The big issue this week is still Mp's expenses. The focus has been on the Speaker of the House of Commons. For those who don't know, the Speaker is like the leader of the House. Maybe somewhat like Nancy Pelosi. The Speaker presides over and keeps order and in the debating chamber. I say 'keeps order' simply because MP's behave similar to children in a playground. They jeer, heckle, and interrupt each other. It is a very undignified place. The crime of this Speaker, apart from having his own snout in the trough of taxpayers money, was that he spent hundreds of thousands of pounds in the courts trying to keep secret MP's expenses. When they were leaked and published in the media, he called the police to investigate the leak, rather than the fraudelant claims made by MP's, He was so out of touch with public opinion, he was forced to resign.
Now they are looking for a new Speaker.
A funny and possibly silly tradition comes into play. Anyone interested in the job has to declare disinterest. Presumably if you actually were disinterested, then you would need openly declare an interest! And when the Speaker is finally chosen, he she has to be dragged to the seat in the chamber.
What if someone didn't know the rules, really didn't want the job. They'd be wondering why people weren't taking 'no' for an answer. And why people then the physically dragged him to the seat. Bizarre. Maybe these people should move into the real world!
Wednesday, 20 May 2009
Snake in Taiwan
A man in Taiwan has been bitten on his 'private-part' by a snake which was hiding in the toilet.
Her says' I felt a really sharp pain and looked down and saw a snake between my legs'.
I know there is a joke in this but I'm going to
A spokesman for the hospital has said the snake isn't poisonous, the only danger is of infection because the snakes mouth might not have been clean.
Her says' I felt a really sharp pain and looked down and saw a snake between my legs'.
I know there is a joke in this but I'm going to
A spokesman for the hospital has said the snake isn't poisonous, the only danger is of infection because the snakes mouth might not have been clean.
Marks & Spencer boobs
Another big story has been a newspaper campaign to stop Marks & Spencer (a popular department store chain) selling larger bra's for a higher price.
"Do they charge people with bigger bottoms more for pants? No, so why discriminate against women with large breast".
M&S has nobly backed down. It has taken full page advertisements out announcing the fact that it will women with large breasts can now better afford their bra's. And this has given newspapers even more opportunity to show pictures of larger breasts. So it's been really pleasant reading the papers this week.
"Do they charge people with bigger bottoms more for pants? No, so why discriminate against women with large breast".
M&S has nobly backed down. It has taken full page advertisements out announcing the fact that it will women with large breasts can now better afford their bra's. And this has given newspapers even more opportunity to show pictures of larger breasts. So it's been really pleasant reading the papers this week.
MP's have claimed it.
This has been the big news story this week.
Our MP's are allowed to claim expenses for all sorts of thing under rules which they set for themselves and has no one policing them. Little wonder that they abused the system. The details -every receipt has been leaked to a newspaper which is releasing snippets of information day-by-day. I've never bought the paper before I've bought it on two days and have been shocked. Their standing in the eyes of public has never been lower. We're like some of the developing countries with endemic corruption.
Our MP's are allowed to claim expenses for all sorts of thing under rules which they set for themselves and has no one policing them. Little wonder that they abused the system. The details -every receipt has been leaked to a newspaper which is releasing snippets of information day-by-day. I've never bought the paper before I've bought it on two days and have been shocked. Their standing in the eyes of public has never been lower. We're like some of the developing countries with endemic corruption.
Lentils keep the world alive
Lentils, or Dall, as known in the Indian Subcontinent keep the world alive. Simple, nutritious and surprisingly tasty, dall is the staple of India and Pakistan.
Here is my mother recipe.
1) Half a mug of Urid dall without skin, and half a mug of Urid dall with skin.
Soak for a couple of hours. Drain the water and rinse a couple of times. Discard the surplus skin which is washed up.
2) Add two cloves of garlic. 4 mugs of water and simmer for about an hour.
3) During the hour, add 1\2 tsp of chilli powder, salt to taste, 1sp of coriander powder, 1sp of ginger.
4) Separately, chop half an onion, half a pepper, (and if you like, some carrot & spring onion).
5) Fry this. When almost cooked, add 2 tomatoes and 1sp of Haldi (turmeric), pinch of salt.
Once the dall is cooked, add the contents of the frying pan to the dall.
Enjoy.
Here is my mother recipe.
1) Half a mug of Urid dall without skin, and half a mug of Urid dall with skin.
Soak for a couple of hours. Drain the water and rinse a couple of times. Discard the surplus skin which is washed up.
2) Add two cloves of garlic. 4 mugs of water and simmer for about an hour.
3) During the hour, add 1\2 tsp of chilli powder, salt to taste, 1sp of coriander powder, 1sp of ginger.
4) Separately, chop half an onion, half a pepper, (and if you like, some carrot & spring onion).
5) Fry this. When almost cooked, add 2 tomatoes and 1sp of Haldi (turmeric), pinch of salt.
Once the dall is cooked, add the contents of the frying pan to the dall.
Enjoy.
Wednesday, 6 May 2009
Dog bites man.....Fiat and GM
A few years ago when GM was flush with money and was looking at expanding abroad, it bought a 20% share of Fiat. Someone very clever at Fiat -I hope they have been well rewarded- inserted a clause which meant Fiat could force GM to buy the rest or Fiat shares at a set date.
Then Fiat become the sick man of Europe with massive losses and GM entered one of its frequent money haemorrhaging periods. As the time approached it was obvious GM couldn't take on another loss making company so they had to buy themselves out of the clause. For $1bn.
Fiat invested that money in new efficient cars and is now hugely profitable. It is going to end up with a majority share of Chrysler and looking to buy GM's profitable European division.
And all because of that clever person inserting that clause and GM's stupidity for not realising.
Then Fiat become the sick man of Europe with massive losses and GM entered one of its frequent money haemorrhaging periods. As the time approached it was obvious GM couldn't take on another loss making company so they had to buy themselves out of the clause. For $1bn.
Fiat invested that money in new efficient cars and is now hugely profitable. It is going to end up with a majority share of Chrysler and looking to buy GM's profitable European division.
And all because of that clever person inserting that clause and GM's stupidity for not realising.
Faactory farms and swine flu
This is largely copied from this article by Johann Hari in the Independent.
Factory farms: They manufacture low-cost flesh, with a side-dish of viruses to go.
Is it time we re-examined our eating habits. I remember as a child we ate meat once of twice a week. We need to go back to that time. And if, as a result of increase cost due to much better animal welfare, we see a reduction in the number of fast food outlet -well that would be another good reason.
Next week: the world lives on pulses. I will post my mothers recipe.
Factory farms: They manufacture low-cost flesh, with a side-dish of viruses to go.
To understand how this might happen, you have to compare two farms. A pig farm in the Swiss mountains, with around 20 swine at any one time. What happened there if, in the bowels of one of their pigs, a virus mutated and took on a deadlier form? At every stage, the virus would meet stiff resistance from the pigs' immune systems. They were living in fresh air, on the diet they evolved with, and without stress – so they had a robust ability to fight back. If the virus did take hold, it would travel only as far as the sick hog could walk. So if the virus would then have around 20 other pigs to spread and mutate in – before it would hit the end of its own evolutionary path, and die off. If it was a really lucky, plucky virus, it might make it to market – where it would come up against more healthy pigs living in small herds. It had little opportunity to fan out across a large population of pigs or evolve a strain that could be transmitted to humans.
Now compare this to what happens when a virus evolves in a modern factory farm. In most swine farms today, 6,000 pigs are crammed snout-to-snout in tiny cages where they can barely move, and are fed for life on an artificial pulp, while living on top of cess-pools of their own stale faeces.
Instead of having just 20 pigs to experiment and evolve in, the virus now has a pool of thousands, constantly infecting and reinfecting each other. The virus can combine and recombine again and again. The ammonium from the waste they live above burns the pigs' respiratory tracts, making it easier yet for viruses to enter them. Better still, the pigs' immune systems are in free-fall. They are stressed, depressed, and permanently in panic, making them far easier to infect. There is no fresh air or sunlight to bolster their natural powers of resistance. They live in air thick with viral loads, and they are exposed every time they breathe in.
Is it time we re-examined our eating habits. I remember as a child we ate meat once of twice a week. We need to go back to that time. And if, as a result of increase cost due to much better animal welfare, we see a reduction in the number of fast food outlet -well that would be another good reason.
Next week: the world lives on pulses. I will post my mothers recipe.
Tuesday, 5 May 2009
Used car market
The used car market and the economic crisis
So, we sit here with the Budget predicting the optimistic resurgence of our
flailing economy, and yet us, the people in the street, still find it hard to
see any real light. Everything has gone up, as the value of our own hard work
goes down. In short, the selling market, although needed to stimulate our
economy again, is drying up, across all sectors. One of these sectors is the
used car market.
You only need to glance at the magazines specifically for the purpose, to the
advertising sections of local newspapers, to the websites to see just how
widespread the used car market is and was. Many people prefer the wheeling and
dealing of seeking out a bargain of a car overlooked by many than paying through
the nose for a brand new car all the time. Another reason is very simple - a lot
of people need transport, but can`t afford to buy a new car.
So, as mentioned, the market used to be a bustling one, with sales made up and
down the country every day. However, with this recession, the purse strings that
would be periodically be loosened to grease the wheels (no pun intended) of this
sector have been tightened. There is not the money to be spending the sums on a
car, making it a nightmare to sell them.
It is also particularly difficult as the new cars, with their special credit and
pay-monthly options, tend to turn the head. With us weathering this difficult
time, the idea of having a brand new car and paying for it over the course of a
few years, when hopefully the economy will have an upturn, and not upfront
straightaway, is very tempting. However, this is often offset by the fact that
it is often false economy; that is, paying the interest on the car will often
mean you spend way more than you initially intended.
And it also comes down to us, the sellers. Even accounting for the problems
enumerated above, you have to realise that, due to the economic climate, if you
manage to sell your car you will often find yourself out of pocket. With people
not willing to spend a penny more than they have to, and even though you have
brought the asking price for your car down to the smallest level for it to be
worthwhile, you will not be receiving anything like what you would expect at any
other time.
Having said that, it wouldn`t do to give up. I`m still going to carry on with my
sale as if everyone just stopped we`d never get out of this! Regardless of how
bad the overall situation is, you have to keep going as, when it comes down to
it, anything you get for selling your car is more than you will have with a car
you do not want or need. Holding on to it in the hope that tomorrow will be
better is a little short-sighted I feel - but that`s just me.
