2009年3月3日星期二

2009.3.1

相关文章:
CSS教程4、CSS的Text文本[翻译Htmldog]
用css网站布局之十步实录!(九)
注意预防黄金的回调风险


 Today is the first day of this month. I went
to work this morning. Four hours working time at motel. It makes me
very tired. All the check-out room for me. I cleaned eight rooms on
time.


 


It is very hot today. I know it is very cool in shanghai. I'm
really missing the cool weather in shanghai.


 


I contacted with grandmother who was at Jiangfen's house. I sew
her and xiaofeng. We talked sth about our life. We are very happy
with that. Jiangfen will go to America this coming August. I hope
she will be fine in America. She applied the university which is in
Newyork. The tuition is very expensive. It costs 30W rmb per from
them. I hope she will get profit from the oversea study. Find her
way in her future.


 


I will go to tafe tomorrow. I hope it will be cool tomorrow.


 


面试时毁掉你的十个漏点

相关文章:
大盘调整后或将迎来反弹_智策
一生寻找“咖啡罐型股票”
DIVCSS布局实例:用css网站布局之十步实录!(目录)






Print


The great thing about a job interview is the way that it narrows
the field. If you can get in front of the people making a hiring
decision, that means that you've already moved from a group of
perhaps 100 resumes to a field of
just a few serious contenders. At that point, your chance of
getting a job offer improves dramatically.



Of course, having surmounted that huge hurdle, the last thing you
want to do is blow it. To that end, here are 10 job-interview gaffes to avoid.



1. Complaining about the parking or
directions(抱怨停车位或门难找)


Don't think it doesn't happen! As cordial and happy-go-lucky as
your interviewers may seem, they don't want to hear a job-seeker
complain that the place was hard to find or that the parking is
inconvenient. The best (that is, the worst) example of this I ever
experienced as an HR person came from the candidate who said,
"Seven handicapped parking spaces next to the front door? What, are
you having a wheelchair convention or something?" That was a short
interview.



2. Bad-mouthing your previous job, manager, or
company(对以前的工作、上司或公司责备)


If you've been laid off or suffered some other unpleasant
experience at your last job, it's easy to launch into a litany of
everything the old employer did wrong. Don't do it! The interviewer
is bound to wonder "Will this person be bashing me behind my back
on some future interview, too?" Zip it.



3. Digging into details off the bat(匆忙陷入细节)

The typical selection process allows plenty of time for you to
learn everything you need to know about the company's dental plan,
its tuition-reimbursement policy, and the size of your cubicle.
Don't ask about any of these items on a first interview, when you should be focusing the
conversation on the role and the organization.



4. Groveling(无尊严地求职)

Employers want to hire people who can do the jobs and who are
enthusiastic about the work. What's not so appealing is the
candidate whose every word and gesture conveys the message, "Hire
me, I beg you!" Joblessness is no fun, but you don't help your
chances of getting the nod by presenting yourself as a candidate
whose most notable attribute is desperation.



5. Answering a question before you understand
it(急于回答需要深思熟虑的问题)


The absolute worst answer to any interview question is the response
that shows you weren't really listening. When an interviewer asks a
question that requires thought, like, "Tell me about a time when
you had to convince a team of people to change gears," you don't
want to blurt out, "Oh, I've done that a million times!" Any "tell
me about a time when" question is a question that the interviewer
has chosen to elicit a specific problem/solution story from you.
Take the time to think through the question and compose a
thoughtful answer. A few minutes of silence in the room won't kill
anybody.



6. Spacing out(心神不定)

Any interviewer worth her salt will be able tell when you've zoned
out. If you're wondering whether the 5:40 train will get you home
in time to watch the playoff game, the interviewer will spot it in
your eyes. If you're really out of it, he may throw you a curve
ball like, "So, who would you say was the most effective member of
Teddy Roosevelt's cabinet, and why?" Stay in the room, with your
eyes either meeting the interviewer's or looking thoughtfully at
the ceiling. Or your shoes.



7. Slouching(无规无矩)

We'll throw in tipping the chair back off its front legs, resting
your head on your hand, and lacing your fingers together behind
your head.



8. Cursing(临时紧张)

Interviewers love to put job candidates at ease. When you reach the
state of ease that lets an "f-bomb" escape your lips, you've gone
too far.



