This article talking about the state of UK society and the need for organistation for national wellbeing versus private gain.... quiet appropriate.. the most striking thing about the article is that it was written over 80 years ago.. 1921
Oh how times change!
The good thing is that we all have to live and make our own mistakes to learn...
it is just a shame they are the same old mistakes made by every generation before us...!
However I dont think reading books will stop this... isnt it part of being human..
and the one thing about us which evolution can not "fix".
Just a thought.
H
Thursday, May 26, 2005
Thursday, May 05, 2005
Subsidies, Tariffs and Other Nonsenses of World 'Free' Trade
As Victor Keegan says in this Guardian aritcle, the WTO negotiations are very boring but the more you read about the details the more absurd and immoral it all is.
It is said this all starting to change, hopefully it will become more and more obvious to everyone how stupid and unfair the current system is. The sooner the better.
As Victor Keegan says in this Guardian aritcle, the WTO negotiations are very boring but the more you read about the details the more absurd and immoral it all is.
It is said this all starting to change, hopefully it will become more and more obvious to everyone how stupid and unfair the current system is. The sooner the better.
Friday, April 22, 2005
I remember hearing about how everything on the planet should be privitised - e.g meaning that someone would have an inherent interest in a specific cubed foot of water in the ocean.
Even though this exists already and is known as worldwide commons. (2) (3)
This did happen before but people were not too happy because all these common areas were given/ bought to people who could afford them- leaving the public in debt to these new owners.... the result of this was known as the land reform act or soemthing like that- I honestly think we are revisiting this area once again.
Where all this privately owned commons wil be reclaimed by the people.The thing that I have thought about history is that we can repeat history indefintely- because new generations make the same mistakes as past generations.
We only learn from our own mistakes- not others... meaning we will repeat history time and time again.
Anyways thats thought for the day..
Even though this exists already and is known as worldwide commons. (2) (3)
This did happen before but people were not too happy because all these common areas were given/ bought to people who could afford them- leaving the public in debt to these new owners.... the result of this was known as the land reform act or soemthing like that- I honestly think we are revisiting this area once again.
Where all this privately owned commons wil be reclaimed by the people.The thing that I have thought about history is that we can repeat history indefintely- because new generations make the same mistakes as past generations.
We only learn from our own mistakes- not others... meaning we will repeat history time and time again.
Anyways thats thought for the day..
Thursday, April 14, 2005
UK Election 2005 - Sensible Party Policies
So, what would a sensible party's policies be for this election?
As food for thought, there's some policy areas to consider -
Crime - Policing, Anti-Social Behavior, Immigration and Asylum
Public Services - NHS, Council Tax, Education
Finance - Income Tax, Corporation Tax, Red Tape, Families, Transport, Pensions
Foreign Policy - Israel/Palestine/Iran/North Korea, Terrorism, EU
Government - Constitution, Reform, Monarchy, House of Lords, Parliament,
Devolution
The BBC list of issues is here
So, what would a sensible party's policies be for this election?
As food for thought, there's some policy areas to consider -
Crime - Policing, Anti-Social Behavior, Immigration and Asylum
Public Services - NHS, Council Tax, Education
Finance - Income Tax, Corporation Tax, Red Tape, Families, Transport, Pensions
Foreign Policy - Israel/Palestine/Iran/North Korea, Terrorism, EU
Government - Constitution, Reform, Monarchy, House of Lords, Parliament,
Devolution
The BBC list of issues is here
Opinion - Tesco's UK Record Profit
I'm generally a patient man but I dislike waiting around because of other people's incompetence. So, taking into account Tesco's record 2 billion pounds pre-tax profits , have a think about this next time you are standing in a queue at a Tesco store looking at empty, un-manned checkouts :
Teso annual Pre-tax profits - 2.03 billion pounds.
Number of seconds in a calendar year : 31449600
Therefore, Tesco pre-tax profit per second is 64 UK pounds and 54 pence.
From what I could find via a quick google, Tesco checkout operator hourly rate of pay (For over 18's), is : 5.65 quid
Therefore, if Tesco spent even a quarter of these profits on more staff, they could employ 3 man hours of checkout staff per second... Why do they not do this?
a) Sheer greed - our current economic system compels companies to make as much money as possible. If you haven't seen it, go and see / rent or buy the DVD of The Corporation for a thorough look at how psychopathic companies are.
b) Incompetence - If some customers are put off by hanging about and spend their money elsewhere on other visits, or even walk out and abandon their trolley, then Tesco lose profits from this. But, they spread their greed ethos down to their management. So what do the management do? They try and get by on as little budget as possible so they can increase their bonus / get a promotion / salary increase. They reduce their staff budget to the minimum they think they can manage on.
