April 27, 2024

Archives for June 2011

App Smart: For the iPad, Books That Respond to a Child’s Touch

The latest book apps to appear on my iPad include The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore ($5), Angelina Ballerina’s New Ballet Teacher ($1), The Wrong Side of the Bed in 3-D ($3), Oh, the Thinks You Can Think! ($4) and Cars 2 Storybook Deluxe ($6).

They’ve scored higher marks with my children than the earliest book apps, like Miss Spider’s Tea Party and Toy Story 2 Read-Along.

Even though publishers haven’t yet woven the interactive thrill of the Elements chemistry app or the AirCoaster roller coaster app into a children’s narrative, the book apps are usually much cheaper than traditional books. It’s hard to feel cheated with a purchase.

The first thing to keep in mind when buying children’s books on the iPad — many of them are also available for the iPhone and iPod Touch — is that there are two places to buy them, the iTunes App Store and the iTunes Books store. The Books store has categories devoted to Children and Teens and Kids’ Picture Books.

Apps in those categories follow the traditional book model, with text and illustrations and little else.

In the iTunes App Store, though, offerings for children are scattered among the 41,000 books that include sound, animation or graphics that respond to the reader’s touch.

Aside from highlighting a children’s book app in the New and Noteworthy or What’s Hot selections, Apple gives parents little help in finding selections for their children. Kirkus, the book review service, devotes a Web page to its 2010 list of best iPad books for children, and sites like CNet, Gizmodo and others occasionally mention good ones as well.

I chose three from those sources and added the Cars 2 and Dr. Seuss books, which were released last week, as examples of the latest products from well-financed developers.

Of those, Morris Lessmore is the best. It is a visually stunning bit of work with entertaining interactive features.

The content is largely pulled from the animated short film of the same name, which tells the story of a young man’s experience with a magical library. The app’s pages are brief movie scenes that pause to reveal interactive elements: books suddenly fly at the reader’s touch, for instance, and readers can play a piano or scribble in a blank book of their own.

The interactions are placed with a storyteller’s touch, so they generally serve the narrative instead of distracting from it.

If there’s a flaw, it’s that the book is not suitable for a wide enough audience. Between the narrator’s voice and the animation, young readers can probably follow the action, but as a reading experience it is beyond the reach of, say, 7-year-olds.

One imagines future books of this type with alternative narratives tailored to different age groups. For now, Morris Lessmore is better suited to older children and preteenagers.

Slightly younger children will appreciate Angelina Ballerina, which also deftly mixes animation into a traditional children’s book format. The story involves a ballet-centric drama consistent with other installments in the “Angelina” TV and publishing franchise.

The artwork isn’t nearly as arresting as that of Morris Lessmore, but it is beautiful in its own right, and the interactions are engaging. If you touch a character’s image, for instance, it acts out a fragment of the plot. But a character will sometimes react to the actions or words of another character, so if you tap them in the incorrect sequence you’re rewarded with non sequiturs.

The text occasionally includes highlighted ballet terms that, when tapped, yield a printed and narrated explanation of the term. It would be nice to see that feature extended to more words that could trip up early readers.

The newest book apps on my list, Oh the Thinks You Can Think! and Cars 2, fairly represent the market’s approach to new readers. Oh the Thinks is conventional Seuss fare. The illustrations aren’t animated, but the images move subtly across the page to enliven the graphics. Like other book apps for early readers, Oh the Thinks highlights each word as the narrator reads it. But if you tap important characters or images from the story, the narrator speaks the operative word — “wall,” for instance — and an animated rendering of the word pops out at the reader.

I’ll let literacy specialists and parents debate the pedagogical merits of this approach, but my immediate impression was that it probably couldn’t hurt.

Cars 2 is more entertainment (and, arguably, media branding) than children’s literature. That will suit many parents and children just fine, of course, but a beginning reader can sometimes lose the text in the wash of animation, music and sound effects. As with many other book apps for children, this one includes a coloring book option, simulated jigsaw puzzles and games for many pages. In other words, it’s more app than book.

Come to think of it, that’s not a bad way to see the genre at the moment — more app than book, but the book is gaining.

