DealBook: Court Gives Investor an Edge in a Lawsuit Against Apple

7:47 p.m. | Updated

In the battle between Apple and the hedge fund manager David Einhorn, score a point for the billionaire who is taking up the mantle of shareholder advocate.

A federal judge said on Tuesday that he was leaning toward Mr. Einhorn’s contention that Apple had violated securities regulations by bundling several shareholder proposals into one matter.

A lawsuit by Mr. Einhorn’s Greenlight Capital, filed this month in Federal District Court in Manhattan, argues that Apple improperly grouped a vote to eliminate the company’s ability to issue preferred stock at will with other initiatives that Mr. Einhorn supports.

While the judge overseeing the case, Richard J. Sullivan, did not immediately grant Mr. Einhorn’s request for a halt to the vote, he said that the facts of the case favored the investor’s interpretation.

“I think success on the merits lies with Greenlight,” Judge Sullivan said at the end of a nearly two-hour hearing. Earlier in the hearing, he implied that he believed Securities and Exchange Commission rules prohibited the bundling of disparate shareholder initiatives.

Spokesmen for Greenlight and Apple declined to comment after the hearing.

Though a small point in the skirmish between Apple and Mr. Einhorn, the judge’s comments may provide some ballast to the hedge fund manager’s call to other investors. Mr. Einhorn’s bigger goal is to persuade Apple to return some of its $137 billion cash trove to shareholders.

He has asked Apple to issue preferred shares, which would pay out billions of dollars in dividends over time. His lawsuit revolves around the technology giant’s proposal to eliminate “blank check” preferred shares that the company can issue without a shareholder vote. He argues that the company improperly bundled the plan with two other corporate governance changes that he supports.

Apple has said that it will consider Mr. Einhorn’s request, but that it has no plans to amend the shareholder proposal.

Judge Sullivan is expected to decide within days whether to grant a preliminary injunction, given the Feb. 27 cutoff for voting on Apple’s shareholder proposals.

A lawyer for Mr. Einhorn, Mitchell P. Hurley of the firm Akin Gump, argued during Tuesday’s hearing that his client would suffer “irreparable harm” if the vote were allowed to proceed, because he would be forced to vote against two matters he would ordinarily support.

During questioning, however, Judge Sullivan expressed skepticism about the need to take immediate action.

A lawyer for Apple, George Riley of O’Melveny & Myers, said in court that if shareholders approved the disputed initiative, the company would wait for the judge to rule before adopting the new measures in its corporate charter.

Judge Sullivan also questioned why Mr. Einhorn had waited so long to act. He filed suit on Feb. 6, over a month after Apple first disclosed its shareholder proxy.

A version of this article appeared in print on 02/20/2013, on page B2 of the NewYork edition with the headline: Court Gives Investor an Edge In a Lawsuit Against Apple.
Read More..

Obama ramps up pressure on GOP to avert budget cuts









WASHINGTON -- With less than two weeks before across-the-board spending cuts begin taking effect, President Obama is cranking up pressure on congressional Republicans to agree to a Democratic plan that would temporarily block the deep reductions.


Obama is scheduled to speak Tuesday on the need to prevent the cuts, known in Washington as a sequester, appearing at a White House event with first responders -- people whose jobs might be lost if the federal government slashes budgets as scheduled on March 1, according to a White House official.


The president plans to endorse a Democratic plan that would replace the across-the-board cuts with more targeted reductions, as well as new taxes on some people making more than $1 million.





"The president will challenge Republicans to make a very simple choice: do they protect investments in education, health care and national defense or do they continue to prioritize and protect tax loopholes that benefit the very few at the expense of middle and working class Americans?" said the official, who would not be named discussing the plans.


Obama's event will be the latest step in his public campaign to cast his Republican opponents as standing in the way of  "balanced" deficit reduction, an effort he has pursued since the election and which he  highlighted in his State of the Union speech last week.


The president says he wants to curb government spending, but any deal must include new tax revenue from changes to the tax code and protect entitlements.


GOP leaders also say they want to avert the blunt spending cuts -- which were enacted as part of a 2011 budget deal as a way to force a compromise.


Nonpartisan experts say the cuts would eliminate hundreds of thousands of jobs and slow the recovery.


But Republicans argue that new taxes should not be included in the alternative. House Speaker John Boehner, (R-Ohio) said last week the cuts were likely to hit unless lawmakers agreed on a long-term plan that dramatically cuts government spending and eliminates the deficit over the next decade.