9. "Opening the kimono."(敞开心扉)

It's tempting to share with a sympathetic interviewer the news that
this job search has been really hard, that you're not getting
callbacks, and that you've already sent out 150 resumes. Don't do it. Smart job candidates put
out a vibe that says, "I'm glad to be here with you and this job
might be fun, but I'm a capable person who's aware of his value on
the job market."



10. Doing anything disgusting(坏习惯令人作呕)

The long list of personal gross factors includes picking one's
teeth or nose, spitting, and other unmentionables that are best
left to the imagination. Any of these is a sure-fire
interview-killer (and can we really blame the employer for that?).
One candidate asked me for a cup of water, took a sip, swished it
around in his mouth, and spat into a potted plant. Niiiiiice!

Liz Ryan is a 25-year HR veteran, former Fortune 500 VP and
an internationally recognized expert on careers and the new
millennium workplace. Contact Liz at liz@asklizryan.com or join the
Ask Liz Ryan online community at www.asklizryan/group.

The opinions expressed in this column are solely the
author's.




Also on Yahoo! HotJobs:



How flexible should you really
be?



10 questions never to ask in job
interviews



How to create a vision for your
career


PresidentObama'saddress(part1of2)

相关文章:
决胜股市七技巧
DIVCSS网页布局中常用的列表元素ulollidldtdd释义
InternetExplorer8(IE8)与两千多中国主流网站不兼容微软声称正在测试


Full text of President Obama's address(part 1 of
2)


 


President Barack Obama addresses a joint session of
Congress in the House Chamber of the Capitol in Washington,
Tuesday, Feb. 24, 2009. Vice President Joe Biden and House
Speaker Nancy Pelosi are behind the president.
(AP
Photo/Evan Vucci)


 


Madame Speaker, Mr. Vice President, members of Congress, and the
first lady of the United States:


I've come here tonight not only to address the distinguished men
and women in this great chamber, but to speak frankly and directly
to the men and women who sent us here.


I know that for many Americans watching right now, the state of
our economy is a concern that rises above all others. And
rightly so. If you haven't been personally affected by this
recession, you probably know someone who has — a friend, a
neighbor, a member of your family. You don't need to hear
another list of statistics to know that our economy is in
crisis, because you live it every day. It's the worry you wake up
with and the source of sleepless nights. It's the job you thought
you'd retire from but now have lost; the business you built your
dream upon that’s now hanging by a thread; the college
acceptance letter your child had to put back in the
envelope. The impact of this recession is real, and it is
everywhere.


But while our economy may be weakened and our confidence shaken,
though we are living through difficult and uncertain times, tonight
I want every American to know this:


We will rebuild, we will recover, and the United States of
America will emerge stronger than before.


The weight of this crisis will not determine the destiny
of this nation. The answers to our problems don't lie beyond our
reach. They exist in our laboratories and universities, in
our fields and our factories, in the imaginations of our
entrepreneurs and the pride of the hardest-working people on
Earth. Those qualities that have made America the greatest force of
progress and prosperity in human history we still possess in
ample measure. What is required now is for this country to
pull together, confront boldly the challenges we face, and
take responsibility for our future once more.


Now if we're honest with ourselves, we'll admit that for
too long, we have not always met these responsibilities — as a
government or as a people. I say this not to lay blame or look
backwards, but because it is only by understanding how we arrived
at this moment that we'll be able to lift ourselves out of this
predicament.


The fact is, our economy did not fall into decline overnight.
Nor did all of our problems begin when the housing market
collapsed or the stock market sank. We have known for
decades that our survival depends on finding new sources of energy.
Yet we import more oil today than ever before. The cost of health
care eats up more and more of our savings each year, yet we keep
delaying reform. Our children will compete for jobs in a global
economy that too many of our schools do not prepare them for. And
though all these challenges went unsolved, we still managed to
spend more money and pile up more debt, both as individuals
and through our government, than ever before.


In other words, we have lived through an era where too often,
short-term gains were prized over long-term prosperity,
where we failed to look beyond the next payment, the next quarter,
or the next election. A surplus became an excuse to transfer
wealth to the wealthy instead of an opportunity to invest in our
future. Regulations were gutted for the sake of a quick
profit at the expense of a healthy market. People bought homes they
knew they couldn't afford from banks and lenders who pushed
those bad loans anyway. And all the while, critical debates
and difficult decisions were put off for some other time on some
other day.


Well that day of reckoning has arrived, and the time to
take charge of our future is here.


