There has been a recent trend among the super rich not to leave their offspring money. Not only do they reach this decision, it seems as though they deem it necessary to let us poor folks know. Bill Gates was one of the more recent to take this action. Despite his being worth many tens of billions of dollars he has concluded that his kids would be best served by not having huge wealth to inherit. Bill, thanks for the information but I was hoping you might want to adopt me, as I’m clearly too old to be spoilt by the experience, whilst still fit and healthy enough to make a pretty healthy dent in one or two of the billion.
Bill made his money from owning and developing Microsoft. He was clearly a business and computing genius, a nerd with attitude, and totally adept at making money and crushing the opposition. Gates has a reputation of being tough, explosive and intimidating. Isn’t it strange that such a person sees no moral paradox in his stance on inheritance?
Is Bill just being a good guy, or has he looked in the mirror and decided he needs to give something back to the society that he has so ruthlessly and successfully exploited?
It appears to the sign of a man looking to establish his place in history, in much the same way as one of the greatest philanthropists ever, Andrew Carnegie. This Scottish man made his fortune in the American steel industry in the 1870s; he founded the Carnegie Steel Company, a step that cemented his name as one of the “Captains of Industry”. By the 1890s, the company was the largest, most profitable industrial enterprise in the world. Carnegie sold it to J.P. Morgan in 1901, and he went on to create US Steel.
Carnegie almost totally devoted the remainder of his life to large-scale philanthropy, with an emphasis on world peace, local libraries, education and scientific research. It looks like Bill has been studying his history and decided on the same course.
We all realize that giving away more than $50 billion is a full time job, and that you don’t want to spoil your kids, but isn’t this all a bit excessive?
Warren Buffett, possibly the canniest investor, businessmen and philanthropist in America since World War Two, amassed a fortune that is estimated to be even bigger than that of Bill. He expressed a desire for Bill to spend some time helping to run his immensely successful investment company. Carnegie has an estimated net worth of around US$62 billion, and Forbes magazine ranked him the richest person in the world on February 11, 2008.
Buffett is called the "Oracle of Omaha," and is noted for his almost total adherence to the value investing philosophy and for his personal frugality despite his immense wealth.
Buffett is also a noted philanthropist. In 2006, he announced that he was going to give away his entire fortune to charity, with 83% of it going to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. In 2007, he was listed among Time's 100 Most Influential People in The World.
These men understood how capitalism works better than any of their peers, and worked out how to harness it to their dreams and aspirations. They then went on to create more wealth than they could spend in a hundred lifetimes. They each had more money than anyone could spend or want, and in their wisdom they decided, after experience of such extreme wealth, that they didn’t want that life for their children. This surely proves that some money, to meet your obligations is great, but too much and it’s trouble. Imagine the people begging for help, threatening blackmail, kidnap. Imagine the fear you have of everyone’s true motive, unless they’re as rich as you, and can’t want anything from you. Perhaps the super rich giving away their money is the best defense they can erect around their family.
Isn’t it also bizarre and somewhat gratifying, that all of these ultra successful capitalists choose to give away their fortunes in such an obviously social liberal and almost, whisper this quietly, socialist method?
But Bill, I could handle just a little bit of cash, I promise.
Saturday, August 2, 2008
Friday, August 1, 2008
YourComments
This is where I try to be brave. As those of you know, who write in reply to my blogs, I do try and respond as fast as I can. However quite a few of you only write to ask me to see what someone else has said, I suppose to confirm their views. I have responded if I thought I could contribute further, and as promised, I have not given more than the first name of any correspondent.
They are real comments and are greatly appreciated, many thanks.
We have edited for space where appropriate, and do wish to make clear that we don’t necessarily agree with the reader’s views. We are proud to note that the comments received have been almost totally positive which is very encouraging.
So here goes, your comments, forming a blog of their own!
