America's problem: Money politics seldom supports reforms

“Money politics” has become even more prominent in the U.S. presidential race this year.

In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court removed the limits on corporate donations to political campaigns and ruled that corporate donations are a protected form of free speech. As a result, this year’s congressional and presidential elections have become the most expensive in U.S. history, with billions of U.S. dollars spent already.

While rich people are throwing loads of money into the presidential election, ordinary Americans are worried about their own financial conditions.

Over the past 20 years, the income of middle-class Americans has been on the decline, and the income gap is becoming increasingly wide.

A poll has found that most Americans believe that too much money has been spent on the elections, and political contributions will only enhance rich people’s influence over the policy-making. No matter who is elected the U.S. president, he is bound to pay more attention to the needs of the rich than those of the poor.

Rich people are enjoying greater influence in politics, while the rights of ordinary voters are being damaged, which runs counter to the U.S. constitutional principle of “political equality.”

The economy is the decisive factor in this year’s presidential election, but the two candidates have mainly attacked each other, and failed to introduce specific plans for solving the country’s economic problems when it comes to debates on economic issues.

The weak U.S. economy is a result of both the global financial crisis that broke out a few years ago and the country’s own political problems. All Americans see on television is the ugly partisan strife and politicians’ lack of courage to carry out reforms.

The U.S. president needs great public support to lead the country out of crisis, and should figure out whether he rules simply for the sake of ruling or acts only after carefully considering the people’s immediate and long-term interests. Americans should remember that money politics seldom support reforms.

Read the Chinese version: “金钱政治”砸不出变革动力; 
Source: People's Daily; Author: Zhong Sheng
Newscribe : get free news in real time 

South-East Asia in the frontline of US containing China rise?

The US presidential contest will make very little difference to us. American policy in the Asia-Pacific has already been reconfigured. The die has been cast.
DON’T wait up. As the world’s second-largest (and most expensive) democracy elects a president, South-East Asians might as well switch off. The US presidential contest will make very little difference for us.

Obama or Romney? Republican or Democrat? Who cares? American policy in the Asia-Pacific has already been reconfigured. The die has been cast.

After a decade-long obsession with Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States has finally switched its focus further east.

In essence, Washington has acknowledged Asia’s centrality both economically and now, politically.

The move has been dubbed the “pivot” as a steady shift towards Asia (and especially the “containment” of China) becomes more deeply-institutionalised in Beltway thinking.

Another less well-known development is accelerating this shift.

Basically, the United States after decades of being a net importer of energy is emerging as a new exporter.

This trend – driven by the shale gas revolution (powered by the “fracking” technique by which gas is extracted from rock) – will reshape the way Americans view the world.

Certainly, petro-powers such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates will see their influence dipping in Washington DC.

According to the US Energy Information Administration, the world’s second-largest energy consumer after China has huge shale gas reserves (some 860 trillion cubic feet).

Indeed, The Economist in July 2012 estimated that shale gas currently contributes one third of America’s gas supplies and by 2035 this could rise to 50%.

Moreover, these new developments could create three million jobs in the United States by 2020.

There’s also the possibility – controversial and hotly-debated– that America might start exporting its LNG surplus, generating, according to Michael A. Levi of the Council on Foreign Relations in an August 2012 New York Times article, an additional US$3bil per year for the American economy.

It’s hard to imagine how an energy-independent America will behave.

There’s no doubt that the Middle East will no longer be so central to US foreign policy. Instead, a resurgent America may well have greater wherewithal to check China in their common Asia-Pacific backyard.

Moreover, an influx of American LNG imports could strengthen its influence on countries like Japan (which is seeking to step away from nuclear power) and radically upend Asian energy markets, including in South-East Asia.

For starters, Indonesia’s coal will be less sought after.

At the same time, the region’s large and costly LNG facilities may well end up experiencing a drop in profitability as long-term contracts lose their attractiveness.

Ironically, America’s new-found energy independence is contrasted by China’s increasing energy import-dependence.

In July, Beijing’s National Energy Administration reported that the Middle Kingdom imported 81.09 million tonnes of coal (up 70.6% year-on-year), 30.2 million tonnes of crude oil (up 30.2%) and 4.08 million tonnes of LNG (up 100.2%) in the first half of 2012 alone.

China’s demand for energy is vast.

Imagine then a super-power that views its energy security with mounting unease, if not “paranoia”: watching developments in the South China Sea, the Strait of Malacca and Myanmar as a series of deliberate moves to limit its reach.

So, while the US presidential elections won’t have any direct bearing on our lives, South-East Asians are going to have to get used to being an important geopolitical stage as the two great superpowers jockey for pre-eminence.

For starters, our hitherto uneventful Asean meetings (durian fests, golf, silk batiks and bad karaoke) will become argumentative, testing all of us.

What happened recently at the Asean Foreign Ministers meeting in Phnom Penh when the Cambodian hosts refused to sign off on a joint communique will become a regular occurrence as Great Power rivalry courses its way through our association.

Having said this, the region barely featured during the actual campaign.

The third and final Obama-Romney debate on foreign policy was merely a set-piece of China sabre-rattling.

Still, Obama’s “pivot” towards Asia and Romney’s talk of a “Reagan Economic Zone” of “free trade”-oriented nations to combat China’s influence underlines the shift.

Of course, all of this is not surprising. We all know that economic gravity is shifting to Asia which in turn will also boost the strategic importance of South-East Asia.

So, like it or not, the next American president’s main foreign policy challenges are likely to come from South-East Asia as anywhere else.

Let’s not forget that China will also have a new leadership in place by then as well, fronted by that princeling extraordinaire Xi Jinping.

