Thursday, December 21, 2006
Change Battery Lifesaver 1235
And with his PC, it will take Mr Windows or Linux?
You never heard this phrase in the mouth of the sellers of the radius of your computer distributor. You should have.
Hardly the decision of the Court of Appeal upheld the sentence of 532 million euros against operators Combine the
mobile
she only been given
UFC-Que Choisir
launches new campaign
, this time against Hewlett Packard, Bagnolet Auchan and Darty Les Halles.
For years surfers made their voices heard against the systematic provision of system operator
Microsoft Windows
sales of laptops 
(
and here). After years of advocacy, DGCCRF starts advantage pay attention to the problem (. If
plans to punish tying as abuse of dominance, the Competition Law was not applicable to this type of practice.
Indeed the two most important texts in Competition Law is the prohibition of abuse of dominance, and the prohibition of cartels ( respectively Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty establishing the union European transposed in the Commercial Code in Book IV thereof , and reflected in the Consumer Code).
If Microsoft has already been condemned by the European Commission for tying Windows Media Player to its system operator, the conditions of application of Article 82 of the Treaty are not fulfilled as regards the provision of Windows computers sold mounted. Regarding the previous case, Microsoft used its dominant position archi operator market systems to attack a downstream market: that of media players. By providing free Media Player, Microsoft wanted to reiterate its strategy "Internet Explorer" stifle the competition by discouraging consumers from taking the time to compare and choose a browser. For if the question is free software, including advertising arrangements can finance their production, and sometimes make them profitable, time to build a reputation and accumulate assets to attack other software markets. In this case, neither the manufacturers nor the distributors can not be regarded as dominant in the PC market mounted. So it's not on the text of the abuse of dominant position that the action against the "Windows Tax" will be paid. To overcome this flaw, French law provides in its Consumer Code prohibition of tying the consumer (Article L122-1
).
It should thus be possible for consumers to buy power so the Windows license for a price A or PC "naked" for a price B, or both together for a price of A + B. Ironically, Dell offers professionals an offer without Windows XP, 75 months euros expensive team of the OS, even though it is a contract between professionals (although the Consumer Law applies to them sometimes, but that's another debate). For consumers, the license for the OS usually reaches 10 to 20% of the total purchase price.
Most of the time, Windows is concerned, but according 01.net Carrefour also practice tying, but this time with Linux as the OS. The road is still long before the consumer is assured an undistorted choice of its OS.
We live in a pivotal time: while awareness of the damage caused by the market distortions of competition is emerging in Europe
, Anglo-Saxon envelop the European institutions in the sophistry of economists who equate chicagoïens undue tying the "Bundling"
(the bundling is to sell such shoes with their laces).
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Alex Delarge South Park
The Court of Appeal of Paris confirmed the condemnation of the "Cartel of moving" a little Competition Law for Dummies
(
version with links to Agoravox, Credit picture: Imagine)
This article provides a quick summary of the case said the cartel of mobile (Bouyges secret agreement, SFR and Orange), and prolongs the problem Component "repair" of the case.
From 1997 to 2003, the three major mobile operators have organized a secret deal aimed to maintain their high prices, and to allocate market shares amicably. The following links will present clearly the facts of the case: On
Boursorama On the website of UFC-Que Choisir
This Tuesday, December 12, 2006, the Court Appeal of Paris confirmed the sentencing decision (the heaviest ever handed over 500 million euros, and particularly hard to Orange) of the Competition Council of 30 November 2005.
The Competition is essential in the functioning of the market: it exerts a downward pressure on prices, is a strong incentive for innovation, limit shortages and surplus energy. Without competition, the price stood at a level called "monopoly", ie at the most favorable for the company. For example, the company will rely on its production curves to set prices and production levels. Competition is actually the force that connects the supply to market forces and more competition, the lower the arbitration by the Market is wrong.
Reaching an agreement is found, under our Code of Commerce and the European treaties.
The fines are intended to punish the breach of Contract. Therefore they are relatively low, given the damage to consumers. Indeed, to a fine of more than 500 million euros, we assessed the damage caused to the 20 to 30 million consumers and 1.2 billion euros (low end). The penalty has no deterrent effect, therefore, at best it will reduce, for offenders less skilled, the profit of larceny.