Now is the time to act boldly and wisely — to not only revive
this economy, but to build a new foundation for lasting prosperity.
Now is the time to jump-start job creation, restart lending,
and invest in areas like energy, health care and education that
will grow our economy, even as we make hard choices to bring our
deficit down. That is what my economic agenda is
designed to do, and that's what I'd like to talk to you about
tonight.


It's an agenda that begins with jobs.


As soon as I took office, I asked this Congress to send me a
recovery plan by President's Day that would put people back to work
and put money in their pockets. Not because I believe in bigger
government — I don't. Not because I'm not mindful of the massive
debt we've inherited — I am. I called for action because the
failure to do so would have cost more jobs and caused more
hardships. In fact, a failure to act would have worsened our
long-term deficit by assuring weak economic growth for
years. That's why I pushed for quick action. And tonight, I am
grateful that this Congress delivered, and pleased to say that the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is now law.


Over the next two years, this plan will save or create 3.5
million jobs. More than 90 percent of these jobs will be in the
private sector — jobs rebuilding our roads and bridges,
constructing wind turbines and solar panels, laying
broadband and expanding mass transit.


Because of this plan, there are teachers who can now keep their
jobs and educate our kids. Health care professionals can continue
caring for our sick. There are 57 police officers who are still on
the streets of Minneapolis tonight because this plan
prevented the layoffs their department was about to
make.


Because of this plan, 95 percent of the working households in
America will receive a tax cut — a tax cut that you will see in
your paychecks beginning on April 1.


Because of this plan, families who are struggling to pay
tuition costs will receive a $2,500 tax credit for all four years
of college. And Americans who have lost their jobs in this
recession will be able to receive extended
unemployment benefits and continued health care
coverage to help them weather this storm.


I know there are some in this chamber and watching at home who
are skeptical of whether this plan will work. I understand
that skepticism. Here in Washington, we've all seen how quickly
good intentions can turn into broken promises and wasteful
spending. And with a plan of this scale comes
enormous responsibility to get it right.


That is why I have asked Vice President Biden to lead a tough,
unprecedented oversight effort — because nobody
messes with Joe. I have told each member of my Cabinet as
well as mayors and governors across the country that they
will be held accountable by me and the American people for
every dollar they spend. I have appointed a proven and
aggressive inspector general to ferret out any
and all cases of waste and fraud. And we have created a new
Web site called
recovery.gov
so that every American can find out how and where
their money is being spent.


So the recovery plan we passed is the first step in getting our
economy back on track. But it is just the first step.
Because even if we manage this plan flawlessly, there will
be no real recovery unless we clean up the credit crisis that has
severely weakened our financial system.


I want to speak plainly and candidly about this issue
tonight, because every American should know that it directly
affects you and your family's well-being. You should also know that
the money you've deposited in banks across the country is
safe, your insurance is secure and you can rely on the
continued operation of our financial system. That is not the source
of concern.


The concern is that if we do not restart lending in this
country, our recovery will be choked off before it even
begins.


You see the flow of credit is the lifeblood of our
economy. The ability to get a loan is how you finance the
purchase of everything from a home to a car to a college education;
how stores stock their shelves, farms buy equipment, and businesses
make payroll.


But credit has stopped flowing the way it should. Too many bad
loans from the housing crisis have made their way onto the books of
too many banks. With so much debt and so little confidence, these
banks are now fearful of lending out any more money to households,
to businesses or to each other. When there is no lending, families
can't afford to buy homes or cars. So businesses are forced to make
layoffs. Our economy suffers even more, and credit dries up even
further.


That is why this administration is moving swiftly and
aggressively to break this destructive cycle, restore
confidence and restart lending.


We will do so in several ways. First, we are creating a new
lending fund that represents the largest effort ever to help
provide auto loans, college loans and small business loans to the
consumers and entrepreneurs who keep this economy running.


Second, we have launched a housing plan that will help
responsible families facing the threat of foreclosure lower
their monthly payments and refinance their mortgages. It's a
plan that won't help speculators or that neighbor down the
street who bought a house he could never hope to afford, but it
will help millions of Americans who are struggling with declining
home values — Americans who will now be able to take advantage of
the lower interest rates that this plan has already helped bring
about. In fact, the average family who refinances today can save
nearly $2000 per year on their mortgage.