In summary, regardless of the financial situation, there will always be cars for sale in the UK. What you have to
do at this time is lower your expectations a bit. Be prepared to go a little
cheaper, expect to wait longer to sell your car and just stick it out; even
though all seems a little rubbish now, what goes down must go up! I wish you
luck with your car buying and selling.
So, we sit here with the Budget predicting the optimistic resurgence of our
flailing economy, and yet us, the people in the street, still find it hard to
see any real light. Everything has gone up, as the value of our own hard work
goes down. In short, the selling market, although needed to stimulate our
economy again, is drying up, across all sectors. One of these sectors is the
used car market.
You only need to glance at the magazines specifically for the purpose, to the
advertising sections of local newspapers, to the websites to see just how
widespread the used car market is and was. Many people prefer the wheeling and
dealing of seeking out a bargain of a car overlooked by many than paying through
the nose for a brand new car all the time. Another reason is very simple - a lot
of people need transport, but can`t afford to buy a new car.
So, as mentioned, the market used to be a bustling one, with sales made up and
down the country every day. However, with this recession, the purse strings that
would be periodically be loosened to grease the wheels (no pun intended) of this
sector have been tightened. There is not the money to be spending the sums on a
car, making it a nightmare to sell them.
It is also particularly difficult as the new cars, with their special credit and
pay-monthly options, tend to turn the head. With us weathering this difficult
time, the idea of having a brand new car and paying for it over the course of a
few years, when hopefully the economy will have an upturn, and not upfront
straightaway, is very tempting. However, this is often offset by the fact that
it is often false economy; that is, paying the interest on the car will often
mean you spend way more than you initially intended.
And it also comes down to us, the sellers. Even accounting for the problems
enumerated above, you have to realise that, due to the economic climate, if you
manage to sell your car you will often find yourself out of pocket. With people
not willing to spend a penny more than they have to, and even though you have
brought the asking price for your car down to the smallest level for it to be
worthwhile, you will not be receiving anything like what you would expect at any
other time.
Having said that, it wouldn`t do to give up. I`m still going to carry on with my
sale as if everyone just stopped we`d never get out of this! Regardless of how
bad the overall situation is, you have to keep going as, when it comes down to
it, anything you get for selling your car is more than you will have with a car
you do not want or need. Holding on to it in the hope that tomorrow will be
better is a little short-sighted I feel - but that`s just me.
In summary, regardless of the financial situation, there will always be cars for sale in the UK. What you have to
do at this time is lower your expectations a bit. Be prepared to go a little
cheaper, expect to wait longer to sell your car and just stick it out; even
though all seems a little rubbish now, what goes down must go up! I wish you
luck with your car buying and selling.
Wednesday, 29 April 2009
Brown and pigs flu
The weeks big thing is swine flu’.
The media are in a frenzy.
The government love it because it takes media attention of the economy and they can spin it to make themselves look like saviours.
They have ordered an information leaflet to be delivered to every household in Britain. In it they will give us some ‘facts’ and tell us not to panic.
Not to panic!What are we supposed to do when they embark on a mass leafleting campaign? Actually they really want us to panic. Then Brown can call a quick election and hope people will overlook his complete incompetence and vote for him. Because only he can stop us getting pig-flu.
The media are in a frenzy.
The government love it because it takes media attention of the economy and they can spin it to make themselves look like saviours.
They have ordered an information leaflet to be delivered to every household in Britain. In it they will give us some ‘facts’ and tell us not to panic.
Not to panic!What are we supposed to do when they embark on a mass leafleting campaign? Actually they really want us to panic. Then Brown can call a quick election and hope people will overlook his complete incompetence and vote for him. Because only he can stop us getting pig-flu.
Brown denies the old Gurkhas
There has been a long running dispute between this government and practically everyone else in Britain about the rights for retired ghurkas to settle here.
Gurkhas are Nepalese soldiers who fought in behalf of Britain for over a hundred years often with great distinction and plaudits. They’re a legacy of the British Empire and the practice of recruiting soldiers from colonies because they were cheaper and often more effective.
Many of them want to retire and live in Britain after their service. They can do so unless they retired before 1997.
There are about 15,000 caught up in limbo and they have great public support with the general feeling being that if they were prepared to die for Britain, they should be allowed to live here and we should support them in their old age.
The government however takes a different view and doesn’t want to take the cost. The costs they have mentioned are of £1.5bn. They didn’t clarify that this was over the cost over 10 years (and presumably the worst case scenario). Even still the view is that if you can throw countless billions at the banks in an instant, why these brave dignified people have some. And even that will be greatly exaggerated by the government.
The other thing which get to people is they have they can’t deport terror suspects who continue to live at taxpayer expense; so why should they be so mean to these people.
I guess t comes down to this, if your decent and law abiding, the government will screw you because they can. If you’re a criminal, you will screw them because they can’t be bothered to go after you or they’ve allowed to many concessions on ‘rights’.
Gurkhas are Nepalese soldiers who fought in behalf of Britain for over a hundred years often with great distinction and plaudits. They’re a legacy of the British Empire and the practice of recruiting soldiers from colonies because they were cheaper and often more effective.
Many of them want to retire and live in Britain after their service. They can do so unless they retired before 1997.
There are about 15,000 caught up in limbo and they have great public support with the general feeling being that if they were prepared to die for Britain, they should be allowed to live here and we should support them in their old age.
The government however takes a different view and doesn’t want to take the cost. The costs they have mentioned are of £1.5bn. They didn’t clarify that this was over the cost over 10 years (and presumably the worst case scenario). Even still the view is that if you can throw countless billions at the banks in an instant, why these brave dignified people have some. And even that will be greatly exaggerated by the government.
The other thing which get to people is they have they can’t deport terror suspects who continue to live at taxpayer expense; so why should they be so mean to these people.
I guess t comes down to this, if your decent and law abiding, the government will screw you because they can. If you’re a criminal, you will screw them because they can’t be bothered to go after you or they’ve allowed to many concessions on ‘rights’.
Cut price...er....sex
German brothels are having to take action in the recession. 'Yes, Sir' brothel in Hanover said revenue had fallen 30% and at some other places by as much as 50% “you can’t charge for extra’s anymore”.
Some brothels have cut prices, others have introduced promotions: Free shuttle busses, discounts for seniors and taxi drivers, and ‘day passes'.
Between 10am and 4pm on weekday, you can have unlimited food, drink and sex, all for a flat rate of 70 euros. This has kept 30 women in work and fully employed.
Other ideas being used are loyalty cards, groups sex parties and discounts for golf players!
How do they know you play golf? Do you have to take the golf clubs with you?
Some brothels have cut prices, others have introduced promotions: Free shuttle busses, discounts for seniors and taxi drivers, and ‘day passes'.
Between 10am and 4pm on weekday, you can have unlimited food, drink and sex, all for a flat rate of 70 euros. This has kept 30 women in work and fully employed.
Other ideas being used are loyalty cards, groups sex parties and discounts for golf players!
How do they know you play golf? Do you have to take the golf clubs with you?
Highly intimate Bruni
Carla Bruni has had some ‘highly intimate’ pictures stolen. A computer, camera and video were taken on Sunday, from the house of the younger brother of a previous lover.
What does 'highly intimate' actually mean? How is it different to just intimate? And if they were so 'highly intimate', what were they doing with the brother of a previous lover?
Any way, she is stunning. I look forward to them being posted on the internet. Especially the videos!
What does 'highly intimate' actually mean? How is it different to just intimate? And if they were so 'highly intimate', what were they doing with the brother of a previous lover?
Any way, she is stunning. I look forward to them being posted on the internet. Especially the videos!
Publish Post
Wednesday, 22 April 2009
Sinners and MP's
Apparently at Sinners bar in Newcastle, they've had a promotion recently where anyone showing their breasts to the bar staff get a free drink (female only).
An MP has made a speech in parliament condemning this type of promotion for being degrading for women and encouraging drinking.
I read this on a local newspapers website and the comments to the article made interesting reading. Most people were more annoyed with the politician for wasting his time in such trivial matters. One said the MP was annoyed more because he himself couldn't claim the freebie (a reference to the uproar here about MP's expenses). And yet another said, they better watch what they wrote otherwise they would be smeared in the media (a reference to another recent uproar about the PM's back-office running a smear campaign against the opposition).
My view: ordinary backbench MP's have no power, can do no good for the people, they should all be sacked and money saved on their rediculous expenses should be put into the deficit. And any bar jobs going at Sinners?
An MP has made a speech in parliament condemning this type of promotion for being degrading for women and encouraging drinking.
I read this on a local newspapers website and the comments to the article made interesting reading. Most people were more annoyed with the politician for wasting his time in such trivial matters. One said the MP was annoyed more because he himself couldn't claim the freebie (a reference to the uproar here about MP's expenses). And yet another said, they better watch what they wrote otherwise they would be smeared in the media (a reference to another recent uproar about the PM's back-office running a smear campaign against the opposition).
My view: ordinary backbench MP's have no power, can do no good for the people, they should all be sacked and money saved on their rediculous expenses should be put into the deficit. And any bar jobs going at Sinners?
Wednesday, 15 April 2009
More rules...special advisors need rules
Typical response from Gordon Brown to the political scandal of his special advisor trying to rake up muck on the Opposition.
As per usual Gordon decided the reason must be because the rules aren't tight enough and more are needed. Surely not that Gordon himself has created a culture where this sort if thing is acceptable...until someone gets caught. No. And not that the people involved shouldn't need rules to stop them lying or writing hurtful and personal things about peoples families, especially when untrue.
In Gordon's world, no one need take responsibility for their own action. No one need ever say sorry because they can't be at fault if the rules didn't specifically forbid what they did. The lack of strict rules are always and only to blame.
I hope Gordon is going to include in his revised rules, that people should flush the toilet after use, then wash their hand, and they shouldn't carry a machine gun to work and shouldn't spray passers by with bullets........
I mean what if he didn't put these in the rules and someone committed mass murder, then he would look a right fool for not having rules tight enough.
As per usual Gordon decided the reason must be because the rules aren't tight enough and more are needed. Surely not that Gordon himself has created a culture where this sort if thing is acceptable...until someone gets caught. No. And not that the people involved shouldn't need rules to stop them lying or writing hurtful and personal things about peoples families, especially when untrue.