Last year the question on what basis the Consumers can claim compensation for his injuries caused within my Master of heated debates. In principle if a contractual relationship exists between the parties, the responsibility is to hire contractual liability. Or in this case the obligations of the contract have been met: the network access and related services has been provided to customers. For my part, I'm focused on Article 1382 of our Civil Code, which is our non-contractual liability clause (referred to as tort). For compensatory damages (compensation for damage) on this basis, must convene a fault (a cartel), injury (an overpayment), and causation (the contract not negotiable). Reportedly, it is on the latter basis it will be possible to seek compensation for damages caused to consumers. problem is highlighted by this case: small brooks make great rivers. Damages are individually too small to make it interesting for a consumer to sue the operator, and sometimes it's not even worth spending the time to find the invoices showing that there has been a victim of the deprivation. That say inflation procedures Justice?
For these 'reasons were provided ways of Law in which the consumer agreed associationsde hold the upper hand.
Thus, in the early 1990s, the inventor of Consumer Law, Jean-Calais Auloy, saw a part of its proposed class actions brought legally to Articles L422-1, L 422-2 and L 422-3 of the Consumer Code. It was just the mechanism that he was considering for litigation groups involving a small number of consumers, which explains its failure to adapt to large-scale litigation.
In fact, this is a simplified mechanism mandate, which relieves including obligations to inform the principal.
The fact remains that this mechanism is cumbersome, requires a fee and time investment too high for the consumer there is widespread use. Alain Bazot, president of UFC Que Choisir (largest consumer association in France), and although it had assumed all costs of the procedure for entering the plaintiffs' action in joint representation, "has managed to rally than 12 500 records 20 to 30 million victims (yes, really!).
Jacques Chirac had asked during the presentation of his vows in 2005, an effort should be done to create a real group action, a class action in France before the end of his reign as president. Ensued conventions DGCCRF and MEDEF on the subject, I encourage you to read that the MEDF which can be summarized as follows: an intervention of Baron Seilliere in the introduction and conclusion, to the detriment of the group action , and the parade of speakers supported the principle of class action, and wondering about the form it should take.
A project is currently supported by the majority. It is tasteless, useless, without consistency. Dare I say, not reality, if not to be a decoy pretending to be concerned about access catastrophic to justice. We must remember the excitement at the Bobigny court for reassessment of legal aid? And the ratio of UMP on this three tier justice?
I will try to produce Agoravox analysis of the bill, but in any event, the 100 call was not heard, and I got the confirmation at the conference of November 2006 The Consumer Law held in Montepllier. Me Casanova, president of the Bar of Montpellier, Mr. Henry Hall, director of the Center for Consumer Law, Faculty of Law, and his own master, Jean-Calais Auloy, took their arguments to storm the member UMP and the representative of MEDEF present.
What the Anglo-Saxons call "private enforcement" is probably the land on which it must be a focus for one day the Competition Law as a deterrent (see this analysis Panafieu on the subject). Especially in this era where we can reflect on the voluntarism of the State in the matter: strange vision of the economy than MT Breton, right?
Thursday, December 14, 2006
How To Cut Your Hair Without Going To Solon
After the cartel of mobile UFC leads action against the bundling of systems operators
Chevenement / Royal: a deal too good
Both agreements (electoral and political) that have been
formalized and ratified this weekend, between the MRC and the PS, raise many questions that keep the viewer to consolidate his opinion on them. Nicolas Voisin
announced in his blog on Friday evening
: Chevenement announced he was withdrawing his candidacy in favor of the Socialist candidate Segolene Royal, who had already benefited from the withdrawal of Christine Taubira radicals. "Sego" was also at his side during the meeting that the President of Honour held at Paris XI. Chevenement / Royal: a deal too good
Both agreements (electoral and political) that have been
formalized and ratified this weekend, between the MRC and the PS, raise many questions that keep the viewer to consolidate his opinion on them. Nicolas Voisin
announced in his blog on Friday evening
The former minister, who had obtained 5.3% for president in 2002, which had brought the "no" to referendum in 2005, thereby obtained a political agreement and an agreement electoral interesting and timely: the radicals leave to withdraw in the first gave him a position of last courted favor. was very relevant, and vis-à-vis was regularly forced to move off the field response to the question (with an original way to make the language of wood that is to speak on substance rather than to justify on the form).