At least on Apple devices, that is. On Android, I found almost nothing worth recommending. The ones I tried often featured static, low-resolution graphics with advertisements intruding on the story. Oceanhouse Media, which publishes Oh the Thinks and many other children’s book apps on Apple, also distributes most of them on Android tablets and phones. But that wasn’t the case for any of the other good Apple app books I tried.

If Android tablets make a bigger dent in the iPad’s market share, the imbalance in the book app category will most likely shift. For now, though, the category is almost all Apple’s.

Quick Calls

Tennis fans can track the month’s biggest tournament on their Apple devices free, with Wimbledon, from the All England Lawn Tennis Club. … N.O.V.A. 2 HD, the poplar first-person shooter game on iTunes, is now available on Android for $7. … Slightly tamer: Pretty Pet Salon for Android, free.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=cfc77251faddd5375b8b2c2865417fa0

State of the Art: Pretty Tablet, Though Late for the Ball

What’s that you say? This all sounds like last year’s news?

Well, don’t tell that to Hewlett-Packard. This week, it introduced what it considers a groundbreaking new product: a tablet with a touch screen!

It’s the H.P. TouchPad ($500 for the 16-gig model, $600 for 32 gigs): a black rectangle with a glossy 9.7-inch multitouch screen. You can zoom into maps, photos or Web pages by putting two fingers on the glass and spreading or pinching them. The screen image rotates when you turn the tablet 90 degrees.

The only buttons are a Home button below the screen and volume up/down buttons on the edge.

If that description sounds just like the iPad (and the 47,298 Android tablets that compete with it), you’re right. H.P. has some nerve coming out with a tablet now — especially because the biggest distinguishing component is its operating system. It’s WebOS, a variation of the software that runs the Palm cellphones (the Pre, Pixi and so on) — but it’s new to tablets.

Which means, of course, that there aren’t many apps for it yet. How many is “not many”? Well, 300.

(H.P. points out, however, that there are even fewer for Android tablets, even after several months: only 232.)

There’s a Kindle app, Pandora and Angry Birds, thank goodness. But some pretty popular apps are among the missing. No Flixter or IMDB. No Pocket God. No Google apps like Google Mobile, Google Earth or Google Voice. No Netflix.

Now, from a hardware-checklist perspective, the TouchPad doesn’t get off to a good start. It’s the same size as the iPad, but it’s 40 percent thicker (.75 inches thick) and 20 percent heavier (1.6 pounds) — a bitter spec to swallow in a gadget you hold upright all day long.

It has a front camera for video chatting but, unlike its rivals, no camera on the back. It has Wi-Fi, but can’t get online over the cellphone network, too. It can sometimes pinpoint its own location on Bing Maps by referencing nearby Wi-Fi hot spots, but it doesn’t have real GPS (what were they thinking?).

It supposedly has a blazing-fast chip inside, but you wouldn’t know it. When you rotate the screen, it takes the screen two seconds to match — an eternity in tablet time. Apps can take a long time to open; the built-in chat app, for example, takes seven seconds to appear. Animations are sometimes jerky, reactions to your finger swipes sometimes uncertain.

And despite being thicker, the TouchPad’s battery life lasts only about eight hours on a charge (the iPad gets 10 hours). .

Now, even H.P. understands that the TouchPad’s only hope is differentiating itself from the better established tablets. The only buying question you have to ask yourself, then, is: Does H.P. make a convincing enough case that you should gamble on this unknown quantity?

Here’s the crux of H.P.’s argument.

First of all, the TouchPad is beautiful. It’s iPad beautiful. The case is glossy black plastic — a magnet for fingerprints, unfortunately, but it looks wicked great in the first five minutes.

The WebOS is beautiful, too. It’s graphically coherent, elegant, fluid and satisfying. That, apparently, is the payoff when a single company designs both the hardware and the software. (Android gadgets, by contrast, are a mishmash of different versions and looks.)

The central conceits of WebOS are the same as on Palm’s phones. For example, when you press the Home button, all open apps shrink into half-size window “cards”; at this point, you can swipe with your finger to move among them, or swipe an app upward to close that app. It works beautifully, and conveys far more information than the iPad’s application switcher (which is just a row of icons).