In Gordon's world, no one need take responsibility for their own action. No one need ever say sorry because they can't be at fault if the rules didn't specifically forbid what they did. The lack of strict rules are always and only to blame.
I hope Gordon is going to include in his revised rules, that people should flush the toilet after use, then wash their hand, and they shouldn't carry a machine gun to work and shouldn't spray passers by with bullets........
I mean what if he didn't put these in the rules and someone committed mass murder, then he would look a right fool for not having rules tight enough.
Gordon Brown is true to his pledge...
...for a change.
A women from Brazil was denied entry into Britain from Newcastle airport because all she had in her luggage was three t-shirts and lingerie. The immigration officers thought she might be coming here to work as a prostitute. So he turned her back. After all, Gordon did promise British jobs for British workers!
I'm wondering there must have been another reason...surely many women go through Newcastle airport with little more than underwear in their luggage. Watch the flight to Magaluf.
As an aside; last year my wife booked a holiday to Majorca. Yes to the resort of Magaluf. I looked on the internet for information about the hotel, and was horrified to find it was a swingers hotel. Stories about naked people running around, having sex in the corridors, all night blaring music, throwing furniture from the balcony into the pool and pissing on the poolside.
We have too young children and I thought it completely inappropriate, even dangerous to take them there. I went back to the travel agent and cancelled it.
A women from Brazil was denied entry into Britain from Newcastle airport because all she had in her luggage was three t-shirts and lingerie. The immigration officers thought she might be coming here to work as a prostitute. So he turned her back. After all, Gordon did promise British jobs for British workers!
I'm wondering there must have been another reason...surely many women go through Newcastle airport with little more than underwear in their luggage. Watch the flight to Magaluf.
As an aside; last year my wife booked a holiday to Majorca. Yes to the resort of Magaluf. I looked on the internet for information about the hotel, and was horrified to find it was a swingers hotel. Stories about naked people running around, having sex in the corridors, all night blaring music, throwing furniture from the balcony into the pool and pissing on the poolside.
We have too young children and I thought it completely inappropriate, even dangerous to take them there. I went back to the travel agent and cancelled it.
Fairy tale, women in business and cup sizes
The Fairy Tale
Do you follow Formula 1 racing?
Honda who had spend about a billion dollars over the last few year, pulled out of Formula 1 in December.
They had had a very poor return for their money and decided with the recession they could be seen to be funding something so extravagant. The wanted to sell the team or if no buyer could be found, they would shut it down. Making all 700 staff redundant including a genius of an engineer called Ross Brawn who they had hired a few months before.
A couple of week before the start of the season, when other teams had been testing their cars for months, Brawn persuaded Honda not to shut the team, but to sell it to him for $1 AND give him $100m to run the team.
With that, the team now renamed to Brawn GP, began testing 2 weeksbefore going to Australia for the 1st GP of the season. The two Brawn drivers finished 1st and 2nd. Last weekend, they finished 1st and 5th.
This really is a fairytale story, a new team hasn’t won the first 2 races since 1950.
Women and commerce
Listening to the radio about a poor women from Africa who started a business using her one asset, a gifted cow, I was reminded of the Asian schemes where the give out micro-loans to women to start a business.
They don’t give them to men only women. They say they have a much better chance of getting the loan back, better chance the women will start and work hard to create a successful business and when they do and have money, they will make better use of the money buy helping their children rather than men who were more likely to buy some gadget or drink it away.
If women had been predominant in the management and control of Wall Street, would we have had the same problem. Probably not. We should learn from the African and Asian experiences. I know in the UK and some other countries we have had female leaders. But just below them it’s been all men. I would be interested in seeing how a country or big corporation would be with female domination in terms of numbers and hierarchy, would be like.
Cup size grows
It has been reported in an annual survey of 1000 women below the age of 30; that bust size if going down from 36 to 34 but cup size is going up from C to D.A spokeswoman put the changes down to women taking more exercise, cutting down on booze and fast food — and simply buying the correct bra size.
I have to say, I did some research when I was at university, but never anything this interesting!
Wild animals
Several wild animal stories in the news....
First there is this story on the BBC site about a snake which coiled itself around a fully grown man and then dragged him up a tree so it could eat him. The man used his shirt to smother the snakes head and managed to use his mobile phone to call for help. Thank god for the spread of the mobile phone because otherwise this guy would have been eaten by the snake.
Fascinating story, that must have been some strong snake, dragging him up a tree like it did.
Women like bears
The other storey is of this women in Berlin who decided to jump into the polar bear enclosure at the zoo. Obviously out of her mind...
First there is this story on the BBC site about a snake which coiled itself around a fully grown man and then dragged him up a tree so it could eat him. The man used his shirt to smother the snakes head and managed to use his mobile phone to call for help. Thank god for the spread of the mobile phone because otherwise this guy would have been eaten by the snake.
Fascinating story, that must have been some strong snake, dragging him up a tree like it did.
Women like bears
The other storey is of this women in Berlin who decided to jump into the polar bear enclosure at the zoo. Obviously out of her mind...
Wednesday, 1 April 2009
Supermarkets, summits, water and condoms.....
India to allow in the big supermarkets?
Big mistake.
The likes of Wallmart will devastate the millions of 'mom & pop' shops and suck huge amounts of money out of the local economy.
We in the UK didn't have the foresight and allowed supermarkets to get out of control.
They not only create unemployment, but the jobs they create are low value. They kill town centres and reduce the variety of good available.
France has big supermarkets but has kept them from killing the thousands of small shops. It's a pleasure to shop in France with the huge number of specialist shops where you can have a conversation with the shop keeper, who knows and is passionate about his speciality.
Don't do it India.
G20 summit in London...
Is costing millions of pounds in security. And what for. So politicians can look good on the 'world stage'. Nothing meaningful comes from these summits which couldn't be achieved otherwise. And France has threatened to pull out if it's agenda isn't met. Sarkozy is in London with his sexy wife, Carla Bruni. Surely he has punched well above his level here? What does she see in him? Maybe the reputation of Frenchmen as lovers is true and Sarkozy compensates in other areas what he lacks in looks.
Contaminated water in the US
Here are some quotes from WDDTY magazine (What Doctors Don't Tell you)
"millions of Americans are regularly drinking water....contaminated by 12,000 military bases where fuel seepage goes unchecked"."The water supply in 22 states contains perchlorate, a toxic chemical found in fuel. Farms and dairies near these bases are shipping contaminated produce across US. A FDA survey found 93% of all lettuce and milk sold in the US is thus contaminated"
The pope doesn't like condoms
The pope has again criticised birth control unless it is by not having sex. Shouldn't he, at least in a recession, lighten up, when other forms of entertainment are too costly. In fact you can even save money by cutting the gym membership!
Big mistake.
The likes of Wallmart will devastate the millions of 'mom & pop' shops and suck huge amounts of money out of the local economy.
We in the UK didn't have the foresight and allowed supermarkets to get out of control.
They not only create unemployment, but the jobs they create are low value. They kill town centres and reduce the variety of good available.
France has big supermarkets but has kept them from killing the thousands of small shops. It's a pleasure to shop in France with the huge number of specialist shops where you can have a conversation with the shop keeper, who knows and is passionate about his speciality.
Don't do it India.
G20 summit in London...
Is costing millions of pounds in security. And what for. So politicians can look good on the 'world stage'. Nothing meaningful comes from these summits which couldn't be achieved otherwise. And France has threatened to pull out if it's agenda isn't met. Sarkozy is in London with his sexy wife, Carla Bruni. Surely he has punched well above his level here? What does she see in him? Maybe the reputation of Frenchmen as lovers is true and Sarkozy compensates in other areas what he lacks in looks.
Contaminated water in the US
Here are some quotes from WDDTY magazine (What Doctors Don't Tell you)
"millions of Americans are regularly drinking water....contaminated by 12,000 military bases where fuel seepage goes unchecked"."The water supply in 22 states contains perchlorate, a toxic chemical found in fuel. Farms and dairies near these bases are shipping contaminated produce across US. A FDA survey found 93% of all lettuce and milk sold in the US is thus contaminated"
The pope doesn't like condoms
The pope has again criticised birth control unless it is by not having sex. Shouldn't he, at least in a recession, lighten up, when other forms of entertainment are too costly. In fact you can even save money by cutting the gym membership!
Tuesday, 24 March 2009
tata nano and the environment
Tata Nano, the cheap Indian car
This is the new car, available in April in
This is half the price of the next cheapest car and until production is ramped up, potential customers will be entered in a prize draw. The prize is: the right to BUY the car. That is how much demand there is. This is going to change people life; families will be able to travel together in a way they couldn’t do on a motor bike.
I have travelled in
Environment
The Nano has again bought up the debate about millions of poor people trading a motorbike for a car and the consequent environmental ‘damage’.
This fitted well with another story I read about overpopulation in the
So essentially it doesn’t matter so much if Indians are moving up to a new car. Since Asians and Africans use so much less of the worlds resources, they can afford it.
End of the road for the Dollar?
The Chinese are looking to move their massive foreign reserve to a new currency which they want the IMF to set up. They will then shed the dollar, which is losing value. They’ll need to do it very slowly otherwise the dollar will collapse together with their investment.
If I was
The question is: will they (or anyone else) buy more debt which
Oil from a plant
Exxon are developing a very fast growing plant which yields oil. Something like this would change the world. The whole debate would change – these plants eat co2, so the oil would be co2 neutral. Energy security and reliance on the
Green shoots of recovery?
The stock market is at last rising. Obama has finally unveiled a way to bring confidence to the financial sector – buy toxic assets. This has been called for, for some time, but is hugely expensive.
Now, with some private money, he plans to bring it about.
And with some surprising good house price data, is the recession starting to bottom out? Can we look a year into the future and see a little sunshine? Wouldn’t it be great to have a time-travel machine?
I would probably go to the 70’s and stay there. Not that I enjoyed my time in the 70’s. I was too young to enjoy it. I liked the music, the distinctiveness of the time. Example: the massive barge-like cars in the
Tuesday, 3 March 2009
Taking responsibility...
One year on from the death of my cousin, I went to a prayer meeting to pay my respects. The priest gave a sermon with which I disagreed: he said you should treat your children to pray because it might be their prayers which take you to heaven. Nothing wrong with that, I hear you say, and taken at face value its a good sentiment.