Senate Republicans are expected propose their own temporary alternative, which would curb the growth of the federal workforce.


The White House is continuing with the strategy that has yielded success in the past -- using the president's megaphone and a popular proposal to pressure Congress on deadline. That tactic successfully forced Republicans to agree to raise income taxes on top earners as part of last month's fiscal cliff deal. That deal also delayed the sequester for two months.


The Democrats are proposing another 10 month delay, replacing half the cuts with the so-called Buffett Rule, a requirement that those who have adjusted gross incomes above $1 million pay a minimum 30% tax rate.


The rule, an early staple in Obama's reelection campaign, is named for billionaire Warren Buffett, who has said that tax loopholes and deductions allow him to pay a lower effective tax rate than his secretary.


The Democratic proposal includes $55 billion in new revenue, along with cuts to farm subsidies and a smaller hit to defense spending than is scheduled.


ALSO:


Republicans successfully block vote on vote on Hagel nomination


In Chicago, Obama stresses community, family in curbing violence


White House pushes back on GOP criticism of draft immigration bill



Kathleen.hennessey@latimes.com


Twitter: @khennessey





Read More..

Watch a Robot Interview <em>Portlandia'</em>s Fred Armisen











Here at Wired we don’t fear losing our jobs to robots – in fact, we advocate for it.


So when Fred Armisen stopped by the Wired office after the SF Sketchfest tribute to his Peabody Award-winning show Portlandia, we decided to let our robot Rob-EE do the talking. Armisen and Rob-EE even had a heart-to-android-heart. Rob-EE also managed to get some dirt about Armisen’s thoughts on the end of 30 Rock, working on both Portlandia and Saturday Night Live, and the very-prescient subject of a robot’s right to comedy.


“Hopefully there will be a day when all comedy is all robots,” Armisen says. “There should be comedians who perform only for robots – I’m saying human comedians that only perform for robots.”


Find out what else happened when Rob-EE sat down with Armisen in the video above. Portlandia airs Fridays at 10 p.m./9 p.m. Central on IFC.






Read More..

Romanian cinema triumphs again with top Berlin award






BERLIN (Reuters) – Romania claimed another major scalp on the European film festival circuit this weekend when “Child’s Pose” won the Golden Bear in Berlin, underlining the country’s emergence as a powerhouse of hard-hitting cinema in the post-Communist era.


The film, directed by Calin Peter Netzer, tells the story of Cornelia, an obsessive mother who uses every trick in the book to prevent her son from going to jail after he kills a boy in a car accident.






It is the latest in a long list of critical hits that have enjoyed startling success at festivals like Berlin and Cannes in recent years, helping to bring Romania‘s cinema to a wider audience.


Some of Romania‘s top directors, who have enjoyed the artistic freedom that flourished after the death of Communist dictator Nicolae Ceausescu in 1989, dismiss talk of a cinematic “new wave”, saying it lumps together very different styles and stories.


But ever since Cristi Puiu’s “The Death of Mr. Lazarescu” hit Cannes in 2005, and two years later his compatriot Cristian Mungiu won the coveted Palme d’Or there for the harrowing abortion drama “4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days”, Romanian cinema has been firmly on the map.


“It is an acknowledgement, I think, that Romanian cinema is still producing good quality cinema and has been for a few years and it is a good endowment that it is still like this,” Netzer told Reuters after receiving the Golden Bear for best film.


UNFLINCHING STORYTELLING


While each film differs, there is a common thread of unflinching storytelling and compelling human drama often laid out against the backdrop of a cold and uncaring society.


Netzer said “Child’s Pose” was not a critique of Romania today, despite its unflattering portrayal of flashy materialism and casual corruption among the nouveau riche.


“I think basically this is about a relationship, a kind of pathological relationship between mother and son,” he told reporters in Berlin after the closing ceremony late on Saturday.


“The rest – the corruption, the framework, the context, all of that is on a separate level and is really only a backdrop.”


Victory in Berlin is likely to give the movie a major boost in terms of distribution in Romania and beyond, although some critics wondered whether the alienating figures of both mother and son might limit its appeal.


“There’s an instant bond the audience has with the two young women in ’4 Months…’ which we are deliberately not supposed to have in ‘Child’s Pose’,” said Jay Weissberg, critic at trade publication Variety.