Third, we will act with the full force of the federal government
to ensure that the major banks that Americans depend on have enough
confidence and enough money to lend even in more difficult times.
And when we learn that a major bank has serious problems, we will
hold accountable those responsible, force the necessary
adjustments, provide the support to clean up their balance
sheets, and assure the continuity of a strong, viable
institution that can serve our people and our economy.


I understand that on any given day, Wall Street may be more
comforted by an approach that gives banks bailouts with no
strings attached and that holds nobody accountable for their
reckless decisions. But such an approach won't solve the
problem. And our goal is to quicken the day when we restart lending
to the American people and American business and end this crisis
once and for all.


I intend to hold these banks fully accountable for the
assistance they receive, and this time they will have to
clearly demonstrate how taxpayer dollars result in more lending for
the American taxpayer. This time, CEOs won't be able to use
taxpayer money to pad their paychecks or buy fancy drapes or
disappear on a private jet. Those days are over.


Still, this plan will require significant resources from
the federal government — and yes, probably more than we've already
set aside. But while the cost of action will be great, I can assure
you that the cost of inaction will be far greater, for it
could result in an economy that sputters along for not
months or years, but perhaps a decade. That would be worse for our
deficit, worse for business, worse for you and worse for the next
generation. And I refuse to let that happen.


I understand that when the last administration asked this
Congress to provide assistance for struggling banks,
Democrats and Republicans alike were infuriated by
the mismanagement and results that followed. So were the American
taxpayers. So was I.


So I know how unpopular it is to be seen as helping banks right
now, especially when everyone is suffering in part from
their bad decisions. I promise you — I get it.


But I also know that in a time of crisis, we cannot afford to
govern out of anger or yield to the politics of the moment.
My job — our job — is to solve the problem. Our job is to govern
with a sense of responsibility. I will not spend a single penny for
the purpose of rewarding a single Wall Street executive, but
I will do whatever it takes to help the small business that can't
pay its workers or the family that has saved and still can't get a
mortgage.


That's what this is about. It's not about helping banks — it's
about helping people. Because when credit is available again, that
young family can finally buy a new home. And then some company will
hire workers to build it. And then those workers will have money to
spend, and if they can get a loan too, maybe they'll finally buy
that car or open their own business. Investors will return
to the market, and American families will see their retirement
secured once more. Slowly but surely, confidence will return, and
our economy will recover.


So I ask this Congress to join me in doing whatever proves
necessary. Because we cannot consign our nation to an
open-ended recession. And to ensure that a crisis of this
magnitude never happens again, I ask Congress to move
quickly on legislation that will finally reform our outdated
regulatory system. It is time to put in place tough, new
commonsense rules of the road so that our financial market rewards
drive and innovation, and punishes shortcuts and
abuse.


The recovery plan and the financial stability plan are
the immediate steps we're taking to revive our economy in
the short-term. But the only way to fully restore America's
economic strength is to make the long-term investments that will
lead to new jobs, new industries, and a renewed ability to compete
with the rest of the world. The only way this century will be
another American century is if we confront at last the price of our
dependence on oil and the high cost of health care, the
schools that aren't preparing our children and the mountain of debt
they stand to inherit. That is our responsibility.


In the next few days, I will submit a budget to Congress.
So often, we have come to view these documents as simply numbers on
a page or laundry lists of programs. I see this document
differently. I see it as a vision for America — as a
blueprint for our future.


My budget does not attempt to solve every problem or address
every issue. It reflects the stark reality of what we've
inherited — a trillion dollar deficit, a financial crisis
and a costly recession.


Given these realities, everyone in this chamber — Democrats and
Republicans — will have to sacrifice some worthy priorities
for which there are no dollars. And that includes me.


But that does not mean we can afford to ignore our long-term
challenges. I reject the view that says our problems will simply
take care of themselves, that says government has no role in laying
the foundation for our common prosperity.


For history tells a different story. History reminds us that at
every moment of economic upheaval and transformation,
this nation has responded with bold action and big ideas. In the
midst of civil war, we laid railroad tracks from one coast
to another that spurred commerce and industry. From
the turmoil of the industrial revolution came a
system of public high schools that prepared our citizens for a new
age. In the wake of war and depression, the GI Bill sent a
generation to college and created the largest middle-class in
history. And a twilight struggle for freedom led to a nation
of highways, an American on the moon and an explosion of technology
that still shapes our world.