However.
I disagree with the other sentiment profoundly. Why should you rely on anyone else? Should he have said, you need to do so many good things in life to make sure you get into heaven? I think so.
So why didn't he? I think it is a 'religion' thing. He wanted a populist message.
Which is more appealing:
(1) You can live as you are doing and rely on someone else to get you to heaven.
(2) You need to sort yourself out. Cut the bad things and only do good things. You may not have many years, don't leave it too late. Only YOU can get you there.
The first one. Populist, maybe, but I think people shouldn't rely on anyone else.
However.
I disagree with the other sentiment profoundly. Why should you rely on anyone else? Should he have said, you need to do so many good things in life to make sure you get into heaven? I think so.
So why didn't he? I think it is a 'religion' thing. He wanted a populist message.
Which is more appealing:
(1) You can live as you are doing and rely on someone else to get you to heaven.
(2) You need to sort yourself out. Cut the bad things and only do good things. You may not have many years, don't leave it too late. Only YOU can get you there.
The first one. Populist, maybe, but I think people shouldn't rely on anyone else.
Wednesday, 28 January 2009
Why some people may dislike the US and will Obama change this?
In this context I've came across an interesting article by Johann Hari in the Independent newspaper. The article is called: “Is the US about to treat the rest of the world better?”
It say that Obama’s election does nothing (in the short term at least) to change the structural pressures on American foreign policy.
Here are some quotes (with a little of my editing). You can read the full un-edited article here.
“Bolivia is the poorest country in Latin America.
The President of Bolivia, Evo Morales, has a story strikingly similar to Obama's. In 2006, he became the first indigenous [Black or Indians] president of his country – and a symbol of the potential of democracy. When the Spanish arrived in Bolivia in the 16th century, they enslaved the indigenous people and worked millions to death. As recently as the 1950s, an indigenous person wasn't even allowed to walk through the centre of La Paz, where the presidential palace and city cathedral stand. They were (and are) routinely compared to monkeys and apes.
Morales was born to a poor potato-farmer in the mountains, and grew up scavenging for discarded orange peel or banana skins to eat. Of his seven siblings, four died in infancy. Throughout his adult life, it was taken for granted that the country would be ruled by the white minority; the "Indians" were too "child-like" to manage a country.
Given that the US is constitutionally a democracy and its presidents say they are committed to spreading democracy across the world, you would expect them to welcome the democratic rise of Morales. But wait. Bolivia has massive reserves of natural gas – a geo-strategic asset, and one that rakes in billions for American corporations. Here is where the complications set in.
Before Morales, the white elite was happy to allow American companies to simply take the gas and leave the Bolivian people with short change: just 18 per cent of the royalties. Indeed, they handed almost the entire country to US interests, while skimming a small percentage for themselves. In 1999, an American company, Bechtel, was handed the water supply – and water rates for the poor majority doubled.
Morales ran for election against this agenda. He said that Bolivia's resources should be used for the benefit of millions of bitterly poor Bolivians, not a tiny number of super-rich Americans. He kept his promise. Now Bolivia keeps 82 per cent of the vast gas royalties – and he has used the money to increase health spending by 300 per cent, and to build the country's first pension system. He is one of the most popular leaders in the democratic world.
I suspect that a majority of the American people – who are good and decent – would be pleased and support this process if they were told about it honestly. But how did the US government (and much of the media) react? George Bush fulminated that "democracy is being eroded in Bolivia", and a recent US ambassador to the country compared Morales to Osama bin Laden. Why? To them, you are a democrat if you give your resources to US corporations, and you are a dictator if you give them to your own people. The will of the Bolivian people is irrelevant.
For these reasons, the US has been moving to trash Morales. By an odd quirk of fate, almost all of Bolivia's gas supplies are in the east of the country – where the richest, whitest part of the population lives. So the US government has been funding and fuelling the hard-right separatist movements that want these regions to break away. The interference became so severe that last September Morales had to expel the US ambassador for "conspiring against democracy".
Enter Obama – and his paradoxes. He is obviously a person of good will and good sense, but he is operating in a system subject to many undemocratic pressures. Bolivia illustrates the tension. The rise of Morales reminds us of the America the world loves: its yes-we-can openness and civil rights movements. Yet the presence of gas reminds us of the America the world hates: the desire to establish "full spectrum dominance" over the world's resources, whatever the pesky natives think.
Which America will Obama embody? The answer is both – at first. Morales has welcomed him as "a brother", and Obama has made it clear he wants a dialogue, rather than the abuse of the Bush years. Yet who is Obama's Bolivia adviser? A lawyer called Greg Craig, who represents Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada – the hard-right former president of Bolivia who imposed some of the most extreme privatisations of the 1980s, and is now wanted on charges of genocide.
The structural pressures within the US system that drove hostility to a democratic civil rights leader like Morales have not dissolved in the cold Washington air. The US is still dependent on foreign fossil fuels to keep its lights on, and US corporations still buy senators from both parties. Obama will still be swayed by those factors.
But while this is a reason to be frustrated, it isn't a reason to be cynical. Why? Because while he will be swayed by those factors, he will also subtly erode them over time. Obama has made energy independence – a massive transition away from foreign oil and gas, and towards the wind, sun and waves – the centre of his governing programme. If the US is no longer addicted to Bolivian gas, then its governments will be much less inclined to topple anybody else who wants to control it. (If they're off oil, they'll be much less invested in Saudi tyranny and petro-wars in the Middle East too.)
Obama also says he wants to peel back the distorting effect of corporate money on the US political system. He is already less slathered in corporate cash than any president since the 1920s. The further he pushes it back, the more breathing space democratic movements like Morales's have to control their own resources.”
I'm writing a book
I've decided to write a book about how to solve the big problems.
Here are roughly the chapters inside it.
1) Here is the solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
2) How to bring (decent levels of) democracy to Britain.
3) Solving the drugs problem.
4) How to sort out non-performing schools.
5) Tax and spend politics. What we need instead.
6) Underclass and lack of respect.
7) Kashmir, Pakistan or India.
8) Terrorism and how to defeat it.
Each chapter will be about 5 pages long so maybe the title should be, How to solve the worlds problems in a short read.
Here are roughly the chapters inside it.
1) Here is the solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
2) How to bring (decent levels of) democracy to Britain.
3) Solving the drugs problem.
4) How to sort out non-performing schools.
5) Tax and spend politics. What we need instead.
6) Underclass and lack of respect.
7) Kashmir, Pakistan or India.
8) Terrorism and how to defeat it.
Each chapter will be about 5 pages long so maybe the title should be, How to solve the worlds problems in a short read.
Wednesday, 10 December 2008
Balance of payments
I have one question?
Why is it cheaper for a Chinese person make a product, ship it all the way to the US (or UK) ..... than ...... an unemployed person in the US (or UK) to make the same product?
This is the reason for the massive imbalance of trade between our countries and China. Even though we have possibly millions of people who are unemployed, we can't mobilise them to make some of the simple products which are shipped all the way from China.
Until we change this -or until the Chinese become like us, we are going to find it difficult to balance our trade.
Why is it cheaper for a Chinese person make a product, ship it all the way to the US (or UK) ..... than ...... an unemployed person in the US (or UK) to make the same product?
This is the reason for the massive imbalance of trade between our countries and China. Even though we have possibly millions of people who are unemployed, we can't mobilise them to make some of the simple products which are shipped all the way from China.
Until we change this -or until the Chinese become like us, we are going to find it difficult to balance our trade.
This explains the economy.
I saw this great article on the BBC site by Robert Preston.
He explaims what is happening, what will happen and why it has happened.
Click here to read it.
Below are interesting quotes from the article.
...some of the numbers that tell us what’s gone wrong. For the UK, if you aggregate together debt (consumer, corporate and public-sector), the ratio of our borrowings to our annual economic output is a bit over 300%, or over £4000bn.
That’s a similar ratio of debt to GDP as that of the US, and it’s a record. Over the past decade, we borrowed and we borrowed and we borrowed: we assumed that the day when we had to pay it back would never arrive.
One of the best ways of understanding how all our debts were accumulated is to look at the gross foreign current liabilities of our banks. These rose from £1,100bn in 1997 to £4,400bn this year (again, about three times the size of our annual economic output).
.........for much of the past decade, millions of Chinese slaved away on near subsistence wages and still managed to save, both as a nation (China swanks £1,400bn in foreign exchange reserves) and as individuals. And to a large extent they were working to improve our living standards, because they made more and more of the stuff we wanted at cheaper and cheaper prices - and clever bankers took their savings and lent the cash to us, so that we could buy the houses we cherished, the cars we desired, the flat-screen TVs.
So the big question is how much debt will we have to repay until our economy is returned to some kind of stability.
This is tricky to calculate.
One important number, which gives us a clue, is the difference between what our
banks have lent and what they've borrowed (from savers). It's what the Bank of England calls the customer funding gap. And it matters because it's a guide to the dependence of British banks on funds from overseas that are diminishing and could well, over time, drop to zero.
This customer funding gap was nil in 2001. But by the end of June this year, according to the bank of England, the gap had soared to £740bn.
British taxpayers have provided loans, commitments, guarantees and capital to our banks in excess of £600bn (in the US, the equivalent figure for taxpayer support is around £5,500bn). Which is probably just the beginning. In the UK, taxpayer funding for our banks is very likely to rise, probably to more than £1000bn, perhaps more still.
This rise in the value of assets sparked yet more lending, often at higher ratios of the loan to the value of the asset, to do more deals – which in turn pushed up asset prices further.
There were twin connected bubbles in assets and credit. Both of those bubbles have burst. Falling asset prices are leading to losses for those who borrowed to buy those assets. And as they struggle to pay their debts, they sell other assets, driving down the price of those assets and causing losses for other borrowers. And when they can’t repay banks, the resources of banks are
depleted, which means there's less credit available which drives down asset prices further, which leads to a further contraction of lending, and so on in vicious cycle of decline.
So it is unrealistic to expect our banks to cease the insidious process of contracting the volume of credit they'll provide - whatever the coaxing and bullying of politicians - unless and until the price of property, shares, commodities and other assets stops falling. Or to put it another way, asset prices have to find a floor – and they haven’t found the floor yet – before the financial economy can rebuild itself and the real economy can receive the necessary finance that will allow the recovery to begin.