H.P. says that the TouchPad offers real multitasking: all open apps are always running. On the iPad, by contrast, only certain apps (like music playback and GPS tracking) chug away in the background; everything else is just suspended until you return. Apple argues that true multitasking runs down the battery — and the battery-life stats prove it correct. Choose the compromise you like best.

E-mail: pogue@nytimes.com

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=910da21b4fef7de72ace2d3d1d9608e1

DealBook: Path Cleared for News Corp.’s BSkyB Bid

Rupert Murdoch on June 21 at The Times C.E.O. summit in London.Pool photo by Ben GurrRupert Murdoch on June 21 at The Times C.E.O. summit in London.

British regulators confirmed on Thursday that they were ready to pave the way for News Corporation’s takeover of the pay television company BSkyB.

The government said that a long review of the deal, which the News Corporation offered to adjust in order to satisfy regulatory concerns, had “produced no new information” to change the official stance to allow the acquisition.

With that, the News Corporation is one step closer to buying the 60.9 percent of BSkyB that it does not already own, leaving the price of the takeover as the chief remaining uncertainty.

Concessions made by Rupert Murdoch’s media empire to spin off Sky News, BSkyB’s popular news channel, were enough to appease the concerns of Culture Minister Jeremy Hunt, who said in March that he was “minded to accept” the proposal.

Mr. Hunt, however, has submitted a few more conditions to closing the deal. These include appointing an independent director with experience in journalism to the Sky News editorial board, ensuring that BSkyB continues to cross-promote Sky News after the spin-off and appointing a trustee to monitor the News Corporation’s compliance with the rules in the transition period.

“The regulators have confirmed that the proposed undertakings are still sufficient to ensure media plurality,” Mr. Hunt said on Thursday in a statement. “I could have decided to accept the original undertakings, but a number of suggestions were made in response to the consultation.”

Given the proposed changes, Mr. Hunt extended the review period until July 8, but government backing is all but assured. Issues of media plurality have delayed the acquisition, given that the News Corporation owns the British newspapers The Times, The Sun and News of the World.

Now, Mr. Murdoch is left to haggle with BSkyB shareholders, many of whom expect a higher offer than the 700 pence a share he bid last summer, which values the 60.9 percent stake at £7.8 billion.

BSkyB responded at the time that its management would support an offer worth more than 800 pence, and some analysts think the final proposal could be well in excess of that.

Nick Bell, an analyst with Jefferies, said he thought a bid of 850 pence a share was likely, but that expectations of anything above 900 pence were unrealistic.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=c4b4076a533b5605b546af14226948aa

Afghans Arrest Two Officials Over Kabul Bank Collapse

According to Rahmatullah Nazari, the deputy attorney general, authorities arrested Sherkhan Farnood, the former chairman of Kabul Bank, and Khalilulah Frozi, its former chief executive officer, on Wednesday in connection with what Mr. Nazari said was $900 million in fraudulent loans to bank officers and insiders, many of them politically well connected.

Mr. Nazari declined to specify what charges have been brought against the two but said they were being held at the Kabul Detention Center for further investigation.

He said further arrests were expected in connection with the case, both among Kabul Bank figures and Central Bank officials.

These were the first arrests in the Kabul Bank affair since exposure of the bank’s huge losses last August. The move is likely to be welcomed by Afghanistan’s international backers, which have held up some aid to Afghanistan until government action is taken on Kabul Bank.

Some $900 million in loans were made to insiders with little or no collateral and even no repayment plan in what auditors have described as effectively a massive Ponzi scheme. Among loan recipients was Mahmoud Karzai, the brother of President Hamid Karzai, and Haseen Fahim, brother of First Vice President Muhammad Fahim.

The attorney general also brought charges this week against the governor of Afghanistan’s Central Bank, Abdul Qadir Fitrat, accusing him of taking millions in bribes to overlook the Kabul Bank fraud. Mr. Fitrat fled to the United States just before those charges were brought, saying he feared for his life because of his own efforts to expose the fraud.

The charges against Mr. Fitrat were brought only after Karzai administration officials, as well as Kabul Bank debtors, reacted furiously to an appearance by Mr. Fitrat at the Afghan Parliament, during which he named the prominent people who he said were resisting repayment of their loans.