“The mother is a monstrous figure and her son is even worse.”


However he, like many others, was impressed by Luminita Gheorghiu’s portrayal of Cornelia, one of several standout performances in Berlin-nominated films by mature actresses making the most of the kind of parts rarely written in Hollywood.


Paulina Garcia was the popular winner of the best actress Silver Bear for her turn in Chilean film “Gloria”, in which she plays a 58-year-old divorcee who sets out to live life to the full despite her setbacks.


“We all face crossroads in our lives where we can retreat into ourselves or we can hit the dance floor,” said “Gloria” director Sebastian Lelio of his character.


The biggest surprise at the Berlin awards ceremony was the best actor prize going to Nazif Mujic, a Bosnian Roma who had never acted before and had to be talked into playing himself in a drama based on his real-life ordeal.


“An Episode in the Life of an Iron Picker”, made for just 30,000 euros ($ 40,000), tells the story of how Bosnian hospitals refused to operate on his wife after she miscarried because she was not insured, despite the fact that her life was in danger.


Best director went to U.S. filmmaker David Gordon Green for his quirky road movie “Prince Avalanche” and Iranian entry “Closed Curtain” picked up the best script prize for directors Kamboziya Partovi and Jafar Panahi.


Panahi made the movie in secret in defiance of a 20-year filmmaking ban and was not allowed to travel to Berlin to collect his award.


“Tradition and culture remain, politicians come and go,” Partovi told reporters after receiving the honour.


(Reporting by Mike Collett-White; Editing by Andrew Heavens)


Movies News Headlines – Yahoo! News





Title Post: Romanian cinema triumphs again with top Berlin award
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/romanian-cinema-triumphs-again-with-top-berlin-award/
Link To Post : Romanian cinema triumphs again with top Berlin award
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment




Read More..

National Briefing | South: Abortion Curbs Clear Senate in Arkansas



The State Senate voted 25 to 7 on Monday to ban most abortions 20 weeks into a pregnancy. The measure goes back to the House to consider an amendment that added exceptions for rape and incest. The legislation is based on the belief that fetuses can feel pain 20 weeks into a pregnancy, and is similar to bans in several other states. Opponents say it would require mothers to deliver babies with fatal conditions. Gov. Mike Beebe has said he has constitutional concerns about the proposal but has not said whether he will veto it.


Read More..

European Parliament Approves Plan to Bolster Carbon Trading


LONDON — In a move to bolster the floundering European market for carbon offsets, the environmental committee of the European Parliament voted Tuesday to allow the European Commission to reduce the numbers of carbon permits that it auctions in the next three years.


Prices of carbon allowances, which permit companies to emit greenhouse gases, plunged below €3, or about $4, per ton last month, compared to around €30 per ton in 2008 and about €9 per ton a year ago.


Many analysts think that setting a hefty price on carbon will prove the most efficient way to reduce emissions. The European system is the world’s flagship program and its struggles could have negative implications for other countries that are considering similar efforts, including the United States.


The vote Tuesday, by an unexpectedly decisive 38 to 25 with two abstentions, is “a lifeline for the carbon market and for emissions trading as a policy tool for curbing emissions,” said Stig Schjoelset, head of carbon analysis at Reuters Point Carbon, a market research firm in Oslo. Mr. Schoelset added that if the vote had gone the other way, the system would have been “more or less dead.”


Although this vote is only a first step, politicians and analysts said it might allow the European Union program to begin recovering credibility with markets as a means to curb emissions.


“It is important that we get this right, and the sooner we get it right the better,” the E.U. climate action commissioner, Connie Hedegaard, said during an interview Monday.


Prices for carbon allowances on the Emissions Trading System, the world’s premier cap and trade program, fell to as low as €2.8 per metric ton last month. After the vote Tuesday prices were about €4.5 per ton, after closing at €5.13 per ton on Monday.


The proposal approved Tuesday would take 900 million carbon credits that were scheduled to be auctioned over 2013 to 2015 and “backload” them to 2019 and 2020 in order to put a floor under prices. It is estimated that there is now a surplus of 2 billion credits, so this move will not soak up all of the carbon allowance glut.


The changes will need to be approved later by the full Parliament and member states.


“It is really the first step in a long, long process,” said Kass Burchett, an analyst at IHS, an energy research firm.