Who's to blame? And where will all this taxpayer support for banks - and probably, before long, for real companies and the real economy too - lead us?
It takes a whole book to assign culpability. But the short answer is that we’re all at fault to varying degrees.
The authorities in the US and the UK were aware of the dangers of allowing the financial and trade deficits with China and other exporting nations to persist. They could have corrected these deficits by using tax and interest rate policies to reduce our rampant consumption. But they chose not to do so, because it all looked too difficult.
He explaims what is happening, what will happen and why it has happened.
Click here to read it.
Below are interesting quotes from the article.
...some of the numbers that tell us what’s gone wrong. For the UK, if you aggregate together debt (consumer, corporate and public-sector), the ratio of our borrowings to our annual economic output is a bit over 300%, or over £4000bn.
That’s a similar ratio of debt to GDP as that of the US, and it’s a record. Over the past decade, we borrowed and we borrowed and we borrowed: we assumed that the day when we had to pay it back would never arrive.
One of the best ways of understanding how all our debts were accumulated is to look at the gross foreign current liabilities of our banks. These rose from £1,100bn in 1997 to £4,400bn this year (again, about three times the size of our annual economic output).
.........for much of the past decade, millions of Chinese slaved away on near subsistence wages and still managed to save, both as a nation (China swanks £1,400bn in foreign exchange reserves) and as individuals. And to a large extent they were working to improve our living standards, because they made more and more of the stuff we wanted at cheaper and cheaper prices - and clever bankers took their savings and lent the cash to us, so that we could buy the houses we cherished, the cars we desired, the flat-screen TVs.
So the big question is how much debt will we have to repay until our economy is returned to some kind of stability.
This is tricky to calculate.
One important number, which gives us a clue, is the difference between what our
banks have lent and what they've borrowed (from savers). It's what the Bank of England calls the customer funding gap. And it matters because it's a guide to the dependence of British banks on funds from overseas that are diminishing and could well, over time, drop to zero.
This customer funding gap was nil in 2001. But by the end of June this year, according to the bank of England, the gap had soared to £740bn.
British taxpayers have provided loans, commitments, guarantees and capital to our banks in excess of £600bn (in the US, the equivalent figure for taxpayer support is around £5,500bn). Which is probably just the beginning. In the UK, taxpayer funding for our banks is very likely to rise, probably to more than £1000bn, perhaps more still.
This rise in the value of assets sparked yet more lending, often at higher ratios of the loan to the value of the asset, to do more deals – which in turn pushed up asset prices further.
There were twin connected bubbles in assets and credit. Both of those bubbles have burst. Falling asset prices are leading to losses for those who borrowed to buy those assets. And as they struggle to pay their debts, they sell other assets, driving down the price of those assets and causing losses for other borrowers. And when they can’t repay banks, the resources of banks are
depleted, which means there's less credit available which drives down asset prices further, which leads to a further contraction of lending, and so on in vicious cycle of decline.
So it is unrealistic to expect our banks to cease the insidious process of contracting the volume of credit they'll provide - whatever the coaxing and bullying of politicians - unless and until the price of property, shares, commodities and other assets stops falling. Or to put it another way, asset prices have to find a floor – and they haven’t found the floor yet – before the financial economy can rebuild itself and the real economy can receive the necessary finance that will allow the recovery to begin.
Who's to blame? And where will all this taxpayer support for banks - and probably, before long, for real companies and the real economy too - lead us?
It takes a whole book to assign culpability. But the short answer is that we’re all at fault to varying degrees.
The authorities in the US and the UK were aware of the dangers of allowing the financial and trade deficits with China and other exporting nations to persist. They could have corrected these deficits by using tax and interest rate policies to reduce our rampant consumption. But they chose not to do so, because it all looked too difficult.
Wednesday, 3 December 2008
Terrorism again and what to do
Terrorism has again hit the headlines with the attack in Mumbai.
What can we do to stop these attacks?
Of course better policing, more security, more intelligence etc etc. These are all needed especially in the short term but what about stopping people becoming terrorists? What about longer-term strategies which might prove more effective.
I can see no evidence of progress on these fronts.
The two front-line states which need to be confronted are Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.
The focus on Iran is both counter-productive (because it takes the focus away from the above) and unnecessary. Why? Because if the world has learnt to live with a much-more-dangerous Pakistan going nuclear, it will learn to live with a nuclear Iran. Iran, after all, is a democracy and despite what it's President Ahmadinejad has said regarding Israel, he wouldn't and couldn't launch any unprovoked attacks (he is not the most powerful man in Iran and has checks and balances to his power).
A friendly Iran can actually be a benefit. If the Clinton Administration had engaged with Iran and helped it fight the Taliban when it first was rising to power, I don't think we would have a problem in Afghanistan today (or not the same problem). And maybe...maybe 9/11 could have been averted. At the time Iran was looking for help and was looking towards the US.
There have been times, opportunities, in history which had they been recognised and acted upon would have changed the whole Islamic terrorism situation for the better. Are these opportunities even recognised today?
One was when the Russians pulled out of Afghanistan. The US had pumped billions of dollars into the war and then for the sake of another few million didn't provide schools, help with rebuilding infrastructure etc. This point was pointedly made in the film Charlie Wilson's war (with Tom Hanks). That investment would have taken boys who knew nothing other than war, off the streets and given them a trade with which to make a living. There would have been no Taliban and probably no Al-Queda.
Another missed opportunity is the failure to recognise how corrupting Saudi Arabia is to the rest of the Muslim world. Islam has traditionally been a very progressive, forward looking and always-questioning religion. There traditions contradict the Saudi's extreme version of Islam and since it became wealthy, it has been buying influence in poor Islamic countries and promoting it's own toxic values. In my lifetime I have seen a sea change in countries such as Pakistan and Egypt with regards to tolerance (of women, other cultures and religions). I have seen people dress habits change (purdah and hijab), levels of crime increase and development of society retarded. How they have achieved much of this and especially the latter is through paying for free education in religious schools (madrassas) and sermonising priest in mosques. The madrassas are the biggest tragedy; they don't teach children maths, science, geography, how to be a builder, become a plumber, how to make a decent living. The just teach them about religion (intolerant Saudi version). They don't teach them something more traditional like always questioning and looking wider for answers; then the children might question them! Also, these so-called schools have, according to anecdotal evidence, high levels abuse of the children.
When Saudi Arabia started doing this, it should have been forced to stop and democratise.
What to do now? It's better to spend a few dollars now then later. Pakistan is on it's knees financially. Give it some money in return for closing all madrassas, fund normal schools for children instead which teach normal subject as well as tolerance and are secular. Force them to disband it's intelligence service and reduce it's military. Subsidise their grain and oil (so they have electricity all day) and publicise it as a gift from US, UK, Germany etc. Let the people know they are being helped in and in-time the extremist will be weeded out.
Saudi Arabia rulers need to shed their brutality and allow freedoms. Make the ruling family confront and eradicate the religious rules and authority. They depend on the US for survival and so can be persuaded. The goal needs to be to make Saudi Arabia itself secular, tolerant and promote those values.
These are long-term objectives but can have a big impact on reducing, maybe eliminating, Islamic terrorism.
What can we do to stop these attacks?
Of course better policing, more security, more intelligence etc etc. These are all needed especially in the short term but what about stopping people becoming terrorists? What about longer-term strategies which might prove more effective.
I can see no evidence of progress on these fronts.
The two front-line states which need to be confronted are Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.
The focus on Iran is both counter-productive (because it takes the focus away from the above) and unnecessary. Why? Because if the world has learnt to live with a much-more-dangerous Pakistan going nuclear, it will learn to live with a nuclear Iran. Iran, after all, is a democracy and despite what it's President Ahmadinejad has said regarding Israel, he wouldn't and couldn't launch any unprovoked attacks (he is not the most powerful man in Iran and has checks and balances to his power).
A friendly Iran can actually be a benefit. If the Clinton Administration had engaged with Iran and helped it fight the Taliban when it first was rising to power, I don't think we would have a problem in Afghanistan today (or not the same problem). And maybe...maybe 9/11 could have been averted. At the time Iran was looking for help and was looking towards the US.
There have been times, opportunities, in history which had they been recognised and acted upon would have changed the whole Islamic terrorism situation for the better. Are these opportunities even recognised today?
One was when the Russians pulled out of Afghanistan. The US had pumped billions of dollars into the war and then for the sake of another few million didn't provide schools, help with rebuilding infrastructure etc. This point was pointedly made in the film Charlie Wilson's war (with Tom Hanks). That investment would have taken boys who knew nothing other than war, off the streets and given them a trade with which to make a living. There would have been no Taliban and probably no Al-Queda.
Another missed opportunity is the failure to recognise how corrupting Saudi Arabia is to the rest of the Muslim world. Islam has traditionally been a very progressive, forward looking and always-questioning religion. There traditions contradict the Saudi's extreme version of Islam and since it became wealthy, it has been buying influence in poor Islamic countries and promoting it's own toxic values. In my lifetime I have seen a sea change in countries such as Pakistan and Egypt with regards to tolerance (of women, other cultures and religions). I have seen people dress habits change (purdah and hijab), levels of crime increase and development of society retarded. How they have achieved much of this and especially the latter is through paying for free education in religious schools (madrassas) and sermonising priest in mosques. The madrassas are the biggest tragedy; they don't teach children maths, science, geography, how to be a builder, become a plumber, how to make a decent living. The just teach them about religion (intolerant Saudi version). They don't teach them something more traditional like always questioning and looking wider for answers; then the children might question them! Also, these so-called schools have, according to anecdotal evidence, high levels abuse of the children.
When Saudi Arabia started doing this, it should have been forced to stop and democratise.
What to do now? It's better to spend a few dollars now then later. Pakistan is on it's knees financially. Give it some money in return for closing all madrassas, fund normal schools for children instead which teach normal subject as well as tolerance and are secular. Force them to disband it's intelligence service and reduce it's military. Subsidise their grain and oil (so they have electricity all day) and publicise it as a gift from US, UK, Germany etc. Let the people know they are being helped in and in-time the extremist will be weeded out.
Saudi Arabia rulers need to shed their brutality and allow freedoms. Make the ruling family confront and eradicate the religious rules and authority. They depend on the US for survival and so can be persuaded. The goal needs to be to make Saudi Arabia itself secular, tolerant and promote those values.