“The Central Bank officially requested a special prosecution and a special tribunal to try those who have been implicated in fraud, mismanagement, misuse of funds and embezzlement of hundreds of millions of dollars from Kabul Bank,” Mr. Fitrat said, announcing his resignation last Monday. “To date, there is no information of any credible plan to try and prosecute these suspects. There is concern that the powerful individuals involved in this fraud will go unpunished while the Central Bank and its foreign advisors will ultimately be blamed.”

Until he fled Afghanistan, Mr. Fitrat had expressed confidence that the Central Bank would be able to recover much of the $900 million in loans and interest owed to Kabul Bank. On the orders of the Central Bank under Mr. Fitrat, Kabul Bank, the country’s largest, was broken into two entities, one a receivership to recover the bad loans, and the other consisting of performing loans, deposits and bank branches, which would eventually be sold.

The International Monetary Fund has refused to renew its credit program for Afghanistan pending action on Kabul Bank, which has resulted in the loss of $70 million in incentive funds so far and has blocked other aid programs from many donor countries. The I.M.F. wants Afghanistan to repay the bank’s losses out of its general revenues, rather than from donor money, but the losses potentially equal one year of Afghanistan’s total revenues. The agency has also demanded a forensic audit and legal action.

Western diplomats have said arrests and prosecutions of those responsible for looting the Kabul Bank would be a start toward satisfying concerns of the international backers.

Mr. Frozi and Mr. Farnood, both with their cellphones, were seen in a meeting room at the detention center, with some 15 visitors. They refused to talk to a reporter from The New York Times. “You destroyed the bank, now you want to destroy the detainees,” Mr. Frozi said, referring to coverage of the Kabul Bank crisis last summer. “Please leave me alone. Talk to the attorney general’s office, they’re the ones who did this.”

The two prisoners then turned to playing a game of chess.

Sharifullah Sahak contributed reporting.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=02e2ad6b6c0d549cf4ffc342942924f0

Media Decoder: MSNBC Suspends Halperin Over Slur

12:55 p.m. | Updated MSNBC suspended one of its best-known political analysts, Mark Halperin, on Thursday morning after he directed a derogatory comment at President Obama on the channel’s morning show, “Morning Joe.”

Sitting on the set of “Morning Joe,” Mr. Halperin smiled mischievously as he disparaged Mr. Obama’s behavior at a news conference a day earlier. “I thought he was kind of a dick yesterday,” Mr. Halperin said.

Time magazine, which employs Mr. Halperin as editor-at-large, issued him a warning but is not taking any further action.

“Mark Halperin’s comments on air this morning were inappropriate and in no way reflective of Time’s views,” a spokesperson for the magazine said. “We have issued a warning to him that such behavior is unacceptable. Mark has appropriately apologized.”

Before Mr. Halperin made the quip, he had asked if there was a seven-second delay available, a feature of television control rooms that can be used to bleep out stray curse words on live TV.

“Delay that,” the show’s co-host, Joe Scarborough, said after hearing the comment.

Minutes later, Mr. Halperin apologized on the air, saying “I shouldn’t have said it. I apologize to the president and the viewers who heard me say that.”

Mr. Scarborough complained on the air that the show’s executive producer failed to bleep the word. “I would tell you what I think of him, but he doesn’t know what button to push,” he said.

Immediately after the show concluded at 9 a.m., a meeting was convened about the incident, and by 10:30 a.m., Mr. Halperin had been suspended indefinitely from his analyst job at MSNBC.

“Mark Halperin’s comments this morning were completely inappropriate and unacceptable,” the channel said in a statement. “We apologize to the president, the White House and all of our viewers. We strive for a high level of discourse and comments like these have no place on our air.”

In a fresh statement from the channel, Mr. Halperin said he agreed completely “with everything in MSNBC’s statement about my remark” and added, “I believe that the step they are taking in response is totally appropriate.” He said he deeply regretted making the comment.

Mr. Halperin is a paid contributor to MSNBC and a regular guest on “Morning Joe.” He is Time’s leading political reporter and one of the magazine’s most recognizable bylines, a visibility that could complicate the fallout from his profane remark.

