Repackaging Globalization

by Dollars and Sense

The 15th World Congress of the International Economic Association (IEA) kicked off a five day convention yesterday, June 25th, entitled "The Challenge of Globalization." Guillermo Calvo, President of the IEA, welcomed the participants by placing emphasis on the importance of the congress: "The IEA World Congress offers an ideal setup to discuss globalization issues because the Association encompasses many countries around the world and, since its inception, encourages scientific and nonpartisan debate." He went on to speak on some of the more current mainstream debates and issues being put forth in the area of international economics:

Globalization issues have become central to the discussion about a good number of important topics such us trade and financial liberalization, global warming, and poverty and income distribution. Although most people would agree that globalization opens up new and exciting possibilities, risks are very real and cannot be ignored. Financial crises in emerging markets, for example, show that opening up channels for capital to flow from rich to poor countries - a process that has the potential of benefiting everyone, rich or poor -could backfire and turn the tide in the opposite direction. Even in cases in which globalization has brought about higher growth rates, one hears loud and angry voices claiming that the winners are just a handful few, while most of the population is left behind. To the extent that this perception prevails, the political sustainability of globalization will always be at stake, weakening the credibility of policy and policymakers, and bringing a new wave of massive and indiscriminate interventionism with global implications.

The main themes being discussed at the congress were listed as; "international finance, political economy considerations, macroeconomic policy, the role of the state and institution in a globalized environment, migration issues, global imbalances, and globalization in historical perspective." Keynote speakers included Joseph Stiglitz (former chief economist of the World Bank ), Dani Rodrik (Harvard professor of international political economy) and Arvind Panagariya (a professor of Indian political economy at Columbia).

As we can see from Calvo's opening remarks, the perspective taken at the congress is one which sheds a favorable light upon the "potential" of globalization and the need to address some of the issues and crises threatening it. Taking this viewpoint, globalization is not a problem in and of itself to be solved or changed but is rather a positive advancement being misconstrued as a problem by "angry voices." It seems that the speakers at the congress are addressing political sustainability of globalization—how globalization is perceived, and the threat of "interventionism"—instead of the nature of capitalism and whether or not it is a legitimate and healthy springboard for global economic integration.

Despite the claim to address "global imbalances" and "migration issues," we didn't notice any evidence that people most negatively affected by neoliberal globalization were invited to participate. Conspicuously absent from the talks are labor and community spokespeople who could best represent the detrimental economic affects of globalization on their wages, working and living conditions, cultures, and societies. The conference seems more like a chance for the elites who dominate the conversation of international economics to gather and exchange ideas about policy solutions and the image of globalization with no intention to involve regular people or seriously alter the status quo.

Given that we are not in attendence—and the interesting and relevant subject matter being discussed—we are hopeful that the conference actually addresses the some of the issues concerning the harmful economic affects of globalization on workers and poorer countries. But without adequate representation from these interests, and what looks to be a dedication to only changing the image of globalization instead of the way it works, we are skeptical.

The website for the IEA Congress can be found here.

Labels: 15th world congress, global imbalances, globalization, international economics

 

Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!).
6/30/2008 03:29:00 PM 2 comments

 

Cousin ♥ NY Landlord

by Dollars and Sense

We received a long and interesting comment about our recent post, Scenes from the Class Struggle in the East Village, from a close relative of the landlord who is trying to turn the five-story tenement he owns into an 11,000-square-foot mansion. We initially posted the comment in full, but our, um, legal department is worried about libel issues. So here is the comment, with the potentially libelous bits taken out:

New York landlord Alistair Economakis's fight to rid the five-story tenement on 47 East Third Street of its tenants has disturbed me, but it hasn't surprised me. That's because I have known Alistair's family for many years now. You see, I have the misfortune of being his first—and eldest—cousin.

Alistair was always ♥♥♥♥. I remember once, in some village in southern Greece, he stuck his five-year-old head out of his father's—my uncle's—car, and, encouraged by his guffawing dad, ♥♥♥♥♥♥. I nearly slapped my little cousin's face for that. I regret now I didn't.