These are long-term objectives but can have a big impact on reducing, maybe eliminating, Islamic terrorism.
Wednesday, 26 November 2008
Third World in 2020: US & UK?
I watched with horror the program I.O.U.S.A.
The US and UK have very similar structured economies and very similar problems both today and awaiting us in the future. The problems today, exasperated by the credit-crunch, are underlined by the inability of successive governments and to live within their means. As a result the debt just goes on increasing. And increasing....
Who is lending this money to us? It used to be the countries' own population, but since we also don't save anymore, it has to be foreign countries. China predominantly. And what does this mean in terms of our security?
Suez
What if the creditor country disagree with the debtor country? This happened to UK in 1956, when it was attacking Egypt over Suez against the wishes of the US. The US President threatened to sell the British pound which would have devastated the UK economy. The UK backed down and withdrew. That is the point when the UK ceased to be a world power. China could use this against the US.
What happens is no one is willing to lend the country anymore money. This could happen when (like now) so many western countries are selling debt. Then the government shuts down.
Why are we even in this situation, why don't we balance our budget?
It may be that politician who are always looking towards the next election won't make decisions which will bring benefit in 20 years. In a democracy that really means, we the electorate, aren't sophisticated enough to be able to demand this from our leaders. In the 1996 US election Ross Perot was running as an independent presidential candidate. He bought this firmly into the political agenda and subsequently Bill Clinton balanced the budget. And then Bush got re-elected and created more debt than all the previous 42 presidents put together.
The really worrying thing is that at this time, we should be running massive surpluses to save for the aging population with the baby boomers about to retire. The US debt is $11 trillion, and unfunded obligations which will be needed in the next 10 to 20 years amount to another $42 trillion!
The UK is in a similar catastrophic position.
What to do about it
It would take a miracle.....I feel sorry for Obama, because he has really taken on a poisoned chalice. But we have to try. Here are some of the things which will be needed:
See the program which triggered these thought.
The US and UK have very similar structured economies and very similar problems both today and awaiting us in the future. The problems today, exasperated by the credit-crunch, are underlined by the inability of successive governments and to live within their means. As a result the debt just goes on increasing. And increasing....
Who is lending this money to us? It used to be the countries' own population, but since we also don't save anymore, it has to be foreign countries. China predominantly. And what does this mean in terms of our security?
Suez
What if the creditor country disagree with the debtor country? This happened to UK in 1956, when it was attacking Egypt over Suez against the wishes of the US. The US President threatened to sell the British pound which would have devastated the UK economy. The UK backed down and withdrew. That is the point when the UK ceased to be a world power. China could use this against the US.
What happens is no one is willing to lend the country anymore money. This could happen when (like now) so many western countries are selling debt. Then the government shuts down.
Why are we even in this situation, why don't we balance our budget?
It may be that politician who are always looking towards the next election won't make decisions which will bring benefit in 20 years. In a democracy that really means, we the electorate, aren't sophisticated enough to be able to demand this from our leaders. In the 1996 US election Ross Perot was running as an independent presidential candidate. He bought this firmly into the political agenda and subsequently Bill Clinton balanced the budget. And then Bush got re-elected and created more debt than all the previous 42 presidents put together.
The really worrying thing is that at this time, we should be running massive surpluses to save for the aging population with the baby boomers about to retire. The US debt is $11 trillion, and unfunded obligations which will be needed in the next 10 to 20 years amount to another $42 trillion!
The UK is in a similar catastrophic position.
What to do about it
It would take a miracle.....I feel sorry for Obama, because he has really taken on a poisoned chalice. But we have to try. Here are some of the things which will be needed:
- The first thing is no more deficits. The constitution needs to be amended to demand this from any future 'George W Bush'-type free spenders.
- The trade balance needs to be addressed. Not by putting up barriers or devaluing currency (China would probably not allow these). We have to start producing things which we can export.
- We have have to get the millions who are unemployed working and producing things which are presently being imported. I can't understand how China can produce and ship over great distances a product which a local unemployed person can't produce cheaper. In countries like the US and UK, with our infrastructure and educated population, why can still developing countries be so much better at so many things.
- We will probably have to massively raise taxes and be much more modest in our material desires.
- We need to be radical in how we can care for our elderly. We still need to look after them and provide for their well being. We might not be able to do this in care homes in California; but if massive care homes in developing countries might be the best way we can continue to look after our elderly. This isn't ideal..but what is? At least with modern communications we can still 'see' and talk to our elderly relatives without having to travel.
See the program which triggered these thought.
Wednesday, 19 November 2008
New Labour and pimps
A new government initiative has been announced today where they will make it illegal for a man to knowingly pay a women for sex if she is looked after by a pimp or is being forced into prostitution against her will. And the ignorance isn't considered adequate defence.
I appreciate and applaud their aims, but the means is the most ridiculous thing I have heard in a long time. It is completely unworkable. How can it be proved that the man knew. He might have asked before engaging in the act but what if the women didn't tell him the truth. Since a women in that situation will be frightened, she is hardly going to confess all to every punter who comes through the door. And if the police could prove a women is being pimped, why don't they just go ahead and lock the pimps, the gangs, and free the women.
Basically this is a typical New Labour headline grabbing initiative, without any regards to effectiveness or making life easier for the victims or the Police. The one and only aim is to be seen to be doing something. Not to actually doing something good, because that take too much time and intelligence. Being seen is good enough.
And that again tells me (as a Labour supporter) that we need a change of government.
I appreciate and applaud their aims, but the means is the most ridiculous thing I have heard in a long time. It is completely unworkable. How can it be proved that the man knew. He might have asked before engaging in the act but what if the women didn't tell him the truth. Since a women in that situation will be frightened, she is hardly going to confess all to every punter who comes through the door. And if the police could prove a women is being pimped, why don't they just go ahead and lock the pimps, the gangs, and free the women.
Basically this is a typical New Labour headline grabbing initiative, without any regards to effectiveness or making life easier for the victims or the Police. The one and only aim is to be seen to be doing something. Not to actually doing something good, because that take too much time and intelligence. Being seen is good enough.
And that again tells me (as a Labour supporter) that we need a change of government.
Baby P shines the light on Britains underclass
There has only been one story in the UK in the last week. That of Baby P, whose real name we can't be told for legal reasons but who's life story makes us weep at each mention.
I won't mention any details but this is a story of a baby who lived with his cruel mother, her sadist boyfriend and their paedophile lodger. He had a cruel 17 month life. He was seen by social worker 60 times, medical professionals many times and at least on one occasion by the Police. All were concerned about his abuse, some tried to prevent him being with his mother but all were ultimately overruled, which allowed the cruelty to continue.
One of the big debates which has come out of this is regarding an underclass of people. These are people who don't work, don't expect or desire to work, probably their parents didn't work and children are unlikely to also. These people live on money from government.
Whereas the traditional working class might have been poor, they wanted to better themselves, wanted their children to be educated and through work were connected with society. The people in the underclass find themselves cut off from mainstream society and so they can have extreme views and society cannot moderate their actions.
What to do about this; how to bring them into society?
Possibly the only way is to link benefit with work. People on benefit (living money from the government) need to put in 40 hours a week doing work for civic benefit. They can continue to get help in trying to find a job but until they do, they can be given work; this will help them get work and make them more motivated to find and keep a job. And it will re-connect them with the wider community.
I won't mention any details but this is a story of a baby who lived with his cruel mother, her sadist boyfriend and their paedophile lodger. He had a cruel 17 month life. He was seen by social worker 60 times, medical professionals many times and at least on one occasion by the Police. All were concerned about his abuse, some tried to prevent him being with his mother but all were ultimately overruled, which allowed the cruelty to continue.
One of the big debates which has come out of this is regarding an underclass of people. These are people who don't work, don't expect or desire to work, probably their parents didn't work and children are unlikely to also. These people live on money from government.
Whereas the traditional working class might have been poor, they wanted to better themselves, wanted their children to be educated and through work were connected with society. The people in the underclass find themselves cut off from mainstream society and so they can have extreme views and society cannot moderate their actions.
What to do about this; how to bring them into society?
Possibly the only way is to link benefit with work. People on benefit (living money from the government) need to put in 40 hours a week doing work for civic benefit. They can continue to get help in trying to find a job but until they do, they can be given work; this will help them get work and make them more motivated to find and keep a job. And it will re-connect them with the wider community.
Wednesday, 12 November 2008
Obama optimism. I remember....
...Tony Blair.
I remember voting and then staying up all night when one result after another pointed to 'a change'. A new era was dawning; the old would be swept away and new would arrive in a sea of optimism.
No, I'm not talking now about Barack Obama, I am recounting May 1997 when Tony Blair came to power in Britain. I felt good, life was going to be great......
There were a few events soon after where my confidence was shaken, but I kept on believing. Then in October 1998 General Pinochet landed in Britain for some medical treatment. A provincial judge in Spain issued his arrest warrant on charges of murder. We were required to arrest him and then hand him over to the Spaniards.
This was the great test. We had been promised that we wouldn't be turning a blind eye to tyranny, we would be following an ethical foreign policy. Now was the time to show it.
The Blair government was procrastinating, they put him under house arrest and then started looking for excuses to release him. The rumour was that the Americans didn't want him standing trial in case he mentioned CIA involvement in the coup and subsequent tyranny. To me the easy and ethical thing to do was to deport him to Spain and the let the Spanish deal with him. But the Blair government used dubious and since discredited 'medical' advice to release him.
That's when I knew a new era hadn't dawned, and there was no real 'change'. And since then I have had only more reasons to be disillusioned. I have met Tony Blair twice, but I've always felt disappointed.
I hope the parallels with Barack Obama's new dawn don't go the same way. I don't think they will. Whereas Blair was obsessed with media and soundbites, Obama has a much more focused and longer term view. His campaign showed that.
But only time will tell.
I remember voting and then staying up all night when one result after another pointed to 'a change'. A new era was dawning; the old would be swept away and new would arrive in a sea of optimism.
No, I'm not talking now about Barack Obama, I am recounting May 1997 when Tony Blair came to power in Britain. I felt good, life was going to be great......