The European Trading System was set up by the European Union to provide a signal to polluters like utilities and heavy manufacturers that they needed to reduce carbon emissions. Companies are either allocated or required to buy at auction enough credits to offset their annual emissions. The trouble is that with Europe’s dismal economy dampening industrial activity and energy use, there is now a huge surplus of allowances, or credits, depressing their price.


Industrialists and analysts say that single-digit prices do not provide the intended incentive for companies to switch to cleaner fuels and energy-efficient technology. Mr. Schoelset said that to encourage switching from coal to natural gas, a price of €30 to €40 per ton is needed, while an even higher level of perhaps €60 to €150 per ton is required for utilities to invest in expensive carbon–reducing technologies like carbon capture and storage.


“The vote signals the intention of the European Parliament to begin the process of restoring the most cost-effective approach to meeting Europe’s energy needs and reducing emissions over time,” David Hone, chief climate change adviser to the oil giant Royal Dutch Shell, said in a statement. “It will not immediately restore the system to good health, but it is a start.”


Read More..

Mary Jo White could face conflicts of interest as SEC chairwoman









NEW YORK — As a lawyer in private practice, Mary Jo White worked for Wall Street all-stars: banking giant JPMorgan Chase & Co., auditor Deloitte & Touche, former Bank of America Corp. chief Ken Lewis.


White, President Obama's pick to lead the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, even did legal work for former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. director Rajat Gupta, the highest-profile catch in the federal government's crackdown on insider trading, according to disclosures White filed ahead of her U.S. Senate confirmation hearing.


If she wins approval to lead the country's top financial watchdog, government ethics rules could force White to sit out of some SEC decisions. Potential conflicts of interest — or the appearances of conflicts — could arise from her work at the high-powered New York law firm Debevoise & Plimpton, and that of her husband John White, a partner at the prestigious firm Cravath, Swaine & Moore.





Obama's appointment of White, a former U.S. attorney in Manhattan known for high-profile prosecutions of mobsters and terrorists, was seen as a signal the administration was getting tougher on Wall Street. Her confirmation hearing in the Senate has not yet been scheduled but is expected in the next several weeks.


"She would have quite a minefield to navigate," said Robert Kelner, an attorney who is an expert in government ethics rules at the law firm Covington & Burling in Washington. "But this is not unusual for a senior-level appointee coming out of a law firm."


White could have to abstain from votes on matters involving former clients at a time when the SEC has been struggling to regain investor confidence among regulators and financial markets.


Government ethics rules generally prevent commissioners from participating in matters in which they or their spouses have any financial stake, or have any interest that could raise questions about their impartiality, Kelner said.


These rules generally restrict commissioners from taking part in cases they worked on while in the private sector — whether to bring a securities fraud lawsuit against a former client, for example, Kelner said.


White could still be involved in other matters dealing with former clients, just as long as she hasn't previously worked on the other side of particular cases before the SEC, Kelner said.


What could also complicate White's tenure at the SEC is an ethics pledge Obama has required executive-branch appointees to sign since he took office.


Aiming to limit the effects of the "revolving door" between government officials and the private sectors they regulate, the ethics pledge precludes appointees from participating in any matter involving "specific parties that is directly and substantially related" to their "former employer or former clients." Kelner said the pledge generally would not apply to broad regulations or policies.


The White House could grant White a waiver from the ethics pledge.


White did not respond to an email request for comment. Nominees typically do not speak publicly ahead of their confirmation hearings.


White would take over the SEC at a time when the agency faces major regulatory issues, aside from enforcement issues. The five-member commission, under former Chairwoman Mary Schapiro, failed to pass a sweeping overhaul of money-market funds, which federal officials say remain a weak link in the financial system.


Also before the SEC are rules governing high-speed stock trading and how the increasingly fragmented stock market is structured. The agency still must mete out myriad regulations called for by the Dodd-Frank financial overhaul of 2010.


John Coffee, a securities law expert at Columbia University in New York, said White has no apparent conflicts involving the marquee regulatory matters facing the SEC.


"There is just a forest of bayonets waiting out there if she looked like she was protecting a former client from an enforcement action," Coffee said. "I think she's also too smart to put herself in that kind of position."


andrew.tangel@latimes.com


Times staff writer Jim Puzzanghera in Washington contributed to this report.





Read More..

Pondering the Point of Snow Bikes While Riding With Wolves


Read More..

Well: Health Effects of Smoking for Women

The title of a recent report on smoking and health might well have paraphrased the popular ad campaign for Virginia Slims, introduced in 1968 by Philip Morris and aimed at young professional women: “You’ve come a long way, baby.”