The apple doesn't usually fall far from the tree. My uncle Alexander (Alistair's father) is a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. Back in 2005, when I first learned of the scandal brewing in New York around the Economakis name, I asked my uncle if it was true Alistair was trying to evict people from the building in the East Village. His answer, word-for-word, was: "♥♥♥♥♥♥♥"

Shocked? You shouldn't be. It's almost impossible to be filthy rich and not be a rotten scoundrel inside. After all, behind most great fortunes lies a crime. But Alistair and his wife Catherine Economakis (who is ♥♥♥♥♥♥) will reap what they've sown. Their crime will come back—again and again, for as long as they live—to haunt them. Of this I haven't the slightest doubt.

My cousin, who grew up in Greece and England, wraps himself in the American flag and evokes the U.S. Constitution to "justify" his family's need to live in 60 rooms, in a 11,000-square-foot home. I've read the popular outcry, the indignant outrage. Yet what do people expect from the likes of my cousin and his wife? Crying "shame!" or noting the irony in the fact that Alistair's mother-in-law is a Columbia University dean who teaches urban studies, of all things [as reported here and elsewhere], is an exercise in futility. I can assure you they aren't at all fazed by such criticism.

So many good people bemoan the legal ruling allowing the eviction to take place. This is naïve. Who makes the laws, after all? The government does. And what is the government but the representative of a country's ruling class? What do low-income tenants expect from the enemy, after all?

Yet what goes around tends to come around. You can spit on the collective—as Alistair and Cathy Economakis have done, but it's quite another thing when the collective turns around and spits on you!

Low income tenants of New York! Run the Economakises—and all human lice like them—out of town! Turn their "American dream"—a dream at your expense—into a real nightmare! Give them no quarter! Make it physically and psychologically impossible for them to evict you! Send THEM packing!

Evel G. Economakis,
Athens, Greece

Labels: affordable housing, Alistair Economakis, rent control

 

Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!).
6/27/2008 12:27:00 PM 0 comments

 

Sexy Comrades and the City

by Dollars and Sense

This hilarious item is from MRZine:

Sex sans the City (A Post-Marxist Preview)

by Susie Day

Many capitalist roaders say the Left is out of touch with popular culture. Well, I say NYET to that! Here, for instance, is an episode of Sex and the City that I translated for my Marxist-Leninist study group, so that we may better throw off our Tiffany chains.

[Scene I: Chic, Upper West Side restaurant]

SAMANTHA: [Striding in elegantly and sitting at table where the girls are waiting] Greetings, comrades! How glad I am that I—sexy, 50-year-old blonde girl, being fabulous and having much sex with men—meet you in favorite haute bourgeois bistro for sex talk. Look at dick of sultry, ethnic waiter—is not fabulous?

MIRANDA: [Rummaging impatiently through briefcase] Waiter dick unimportant for proper ordering, comrade. I, being caustic, hard-driven attorney with bright red hair, styled to evoke Great Mistakes in Hedge Trimming, no have time for frivolity. Must get back to office to shill for corporate capital—

SAMANTHA: Ooh, "shill"—sounds sexy, comrade!

MIRANDA: It is, comrade! Today, I defend sexy Fortune 500 Company owning Indian Point—nuclear power plant making much electricity for city—from selfish, unsexy officials who warn of nuclear disaster. My logic: Why upset capitalist system?

CHARLOTTE: [Sighing pertly] For myself, comrades, I—token person of dark hair color—esteem the finding of Perfect Monogamous Soul Mate as most high goal in consumerist free market society. This is exalted dream for which masses labor, regardless of increasing work hours, fear of layoff, dwindling surplus profit, endless war—and possible nuclear disaster. Heedless, heedless masses!

CARRIE: [Flexing highly toned abs, set off to perfection by jaunty, $5,000 Christian Dior ensemble resembling clothes of Carmen Miranda after werewolf attack] Ah, comrades—how good it is to exploit our lives in my column, earning many thousands of dollars more than other writers who, unlike me, have college vocabulary and knowledge of world history! [She signals waiter]

Greetings, comrade bit actor of exotic descent who is destined to receive five dollars each time this episode is played in rerun! Please give us four of your most costly watercress omelets, removing yoke and other caloric nutrients. Hurry—before more radioactive groundwater leaches from Indian Point into Hudson River!