 


奥巴马每周电台演讲(2009年1月31日)_计算机

相关文章:
黄金T+D介绍
小站长的博客赚钱思维
轻轻松松炒股票


Moving forward


In the
weekly address, President Barack Obama addressed the latest
economic news and urged the passing of an America Recovery and
Reinvestment Plan.



He also announced that Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is
preparing a new strategy for reviving our financial system -- which
will not only ensure that CEOs aren't abusing taxpayer dollars, but
also get credit flowing and lower mortgage costs.


 


ADDRESS OF THE PRESIDENT

TO THE NATION

January 31, 2009


This morning I'd like to talk about some good news and some bad
news as we confront our economic crisis.


The
bad news is well known to Americans across our country as we
continue to struggle through unprecedented economic turmoil.
Yesterday we learned that our economy shrank by nearly 4 percent
from October through December. That decline was the largest in over
a quarter century, and it underscores the seriousness of the
economic crisis that my administration found when we took
office.


Already the slowdown has cost us tens of thousands of jobs in
January alone. And the picture is likely to get worse before it
gets better.


Make no mistake, these are not just numbers. Behind every
statistic there's a story. Many Americans have seen their lives
turned upside down. Families have been forced to make painful
choices. Parents are struggling to pay the bills. Patients can't
afford care. Students can't keep pace with tuition. And workers
don't know whether their retirement will be dignified and
secure.


The
good news is that we are moving forward with a sense of urgency
equal to the challenge. This week the House passed the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Plan, which will save or create more than
3 million jobs over the next few years. It puts a tax cut into the
pockets of working families, and places a down payment on America's
future by investing in energy independence and education,
affordable health care, and American infrastructure.


Now
this recovery plan moves to the Senate. I will continue working
with both parties so that the strongest possible bill gets to my
desk. With the stakes so high we simply cannot afford the same old
gridlock and partisan posturing in Washington. It's time to move in
a new direction.


Americans know that our economic recovery will take years --
not months. But they will have little patience if we allow politics
to get in the way of action, and our economy continues to slide.
That's why I am calling on the Senate to pass this plan, so that we
can put people back to work and begin the long, hard work of
lifting our economy out of this crisis. No one bill, no matter how
comprehensive, can cure what ails our economy. So just as we
jumpstart job creation, we must also ensure that markets are
stable, credit is flowing, and families can stay in their
homes.


Last year Congress passed a plan to rescue the financial
system. While the package helped avoid a financial collapse, many
are frustrated by the results -- and rightfully so. Too often
taxpayer dollars have been spent without transparency or
accountability. Banks have been extended a hand, but homeowners,
students, and small businesses that need loans have been left to
fend on their own.


And
adding to this outrage, we learned this week that even as they
petitioned for taxpayer assistance, Wall Street firms shamefully
paid out nearly $20 billion in bonuses for 2008. While I'm
committed to doing what it takes to maintain the flow of credit,
the American people will not excuse or tolerate such arrogance and
greed. The road to recovery demands that we all act responsibly,
from Main Street to Washington to Wall Street.


Soon my Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner, will announce a new
strategy for reviving our financial system that gets credit flowing
to businesses and families. We'll help lower mortgage costs and
extend loans to small businesses so they can create jobs. We'll
ensure that CEOs are not draining funds that should be advancing
our recovery. And we will insist on unprecedented transparency,
rigorous oversight, and clear accountability -- so taxpayers know
how their money is being spent and whether it is achieving
results.


Rarely in history has our country faced economic problems as
devastating as this crisis. But the strength of the American people
compels us to come together. The road ahead will be long, but I
promise you that every day that I go to work in the Oval Office I
carry with me your stories, and my administration is dedicated to
alleviating your struggles and advancing your dreams. You are
calling for action. Now is the time for those of us in Washington
to live up to our responsibilities.


Jen'sSecretGarden...我的秘密花园:IsSheTrulyQualified

相关文章:
DIVCSS布局实例:用css网站布局之十步实录!(目录)
用css网站布局之十步实录!(五)
决胜股市七技巧


I always have the problem about getting my bow straight when drawing it over the strings. I will draw my bow slantingly into a curve angle throughout my playing. It happens unknowingly everytime and I have no idea how can I keep it as straight as possible.



