and women who had at least six hours’ sleep a night and coped well with the stresses of everyday life were twice as likely to lose a stone when put on a diet for six months.

Rest easy: Those who slept for at least six hours were twice as likely to succeed with their diet
Rest easy: Those who slept for at least six hours were twice as likely to succeed with their diet

It is thought that between six and eight hours’ sleep helps keep the hormones that govern the feelings of being full and hungry in balance. And reducing stress stops us from bingeing on comfort foods.

The 500 overweight American men and women who took part in the study were asked to cut back their daily food intake by around 500 calories.

They were also advised gradually to increase the amount of exercise they did, until they reached three hours a week, and eat a healthy, low-fat diet rich in fruit and vegetables.

Weekly group meetings provided motivation and support.

At the start of the study, the dieters were questioned on their sleep habits, how stressed they felt and how much time they spent in front of a TV or computer screen.

Six months later, those who had the lowest stress levels, who also got more than six hours of sleep a night but not more than eight, were most likely to have lost at least 10lb.

And they were twice as likely as stressed-out light sleepers to have shed a stone, the International Journal of Obesity reports.

TV and computer time did not affect dieting success, but this may have been because even the telly addicts took plenty of exercise, the researchers said.

Dr Charles Elder, of the Kaiser Permanente Centre for Health Research, in Portland, Oregon, said: ‘This study suggests that when people are trying to lose weight, they should try to get the right amount of sleep and reduce their stress.

‘Some people may just need to cut back on their schedules and get to bed earlier. Others may find that exercise can reduce stress and help them sleep.

‘For some people, mind-body techniques such as meditation might also be helpful.’
He added that stress may bring on hormonal changes that heighten appetite. This sends people reaching for junk food.

Other slightly unusual advice for keeping slim includes turning down the heating and keeping your hands clean.

It is claimed that ‘comfortable’ temperatures stop us from burning off fat, while some scientists believe that a virus spread by dirty hands fools the body into making fat cells. ( dailymail.co.uk )

READ MORE - Want to win the battle of the bulge? A good night's sleep will help you stick to your diet