The electoral agreement would, in the words of JP Chevenement himself on a dozen constituencies for parliamentary elections. Many mixed, but suggests that secret clauses: the end of the interview, the former minister did not rule out returning to PS in the coming years, and has not closed the door on a merger MRC-PS . By that Che signed the death probably next MRC on the altar of bipartisanship, and let him consider the analysis of experts in constitutional law after the quinquennium of 2000, unless the dose proportional announced by the former Minister does not change the deal finally.
But the skill of Chevenement has been to have reached a political agreement, which is reflected in a joint statement
(and here
). Appropriate agreement appear to have been preserved since the main thrust of the MRC program, which allows him to brag that this is a "union" and not an act of allegiance.
For example, the most salient points regarding the economics are: to reduce the independence of the European Central Bank (devaluation of the Euro), interfere Foreign takeovers, an ambitious energy policy, protection of public services, upgrading of low wages, increased taxes on capital income, and, what is perhaps the most ambitious, a change in standards of WTO to impose minimum social and environmental protectionism to stem offshoring and combat unemployment, and the establishment of a social dumping clause at European level.
These measures, while employment is the primary concern of the French, were the cornerstone of the program Chevenement JP, and repeated that his first priority was the "reorientation of the EU in promoting growth and employment". To listen to Night 3, the project differed from that of L. Jospin (including the five-year) and significantly less than that of S. Royal. Despite their common slingshot to the strong euro, it's hard to believe as president of the Region claims it is awaiting the results of its national consultation to determine. Except that his vision is already established and it is only a facade?
The agreement is almost too good and too strong to be true: it seems that one of two bluffs. At least that are both: one seeking to see join the 5.3% French-sensitive approach Chevenement (the polls speak louder than the polls), or at least to avoid as much as possible delaying the vote, the other acting in his movement (and himself) a difficult to guarantee continuity since April 21, 2002. In a convergence of interest would then be born with a declaration that, once again, will be superbly forgotten when exercising power? On
blog Chevenement, the reactions are very strong and frankly shared in any case much more than the score of 84% of delegates in favor of rallying in PS (but it must be said that the activist, supporter is not the same requirement to obtain warrants a politician who is his career).
bet that many voters who distrusted S. Royal are now being forced to question his credibility, and above all, respect it has vis-à-vis its commitments, not only electoral but also politically: it is clear that the early promises Indeed, after having demonstrated the ease with which she considers the program Socialist. Now
S. Royal will have to assume a new position: an outsider, she became responsible for a diverse mix of power, from the pro Chevènement DSK. Anything can come out, the best and the worst and after primary health walk, things are very serious for the candidate.
But the skill of Chevenement has been to have reached a political agreement, which is reflected in a joint statement
(and here
). Appropriate agreement appear to have been preserved since the main thrust of the MRC program, which allows him to brag that this is a "union" and not an act of allegiance.
For example, the most salient points regarding the economics are: to reduce the independence of the European Central Bank (devaluation of the Euro), interfere Foreign takeovers, an ambitious energy policy, protection of public services, upgrading of low wages, increased taxes on capital income, and, what is perhaps the most ambitious, a change in standards of WTO to impose minimum social and environmental protectionism to stem offshoring and combat unemployment, and the establishment of a social dumping clause at European level. These measures, while employment is the primary concern of the French, were the cornerstone of the program Chevenement JP, and repeated that his first priority was the "reorientation of the EU in promoting growth and employment". To listen to Night 3, the project differed from that of L. Jospin (including the five-year) and significantly less than that of S. Royal. Despite their common slingshot to the strong euro, it's hard to believe as president of the Region claims it is awaiting the results of its national consultation to determine. Except that his vision is already established and it is only a facade?