My violin teacher will correct me when she discovers my mistake, but not everytime. She merely adjusts my bow position and keeps reminding me not to slant my bow, make sure it is placed so that both of the bow and string will against each other to produce a plus (+) sign. Gosh, how can I judge if the bow and the string are producing a plus sign from my point of view?! *ridiculous*



I sought her further advice for improving my weak point. Disappointingly, she had nothing to show me but with a very general and unspecific verbal answer - “You can only improve it on your own with a mirror in front of you.” I expect her could suggest me some useful hints or guidelines that can particularly work on my mistake. Or may be she can also share her learning experience about the right bowing technique to me so that I could be inspired at the end. But now, I realize that I could be expecting her too much.



One more thing that worried me so much is she seldom emphasizes and focuses on the essential violin techniques that we suppose to adhere before proceeding to the advanced piece. She intends to go through the lessons very quick in spite of we have really picked up the skill or not. I doubt the teaching attitude of her. Does she know that violin basic studies are the most critical in the foundation stage? What habit we develop today may contribute to our advancement tomorrow. Perhaps, earning tuition fee from us would be her main aim.



Frankly, she is disappointing. I would say that she is not a QUALIFIED violin TEACHER even though she might be a good violin performer. I truly do want to establish good habits from the start. Therefore, I will definitely quit my current lesson if I could find a better tutor even if I have to fork out extra dollars and cents.


CORNELL

相关文章:
关于黄金的多空思辨
轻轻松松炒股票
用css网站布局之十步实录!(七)


Admission with advanced placement
will be considered for individuals who completed a pre-professional
bachelor degree program in architecture or design. Applicants are
considered for advanced placement by the Admissions Committee and
evaluated in relation to the quality of work expected of students
entering the second year of design. If advanced placement status is
granted an equivalence of 12 credit hours (two semesters of
architectural design) will be given and the student will be placed
in the first semester of the second year design studio.



Applicants should be able to demonstrate fundamental skills of
building design and demonstrate a facility in advanced tectonic
composition. This is often demonstrated through plan and section
representations of complex building proposals that also indicate an
awareness of more advanced structural and programmatic
relationships.



Equivalency
Evaluation


To be considered for equivalency credit for previous coursework,
applicants must submit course syllabi and transcripts from that
previous coursework for review by a faculty member charged with
reviewing that area of study (history, building technology,
professional practice, etc…). This faculty member will then
determine if equivalency credit is appropriate for equivalency
credit in ARCH 551: Analog/Freehand Drawing and Arch. 552
Analog/Digital Constructed Drawing, samples of academic or
professional work must also be included for review.

The maximum total number of
equivalency credits granted is 40.




Note on Professional
Accreditation
The new professional Master of
Architecture program was granted candidacy status by the National
Architectural Accrediting Board in 2004.

more information
regarding NAAB




BigGovernmentIsBack—BigTime

相关文章:
如何做点击网赚揭开运营模式内幕才可以网赚.
黄金勇者。
钢材期货重启,资金门槛仅6000元


Big Government Is Back—Big Time

U.S. policymakers reconsider the relationship between government
and the private sector.


By Michael Freedman | NEWSWEEK

Published Feb 7, 2009

From the magazine issue dated Feb 16, 2009




Have you noticed that Barack Obama sounds more like the president
of France every day? When Obama said in his Inaugural Address that
it was time to get past stale arguments over whether government is
big or small, he was echoing the eclectic philosophy of Nicolas
Sarkozy, who champions markets one day and state industrial
"champions" the next. When Obama called Wall Street "shameful" and
greedy, he was articulating what the French have always thought,
and endorsing Sarkozy's recent dismissal of the "crazy" idea that
markets are always right. In endorsing the "Buy American" rules
that would steer the billions in U.S. stimulus spending toward
domestic manufacturers, members of the Obama administration were
seconding the old French culture of "economic patriotism." And when
Obama moved to cap the pay of executives at financial firms in line
for the federal bailout at $500,000, he was forcing on them a
massive pay cut that Sarkozy had already coaxed from French bank
leaders when he gathered them together last month and got them to
agree, publicly, that they would forgo bonuses.


It was with a distinctly continental sniff that Obama said top
bank brass had shown "bad taste" by taking their bonuses despite
massive losses.


Obama's rhetoric and actions reflect how quickly the debate has
changed over the past several months. Until the financial crisis
began last year, this kind of business bashing and protectionism
was largely relegated to the far left, and it seemed axiomatic in
the United States that the business of America was business. But
with an urgency not seen since Ronald Reagan declared that
government was in fact the problem, policymakers are now
reconsidering the relationship between government and the private
sector. At its most basic level, the nearly $1 trillion U.S.
stimulus package now being dissected on Capitol Hill is a fight
over how great a role the federal government will play in what had
been, for decades, private economic life. And while it's impossible
to know just what the day after the crisis will look like, the
broad contours of the new economic world are becoming visible.


