http://www.time.com/...
TIME Mag always gets nostalgic for the year gone by; enclosed is the link for people who made a difference this year, which will then lead to people who died that impacted our society during their lifetimes, which will then lead to who knows where.
Last week I wrote that I supported TIME Magazine for choosing Putin as their Man of the Year. Many of you expressed concern--I was aware, you asked, that under his regieme, journalists, writers, and other sorts of protesters had died in an amount equal to the amount that are dying annually in Iraq?
My point exactly.I am expressly sorry if I didn't make this point clear, previously. Working retail during Christmas has made me extremely exhausted and it is only now that I have had time to breathe and catch up.
Picture, for example, if Minister Hu Jintao had been chosen as the Man of the Year. Out of rage, many readers would outright cancel their subscription. The crimes and transgressions of China have been widely publicized and noted, and, as the Beijing games have become more pressing, the crimes of China have become more pertinent. This has also led to more grassroots movement against China, against their involvement (and appalling lack theirof) in Sudan/Angola/et cetera, and has given the public outlets to pressure their respective representatives to make decisions respective to how they feel about having their jobs.
Now that Russia is garnering the attention that China has long recieved--and will continue in the future to recieve more--more and more of Putin's appalling behavior's will becoming to light. Moreover, the policies that Putin has instigated that has brought the Chechen rebel groups under jurisdiction will come to light not simply as effective means of controlling militant factions, but moreso as means of controlling any faction seen as "government destructor." That also means that more and more of the activities of the Russian government will come to light, and will be seen as they are for what they are.
This, in my opinion, will usher in and further solidify the movement in economics/finance, which, until the past 10 years has been seen as fringe/extremeist and has not been met with much warmth, nee since the "green" movement was welcomed: ethical investing. We see it on a grassroots level with "free trade coffee," but, on a more global scale, I feel that, within the next 20/25 years, investors are going to expect that thier money be spent by companies that, from the bottom up, be used in fair market value commodities. This means that workers are paid per hour what their skills and abilities are worth, and not what their comission is worth. This will also mean that a new, safer era of work will be ushered in, and that the cost of goods, services, and basics will inherently, rise. This also means that, for the more educated and discretionary investors, there will be an expectation that the higher the cost of the good/service, the more education, respect due per worker. The era of the blue collar worker will be over only in the sense of how we see blue collar workers treated overseas: sweat shops, comissioned per piece pay, dangerous conditions of employment, impossible contract negotiations, et cetera. The employees will be empoweed to be their own champion, with the consumer as their guide.
These are all far reaching and long term ideals, that may never come to pass. In the mean time, now that eyes are turned to Moscow, Moscow may now have to turn to itself.