Today that slogan should include: “…toward a shorter life.” Ten years shorter, in fact.

The new report is one of two rather shocking analyses of the hazards of smoking and the benefits of quitting published last month in The New England Journal of Medicine. The data show that “women who smoke like men die like men who smoke,” Dr. Steven A. Schroeder, a professor of health and health care at the University of California, San Francisco, wrote in an accompanying editorial.

That was not always the case. Half a century ago, the risk of death from lung cancer among men who smoked was five times higher than that among women smokers. But by the first decade of this century, that risk had equalized: for both men and women who smoked, the risk of death from lung cancer was 25 times greater than for nonsmokers, Dr. Michael J. Thun of the American Cancer Society and his colleagues reported.

Today, women who smoke are even more likely than men who smoke to die of lung cancer. According to a second study in the same journal, women smokers face a 17.8 times greater risk of dying of lung cancer than women who do not smoke; men who smoke are at 14.6 times greater risk to die of lung cancer than men who don’t. Women who smoke now face a risk of death from lung cancer that is 50 percent higher than the estimates reported in the 1980s, according to Dr. Prabhat Jha of the Center for Global Health Research in Toronto and his colleagues.

After controlling for age, body weight, education level and alcohol use, the new analysis found something else: men and women who continue to smoke die on average 10 years sooner than those who never smoked.

Dramatic progress has been made in reducing the prevalence of smoking, which has fallen from 42 percent of adults in 1965 (the year after the first surgeon general’s report on smoking and health) to 19 percent in 2010. Yet smoking still results in nearly 200,000 deaths a year among people 35 to 69 years old in the United States. A quarter of all deaths in this age group would not occur if smokers had the same risk of death as nonsmokers.

The risks are even greater among men 55 to 74 and women 60 to 74. More than two-thirds of all deaths among current smokers in these age groups are related to smoking. Over all, the death rate from all causes combined in these age groups “is now at least three times as high among current smokers as among those who have never smoked,” Dr. Thun’s team found.

While lung cancer is the most infamous hazard linked to smoking, the habit also raises the risk of death from heart disease, stroke, pulmonary disease and other cancers, including breast cancer.

Furthermore, changes in how cigarettes are manufactured may have increased the dangers of smoking. The use of perforated filters, tobacco blends that are less irritating, and paper that is more porous made it easier to inhale smoke and encouraged deeper inhalation to achieve satisfying blood levels of nicotine.

The result of deeper inhalation, Dr. Thun’s report suggests, has been an increased risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or C.O.P.D., and a shift in the kind of lung cancer linked to smoking. Among nonsmokers, the risk of death from C.O.P.D. has declined by 45 percent in men and has remained stable in women, but the death rate has more than doubled among smokers.

But there is good news, too: it’s never too late to reap the benefits of quitting. The younger you are when you stop smoking, the greater your chances of living a long and healthy life, according to the findings of Dr. Jha’s international team.

The team analyzed smoking and smoking-cessation histories of 113,752 women and 88,496 men 25 and older and linked them to causes of deaths in these groups through 2006.

Those who quit smoking by age 34 lived 10 years longer on average than those who continued to smoke, giving them a life expectancy comparable to people who never smoked. Smokers who quit between ages 35 and 44 lived nine years longer, and those who quit between 45 and 54 lived six years longer. Even quitting smoking between ages 55 and 64 resulted in a four-year gain in life expectancy.

The researchers emphasized, however, that the numbers do not mean it is safe to smoke until age 40 and then stop. Former smokers who quit by 40 still experienced a 20 percent greater risk of death than nonsmokers. About one in six former smokers who died before the age of 80 would not have died if he or she had never smoked, they reported.

Dr. Schroeder believes we can do a lot better to reduce the prevalence of smoking with the tools currently in hand if government agencies, medical insurers and the public cooperate.

Unlike the races, ribbons and fund-raisers for breast cancer, “there’s no public face for lung cancer, even though it kills more women than breast cancer does,” Dr. Schroeder said in an interview. Lung cancer is stigmatized as a disease people bring on themselves, even though many older victims were hooked on nicotine in the 1940s and 1950s, when little was known about the hazards of smoking and doctors appeared in ads assuring the public it was safe to smoke.