There were a few events soon after where my confidence was shaken, but I kept on believing. Then in October 1998 General Pinochet landed in Britain for some medical treatment. A provincial judge in Spain issued his arrest warrant on charges of murder. We were required to arrest him and then hand him over to the Spaniards.
This was the great test. We had been promised that we wouldn't be turning a blind eye to tyranny, we would be following an ethical foreign policy. Now was the time to show it.
The Blair government was procrastinating, they put him under house arrest and then started looking for excuses to release him. The rumour was that the Americans didn't want him standing trial in case he mentioned CIA involvement in the coup and subsequent tyranny. To me the easy and ethical thing to do was to deport him to Spain and the let the Spanish deal with him. But the Blair government used dubious and since discredited 'medical' advice to release him.
That's when I knew a new era hadn't dawned, and there was no real 'change'. And since then I have had only more reasons to be disillusioned. I have met Tony Blair twice, but I've always felt disappointed.
I hope the parallels with Barack Obama's new dawn don't go the same way. I don't think they will. Whereas Blair was obsessed with media and soundbites, Obama has a much more focused and longer term view. His campaign showed that.
But only time will tell.
British Shame of battered Baby P
I have cried, I have wanted to do something, anything to help that poor little baby.
Known as Baby P, he was used as a punchbag for most of his young 17 month life.
This is the story which came out yesterday about the death of the baby which has been seen 60 times by the social services or health professionals, but still lead a tortured life. I can't even to listen to the radio news... I want to cry....how can this happen?
How can people who will do this to a child be allowed to have children.
This is a day of shame for all of us, for living in a society where this can take place. For the pain and misery of that poor child. For the mother who allowed her boyfriend to do such things. It just makes me sick...
Known as Baby P, he was used as a punchbag for most of his young 17 month life.
This is the story which came out yesterday about the death of the baby which has been seen 60 times by the social services or health professionals, but still lead a tortured life. I can't even to listen to the radio news... I want to cry....how can this happen?
How can people who will do this to a child be allowed to have children.
This is a day of shame for all of us, for living in a society where this can take place. For the pain and misery of that poor child. For the mother who allowed her boyfriend to do such things. It just makes me sick...
Wednesday, 5 November 2008
President Barack Obama
Congratulations, Mr President-elect Barack Obama.
When he won the Iowa primary, over a year ago, I showed a picture of Mr Obama to my wife and announced him as the next US President. My wife said, "Barack Obama, what a nice name". Although my announcement was very premature, I thought he had much more to offer than Hilary Clinton and couldn't see a Republican being elected in the light of approval ratings of GW Bush.
I can see his colour but I can also easily see past his colour. That makes him different to the likes of Jesse Jackson.
I really like Obama. I like his demeanour and his calmness in the face of chaos. I think he is supremely intelligent, he can see the bigger picture and navigates the kind of obstacles most people wouldn't even see (beating the Clinton showed all of these qualities). I don't buy this 'lack of experience' argument. I don't believe sitting in Washington for 20 years or running a company will give you the kind of experience which is useful. That, only comes from living a reasonably ordinary life. You need to have experienced the same ups and downs which the average person feels and this only comes from being ordinary for most of your life. Clinton had forgotten that. McCain has been in Washington too long. Bush was born to privilege.
Today is an extraordinary day; Americans have looked past the colour and seen the man. In a country which a history of slavery and relatively recent segregation, this is a momentous achievement. How many other countries would look past the colour and elect a similar black man?
Here in the UK, he wouldn't have even got to the stage where the public could vote. In Spain when the English football team played, the black English players were subjected to monkey noises and bananas were thrown at them. Would Spain look past the colour? I doubt it.
Pakistan would rather elect a thief (like Mr Zardari is widely thought to be) than a black man. What about Russia? No.
The United States were presented with this extraordinary black man and should be commended that they looked at the man, where many other counties would have only seen the colour.
When he won the Iowa primary, over a year ago, I showed a picture of Mr Obama to my wife and announced him as the next US President. My wife said, "Barack Obama, what a nice name". Although my announcement was very premature, I thought he had much more to offer than Hilary Clinton and couldn't see a Republican being elected in the light of approval ratings of GW Bush.
I can see his colour but I can also easily see past his colour. That makes him different to the likes of Jesse Jackson.
I really like Obama. I like his demeanour and his calmness in the face of chaos. I think he is supremely intelligent, he can see the bigger picture and navigates the kind of obstacles most people wouldn't even see (beating the Clinton showed all of these qualities). I don't buy this 'lack of experience' argument. I don't believe sitting in Washington for 20 years or running a company will give you the kind of experience which is useful. That, only comes from living a reasonably ordinary life. You need to have experienced the same ups and downs which the average person feels and this only comes from being ordinary for most of your life. Clinton had forgotten that. McCain has been in Washington too long. Bush was born to privilege.
Today is an extraordinary day; Americans have looked past the colour and seen the man. In a country which a history of slavery and relatively recent segregation, this is a momentous achievement. How many other countries would look past the colour and elect a similar black man?
Here in the UK, he wouldn't have even got to the stage where the public could vote. In Spain when the English football team played, the black English players were subjected to monkey noises and bananas were thrown at them. Would Spain look past the colour? I doubt it.
Pakistan would rather elect a thief (like Mr Zardari is widely thought to be) than a black man. What about Russia? No.
The United States were presented with this extraordinary black man and should be commended that they looked at the man, where many other counties would have only seen the colour.
Wednesday, 29 October 2008
Difference in living costs: UK and USA
I have had an email from a listener asking to make a comparison of living cost between the USA and UK.
It's difficult to make like-for-like comparison. There is a huge variation in living cost in each country. And I haven't lived in the USA so can't compare directly.
However, as most listeners and readers are in the USA, I will list some general living costs in the UK and people can compare with their own experience.
Tax
UK Sales tax is 17.5%.
Annual Road Tax on every car varies between 0 and £400 (US$600): Toyota Prius is zero, and a Honda Accord 2.4 is £400 ($600) per year. Many people opt for Diesel powered cars which reduces this cost and increases fuel efficiency (even better than Hybrids).
Income tax. Someone earning a reasonable income of £30,000 ($45,000) per year can expect £2000 ($3000) per month in their pocket. In my example, about 60% of this then goes into my mortgage and child care (1 child is in a private nursery and other in a state school).
Property
A reasonable sized house in a decent area would cost about £200,000 ($300,000). In London and the South-East, that would probably double. Renting the same property would cost a little more than the monthly mortgage.
Council tax and utilities £2000 ($3000) per year.
Other expenses
Petrol £5 per gallon ($8), and this is after a recent reduction of about 15%.
My monthly groceries for 2 adults and 2 children cost about £400 ($600).
Benefits
Health care is free. Unemployed people get housing and living expenses. Old aged people get a state pension and some help with living costs (although if you only relied on state help, you would be very uncomfortable).
European Comparison
I have direct experience of living and earning in Netherlands and Paris.
I found Paris to be very similar to UK, although I was being paid in the UK for my work there so I don't know about the tax system. But in Netherlands, I found the tax to be so high as not worth working there. Other expense in Netherlands are also very high and I found it a relief to get back to the UK.
A country I would really like to have experience of is Norway. Probably very expensive but with very evenly distributed wealth and apparently very good quality of life.
Summary
I believe generally, the living costs will be lower in the US, especially with regards to tax. Generally in Europe people like (and vote for) big government and socialism, whereas US prefer the opposite (although G.W. Bush has spent time reversing this).
When we from Britain come to the US, we can't believe how cheap prices are and many turn up for a shopping spree especially near Christmas. And similarly Norwegians come to UK to grab the bargain!
It's difficult to make like-for-like comparison. There is a huge variation in living cost in each country. And I haven't lived in the USA so can't compare directly.
However, as most listeners and readers are in the USA, I will list some general living costs in the UK and people can compare with their own experience.
Tax
UK Sales tax is 17.5%.
Annual Road Tax on every car varies between 0 and £400 (US$600): Toyota Prius is zero, and a Honda Accord 2.4 is £400 ($600) per year. Many people opt for Diesel powered cars which reduces this cost and increases fuel efficiency (even better than Hybrids).
Income tax. Someone earning a reasonable income of £30,000 ($45,000) per year can expect £2000 ($3000) per month in their pocket. In my example, about 60% of this then goes into my mortgage and child care (1 child is in a private nursery and other in a state school).
Property
A reasonable sized house in a decent area would cost about £200,000 ($300,000). In London and the South-East, that would probably double. Renting the same property would cost a little more than the monthly mortgage.
Council tax and utilities £2000 ($3000) per year.
Other expenses
Petrol £5 per gallon ($8), and this is after a recent reduction of about 15%.
My monthly groceries for 2 adults and 2 children cost about £400 ($600).
Benefits
Health care is free. Unemployed people get housing and living expenses. Old aged people get a state pension and some help with living costs (although if you only relied on state help, you would be very uncomfortable).
European Comparison
I have direct experience of living and earning in Netherlands and Paris.
I found Paris to be very similar to UK, although I was being paid in the UK for my work there so I don't know about the tax system. But in Netherlands, I found the tax to be so high as not worth working there. Other expense in Netherlands are also very high and I found it a relief to get back to the UK.
A country I would really like to have experience of is Norway. Probably very expensive but with very evenly distributed wealth and apparently very good quality of life.
Summary
I believe generally, the living costs will be lower in the US, especially with regards to tax. Generally in Europe people like (and vote for) big government and socialism, whereas US prefer the opposite (although G.W. Bush has spent time reversing this).
When we from Britain come to the US, we can't believe how cheap prices are and many turn up for a shopping spree especially near Christmas. And similarly Norwegians come to UK to grab the bargain!
Tuesday, 28 October 2008
Coming to Edinburgh...
I have been given a two week Lotus Domino assignment in Edinburgh beginning 17th November.
I have places and advert on Gumtree for accommodation. See here
I have places and advert on Gumtree for accommodation. See here
Lotus Notes Domino
I am again, through my company, pursuing Lotus Domino assignments.
Works undertaken are Administration, Training and Infrastructure Development of Lotus Domino.
In particular I can leverage an existing Domino installation give greater returns by using Workflow to increase efficiencies in your business and also reduce the running costs of domino itself.
Workflow is when a Lotus application uses Domino databases combined with email to streamline a business procedure and communication.
I might be able to help you fund this work with European Business funding, please enquire.
If anyone is interested, please email me on n.ash@usa.net. I can undertake work anywhere in the world with suitable remote access.