Result - You get left standing around, and every second you stand there the directors and shareholders are clocking up as much profit per second as you are probably going to spend when you eventually get served at the checkout.
The reason there are so few manned checkouts in the quarter following Christmas is that the managers used up all their budget on extra staff over Christmas trying to get as much of your cash as possible in their tills during the busiest period.
I wonder how much money Tesco would make if they were smart as well as enormously greedy?
"Our market share of UK retailing is 12.5 per cent - that leaves 87.5 per cent to go after.",
Tesco Chief Executive, Sir Terry Leahy
I'm generally a patient man but I dislike waiting around because of other people's incompetence. So, taking into account Tesco's record 2 billion pounds pre-tax profits , have a think about this next time you are standing in a queue at a Tesco store looking at empty, un-manned checkouts :
Teso annual Pre-tax profits - 2.03 billion pounds.
Number of seconds in a calendar year : 31449600
Therefore, Tesco pre-tax profit per second is 64 UK pounds and 54 pence.
From what I could find via a quick google, Tesco checkout operator hourly rate of pay (For over 18's), is : 5.65 quid
Therefore, if Tesco spent even a quarter of these profits on more staff, they could employ 3 man hours of checkout staff per second... Why do they not do this?
a) Sheer greed - our current economic system compels companies to make as much money as possible. If you haven't seen it, go and see / rent or buy the DVD of The Corporation for a thorough look at how psychopathic companies are.
b) Incompetence - If some customers are put off by hanging about and spend their money elsewhere on other visits, or even walk out and abandon their trolley, then Tesco lose profits from this. But, they spread their greed ethos down to their management. So what do the management do? They try and get by on as little budget as possible so they can increase their bonus / get a promotion / salary increase. They reduce their staff budget to the minimum they think they can manage on.
Result - You get left standing around, and every second you stand there the directors and shareholders are clocking up as much profit per second as you are probably going to spend when you eventually get served at the checkout.
The reason there are so few manned checkouts in the quarter following Christmas is that the managers used up all their budget on extra staff over Christmas trying to get as much of your cash as possible in their tills during the busiest period.
I wonder how much money Tesco would make if they were smart as well as enormously greedy?
"Our market share of UK retailing is 12.5 per cent - that leaves 87.5 per cent to go after.",
Tesco Chief Executive, Sir Terry Leahy
Saturday, April 02, 2005
Coming Home from Iraq
No matter what your position on the Iraq war, surely anyone would think what has happened to the US soldiers in this Guardian story is a disgrace. Homelessness is a blight on society at the best of times, that people who have offered up their lives should be let down so badly by the system that sent them to war is unforgivable.
No matter what your position on the Iraq war, surely anyone would think what has happened to the US soldiers in this Guardian story is a disgrace. Homelessness is a blight on society at the best of times, that people who have offered up their lives should be let down so badly by the system that sent them to war is unforgivable.
Monday, January 31, 2005
Opinion - The Demise of the Trade Union
I found some of the comments in the 'Have You Say' section of this BBC News story somewhat ironic.
People bemoan union members for going on strike stating that the union is out of order for demanding a 5.9% pay rise because they (The complainers) would be lucky to ever get such a rise in their work place. Do they not even think for a second that the reason they could never get such a pay rise is precisely because of the lack of unionisation in their workplace? Do they not realise that we are increasingly headed backwards to a 6/7 day a week working week because these conditions are now dictated by 'the free market' and not by negotiation between workers and management? Unions were out of order to some extent in the 1970s in the UK, only now are we beginning to see the legacy of their loss. Sadly people seem to be so caught up in their own convenience that they cannot see this.
I found some of the comments in the 'Have You Say' section of this BBC News story somewhat ironic.
People bemoan union members for going on strike stating that the union is out of order for demanding a 5.9% pay rise because they (The complainers) would be lucky to ever get such a rise in their work place. Do they not even think for a second that the reason they could never get such a pay rise is precisely because of the lack of unionisation in their workplace? Do they not realise that we are increasingly headed backwards to a 6/7 day a week working week because these conditions are now dictated by 'the free market' and not by negotiation between workers and management? Unions were out of order to some extent in the 1970s in the UK, only now are we beginning to see the legacy of their loss. Sadly people seem to be so caught up in their own convenience that they cannot see this.