The agreement is almost too good and too strong to be true: it seems that one of two bluffs. At least that are both: one seeking to see join the 5.3% French-sensitive approach Chevenement (the polls speak louder than the polls), or at least to avoid as much as possible delaying the vote, the other acting in his movement (and himself) a difficult to guarantee continuity since April 21, 2002. In a convergence of interest would then be born with a declaration that, once again, will be superbly forgotten when exercising power? On
blog Chevenement, the reactions are very strong and frankly shared in any case much more than the score of 84% of delegates in favor of rallying in PS (but it must be said that the activist, supporter is not the same requirement to obtain warrants a politician who is his career).
bet that many voters who distrusted S. Royal are now being forced to question his credibility, and above all, respect it has vis-à-vis its commitments, not only electoral but also politically: it is clear that the early promises Indeed, after having demonstrated the ease with which she considers the program Socialist. Now
S. Royal will have to assume a new position: an outsider, she became responsible for a diverse mix of power, from the pro Chevènement DSK. Anything can come out, the best and the worst and after primary health walk, things are very serious for the candidate.
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Tooth Extraction Cost
Let us the strong program of FN into a corner ...
... rather than trying to disqualify the candidate.
This article is controversial and requires the Precommercial which are contributed by the comments that followed. 
http://www.agoravox.fr/article.php3?id_article=16521
article also listed on Yahoo! France
About Cortisone Injections In Spanish
The race in the East 1 / 2
The recent awarding of the Legion of Honour to Vladimir Putin talking. This decoration has nothing surprising when one knows the diplomatic approach of President Chirac. To understand the reasons for this attitude, which was the ranting Atlanticist and presidential candidate Nicolas Sarkozy, we must go back in time.
This article traces nearly 20 years of geopolitics in Eastern Europe. This is a view of the struggle for influence in Eastern Europe and the collapse of European ambitions. Countries of Central and Eastern Europe (hereinafter: CEE) created in the fall of the Berlin Wall, a large intake of air which responded more or less rapidly and intensely all the major Western powers. The region is then re-shape and secure (from a military standpoint, but also legal and economic). Germany, in the best position in 1989, will toast its strengths and leave the area to the lust of the great powers. The European Union (hereinafter EU) could take the opportunity to emerge as key player in the diplomatic arena, will miss the boat, to the chagrin of the French, political drivers of it.
I The German ambitions: In the euphoria of the 90s to the 2000s procrastination
According Edouard Husson, German is an obsession to try to stabilize the area as it left the Soviet bloc. "In the spirit of economic and political leaders German, this is for Germany to regain its old sphere of influence. When you look at the extension of the European Union, it is to find the sphere of influence of Prussia and Austria. Which incorporates both Scandinavia (Sweden, Finland), Baltic countries (Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia), Central Europe (Poland, Czech Republic, Slovak Republic, Hungary) and the Balkans (former Yugoslavia, Macedonia) "Does he declares in the article German Crisis, European crisis, [http://www.diploweb.com/p5husson3.htm/]. Germany leads in H. Kohl (1982-1998) an ambitious, which will prove clearly presumptuous in the years 1994-95.
In 1989, Germany is investing heavily in the East, both politically and economically. Russia greatly benefits from the "politics of Deutchmark", which allows Germany to glean more licenses. And Gorbachev, originally very reluctant to join the East Germany to NATO will shrink more zeros on the check. Mitterrand, who was not prepared for a unified Germany and fears of thus lose its influence over its neighbor, which Moscow hopes to end oppose. Kohl, aware of the metamorphosis that will take place in the CEECs, hopes to influence the transition to his favor: "He has tended to expand the settlements and the German power in Central and Eastern Europe at the expense of Russia. H. Kohl has repeatedly told Boris Yeltsin that Germany was the best friend of Russia. This did not, at the same time, the German Foreign Minister Klaus Klinkel to spend her time visiting the governments of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, to discuss cooperation and investments. The Balkans are of the view that one of the most famous examples and more ambiguous, but we could multiply the examples. [Edouard Husson Crisis in German, European crisis http://www.diploweb.com/p5husson3.htm/]). crisis of Yugoslavia 94-95 is an opportunity to see the United States frustrated with the position taken by Germany which makes not resolve the conflict.