CHARLOTTE: Comrade! This is too much food! Is not anorexia neoliberal pre-condition for true female happiness?

CARRIE: You are mistaken, comrade. We must order many expensive things—regardless of whether we shall actually consume them—so that our power may grow! Profit motive of late capitalism dictates terms of feminine value and we must obey.

Read the whole piece here.

Labels: communism, late capitalism, MRZine, Sex and the City, Susie Day

 

Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!).
6/26/2008 11:54:00 AM 0 comments

 

Scenes from the Class Struggle in the East Village

by Dollars and Sense

The New York Times recently ran a story about a New York landlord, Alistair Economakis, who is trying to convert the five-story East Village tenement he owns into an 11,000-square-foot mansion for himself and his family. The building formerly housed fifteen rent-stabilized apartments, whose rents ranged from $675 to $1200 per month. So far Economakis has been able to buy off six of the tenants, and has renovated and converted the spaces into a home with which he, his wife, and his two children are making do.

But the remaining tenants are fighting back:

At its core, the fight involves a law allowing landlords to displace rent-stabilized tenants if the landlords will use the space as their primary residence. The Economakis family has prevailed, thus far, on the principle that the law applies even to a building this large. But the tenants continue to press the notion that given the scope of the proposed home — which calls for seven bathrooms, a gym and a library — the owners are just trying to clear them out so they can sell the building off to become so many market-rate condos.

As evidence that they have no such intention, the landlords emphasize how much they love the neighborhood, especially its working-class history:

“Once we realized we wanted to make this building our home, nothing else compared,” said Mrs. Economakis, 36, who, along with her husband, works for her father’s company, Granite International Management, which manages about a dozen apartment buildings in Manhattan and Brooklyn. “I love this building, and I love this neighborhood.”

Part of the charm, she said, is that the block includes the Hells Angels headquarters and Maryhouse, one of the city’s most enduring Roman Catholic missions for the homeless.

In Manhattan, it seems, the super-rich want have the working class and eat it too.

The Times's coverage of the struggle is characteristically even-handed, depicting both landlords and tenants as in enviable positions:

In a way, each faction is living a version of the New York real estate dream. Anyone might envy the Economakises, who work at a family-owned apartment-management company and lucked into buying the building for $1.3 million — what some one-bedroom condos in the area cost today. They have both the cash and the connections to create a sprawling showpiece. But there are also countless New Yorkers who would sacrifice their firstborns (or at least a beloved pet) for a charming if cramped perch like [tenant] Mr. Boyd’s in a coveted neighborhood where comparable spaces command twice or three times as much.

Evidently, the Times regards affordable housing in New York as but a dream, and rent-stabilization as a luxury.

Read the whole story here.

For information about the tenants' struggle, visit their website.

Labels: affordable housing, rent control, wealth inequality

 

Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!).
6/17/2008 09:16:00 AM 4 comments

 

Elasticity! Why cutting gas taxes won’t lower prices, but will fatten oil companies

by Polly Cleveland

When Clinton and McCain proposed cutting gas taxes, I asked my environmental economics students, "So how much do you think drivers will save?" The students diligently Googled the numbers. "Well," said one, "the federal gas tax is 18.4 cents and the average state tax is 28.6 cents, so that’s 47 cents a gallon drivers will save!" "But what about elasticity of demand and supply?" I asked. "Oh!!! Forgot about that!"

Elasticity. Nemesis of Econ. 1. A vital concept even professional economists often forget. Elasticity is just the percentage change in quantity purchased or supplied, divided by the percentage change in price. An increase in price will lead consumers to buy less, and suppliers to offer more; vice versa for a price decrease; elasticity measures the size of that effect.

Elasticity of demand for gas is low, around 0.5. That means a 10% increase in gas prices will cause only a 5% decrease in gas consumption. That’s because it’s difficult, in the short run, for people to change their habits, for example, to buy smaller cars, to move closer to work, or to change vacation plans. But in fact some people do change; already unsold SUV’s clog the dealers’ showrooms and lots.