Wednesday, January 12, 2005
Monday, January 10, 2005
The Bush Organisational Philosophy
This op-ed piece (c/o Mike, ta), makes some interesting points about how Bush appoints cabinet members. Worth a read.
This op-ed piece (c/o Mike, ta), makes some interesting points about how Bush appoints cabinet members. Worth a read.
Tuesday, November 30, 2004
Interesting read.. I'm stil lworking my way through it..
Participatory Economics (Parecon for short) is a type of economy proposed as an alternative to contemporary capitalism. The underlying values are equity, solidarity, diversity, and participatory self management.
The main institutions are workers and consumers councils utilizing self managed decision making, balanced job complexes, remuneration according to effort and sacrifice, and participatory planning. This page links to articles, interviews, talks, instructionals, Q/A sessions, and books about parecon and closely related matters.
Also a wee bit from the parecon site ..... food for thought..life after capitalism..
H
Participatory Economics (Parecon for short) is a type of economy proposed as an alternative to contemporary capitalism. The underlying values are equity, solidarity, diversity, and participatory self management.
The main institutions are workers and consumers councils utilizing self managed decision making, balanced job complexes, remuneration according to effort and sacrifice, and participatory planning. This page links to articles, interviews, talks, instructionals, Q/A sessions, and books about parecon and closely related matters.
Also a wee bit from the parecon site ..... food for thought..life after capitalism..
H
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
A wee bit about sensible economics:
Industry and markets founding their costings which do not include social aspects of our society are surely doomed to failure. Should we not encourage sensible economics and sensible accounting practices to factor in these very important areas?
Surely it is up to us, the people who can change this.
Surely we *should* be factoring in costs which will affect our children and future generations?
As it is just now, they have no baring on current costing models, the cost of increasing pollution in the environment which could increase deaths of our children have no current value and so are irrellevant. Is this not wrong?
We have the principle of opportunity costs, can they not include social costs and future enviromental costs?
Adbusters have an interesting piece*:
"A new paradigm is waiting in the wings, one that values nature flows and money flows equally. One that addresses the social and environmental costs of the current model."
*http://adbusters.org/metas/eco/truecosteconomics/neoclassical.html
H
Industry and markets founding their costings which do not include social aspects of our society are surely doomed to failure. Should we not encourage sensible economics and sensible accounting practices to factor in these very important areas?
Surely it is up to us, the people who can change this.
Surely we *should* be factoring in costs which will affect our children and future generations?
As it is just now, they have no baring on current costing models, the cost of increasing pollution in the environment which could increase deaths of our children have no current value and so are irrellevant. Is this not wrong?
We have the principle of opportunity costs, can they not include social costs and future enviromental costs?
Adbusters have an interesting piece*:
"A new paradigm is waiting in the wings, one that values nature flows and money flows equally. One that addresses the social and environmental costs of the current model."
*http://adbusters.org/metas/eco/truecosteconomics/neoclassical.html
H
Sunday, November 07, 2004
2004 Presidential Election
What can I say? I got the turnout right, sort of - not found any official figures on that yet.
But, Bush? Why oh why?
1. The Media - Still overwhelmingly obsessed with the idea that being patriotic is not questioning the President / Administration. They certainly had a go at times on his military record but not the real issues - Iraq, the fiscal defecit, healthcare etc.
2. Moral Majority / Christian Right - They came out to vote in enough numbers to add to Bush's 2000 total. The Democrats need to learn from this.
3. Kerry - Not compellingly different enough. Too much critisicm without presenting sufficiently different, alternative ideas (Very reminiscent of the problem the Tories have in the UK).
Of the post-match analysis, I liked this piece by Simon Schama.
I think the one thing that we, in the UK in particular, is that the US Presidential Election is not about policies and manifestos, it's a popularity contest and basically it's like this :
Presuming those dodgy e-voting machines worked properly and weren't tampered with - Just over half of the people who can be bothered voting in the US like a man with these qualities in charge :
Decisive - Refuses to admit any mistake or revisit any decision.
Poor Verbal Skills - No fancy words or rehetoric - simple aphorisms only please.