Mr. Halperin often takes the lead role for Time in reporting on the presidential campaign and writes the popular political blog “The Page.” He is also co-authoring a follow-up book to “Game Change,” the best-seller about the 2008 campaign.

Time had no immediate comment about how the comment could jeopardize his access to the president or his credibility as an objective journalist.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=fd928642385b8044457ec74be542ac77

DealBook: Mortgage Executive Receives 30-Year Sentence

A federal agents escorts Lee B. Farkas, a former mortgage industry executive, after a court appearance in June 2010 in Ocala, Fla.Bruce Ackerman/Ocala Star-BannerA federal agents escorts Lee B. Farkas, a former mortgage industry executive, after a court appearance in June 2010 in Ocala, Fla.

A federal judge sentenced Lee B. Farkas, a former mortgage industry executive, to 30 years in prison, far short of the 385-year penalty sought by prosecutors.

The case against Mr. Farkas, who was convicted of masterminding one of the largest bank fraud schemes in history, stands as the single biggest prosecution stemming from the financial crisis.

As chairman of mortgage firm Taylor, Bean Whitaker, Mr. Farkas orchestrated a plot that caused the demise of Colonial Bank and cheated investors and the government out of billions of dollars, prosecutors say.

Mr. Farkas led a minor financial firm based in Florida, and his crimes began well before the crisis struck. So while the case is a defining moment for the government, its relative obscurity also highlights the continued struggle to prosecute financial fraud in the wake of the crisis.

Other than Mr. Farkas and a string of small fry mortgage fraud prosecutions, no senior financial executives have been imprisoned. Even now, federal prosecutors have yet to bring charges against an executive who ran a large Wall Street institution leading up to the crisis.

A 2009 case against hedge fund managers at Bear Stearns ended in acquittal. Prosecutors also recently dropped perhaps their biggest case related to the crisis, an investigation into Angelo R. Mozilo, the former head of the subprime lending giant Countrywide Financial.

Mr. Farkas, 58, appeared in federal court in Alexandria, Va., on Thursday, wearing a green prison jumpsuit.

His sentence, while steep, falls short of the 150 years given to Bernard L. Madoff for running a huge Ponzi scheme.

Mr. Farkas’s fellow Taylor Bean executives fared far better. The firm’s former chief executive and treasurer, among others, pleaded guilty and cooperated in the case against Mr. Farkas. The executives received sentences ranging from three months to eight years.

The government, aiming to send a message to the financial industry, had asked the judge to impose the maximum penalty on Mr. Farkas, a 385-year sentence.

“Sentencing him to the maximum penalty allowed by law will send the most forceful and unequivocal message to senior corporate executives that engaging in fraud and deceit in order to pump up your company or line your own pockets is unacceptable and will have severe consequences,” prosecutors said in a recent court filing.

Mr. Farkas’s lawyers had asked for a 15-year sentence, saying his actions were intended to keep Taylor Bean and Colonial Bank in business. Mr. Farkas took the stand during the trial to deny any wrongdoing.

In recent weeks, his friends and supporters sent letters to the judge that painted Mr. Farkas as a kindhearted humanitarian, someone who always “displayed integrity.” Mr. Farkas once paid a stranger’s medical bills, often donated to the local salvation army’s Christmas fund-raiser and even offered up his private jet to transport a mother and her baby to New York for cancer treatment, they said.

A federal jury in Virginia was unmoved. In April, after a 10-day trial and little more than a day of deliberations, the jurors found Mr. Farkas guilty on 14 counts of securities, bank and wire fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud.

Mr. Farkas’s $2.9 billion scheme began in 2002, prosecutors say, when Taylor Bean was facing mounting losses. To hide the losses, Taylor Bean executives secretly overdrew the firm’s accounts with Colonial Bank. The lender, aiming to cover up the overdrafts, sold Colonial about $1.5 billion in “worthless” and “fake” mortgages. The government, in turn, guaranteed the bogus loans.

When Colonial started to struggle, Mr. Farkas helped convince the bank to apply for $570 million in taxpayer bailout funds. The Treasury Department initially approved the rescue loan, but ultimately withdrew the offer.