But--and here’s the crucial point--elasticity of gas supply is even lower, much lower than elasticity of demand. In fact, short run elasticity of supply is near zero. Two reasons: First, it’s very hard to increase supply quickly because that means expanding refining capacity. Many suppliers, especially national suppliers like Russia, Venezuela and Libya, are failing to invest in upgrading capacity. Then there’s the oil production disaster in Iraq. Second, oil companies have some monopoly power, which means they are, to some degree, already holding back production in order to raise their prices. That makes it even harder for them to decrease or increase supply in response to a tax or subsidy.

A tax on a product like gasoline falls in inverse proportion to elasticity. If elasticity of demand is 0.5, and the elasticity of supply is, say, one tenth as much, or 0.05, then suppliers pay ten times as much of the tax as consumers. That is, most of the tax falls on suppliers. Another way to put it is that suppliers cannot pass on a gas tax to consumers.

Conversely, a tax cut will deliver a windfall to suppliers, without appreciably lowering prices at the pump. When some New York State counties tried lowering local gas taxes in response to consumer protests, gas prices didn’t budge.

There are broader policy implications here: First, we can substantially raise gas taxes without much pushing gas prices above their market level--in the process capturing more of the windfall profits currently enjoyed by oil producers. Second, if we wish to discourage carbon emissions from cars, we need to look to other approaches besides gas taxes, for example, setting emission standards for automobiles, improving public transportation and encouraging denser development.

The US subsidizes ethanol production by something over a dollar a gallon, supposedly to replace gasoline. On the final exam, I asked my students this question: if Congress eliminates ethanol subsidies, will suppliers or consumers suffer more, and why? Only one student got the answer completely correct: By the same logic of relative elasticity, subsidies to ethanol production accrue mostly to suppliers, not consumers. So eliminating subsidies hurts suppliers more than consumers. Elasticity is a slippery concept!

Polly Cleveland

 

Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!).
6/15/2008 06:21:00 AM 1 comments

 

EPI urges immediate action on unemployment benefits extension

by Dollars and Sense

A press release from the Economic Policy Institute:

This morning, EPI Vice President Ross Eisenbrey issued the following statement on pending legislation to extend unemployment benefits:

"For months, as the nation's economy has deteriorated, members of Congress have tried and failed to push through a common-sense extension of unemployment insurance benefits. Now there is another chance. House leaders plan to vote as soon as tomorrow (Wednesday) on a stand-alone extension bill passed April 16 by the House Ways and Means Committee. The extension, which adds 13 weeks of benefits to unemployed workers who have exhausted their benefits, might also remain attached to the emergency supplemental appropriations bill for war funding. Congress should use every possible vehicle to put this issue before the president. For the families of the millions of workers who are exhausting their right to unemployment compensation, the deteriorating job market is a real emergency. There are now only 3.7 million job vacancies but 8.5 million unemployed looking for work. The fault is not with the jobless; the problem is a failing economy and the government's failure to turn it around."

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the bill now under consideration will provide benefits to 3.8 million people who otherwise are at extreme financial risk. The benefits will also provide a crucial boost to the faltering economy. Now is the time to ensure that Congress takes action. EPI asks that you contact your local representatives in the House and Senate (names and addresses can be located at www.house.gov and www.senate.gov) and urge them to pass this needed legislation.

Labels: Economic Policy Institute, unemployment

 

Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!).
6/10/2008 11:36:00 AM 6 comments

 

Labour as a "Limited Liability Party"?!

by Dollars and Sense

Excerpts from a recent article from the New Statesman, about one proposal for how Britain's Labour Party can deal with its financial woes:

The party's impending insolvency is beginning to concentrate minds, not least those of a group of previously Labour-friendly businessmen, who can spot a bargain when they see one. The New Statesman has learned that the unnamed, secretive group—whose members have track records in helping turn round left-leaning institutions in the past—is considering approaching hedge funds with a view to buying out the Labour Party, or rather the remaining individual members, who would be offered shares instead. "Turning the members into shareholders could offer the same opportunities as the demutualisation of the building societies," says one who is involved.