As I said earlier, South-East Asia is likely to be at the frontlines of the next global contest for supremacy. Let’s hope we’ll be able to cope with all the attention.

CERITALAH By KARIM RASLAN

Related posts: 

The role that the US plays in Asia: Containment of China! Nov 27, 2011 
China advises ASEAN to be independent Jun 26, 2012

Singapore warns US on anti-China rhetoric! Feb 11, 2012

China warns US on Asia military strategy Jan 07, 2012

US Military Strategy to Asia: Poke a Stick In China's Eye Jan 22, 2012

US threat: superpower gun barrels pivot east Aug 12, 2012

America's Highest-Paying Office Jobs

If you want to keep getting raises, get promoted to senior management. As tough as the economy has been, people in executive positions saw their paychecks increase by an average of 6.6% this year, to $108,800. That’s according to data just released by Compdata Surveys, a national compensation survey and consulting firm in Olathe, Kan.

Compdata looked at base salaries for 26 senior management jobs below C-level. For the eighth consecutive year, commercial lending directors take the top spot, with the highest average paychecks. They are earning $143,700, on average, in 2012, up from $139,000 last year.

In Pictures: America’s 10 Highest-Paying Office Jobs

“Commercial lending directors hold the top spot again this year and have for many years. Although their salary did take a slight hit during the recession, it was minor compared to other senior management positions,” says Amy Kaminski, a vice president at Compdata Surveys. “This is likely because of the nature of their work.”

Commercial lending directors are responsible for the development, administration and oversight of commercial lending policies. “Since a large number of new businesses fail within the first five years, a lot of pressure is put on commercial lending directors to ensure the loans they are granting are sound,” Kaminski adds. “The recession only amplified the difficulty of this position as the qualifications to obtain any type of loan became more rigid.”

Ranking second on the list, engineering directors are making an average of $131,300 this year, up 7.4% from 2011.

“Engineering directors have always been one of the higher paid senior management positions,” Kaminski says. “Engineers are in great demand, and finding a person with the right combination of education, experience and leadership skills to oversee a company’s engineering activities can be difficult. Now, with speculation of an engineering shortage looming, compounded with an increased emphasis on growing the manufacturing industry in the United States, engineering directors have become a valuable asset.”

In the No. 3 position, general managers are earning $131,200, up slightly from $127,900 last year, while No. 4 finance directors are making $125,000, which is 9.5% more than they made in 2011.

The biggest winners over a five-year period are material management directors, who are earning 18% more this year than in 2007, and accounting directors, whose paychecks have grown 17.8% in the same period.

“Over the past several years, an emphasis has been placed on lean manufacturing practices, with these practices even inching their way into other industries,” Kaminski says. “Keeping tight control over inventory levels or materials needed for businesses to function is a big element of implementing lean practices – and that is where materials management directors come in.”

They control, measure, and regulate efficient inventory levels, making sure to have enough materials on hand to conduct business. “The recession reinforced this practice, as budgets were slashed and employers demanded that no dollar be wasted,” she says. “Keeping the proper amount of materials on hand while trying to ensure minimal or no overstock is a balancing act at which material management directors need to excel.”

Of the 26 jobs included in the survey, only one—controller assistant—is earning less in 2012 than last year. These professionals manage the accounting functions under the general direction of the controller, including establishing and maintaining accounting principles, practices, and procedures. To hold this position, you need a Bachelor’s degree and six years of experience. They’re earning $81,400 this year, down 2.2% from 2011.

“We would not consider this a large enough decrease to show a trend, especially since this position did experience a higher than expected increase in 2011,” Kaminski says. When you look at the overall results of the past five years, this position is still trending upward.

So, why are some employers compensating their managers so well right now?

“It’s no secret that having the most talented and experienced individuals on staff are going to be the key for most businesses to successfully begin moving forward after the recession. However, some studies suggest as the economy continues to improve, more individuals will be looking to change employment,” Kaminski says. “Companies cannot afford to lose those needed to lead their workers towards economic growth.”

Providing competitive compensation plans is an important element in retaining those individuals. Although the unemployment rate is just under 8%, the pool of qualified leadership candidates is significantly smaller, “making the need to retain your successful leaders that much more important,” she concludes.

Salary Data for All 26 Management Jobs:

Commercial Lending Director – $143,700 a year, on average
Engineering Director – $131,300 a year, on average
General Manager – $131,200 a year, on average
Finance Director – $125,000
Information Syrtems Director – $121,500
Accounting Director – $118,600

Development Officer – $118,200
Marketing Director – $118,100
Information Security Director – $116,600
Human Resources Director – $116,000
Operations Director – $115,200
Controller – $114,800
Materials Management Director – $113,000
Plant Manager – $112,000
Mortgage Lending Director – $111,100
Nursing Services Director – $109,600
Senior Manufacturing Manager – $108,000
National Sales Manager – $106,300

Systems and Programming Manager – $100,600
Plant Engineering Manager – $98,900
Distribution Manager – $86,500
Quality Control Manager – $83,600
General Accounting Manager – $83,300
Advertising and Public Relations Manager – $82,500
Human Resources Manager – $82,000
Assistant Controller – $81,400

America's 10 Highest-Paying Office Jobs

If you want to keep getting raises, get promoted to senior management. As tough as the economy has been, people in executive positions saw their paychecks increase by an average of 6.6% this year, to $108,800. That's according to data just released by Compdata Surveys, a national compensation survey and consulting firm in Olathe, Kan.Here are the 10 highest-paying senior management jobs below C-level.

This is an update of a piece that ran previously.

Jacquelyn Smith, Forbes Staff

 

  Newscribe : get free news in real time