“Thank God someone has said something sensible about this. Rules for one different for another? Yesterday’s news was a mixture of contradictions. Having been a victim of “domestic violence” – physical through in partner (hit with an iron), and psychological in another (constant wearing down of my self-esteem) – I get very upset by the “zero tolerance” campaigns which state domestic violence against women is a crime and never acknowledge that men can also suffer. Domestic violence, from either gender, is just that, violent. This year, the news has been swamped with reports of fatalities through knives and guns and asks rhetorical questions: “what can be done about it?” “Are the parents to blame?” In order to send the right message, surely the government should be making it a lot harder to get away with murder, not justifying it.”
Jon on The License to Murder argument
“I think your observations are acute, but I disagree that the main reasons Barak Obama is adored is that he is not Bush. He is an eloquent black man nominated in America. That is a powerful statement and cannot be overlooked in the midst of all the other tumult. What he would actually do in office, is, I agree, absolutely unknowable, possibly promising, possibly very frightening.”
David on Obama in Berlin
“One more thing, I am glad you are open as a thinker, most claim to be interested in external issues are only interested to the extent that it has a reference to their life and unfortunately it does not go much deeper.”
Stevie
“Love what you wrote. Absolutely true!”
_____________________________________________________
“I am not sure about your blog but I distrust everyone in both parties who are politicians. With few exceptions...I know one thing we cannot force our way of life on anyone but if they mess we have to play ball.
The blog is well written and it is expressed also by manpower over here mostly republican but also Hilary Demos...
Sherry on Will Barak Blink?
I was basically just writing to say that I've been reading your blog and how much I've enjoyed it, and also have found it to be both very interesting and informative, thanks! I particularly enjoyed your most recent post and your musings on what democracy means to
Europhiles. I never realized how true that is, it's quite thought provoking.
Matt M. on Europhiles
“The bad thing about being swept up into the madness is you wake up 4 years later and not much has changed and your energy fizzles out and you have wasted a lot of time. It is a PR job, I hope he wins but it could back fire. They all fall down; all hero’s fall in this imperfect world.”
Stevie on the Obama blog
I've read your blogs where possible--some of seems right on and some of it full of shit-- but that's what you get for publishing. Israel...I mean look, it's going to be a lot of rotten compromises and pathetic stalemates on both sides that allow regular people to go about their lives as best they can. The apocalyptic scenarios are a bit silly at this point. Nut job dictators with the nukes and the like--that's a police problem---uninspected cargo containers....uninspected luggage on airplanes---no one has the money to do this because we're bogged down in the stupid war which ought to be a UN- Arab security operation if its to be fought at all. There are National Guard members in this town I'm in who have done four tours of duty in Iraq and they don't have health insurance. They live in trailers because their mortgages went under in the housing crisis. They can't drive to work because they can't afford gas.... etc. Etc. Moreover, most are rejects and petty criminals because no one will go near the army anymore. Christ, you don't invade a country like Iraq if you've read a history book. Not without a UN. /Arab coalition and the mindset that you are going to be there for at ten to twenty years. I was against that. war from the start--I said it would last 10 years minimum...spelled out all the reasons that Saddam can't just buy yellow cake uranium from Nigeria and make a bomb, etc. The stuff you are peddling.... the U.S....Israel...the Arabs.... etc. It’s an old great powers-nationalist-narrative There are multinational corporations now who contract out on security, information, destabilization of governments..."making the world safe for business." That's the real story here.
In any event, cheers and keep the shot gun blasts coming.
Brad.
Very good one. It reflects the feelings and sentiments of many Americans as well. Good questions and true of popularity in general leaders are great but worship is not. Beatles a good illustration.
You writing is clear and to the point and cutting through the BS and this is good.
SJK on the US elections blogs
“Tony this is great!”
Steve on RomeUSA
“Tony, I hope you're getting pick up on this. The material is fascinating and imperative. “
Dick on IslamaConfusion
“Well done. Very interesting!”
K on Museum in Docklands
“Very interesting blog on the elections. I really like your blogs!
Sherry
“You should have a newspaper column!”
Harvey
I think you should have a column it would be wonderful - and you are a bright light when I get your blog
Chip
Thank God for tonybeingcreative and an end to all that uncertainty about the future. Keep being creative and here's to the next hundred.