A business plan has yet to be drawn up, as the group will wait until it hears what the NEC intends to do. But the same source adds: "We have been watching how Silvio Berlusconi created Forza Italia in parallel to his business interests, and we believe that our idea offers a fascinating adaptation to British conditions."

Quite how those who are courting this rapidly declining asset stand to benefit is unclear. Another businessman who is part of the "Syndicate", as he puts it, is less guarded. If new Labour became a "limited liability party", it might be possible, he says—not entirely jokingly—to "sell non-core policies, from a customer perspective, as three-to five-year options on implementation in office". These could include policy sales to the nuclear industry or to the green lobby. "This," he points out, "could help ensure that national policies achieve the highest returns. And that could only benefit the shareholders—or, as they used to be known, the party members."

Click here to read the whole article.

Labels: Gordon Brown, Labour Party, New Statesman, Tony Blair

 

Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!).
6/09/2008 03:13:00 PM 0 comments

 

Race, Ethnicity, and the Subprime Mortgage Crisis

by Dollars and Sense

Presented by EPI's Program on Race, Ethnicity, and the Economy

Thursday, June 12, 2008
Registration 2:30 pm
Program 3:00-5:00 pm

Economic Policy Institute
1333 H Street, NW, Suite 300, East Tower
Washington, D.C. 20005
[RSVP below]

Moderated by
DR. ALGERNON AUSTIN
Director of the Program on Race, Ethnicity, and the Economy

with presentations by

GRACIELA APONTE
National Council of LaRaza

DEBBIE BOCIAN
Center for Responsible Lending

WILHELMINA LEIGH
Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies

DEDRICK MUHAMMAD
Institute for Policy Studies

GREGORY SQUIRES
George Washington University

The subprime mortgage crisis, with its links to the broader housing sector and to financial markets, is at the top of the national policy agenda. As Congress and the Federal Reserve consider proposals for reform, it is important to consider how and why this crisis came to have a disproportionate impact on communities of color. Our panel will discuss the reasons for this disparate impact and how policy reforms can be best tailored to serve the communities hardest hit by the crisis.

Seating is limited; click here to RSVP.

Labels: Economic Policy Institute, subprime crisis

 

Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!).
6/09/2008 01:18:00 PM 0 comments

 

Ed McMahon May Lose Beverly Hills Home

by Dollars and Sense

From yesterday's Wall Street Journal; hat tip to Doug Henwood of the Left Business Observer and lbo-talk.

By JAMES R. HAGERTY and GLENN R. SIMPSON

Ed McMahon, the longtime sidekick to television star Johnny Carson,
faces the possible loss of his Beverly Hills home to a foreclosure
action initiated by a unit of Countrywide Financial Corp.

Howard Bragman, a spokesman for Mr. McMahon, said late Tuesday that
his client is having "very fruitful discussions" with the lender and
hopes to find a resolution. It isn't clear whether that would allow
the 85-year-old Mr. McMahon and his wife, Pamela, to remain in the
six-bedroom home.

A Countrywide spokeswoman said the lender couldn't comment in such
cases "due to privacy issues."

Mr. McMahon, a jovial fixture of American television for decades, is
one of the most prominent people caught up in a wave of mortgage
defaults that has devastated low-income areas, suburbia and even a
few posh gated communities, such as the one where the McMahons live.
U.S. Rep. Laura Richardson, a California Democrat, recently lost a
home in Sacramento to a foreclosure. Rep. Richardson didn't respond
to requests for comment.

ReconTrust, a unit of mortgage lender Countrywide Financial, on Feb.
28 filed a notice of default on a $4.8 million Countrywide loan
backed by Mr. McMahon's home. The notice was filed with the Los
Angeles County Recorder's Office but hasn't previously come to light.
According to the filing, Mr. McMahon was then about $644,000 in
arrears on the loan. It isn't clear whether Countrywide still owns
the loan or is acting on behalf of investors who acquired it. Public
records also show that Mr. McMahon had a separate home-equity line of
credit from Countrywide of up to $300,000 secured by the same house.