One of the more lasting effects will be a steady drift toward
what could be called a European model of governance, regulation and
paternalism. Already, big government is on the rise—projected
public-spending figures show the United States will move ever
closer to European averages over the next two years. More
specifically, in the absence of a robust private sector (or at
least public confidence in business) the U.S. government will be
forced to fill the gap, firmly directing businesses in all sorts of
ways—regulating some industries (particularly banking and the
automotive sector) with big-brother vigilance, favoring others like
clean energy with grants and loans, and turning still others—health
care, pensions—into virtual wards of the state. Harvard economist
Ken Rogoff predicts the United States will move toward "a more
centralized, redistributional health-care system, as Europe already
has," with a greater emphasis on the environment, higher regulation
and increased protectionism. "I take the 2008 U.S. elections as
marking a turn toward continental Europe," he says.


This is all likely to prove very popular if the conventional
wisdom is right. Many economists think this is going to be a long,
perhaps very long, recession. In this case, the banks would largely
stabilize, thanks to the help of the federal government, but the
stimulus package would be too small and insufficiently "timely,
targeted and temporary," as Obama economic adviser Lawrence Summers
has frequently suggested it needs to be. Rather than a speedy
V-shaped recovery, in which the economy quickly rebounds, the U.S.
would face a Japan-style L-shaped recovery, which is to say
extraordinarily slow growth over a decade or more. As in Europe,
slow or no growth is likely to generate greater demand for publicly
funded social services in the years to come.


Slow growth could kill rugged American individualism, too.
Health care in the U.S. is for the most part tied to employment, so
if job numbers continue to look dismal, or get even worse, an
ever-greater number of people will start looking to the government
for support. Moreover, if the New York Stock Exchange goes the way
of Tokyo, still down by more than half from its level 20 years ago,
the cultural impact will be profound. Today, basic U.S. social
services are tied to private wealth generated by the stock market:
retirement is funded through 401(k)s, for instance, and college
tuition through 529 plans and endowments that help defray costs. As
of last week the S&P 500 was down 41 percent from
its 52-week high, and if it continues to bump along at that level,
pressure will only grow on the Obama administration to step in and
take over more and more public services. Think about it, and it's
very easy to imagine a chorus of former American individualists
demanding cushy French-style pensions and free British-style health
care if their private stock funds fail to recover and unemployment
inches upward toward 10 percent and remains there.


Obama's populist rhetoric will likely subside, but already U.S.
government spending is expected to increase, approaching European
levels. A decade ago, total government spending in the United
States constituted 34.3 percent of GDP, compared with 48.2 percent
in the euro zone—roughly a 14-point gap, according to the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. That gap has
declined dramatically, and by 2010, U.S. spending is expected to be
39.9 percent of GDP, compared with 47.1 percent in the euro zone—a
gap of just 7.2 points. To be fair, much of the big increases in
spending took place in the Bush era (in large part thanks to two
wars), but a prolonged period of low growth and greater demands on
the public sector will likely mean a further narrowing, as well as
a seismic shift in spending priorities, away, perhaps, from defense
and toward social programs. The baby boomers, meantime, will be
putting an increased demand on Medicare and Social Security.


The public seems to want the government to fill in where the
private sector cannot. Recent Gallup polls say trust in financial
institutions is lower than at any point since it started asking
that question in 1985, and 68 percent of Americans want major
corporations to have less influence than they do now—up from 52
percent in 2001. Another poll shows a 12-point jump between 1994
and 2007, to 69 percent, in the number of Americans who believe
government should do more for people who cannot care for
themselves. So aside from expanding the social safety net, the
government will have to take a greater role in guiding business
toward ends the state deems healthy for the overall economy.


This differs from European-style statism, in which governments
have been known to take a firm hand in directing individual
businesses. But the difference is only a matter of degree. The
bailout of Detroit's Big Three automakers was essentially a
protectionist measure at the expense of foreign auto manufacturers,
and is not much different from Sarkozy's controversial 2004 support
as finance minister for state intervention to protect French
manufacturing giant Alstom. Stephen Roach, a top economist at
Morgan Stanley, says a prolonged downturn will mean even further
"public-sector engineering of our economy," particularly in the
form of protectionism. "America is not France," he says. "We will
do it our way. But big government is definitely on the
ascendancy."