B: 95-2003: Time for realism about the limits of German ambitions:
Chancellor Schroeder came to power in 1998 and discusses the situation with realism: hopes that German reunification is an opportunity are exaggerated. It's really a money pit, and reunification was too brutal and too vexatious. The French delay that has increased up to 1996 has encouraged Russia has managed to forget a time, and whose new president to handle (2000: election of Vladimir Putin) attempts of France by proposing an alliance to reverse cons Germany. French diplomacy can not resist this argument and Putin is rapidly taking over. Moreover, in spring 2001, after collecting the limits of its influence in the Council of Nice, Moscow primer activation of its links with the United States to play competitive EU / USA. With these, the pickings are slim but Russia negotiates skillfully face to face and divide the EU, while Germany remains convinced that it is imperative to guarantee the security of Europe is the combining and continues the questionable technical assistance. [See article Masada: The following technical assistance Western Russia to broadcast on http://www.diploweb.com/]. Alexei Arbatov
said at a press conference on March 5, 2001 before the Duma Committee on Defense: "In Russia bilateral relationship is stronger than any other partner. All others are lower. Russia also can not find it in front of united fronts of states that go against Russian interests ... . Schroeder is a diplomat with the U.S. and finds in them an ideal partner in the declaration of unlimited solidarity following the attacks of September 11, 2001. Americans are in competition with Germany in the CEE countries, where they enjoy the favorable image of winners of communism, but agree to intimidate Russia in exchange for the Advancement of CEEC membership in NATO.
http://www.diploweb.com/cartes/natotan2004verluise.htm
Copenhagen 2002: EU summit which finalizes enlargement to the CEECs in May 2004. Germany will finally reap the benefits of 'soft hegemony' (a word of Joseph Fischer). which was to facilitate the transition of CEE countries by establishing FDI, and to improve its image, moving away in Russia in order to print its sphere of influence, and by including them in an integrated economic zone that helps preserve the Rhineland model. But in 2002 Germany was in economic difficulties, partly because of the adverse speculation that followed Sept. 11, partly for structural reasons, the Rhineland model is undermined by the international social dumping. After skillful maneuvers that allowed him to print his line on European policy and impose the enlargement as evidence of a continuation of German reunification, there she is forced to resort to systematic consultation of its European partners, which should give him the means to conclude its policy. This is an opportunity to renew ties with France but the French-German friendship is undoubtedly affected.
PS: This article is a summary of articles from http://www.diploweb.com/
Johan is the author of a memoir in 2005 "EU Enlargement to the CEEC and legal rigidities geopolitical realities, economic and social. "
Run for the East 2 / 2
This article follows the article: Race to the East 1 / 2
In it, we followed the German frustrated ambitions of 'soft hegemony'. This article takes up the drama when the diplomatic crisis over Iraq and described the collapse of political Europe.
PECO II, Russia and the United States resumed the hand: the EU is becoming a Free Trade Area (FTA) luxury which their mutual influence to be exerted:
Germany goes beyond that a simple competition to the United States by resuming its independence vis-à-vis Washington in the first quarter of 2003, after the rider refused the United States a German contingent in Afghanistan and after enlargement on 1 May 2004 acquired the Copenhagen summit in 2002. According to some analysts, this would even the chancellery that have inspired the opposition of France to the preemptive attack on Iraq. Germany marks his divergence on the intervention of the private agreement of the UN, following a Jacques Chirac in the lead, and soon joined by China and Russia.
"Hegemony soft" water is the benefit of CEE emerging requirements of the CFSP, and Russia, which has a new point to make: its bridgehead Kaliningrad exclave Russian overlooking the Baltic Sea and borders with Poland and Lithuania. This is the hub of criminal trafficking in which Moscow closes his eyes, conscious of the weakening of the EU that it generates. Kaliningrad is also the reason given by Russia to ensure long term derogations from the Schengen area, after the transit facilities it got face to face with Lithuania (the latter was awaiting a response from the EU side to Russian pressure to obtain a right of passage through Belarus).