Nationalist and Unilateralist - The US does not need anything from the rest of the world right? Doh! Wrong. The USA needs money from the rest of the world invested in it in order to keep it's economy going. It also needs the rest of the world to sell it all the stuff that it consumes which the US does not manufacture - and there's a whole lot of that...
The bizarre thing to me about this result is it is kind of like the inverse of what happened with Labour and the Tories in the 80s, especially from a Scots point of view.
Then the North and Scotland voted for Labour but got the Conservatives because the richer folks in the South-East voted for them.
In the US the richest folks are more likely to be liberal (That damn Liberal Elite again....) so they vote Democrat. Meanwhile, all the poor folk who can't get jobs love Bush because he promises to protect them from the bogey men he likes to invoke to scare them, all the while he is taking dollars from their back pockets and passing them out to rich Corporations.
Here's hoping the other 35% who don't vote wake up and realise they are needed to swing this in a more sensible direction in 2008 for President (Mrs) Clinton the second....
What can I say? I got the turnout right, sort of - not found any official figures on that yet.
But, Bush? Why oh why?
1. The Media - Still overwhelmingly obsessed with the idea that being patriotic is not questioning the President / Administration. They certainly had a go at times on his military record but not the real issues - Iraq, the fiscal defecit, healthcare etc.
2. Moral Majority / Christian Right - They came out to vote in enough numbers to add to Bush's 2000 total. The Democrats need to learn from this.
3. Kerry - Not compellingly different enough. Too much critisicm without presenting sufficiently different, alternative ideas (Very reminiscent of the problem the Tories have in the UK).
Of the post-match analysis, I liked this piece by Simon Schama.
I think the one thing that we, in the UK in particular, is that the US Presidential Election is not about policies and manifestos, it's a popularity contest and basically it's like this :
Presuming those dodgy e-voting machines worked properly and weren't tampered with - Just over half of the people who can be bothered voting in the US like a man with these qualities in charge :
Decisive - Refuses to admit any mistake or revisit any decision.
Poor Verbal Skills - No fancy words or rehetoric - simple aphorisms only please.
Nationalist and Unilateralist - The US does not need anything from the rest of the world right? Doh! Wrong. The USA needs money from the rest of the world invested in it in order to keep it's economy going. It also needs the rest of the world to sell it all the stuff that it consumes which the US does not manufacture - and there's a whole lot of that...
The bizarre thing to me about this result is it is kind of like the inverse of what happened with Labour and the Tories in the 80s, especially from a Scots point of view.
Then the North and Scotland voted for Labour but got the Conservatives because the richer folks in the South-East voted for them.
In the US the richest folks are more likely to be liberal (That damn Liberal Elite again....) so they vote Democrat. Meanwhile, all the poor folk who can't get jobs love Bush because he promises to protect them from the bogey men he likes to invoke to scare them, all the while he is taking dollars from their back pockets and passing them out to rich Corporations.
Here's hoping the other 35% who don't vote wake up and realise they are needed to swing this in a more sensible direction in 2008 for President (Mrs) Clinton the second....
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
Monday, November 01, 2004
Eloquent View from New Jersey
From a Talking Point page on news.bbc.co.uk
"Whoever is elected President will be dealing with a very rapidly changing world. Economic wealth is shifting, instability and the resulting security threat is growing, an ever more 'aware and educated' world community is demanding justice, equality, honesty, and fairness. America must eventually understand and accept that it has no choice, but to become a full and integral part of a global society. If we deal with these challenges with an open mind, America and the world will be a much better place for our children, but if not, we as well as the rest of the world are in for a 'very rough' and dangerous ride. A new world is coming whether we like it or not and I just hope that whoever we elect as President understands this.
John, NJ, USA"
I wish all US voters were as wise as John here. Smart man.
From a Talking Point page on news.bbc.co.uk
"Whoever is elected President will be dealing with a very rapidly changing world. Economic wealth is shifting, instability and the resulting security threat is growing, an ever more 'aware and educated' world community is demanding justice, equality, honesty, and fairness. America must eventually understand and accept that it has no choice, but to become a full and integral part of a global society. If we deal with these challenges with an open mind, America and the world will be a much better place for our children, but if not, we as well as the rest of the world are in for a 'very rough' and dangerous ride. A new world is coming whether we like it or not and I just hope that whoever we elect as President understands this.