Colonial filed for bankruptcy in August 2009, making it one of the largest bank failures during the crisis.

Mr. Farkas, meanwhile, diverted more than $40 million from Taylor Bean and Colonial to “finance his lifestyle,” prosecutors said. He used the funds, according to the government, to buy a private jet, vacation homes and a collection of vintage cars.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=7c82d7417c11106e1b56a117fa364752

Bucks: Thursday Reading: Compare College Costs on a New Web Site

June 30

Thursday Reading: Compare College Costs on a New Web Site

A new federal Web site lets families compare college costs, Federal Reserve caps debit-card swipe fees, owning a home still retains its allure and other consumer-focused news from The New York Times.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=4b349c4e6615e5c5e90daf16603572fb

Bucks: Some Tax Refund Checks Still Not in the Mail

For most of us, the tax-filing season seems a distant memory as the summer season unfolds. But for some unlucky filers, it isn’t over quite yet.

Back in the spring, Bucks looked at refund delays affecting taxpayers who bought a home in 2008 and took that year’s version of the first-time home buyer credit on their federal tax return. At the time, the Internal Revenue Service said the issue was related to computer problems in processing Form 5405, which is used for repayment of the credit. (The earliest version of the first-time home buyer credit — for homes bought from April 8, 2008 to Dec. 31, 2008 — functioned like a no-interest loan. First-time buyers could take a credit on their 2008 tax return of up to $7,500. But the catch was that they had to repay it over 15 years, beginning with their 2010 tax return.)

Couples filing joint returns, and those who filed before Feb. 22, were particularly affected by the processing problems. Filers who tried to repay more than the minimum required amount also experienced glitches. The agency said employees were manually processing returns for these taxpayers and expected most, if not all, of those affected to get refunds by April 5 or the following week — assuming there were no other issues with the return.

That is little comfort to one couple in Bowie, Md.

Brandon, a 30-year-old information technology specialist — he asked that his last name not be used, for privacy reasons — said he and his wife, who are expecting their first child, are still waiting for their refund of nearly $10,000, almost five months after they filed their return. He contacted me out of frustration, saying that his accountant has verified that all forms were filed correctly and that the I.R.S. has said there is no other problem with the couple’s return. But at least eight estimated payment dates provided by the agency have come and gone, with no refund in sight.

“It has been an absolute nightmare,” he said in a phone interview. “This is ridiculous.” He contacted the agency’s Taxpayer Advocate Service,  but said that hasn’t helped get the issue resolved.

An I.R.S. spokesman was unable to provide updated information about the scope of the delays. And a quick look at a Facebook page established for filers experiencing delays suggests he isn’t alone. Some filers say they are being given estimated refund dates in August.

Are you still waiting for your 2011 tax refund? What reason were you given?

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=d64c75ad76613f047d30561e222227c7

Economix: Christine Lagarde and the Demand for Dollars

Today's Economist

Simon Johnson, the former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, is the co-author of “13 Bankers.”

After receiving support from the United States at the critical moment, Christine Lagarde was named Tuesday as the next managing director of the International Monetary Fund. In campaigning for the job, Ms. Lagarde, France’s finance minister, made various promises to emerging markets with regard to improving their relationships with the I.M.F. But such promises count for little.

The main impact of her appointment will be to encourage countries like South Korea, Brazil, India and Russia to back away from the I.M.F. and to further “self-insure” by accumulating larger stockpiles of foreign-exchange reserves –- the strategy that has been followed by China for most of the last decade.

From an individual country’s perspective, having large amounts of dollar reserves held by your central bank or in a sovereign wealth fund makes a great deal of sense – a rainy day fund in a global economy prone to serious financial floods.

From the perspective of the global economy, such actions represent a major risk going forward, because they will further push down interest rates in the United States, feed a renewed buildup in private-sector dollar-denominated debt and make it even harder to get policy makers focused on a genuine fix to our long-term budget problems.

Ms. Lagarde is sincere and will no doubt try to be friendly to her supporters, perhaps, for example, by creating a senior management-level job at the I.M.F. and making sure it goes to China or another emerging market. But what the emerging markets really want is more “quota” (the term used for share ownership and therefore votes at the I.M.F.), as well as more seats on the fund’s executive board.