http://www.diploweb.com/cartes/qi7.htm
Despite this, Germany believes it can make again play the politics of Mark, which is not guaranteed to work against the return of the concept of "common European home" Gorbachev that Moscow is gradually up to date under the cover of the possibility of accession Russia to the EU. This membership does not actually function to be realistic, but to remember instead of the sphere in the Russian zone. Anyway, the German position in the East actually seems more fragile than expected, and its latent dispute with Russia were exacerbated by its competitor in the race for the Russian markets: Washington recalled CEECs their apprehension about the Russian ogre. In this game, it is the United States the strongest, as evidenced by the various "color revolutions" across the Atlantic with an orchestrated scenario now perfectly honed (Orange Revolution in Ukraine in 2004, Rose in 2003 in Georgia, Kyrgyzstan and Lebanon in 2005). What about secret CIA prisons in Romania (which joined the EU January 1, 2007)?
The Iraq crisis of 2002-2003 revealed acute differences of opinion which exist in Europe on European Security Policy (CFSP). Although Germany has promoted accession CEE countries to NATO, but it did not intend to empty the CFSP his entire military function tool of conflict resolution outside the EU, including the nationalist unrest from the melting of the Soviet bloc (particularly in the Balkans, but also in Chechnya and in former satellite states wishing to escape the Russian fold). France sees this structure as the result of the belated but firm PED (European Defence Policy), which should lead to an EU that speaks and acts with one voice at international level. CEE countries, they do design as an instrument of internal security, NATO is the military treaty central Europe, and the field outside the EU. In reality, this discussion sheds light on the clear understanding of their operating requirements of the CEECs and their desire not to risk the double aspect of external security, logical in view of their lack of ambition for power.
In the end, despite being coveted advantage of the actors, the CEECs seem to have relatively well served their interests (obtaining an FTA and Luxury Community aid), but remain fragile in their bilateral relations against Russia and the United States. They thus rely on the EU, within the institutions which they have negotiated an important institutional role, to bargain collectively against the major powers on the most critical issues. Casually, the EU leaders are proving to be tough negotiators, including through iconic characters such as Romano Prodi, who has stood out the directives of the Italian Prime Minister S. Berlusconi, is exemplary of independence. May be the loss of their role as stake PECO serves, but they have substituted a place in an integrated market, and NATO membership after the first quarter of 2003 proved their motivation to join. Today
France and the United States is always boiled, despite a thaw in relations. Jacques Chirac openly dredge Moscow, which has the oil needed to conduct a so-called "culture war" against the Arab-Muslim countries (terminology that actually conceals far more prosaic considerations of both sides behind the facades ideological refugees).
Besides the decoration of the Russian President has cleverly re-nationalized much of its gas, one can notice the weakness of the protests at the brutal murder of a journalist pro Chechen until recently the Soviet advantage that Americans still presented as the liberators of Nazi-occupied Europe, and the inauguration in May 2005 of a gigantic statue of General de Gaulle in Russia.
Conclusion:
strategies alone 'French and German have destroyed almost all hope of European diplomacy, even of a political Europe. It therefore remains an economic Europe, leaving the former superpowers free to expand their influence within the EU. This may explain why the EU is currently the best Trojan horse to bring down the Rhine model by typing their Achilles heel: the office, and using as a weapon dumping (tax, as in Luxembourg or England office in the East). In exchange, hoping to regain the CEEC regional powers. As for a political Europe, she is currently at its worst. The French and Dutch rejections of the Constitutional Treaty did not help.
Can we regenerate the EU policy? Hardly: the link between membership and economic and social policy is broken. A directory of major, desired by N. Sarkozy and more commonly called "hard core "Would have probably found a good support in" collaborations enhanced "under the Constitutional Treaty.
Everything is redone. An opportunity or a calamity? A New European Union is it possible on the basis of the fight against dumping (economic, social, environmental, fiscal, legal and judicial)? Time will tell.
PS: This article is a summary of articles from http://www.diploweb.com/
Johan is the author of a memoir in 2005 "EU Enlargement to the CEEC and legal rigidities geopolitical realities, economic and social. "
Agoravox Published:
http://www.agoravox.fr/tb_receive.php3?id_article=15709
http://www.agoravox.fr/tb_receive.php3?id_article=15711
Thursday, December 7, 2006
Metformin 2000 Mg Daily Pcos
interstate competition and sustainable development
The end of trade barriers, barriers to the movement of capital, and development of rapid transportation and inexpensive lead to almost complete deregulation and detrimental to a harmonious development.