John, NJ, USA"
I wish all US voters were as wise as John here. Smart man.
Sunday, October 24, 2004
Bush - Little Things Count a Lot
Molly Ivins column (Also here) which points out the little blots on Bush's copy book. Please do not vote for this guy, it only encourages him... but, if you don't vote for him, please vote for somebody else, and somebody else who stands a chance of getting in, not Mr Nader. Please!
Molly Ivins column (Also here) which points out the little blots on Bush's copy book. Please do not vote for this guy, it only encourages him... but, if you don't vote for him, please vote for somebody else, and somebody else who stands a chance of getting in, not Mr Nader. Please!
Friday, October 22, 2004
UK Management and Productivity
This one touched a nerve with me :
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/09/16/it_holy_grail/
It's easy, especially as a cynical, non-employee, IT geek, to just
slag off management and blame managers for everything but this
article seems to bear this view out with respect to the productivity
gap.
Personally I think there are a couple of reasons why we are in this
mess :
One such reason why this is such a problem in the UK versus the US is
the albatross we carry round our necks which we call "The Class
System". We defer less than we used to to the "high heid yin's" but
we still have this "them and us" bull and associated inferiority /
superiority complex. I dare say this goes on in the US too but I
doubt it's quite as much of a problem.
Management in the UK is too centered around finance and accountancy.
I can't quote it here but I've read elsewhere that there is some
astonishingly high ratio of accountants in the UK versus the US. This
in turns means more conservative (With a small 'c') decisions are
made and less innovation and input from non-management / non-finance
employees. The obsession with costs also makes investment a very low
priority in the UK, especially with respect to training.
Finally, much as I like to bash the US, I do get the impression that
US employees do invest more of their own time and money in improving
their skills than we do in the UK. Can't blame managers for that,
though maybe I could blame them for not motivating us enough?
Thursday, October 21, 2004
Cars = Stupid, Stupid, Stupid.
Disclaimer : I've owned 4 cars in the 16 years I've been legal to drive. 3 were cheap bangers 13+ years ago, my current I've had since '99 and was mainly bought for two reasons :
a) Having a kid more or less makes a car essential, having a teenager makes you an unpaid taxi-driver ;)
b) I work freelance, so not having a car restricts the places I can work a lot.
The car, to me, is the single purchase which most clearly defines all that is wrong with 'Western Civilisation' :
It's individualist and about personal freedom primarily, and doesn't give a toss about the common good.
It brings out the worst characteristics in people.
It's use leads to people being killed and injured, a lot.
It has lead to our destroying large parts of the natural world to accommodate it's use.
Worst of all, it's not even a good technological solution - Cars are woefully inefficient and , superficial changes and materials aside, haven't changed design much since the days of the Ford Model T.
It's one of those things that everyone knows should be scrapped and replaced with a better solution but nobody has the vision or balls to do so - The classic, "But we've always done it that way." excuse.
Until we can take a good hard look at nonsense like driving around in piles of metal powered by dead fish bits, each of which is generally piloted by one person alone, progress of the human race is going to very slow. If indeed we can progress without going into a decline brought on by our use of such 'non-sensible' solutions...
Disclaimer : I've owned 4 cars in the 16 years I've been legal to drive. 3 were cheap bangers 13+ years ago, my current I've had since '99 and was mainly bought for two reasons :
a) Having a kid more or less makes a car essential, having a teenager makes you an unpaid taxi-driver ;)
b) I work freelance, so not having a car restricts the places I can work a lot.
The car, to me, is the single purchase which most clearly defines all that is wrong with 'Western Civilisation' :
It's individualist and about personal freedom primarily, and doesn't give a toss about the common good.
It brings out the worst characteristics in people.
It's use leads to people being killed and injured, a lot.
It has lead to our destroying large parts of the natural world to accommodate it's use.
Worst of all, it's not even a good technological solution - Cars are woefully inefficient and , superficial changes and materials aside, haven't changed design much since the days of the Ford Model T.
It's one of those things that everyone knows should be scrapped and replaced with a better solution but nobody has the vision or balls to do so - The classic, "But we've always done it that way." excuse.
Until we can take a good hard look at nonsense like driving around in piles of metal powered by dead fish bits, each of which is generally piloted by one person alone, progress of the human race is going to very slow. If indeed we can progress without going into a decline brought on by our use of such 'non-sensible' solutions...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)