Mr. McMahon's home has been on the market for about two years, his
real-estate agent Alex Davis said. Mr. Davis said the price had been
reduced, but he couldn't immediately provide details. The Christie's
Great Estates Web site, which includes homes listed by Mr. Davis,
lists the asking price at $5.75 million and says it has a canyon view
and a master-bedroom suite with his and her bathrooms.

Mr. McMahon broke his neck in a fall about 18 months ago and hasn't
been able to work, Mr. Bragman said. That health problem, along with
the weak housing market and economy, has forced Mr. McMahon into
foreclosure proceedings, Mr. Bragman said.

The McMahons "understand that they are in the same situation as
hundreds of thousands of other hard-working Americans, and their
hearts go out to them," Mr. Bragman said.

It isn't inevitable that the McMahons will lose their home to
foreclosure. Lenders often ease terms on loans or provide more time
for borrowers to catch up. Lenders also sometimes agree to accept
less than the full amount due on the loan if the borrower can find a
buyer for the home.

Labels: Beverly Hills, Ed McMahon, foreclosures

 

Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!).
6/05/2008 11:00:00 AM 2 comments

 

As homes foreclose in U.S., squatters move in

by Dollars and Sense

This is from Reuters:

By Jason Szep

BROCKTON, Massachusetts (Reuters) - They enter through a broken first-floor window each night to sleep on a moldy bed in the abandoned four-family house at 827 Main Street, part of a new generation of squatters emboldened by America's housing foreclosure crisis.

"For squatters, foreclosed homes like this are like a camp-ground with free camping," says real-estate broker Marc Charney, a foreclosure specialist, as he enters the home in Brockton, Massachusetts, and shines a flash-light at a mattress where homeless people have been sleeping each night.

Squatting is on the rise across the United States as foreclosures surge, eviction notices mount and homes go unsold for months, complicating the worst U.S. housing slump in a quarter century and forcing real-estate brokers to enlist the help of law enforcement and courts to sell empty houses.

In some regions, squatting is taking on new twists to include real-estate scams in which thieves "rent out" abandoned homes they don't own. Others involve "professional squatters" who move from one abandoned home to another posing as tenants who seek cash from banks as a condition to leave the premises -- a process known by real-estate brokers as "cash for key." Read the rest of this Reuters article.

Labels: affordable housing, foreclosures, homelessness

 

Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!).
6/05/2008 10:54:00 AM 0 comments

 

Skyrocketing Commodity Prices

by Dollars and Sense

For months, skyrocketing prices of food, oil, and other commodities have bewildered investors and governments, and have also threatened to raise the price of a subsistence-level diet out of the reach of the world's poorest citizens.

Pundits, investors, and government regulators have offered many explanations for the spike in food commodity prices, including the growing use of biofuels in wealthy countries, a loss of crop production after years of destructive agricultural trade policies, drought, and a recent rise in fertilizer and energy prices.

In addition to these factors, the current combination of a weakening dollar, stagnating financial markets, and roaring inflation rates in the U.S. and abroad has led to a renewed interest in commodities among retail and institutional investors. Although the impact of these new commodity "index" investors on commodity prices has been hotly debated, a number of market participants have argued that this new flood of investment dollars has amplified the recent increase in commodity prices.

In his remarkable testimony to the U.S. Senate last month, the hedge fund manager Mike Masters presented evidence that index funds and institutional investors were responsible for recent price spikes in oil, food, and other commodities, prompting a number of responses among financial bloggers, including Yves Smith.

The U.S.'s commodities regulatory agency, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has been relatively quiet on the issue of commodity index investment until yesterday, when the CFTC's acting chair Walter Lukken announced plans to "improve oversight of the futures markets and bring greater transparency and scrutiny to the types of traders in the marketplace, including large index traders." Ironically, back when he was counsel to Senator Richard Lugar, Lukken helped draft the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, which opened up U.S. commodities markets to index and retail investment in the first place.

Labels: commodity prices, food crisis, Mike Masters, oil, oil prices, Yves Smith

 

Please consider donating to Dollars & Sense and/or subscribing to the magazine (both print and e-subscriptions now available!).
6/04/2008 02:54:00 PM 0 comments