Going forward, the Obama administration has announced plans to
spark growth and job creation by investing in green technology, and
on the table as well is a wholesale transformation of health care.
Whether that means the United States will one day have a free,
public national health service like Great Britain's, or provide
universal insurance through a mix of public and private means, is
still a very open question. But sentiment is moving toward some
form of universal health care and will only grow if unemployment
remains high. "You can count on the fact that there will be
nationalized health care of some sort," says Peter Schwartz, head
of the Global Business Network, a San Francisco consultancy that
advises big corporations on long-term trends and strategy.
"Business is just not going to be able to carry the load."


Too much government interference can lead to the same kind of
slow growth that Europe has suffered for years. Just how to come
out from the inevitable mountain of debt is another concern. Now
one of the big debates in the U.S. is how to bridge the gap between
business and government in a way that avoids stagnation while still
satisfying the intense demand for financial and social services. In
other words, can America adopt a more European model, only with a
faster rate of growth? There may be ways. Andrew Jakabovics,
associate director of the economic-mobility program at the Center
for American Progress, a think tank that has incubated a number of
administration advisers, argues that one role for the government
could be to spur competition in lending by creating a public entity
that would guarantee certain kinds of loans—say a standard 30-year,
fixed-rate mortgage—and then allow the private sector to compete at
a standard set by the federal government. Such a mechanism would
protect consumers by ensuring their ability to get loans while also
raising the level of competition.


Another way government can take a larger role, particularly in
easing the burden created by low stock-market returns, is by
introducing programs that forgive some or all college-tuition debt
in exchange for public service, something Obama promised to do on
the campaign trail. Such a move would be broadly similar to a
French program in which students at the école Normale Supérieure,
one of the world's top universities, pay no tuition (and are
actually paid a monthly stipend of €1,500) in exchange for their
agreement to spend 10 years in public service.


The crisis is also likely to spur policymakers into reforming
public pension systems like Social Security, which is expected to
be unable to provide retirees with full benefits starting in 2041.
If nothing else, the collapse of trust in the markets has probably
killed for good the Bush-era idea of privatizing Social Security.
Obama proposes to expand retirement-savings programs with
government matches and raising Social Security taxes by 2 to 4
percent for those making more than $250,000. But a rattled nation
may push the government to take an even bigger role. "Confidence
has been shattered," says William Galston, a former policy adviser
to President Bill Clinton. "It's going to take a very long time for
the average American to accept anything like the 401(k)."


This crisis-driven debate on the proper role of government is
not confined to America. At the recent World Economic Forum in
Davos, Switzerland, Russia's Vladimir Putin and China's Wen Jiabao
each took shots at U.S.-style free-market capitalism, implicitly
promoting their respective countries' brands of state-controlled
capitalism. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has more than once
spoken of the need for "free markets" but not "value-free markets,"
and last week Japan's economics minister told Parliament that the
country should create a new brand of "tenderhearted capitalism."
But none of this means a revival of socialist models with a capital
S. As British journalist Stephen Pollard recently noted, even when
Britain's Labour government decided to effectively nationalize the
banking system in October, "it did so not to replace capitalism but
to save it."


The same, in a way, could be said for the United States.
Bailouts, protectionism, talk of bank nationalization and a nearly
$1 trillion stimulus package are not a socialist conspiracy, as
some right-wing U.S. pundits and talk-show hosts insist. Even if
the U.S. banks or automakers were nationalized, it would almost
certainly be temporary, with no likelihood that the United States
would have the kinds of national champions one sees in Europe. Even
if the Obama government is the only American employer still hiring,
it will remain generally easier to hire and fire workers, and start
and close down businesses, in America's rougher form of
capitalism.


Nonetheless, it is clear that a "centrist rebalancing" is taking
place even in America, says Sunder Katwala, head of Britain's
center-left Fabian Society, and that a prolonged period of slow
growth will force the United States to become something more like
Europe. But if Obama can somehow forge a middle path that builds
upon the best of the European safety net while also encouraging the
kind of dynamism and innovation that has helped the United States
prosper, it will represent a major shift, and provide evidence that
government, pace Reagan, can actually be part of the solution.


With Tracy McNicoll in Paris