Over the "rounds" (cycles) the GATT (General Agreement we Tariffs and Trade, in 1994 became the World Trade Organization) has spread worldwide, and the few who are not members are now exception (Russia, Belarus ...). The heart of the WTO lies in the now famous "clause of the most favored nation." This clause is a simple principle: if a WTO Member State grants a tariff favored for its products, then this country must accord all WTO member countries the same benefit to the entire class of this product without possible discrimination (1). Each state is therefore obliged to apprehend his policy Customs globally (almost globally), not in a context of patronage, with all that that implied political intrigue, and political preference or ideological, or economic sanctions to stifle another member state of WTO. Is approached from a "Hayekian" of market regulation, as we have mentioned in a previous article (see Consuming just or fair use), and one can only rejoice at the supposed end discrimination against rival countries economically or politically.
Second instrument created after the Second World War : International finance as embodied by the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. It should be noted that the loans (which are rarely grants) of these organisms are conditioned by respect "criteria of good governance." While some of these criteria are those that we should legitimately expect the recipient of the funds released: project viability, guarantees of integrity, compliance with accounting rules, compliance standards including sanitary and phytosanitary measures, but other criteria cons are clearly ideologically connoted: elimination of tariffs, privatization particular. (2) The goal is to ensure free movement of capital and goods, to establish a global market.
Add to this technological advancement that has drastically reduced transportation costs, the collapse of communism rotted by corruption and obsolescence of economic tools, the dissemination of business English, disparities in living standards and law, and we get all the elements of a forum shopping, which deregulates the market completely.
forum shopping, butchering and legal deregulation Forum shopping is the ability to choose the right case for each which is more favorable. For example, a strong currency like the euro or the dollar, while locating production in China, Thailand or elsewhere, to take advantage of cheap labor without social rights, and where the obligations security are fewer, if they exist, and therefore less expensive. Regarding some states particularly complacent, Army and Police are even available to employers, such as ousting a strike that would turn s'insurrection. Thus, the legal conditions are more disparate, more economic agents operating at the international level are favored. How is this legally possible? Unable to deal with private international law simply without shortcuts. To provide an appropriate vision, note that (s) right (s) applicable (s) varies / nt according to the subject matter: the right of the person, company law depend on the nationality or location of the seat social, labor law often depends on the place of performance of the service, etc..
Prior to the Forum shopping, states were competing to attract investment, and had to build a politico-legal and socio-economically attractive, but should not neglect none of these aspects, because the choice of one could not be separated from the others. Thus the U.S. could argue a strong currency, a large domestic market, but suffered from a labor cost and a litigious trend. Germany had for her excellence in its industry, dragging a heavy unionization, but a culture of peaceful collective bargaining. France argued the effectiveness of its public services, and productivity per hour worked great, while his weaknesses were the constant threat of strikes (and if you go back a little further in time, its tendency to revolution). Now, time is no longer a choice for society, but in a choice of activity, for which we must offer the best conditions for investors to curry his favor, if not to say ignore the interest of his country. Take for example the case of sex tourism: some countries do not see any interest in taking effective measures against sexual exploitation of minors as long as there is a market for such degradation. It is the same working conditions or environmental, that would be a charge that the company would not assume. 
Because the investor is a free rider (rider), by very definition that gave Olson. Motivated by his own interests accounting, it does not try to fill the cracks, but can operate at without taking into account the public interest and will carve its business by producing and selling there, and transported by a third (butchering: Also used in private international law when different parts of a contract are subject to different rights). We also include in this respect John Nash. The father the "game theory" has shown that in many games where the pursuit of individual interest led to one or more sub-optimal equilibria (Nash equilibria). Skinning and deregulation true if the investor himself alone, there is no reason to blame him as such. Capitalist society is profit, and is far preferable to the company sunk. It is also written in the definition in the Civil Code "in order to share the profits." The problem is that competition states between them leads to a frantic race ahead in a bidding war that leads them to consider only the requirements of investors, whose entire economy needs, it goes without saying, contempt, if necessary, the interest. They are also the states that become free riders because of the premium to the highest bidder, in defiance of global concern. This is manifested by a disregard for the environment, natural resources, for Human Rights. This has led to a de facto modern slavery in lawless areas specially equipped as in China, Mexico, Haiti (EPZs). Skinning allows research the law less restrictive in any case has led to widespread deregulation regarding matters of law flowing freely, ie goods and capital, but alone. To maintain a sufficiently attractive (though France is the second country that receives the most foreign capital behind China which has him steal the first place), the Western states to deregulate everything goes.