These are not within Ms. Lagarde’s purview to grant. Rather the European Union, at the highest political level, would have to agree to give up some of its votes and reduce its voice. The E.U. is indeed overrepresented at the I.M.F., both in terms of shares and — most egregiously — with 8 or so seats on a board of 24 members (the exact number depends on how you count some seats shared by Europeans and non-Europeans).

And the E.U. has proved to itself and everyone else that it both cares a great deal about who controls the I.M.F. and that it can continue to assert this control.

To be fair, the control this time was partly about organizing early to provide unanimous support for Ms. Lagarde – amid an understandable desire to appoint a woman, given the recent resignation of her predecessor, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, amid pending charges of sexual assault.

But the E.U.’s dominance also reflects disorganization among the emerging markets. These countries, though often grouped in a category, do not really see themselves as having convergent interests on many issues, either now or in the near future.

If you look at the current circumstances from the perspective of countries like South Korea, India, South Africa, Brazil, or Russia, what conclusion would you draw?

Emerging markets cannot rely on the I.M.F. to provide help on generous terms during a crisis – such support looks as if it is available to European countries but no others. As a result, an appropriately cautious strategy is to hold a great deal of reserves; the only form of unconditional “foreign” support in a serious financial crisis comes from your own hard currency, perhaps in the form of United States Treasuries that can easily be sold in a liquid market.

What else constitutes appealing foreign exchange reserves in today’s world? The euro has some use, but is limited as long as a serious sovereign debt crisis looms –- very few euro-zone governments look to be risk-free. The Swiss franc continues to do well, but this is a relatively small volume of available assets. The British pound and the Japanese yen have lost a lot of their traditional allure as reserve currencies.

This leaves the dollar, which, despite all the obvious problems in the United States, is still the world’s No. 1 reserve currency. Emerging markets are likely to follow increasingly in the footsteps of China -– trying to run current-account surpluses, intervening to prevent their currencies from appreciating by selling local currency and buying dollars and investing the proceeds in dollar assets.

If our fiscal and financial house were in order, the resulting inflow of foreign capital would constitute a bonanza, allowing us to invest productively while paying low interest rates. But given the way our financial system operates and the dysfunctional nature of our budget politics, the availability of this capital will just encourage us further to overborrow, both in the private sector and in the public sector.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=a94aab8232553b862c6974dae4a5cae8

Economix: Nurturing Small Businesses Around the World

12:21 p.m. | Updated In an earlier post, I looked at some new data from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development that showed the small-business presence in the United States to be somewhat weaker than in peer countries.

Somehow, though, by many measurements America appears to have an economic environment that is far friendlier to small and new companies.

The administrative burden required to start a new company, for example, is relatively low in the United States compared with most other developed and emerging markets.

The O.E.C.D. looked at a composite measure reflecting the “procedures, time and costs necessary to incorporate and register a new firm with up to 50 employees and start-up capital of 10 times the economy’s per-capita gross national income.” This metric found Mexico and China to be most restrictive, while Ireland and Germany to be the least. The United States is on the less-restrictive end of the spectrum.

DESCRIPTIONSource: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

The United States also has a good venture capital market. Venture capital spending in America adds up to about 0.09 percent of the country’s gross domestic product — a higher percentage than any other country the O.E.C.D. looked at except for Israel. Israel’s venture capital spending as a share of the economy is about twice that.

Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

And on other measures, entrepreneurs are looked upon especially favorably by Americans, according to survey conducted annually by the European Commission Directorate-General Enterprise and Industry.

The latest survey, conducted between Dec. 10, 2009, and Jan. 16, 2010, covered 36 countries. In response to a question about “your opinion about entrepreneurs (self-employed, business owners),” 73.4 percent of Americans polled said they had a “rather favorable” attitude toward this group. That was among the most positive responses from the countries surveyed.

Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development; European Commission Directorate-General Enterprise and Industry

Given a climate so favorable to entrepreneurs, what might account for the fact that self-employment and other measures of entrepreneurship are lower in the United States than in many other developed countries? Any suggestions, readers?

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=9b257345e25c066191e112c3269539d8