Raising taxes on cigarettes can help. The states with the highest prevalence of smoking have the lowest tax rates on cigarettes, Dr. Schroeder said. Also helpful would be prohibiting smoking in more public places like parks and beaches. Some states have criminalized smoking in cars when children are present.

More “countermarketing” of cigarettes is needed, he said, including antismoking public service ads on television and dramatic health warnings on cigarette packs, as is now done in Australia. But two American courts have ruled that the proposed label warnings infringed on the tobacco industry’s right to free speech.

Health insurers, both private and government, could broaden their coverage of stop-smoking aids and better publicize telephone quit lines, and doctors “should do more to stimulate quit attempts,” Dr. Schroeder said.

As Nicola Roxon, a former Australian health minister, put it, “We are killing people by not acting.”

Read More..

Today's Economist: Nancy Folbre: Preschool Economics

Nancy Folbre is an economics professor at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. She recently edited and contributed to “For Love and Money: Care Provision in the United States.“

Even a 4-year-old can understand the case for early-childhood education. It’s fun, you learn things, you make it easier for Mom and Dad to earn a decent living, and when you grow up you will be better able to earn a decent living yourself. At that point, you will start paying taxes that return the favor, helping finance the retirement and health care of the generation that invested in your education.

President Obama’s proposal to help states develop and expand high-quality early-education programs has won verbal support from across the political spectrum, including David Brooks. More tangible evidence of political viability comes from Oklahoma and Georgia, two traditionally red states that now provide universal voluntary preschool for 4-year-olds.

Still, conservative opposition remains fierce. The loudest complaint is that public programs have not been shown to be cost-effective. But a wealth of research by highly respected economists shows that well-designed, high-quality early-childhood education programs offer a positive payback. At National Public Radio you can listen to the University of Chicago economist James Heckman reiterate this point – as he has been doing for many years.

Timothy Bartik of the Upjohn Institute offers great running commentary on debates over technical issues (such as whether small, demonstrably successful programs can be effectively scaled up) at his Investing in Kids blog.

Academics aren’t the only ones on board. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce published a report last year explaining “Why Business Should Support Early-Childhood Education.”

But the case for a public commitment to early-childhood education extends well beyond any cost-benefit analysis of child outcomes. It would help parents meet their child-care needs and reconcile the conflicting demands of wage employment and family care.

As a report published by the Center for American Progress emphasizes, preschool enrollment rates are already high among 4-year-olds in particular. But high costs mean that participation is highest among the poor, who qualify for Head Start, and the affluent, who can afford to pay out of pocket.

Even parents who currently rely on informal child-care arrangements would benefit from more dependable public provision. Many are just one family member, friend or neighbor away from a child-care crisis that could endanger their jobs. At Forbes, Bryce Covert makes a case for emphasizing the positive employment impact of the proposed policy.

Women’s labor-force participation rates in the United States were once relatively high by international standards. In 1990, we ranked sixth among 22 countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. By 2010, our rank had fallen to 17th. Francine Blau and Lawrence Kahn of Cornell University estimate that about 29 percent of the decrease in women’s labor-force participation relative to other countries is attributable to those countries’ adoption of more “family friendly” public policies than those in the United States.

Improvements in children’s future productivity and greater opportunities for productive employment for everyone will shape the future of the United States economy. Conservatives enjoy their strongest support among older white voters, many of whom have already raised their children.

Both young parents and young children are far more ethnically diverse than the population over age 65.

But as the journalist Ronald Brownstein points out in an article memorably titled “The Gray and the Brown,” the very structure of our social programs makes the generations dependent on one another:

Today’s minority students will represent an increasing share of tomorrow’s workforce and thus pay more of the payroll taxes that will be required to fund Social Security and Medicare benefits for the mostly white Baby Boomers. Many analysts warn that if the U.S. doesn’t improve educational performance among African-American and Hispanic children, who now lag badly behind whites in both high school and college graduation rates, the nation will have difficulty producing enough high-paying jobs to generate the tax revenue to maintain a robust retirement safety net.

These are linkages that voters sorely need to understand. In coming months both Social Security and Medicare are likely to withstand the budgetary pressures imposed by the threat of sequestration. On the other hand, programs directed at children – including support for early-childhood education – are likely to come under the deficit-cutting knife.

In the long run, that knife will cut both ways, bleeding our system of intergenerational transfers.

Which is one more reason why it’s important for President Obama and his supporters to wrestle it out of conservative hands.

Read More..