Before the flight of his companies prefer London or Rotterdam, the more favorable legal level of corporate law, France established a very flexible SAS (simplified joint stock company). The free movement of workers across Europe were aligned using the Bolkestein directive on employment law regimes most of Europe has minima: those new member countries from the former Soviet bloc. The first employment contract and his twin brother the new contract would allow the hiring of foreign companies come to seek employment in France, hyper flexible and precarious work in their country through a services directive that would sanction a state of affairs: inefficient for cross-border workers protective regimes.
The
rightful place in the competition interstate Yet the competition among states could and should be rich and fertile. This could be the competition, which makes rival their scientific research, their expertise, their art, their education, urban infrastructure, their industries, their agriculture, their creativity, well-being of their populations, in short their genius. And this competition is the indispensable sword of Damocles over the heads of governments so that each act of kindness, so that each sees neglect is reflected immediately on the country's competitiveness, and thus citizens are demanding of them and still be active factors in their democracy.
To do this, that this competition should be done on a site chosen by the people through their states, and some are deliberately banned bidding. There would be a way: the International Convention reciprocal, universal and effectively enforced. But it is precisely this logic of the free rider who gets in the way, as in the prisoner's dilemma (3) where each betrays fear of being betrayed, to the detriment of both actors. And so there is nothing to wait for decisive government development sustainable self-restraint. However, an outside authority will necessarily have to intervene to secure another balance which, if not optimal, will be at least sustainable. This role is the consumer and no one else who plays in a market economy. We will see in a future article how he will regain his position.
1 An exception is recognized for regional agreements such as NAFTA (North American Free Trade), or the EU (European Union), but since the Maastricht Treaty of 1992, the EU has abandoned " Community preference "which allowed States to the EU to grant tariff preferences without having to benefit all partners. The EU finds itself without tariff barrier to stem imports from abroad, and each of its member states is seen in direct competition with developed countries economic development and societal choices, when other economic zones to protect from outside. The EU countries are particularly vulnerable to global market deregulation.
2 It is of course no question of any advocacy of economic centralism and state planning, leading often too far from competition to monopolies exploiting the consumer, by providing goods at high prices, and lower quality than competitive situation. This is by cons in mind that these bodies should not be tools to promote ideological, and that state sovereignty must be respected as the well-being of citizens is improved (it is after all the alibi raised by these funds).
3 The Prisoner's Dilemma is an illustration of the type of game theory of John Nash. Following investigations, we managed to arrest two robbers that we assume about to shine a bank. To obtain confessions, they are separated then they are offered the following market: everyone can terminate or not terminate the other. If neither condemns it pay the price of one year imprisonment each. If both condemning the other, they have 7 years in prison each. If one denounces the other and not one who has complained of is released, and the other takes 10 years in prison. The paradox is that each person has an interest in denouncing. Indeed, suppose that A robber does not denounce, he has an even chance of being denounced, and two not to be, so on average 1 / 2 + 10 / 2 = 11 / 2 = 5.5 years. For if cons denounced it an even chance of being denounced and a chance of not being so average 0 + 7 / 2 = 3.5 years. A report will therefore B, especially since he is convinced that the latter has more interest to report that not doing so, he will denounce it, so much to cover. And so both players miss the best balance: mutual silence with which they would be one year in prison. The most fun in the prisoner's dilemma is that experiments have shown that even leaving the prisoners to agree before separating them, even when they end up being betrayed by lack of trust (or opportunism ultimately unsuccessful).
Reprinted by Agoravox
TRACKBACK URL: http://www.agoravox.fr/tb_receive.php3?id_article=10470
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)