Will California become America's first failed state? Los Angeles, 2009: California may be the eighth largest economy in the world, but its state staff are being paid in IOUs, unemployment is at its highest in 70 years, and teachers are on hunger strike. So what has gone so catastrophically wrong?Comments (621)Paul HarrisThe Observer, Sunday 4 October 2009 Article historyPatients without medical insurance wait for treatment in the Forum, a music arena in Inglewood, Los Angeles. The 1,500 free places were filled by 4am. Photograph: John Moore/Getty Images California has a special place in the American psyche. It is the Golden State: a playground of the rich and famous with perfect weather. It symbolises a lifestyle of sunshine, swimming pools and the Hollywood dream factory.But the state that was once held up as the epitome of the boundless opportunities of America has collapsed. From its politics to its economy to its environment and way of life, California is like a patient on life support. At the start of summer the state government was so deeply in debt that it began to issue IOUs instead of wages. Its unemployment rate has soared to more than 12%, the highest figure in 70 years. Desperate to pay off a crippling budget deficit, California is slashing spending in education and healthcare, laying off vast numbers of workers and forcing others to take unpaid leave. In a state made up of sprawling suburbs the collapse of the housing bubble has impoverished millions and kicked tens of thousands of families out of their homes. Its political system is locked in paralysis and the two-term rule of former movie star Arnold Schwarzenegger is seen as a disaster…
Adding Fees and Fences on Media Sites Jason Reed/ReutersRupert Murdoch's News Corporation charges for access to The Wall Street Journal and could do the same on Hulu Read Full Article
Change or deja vu? Obama divides Iran By Gareth Porter
TEHRAN - Iranian national security officials and political leaders have been carrying out an internal debate over how much freedom President-elect Barack Obama will have to change US policy toward Iran, and those who have argued that he will not be able to do so have gained the upper hand since Obama's announcement of his national security team, interviews with Iranian officials and their advisers reveal.
The outcome of that debate, which is very sensitive to signals from Obama and his national security team, could be a key factor in how far Iran goes in indicating its own willingness to make concessions to Washington next year.
Two different views of Obama and his administration's likely policy toward Iran emerged within the regime in the first weeks after his election, according to the officials interviewed in Tehran. One interpretation was that Obama's election is the result of a fundamental shift in US politics and offers an opportunity for Iran to find a way out of its decades-long conflict with the United States.
The other view sees Obama as subject to the control of powerful forces - especially the pro-Israel lobby - that are inherently hostile to Iran. That interpretation implies that Iran should make no conciliatory move toward the Obama administration.
Both groups appear to agree that Obama's victory reflects political demands for change in the United States, and that his administration's policy will be subject to structural constraints. The difference between them lies in the emphasis placed on the two factors in US politics and policymaking toward Iran.
Murdered British spy: life of a modern day spook Murdered in a Pimlico flat registered to a mysterious company, his body found in a sports bag in the bathroom: Gareth Williams died a spy's death. Read Article