Works undertaken are Administration, Training and Infrastructure Development of Lotus Domino.
In particular I can leverage an existing Domino installation give greater returns by using Workflow to increase efficiencies in your business and also reduce the running costs of domino itself.
Workflow is when a Lotus application uses Domino databases combined with email to streamline a business procedure and communication.
I might be able to help you fund this work with European Business funding, please enquire.
If anyone is interested, please email me on n.ash@usa.net. I can undertake work anywhere in the world with suitable remote access.
Thursday, 16 October 2008
Is this the solution to the Middle East's problems?
Author’s note –please read
Please read this through carefully and with an open mind.
This paper has only one aim: to move on the debate around the primary
Over the last half-century no answer has emerged on how to solve this problem. Whereas it is almost impossible to find the course which will lead to lasting peace, it is very easy to see which course will make finding peace much more difficult. Despite this knowledge, this is precisely the path which has constantly and repeatedly been followed. Simply; if you hope to stop rockets and stones raining on your children, don’t kill other people’s children, their parents, their brothers and sisters. If you want peace, give peace to others. Of course it’s easy to say but when emotions are running high after burying your child, people don’t react logically.
So we are at the difficult impasse. There is no trust, only hatred. No dialogue, only fighting. No hope, only misery.
This proposal may not be the perfect answer but it might be the best available. Significantly, it is different to the many failed road maps of the past. It throws another option into the mix in the hope that the stumbling blocks become irrelevant.
No doubt it will divide opinion. Expressing any view on this subject brings accusations of favouring one side or another, anger and possibly hatred. I hope people keep their emotions in check, and see this paper for what it is: a neutral attempt to stem the bloodshed and bring peace, prosperity and happiness to a troubled region. No offence is intended and no one should feel angry, even if they completely disagree.
This paper needs to be read completely and in detail otherwise the crux of it can be missed. Just read it carefully and then think about it.
Introduction
This is the solution to the
This solution recognises these seemingly contradictory desires and moves on.
Some assumptions have been made.
Firstly, all people involved love their children so much that if it could be demonstrated that their children can be safe, educated, and healthy, have prospects, jobs and the potential for a good life; they might look past their painful memories and move on. The key word here is ‘demonstrate’. There is so much distrust that no one will believe words only. This solution is able to demonstrate intention AND can be started without a trust-building ceasefire – because that never lasts.
The other assumption is that land which has been developed is worth more and is more desirable than less developed land. In other words people will prefer to live in
However good the plan might be, it is still nothing compared to execution of the plan. This means the focus and emphasis should be on executing, the means to achieving, rather than the plan itself. This cannot be stressed enough. The most obvious example to the contrary is the US-UK invasion-occupation of
In
The solution
The solution is to persuade people of another country to swap a proportion of their land for massive infrastructure improvements. Also, by offering Palestinian people a vision of a healthy, safe and prosperous life by migrating into this vacated land also with massive infrastructure developments. The donor country might be one of a few; an African country or
This plan has the potential for massively escalating the existing troubles. If it is done wrongly the
Donor Country
This proposition could be very attractive to many poor & impoverished countries; although since good governance is a requirement, maybe less attractive to some leaders. Nevertheless, once this plan gets publicised there should be 3 or 4 countries which want to be considered as potential donors.
One way to narrow down interested countries is by looking at how easy it would be to clear a sizeable portion for a possible future Palestinian state. The area needs to be fully cleared, willingly and happily, with generous settlements for people needing relocation. The clearing should be made immediately after the donor country has been selected, as any hiccups here (people unwilling to move) after the project has started, could derail the whole plan.
Once a donor country has been chosen, the task starts to persuade the vast majority of the people that sacrificing a percentage of their land will be beneficial and transform their lives for the better. By giving them infrastructure such as an airports (maybe in the sea); bullet trains criss-crossing the country, new roads, underground metro in cities, hospitals, schools, universities, parks, and optical fibre covering the country to provide every person the fastest broadband in the world. Good housing, good jobs, good health and good opportunities.
People would benefit from free education, training and health care. Good jobs would be created with enterprise help. Governance, laws, regulations and taxation would be light enough to promote wealth, but strong enough to spread wealth and create a fair and just society.
In short, the people of the donor country would get a rich and highly developed country albeit with smaller land area. The model would be something like
The people from the donor country would have to be overwhelmingly convinced and need to vote in a referendum 75% in favour. This is to avoid having a situation where people feel pushed and impotent. It’s this type of scenario that can sow the seeds for discontent leading to terrorism. Terrorism only needs a few extremist individuals to exist, but a sizeable chunk of the population need to help and approve for terror to be sustained and grow. So by seeking a 75% approval, the threat of terrorism jeopardising the peace solution is kept to a minimum.
The only way to even get near 75% approval is to demonstrate what they will get. Words are simply not enough; they need to see a sample of the infrastructure improvements which can be expected.
Persuading the people
The debates start in both the donor country and West Bank-Gaza, about whether this is a solution or a cynical land grab by
The sample construction could be a hospital, a few schools, bullet train line between two prominent destinations and maybe even an airport.
The sample project will take a number of years to complete. No doubt an intense debate will continue. As always with a big change, people tend to be reluctant. Fear takes a hold; will they loose what they already have rather than gain? They feel that their views and feelings will be ignored or misrepresented. These are natural feelings, but will subside with time when they see the sample construction coming to fruition. The 75% threshold should also reassure doubters. And spur on supporters to actively champion it for fear the threshold may not be reached.
Similar campaign and debate will take place in the Palestinian territories. Here also needs to be emphasised the 75% support requirement, and even then those who don’t want to go, can stay behind. They can visit the new
As the construction starts of sample projects, plans will be drawn for all the development. Public consultation will start, finance arranged, and contracts advertised. These can take place for both the donor country and the new Palestinian state.
Construction
The so-called reconstruction in
All construction has to be costed with such accuracy; the project will be delivered cheaply and on budget, with bidding open and fully transparent. We want to bring work, enterprise, prosperity, and happiness to the area. Therefore local people need to be given priority for the jobs and need to limit the amount of money which can leave the country. The money pumped in largely remains and circulates locally.
Costs
There is no doubt all this infrastructure building will be very expensive. Although, if the aims are all met, it also will be cheap. What savings could be made with the Middle-East at peace?
However when savings are made, someone loses out and if there are many losers and they are powerful enough, they could present this project with a big hurdle. To minimise this scenario, funding needs to be wide and shallow.
One possible way to fund this is with US$ 0.10 per gallon fuel duty for G8 countries and $2 from the price of barrel of oil from the 10 richest oil-producing countries. Since the plan will take about 10 years to implement, these measures should fund it without it affecting the average person in the contributing countries. Over time savings due to peace and prosperity will filter down and actually reimburse all costs.
Conclusion
Throughout history people have migrated to other lands in search of peace and prosperity. This is not a new idea, except maybe in the context of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It may not be the perfect answer or the fair answer. But if migration is managed with care, thoughtfulness, and sensitivity, it might be the best available answer.
Some people may say, what does
Firstly, the Palestinians are not asked to move. They are shown a doorway to peace, prosperity, security, and a life of opportunity and hope. They are offered incentives but they have a choice to go or stay.
Secondly,
With this plan everybody wins. Some may gain more than others, but people need to look at what is best for themselves, their family and their children, rather than what other people are gaining.
The new
I have deliberately ignored the contentious issue of
They did it in
Copyright by Ash Nehmet
This article can be expanded into a book. Interested publishers contact: n.ash@usa.net
Author is available for interview by media organisations.
This article is sponsored by Ozonology: Replacing germs with Oxygen www.ozonology.co.uk
See also: Proqul Ozone Store
The sponsors neither agree nor disagree with the articles contents or opinion. They only help to provide a forum for discussion of ideas.
Publishing guidelines. Word count 2311 (body)
Permission is granted to publish this article electronically in free-only publication, like a website or ezine (print requires individual permission) as long as the resource box is included. All links must be active. A courtesy copy is requested on publication (email: n.ash@usa.net).
| **** This resource box must be included ***** About the author: Mr Ash Nehmet Blog on www.breaking-news-debate.com Any book publishers interested producing this article into a book, please contact me. I am available for media interviews. Read this article: |
Monday, 13 October 2008
John McCain rises above politics. And Palin for 2012? I don't think so.
I've found the mud slinging by the Republicans really distasteful. Palin is the worst offender by far. She's really getting down-an-dirty.
I always liked John McCain but recently he's disappointed me. I didn't like the rhetoric or the ugliness of his campaign. However he's now risen above it when he corrected a women for calling Obama an Arab. Good on ya' John.
If Sarah Palin has an eye on 2012 as President, she can forget it. She will be badly beaten by the other Republican candidates. See, then she won't have the party machine protecting her from the press and her gaffes will give the other candidates all the red meat they need.
I always liked John McCain but recently he's disappointed me. I didn't like the rhetoric or the ugliness of his campaign. However he's now risen above it when he corrected a women for calling Obama an Arab. Good on ya' John.
If Sarah Palin has an eye on 2012 as President, she can forget it. She will be badly beaten by the other Republican candidates. See, then she won't have the party machine protecting her from the press and her gaffes will give the other candidates all the red meat they need.
What is a 'hockey mum'
Is it a mum who plays hockey?
Does that make me a 'sqaush dad'? Or maybe a 'really-bad-at-squash dad'.
Does that make me a 'sqaush dad'? Or maybe a 'really-bad-at-squash dad'.
Friday, 10 October 2008
Lending money to banks
I watched This Week on BBC last night.
Andrew Neil said we've lent the banks £500bn so they can lend it back to us at 7%.
Putting it that way made me think; why don't they just lend it direct to us?
Cut out the middle man and let the banks fall, we can have a super-dooper Peoples Bank.
Any thoughts?
BTW: This Week is my favourite program and I really like Michael Portillo. Maybe he should have been PM after all -and I say this as a Labour Party member.
Andrew Neil said we've lent the banks £500bn so they can lend it back to us at 7%.
Putting it that way made me think; why don't they just lend it direct to us?
Cut out the middle man and let the banks fall, we can have a super-dooper Peoples Bank.
Any thoughts?
BTW: This Week is my favourite program and I really like Michael Portillo. Maybe he should have been PM after all -and I say this as a Labour Party member.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