Neville on 100Up
Many thanks for all your contributions, and for those of you who have made comments but not been included, maybe next time?
They are real comments and are greatly appreciated, many thanks.
We have edited for space where appropriate, and do wish to make clear that we don’t necessarily agree with the reader’s views. We are proud to note that the comments received have been almost totally positive which is very encouraging.
So here goes, your comments, forming a blog of their own!
“Thank God someone has said something sensible about this. Rules for one different for another? Yesterday’s news was a mixture of contradictions. Having been a victim of “domestic violence” – physical through in partner (hit with an iron), and psychological in another (constant wearing down of my self-esteem) – I get very upset by the “zero tolerance” campaigns which state domestic violence against women is a crime and never acknowledge that men can also suffer. Domestic violence, from either gender, is just that, violent. This year, the news has been swamped with reports of fatalities through knives and guns and asks rhetorical questions: “what can be done about it?” “Are the parents to blame?” In order to send the right message, surely the government should be making it a lot harder to get away with murder, not justifying it.”
Jon on The License to Murder argument
“I think your observations are acute, but I disagree that the main reasons Barak Obama is adored is that he is not Bush. He is an eloquent black man nominated in America. That is a powerful statement and cannot be overlooked in the midst of all the other tumult. What he would actually do in office, is, I agree, absolutely unknowable, possibly promising, possibly very frightening.”
David on Obama in Berlin
“One more thing, I am glad you are open as a thinker, most claim to be interested in external issues are only interested to the extent that it has a reference to their life and unfortunately it does not go much deeper.”
Stevie
“Love what you wrote. Absolutely true!”
_____________________________________________________
“I am not sure about your blog but I distrust everyone in both parties who are politicians. With few exceptions...I know one thing we cannot force our way of life on anyone but if they mess we have to play ball.
The blog is well written and it is expressed also by manpower over here mostly republican but also Hilary Demos...
Sherry on Will Barak Blink?
I was basically just writing to say that I've been reading your blog and how much I've enjoyed it, and also have found it to be both very interesting and informative, thanks! I particularly enjoyed your most recent post and your musings on what democracy means to
Europhiles. I never realized how true that is, it's quite thought provoking.
Matt M. on Europhiles
“The bad thing about being swept up into the madness is you wake up 4 years later and not much has changed and your energy fizzles out and you have wasted a lot of time. It is a PR job, I hope he wins but it could back fire. They all fall down; all hero’s fall in this imperfect world.”
Stevie on the Obama blog
I've read your blogs where possible--some of seems right on and some of it full of shit-- but that's what you get for publishing. Israel...I mean look, it's going to be a lot of rotten compromises and pathetic stalemates on both sides that allow regular people to go about their lives as best they can. The apocalyptic scenarios are a bit silly at this point. Nut job dictators with the nukes and the like--that's a police problem---uninspected cargo containers....uninspected luggage on airplanes---no one has the money to do this because we're bogged down in the stupid war which ought to be a UN- Arab security operation if its to be fought at all. There are National Guard members in this town I'm in who have done four tours of duty in Iraq and they don't have health insurance. They live in trailers because their mortgages went under in the housing crisis. They can't drive to work because they can't afford gas.... etc. Etc. Moreover, most are rejects and petty criminals because no one will go near the army anymore. Christ, you don't invade a country like Iraq if you've read a history book. Not without a UN. /Arab coalition and the mindset that you are going to be there for at ten to twenty years. I was against that. war from the start--I said it would last 10 years minimum...spelled out all the reasons that Saddam can't just buy yellow cake uranium from Nigeria and make a bomb, etc. The stuff you are peddling.... the U.S....Israel...the Arabs.... etc. It’s an old great powers-nationalist-narrative There are multinational corporations now who contract out on security, information, destabilization of governments..."making the world safe for business." That's the real story here.
In any event, cheers and keep the shot gun blasts coming.
Brad.
Very good one. It reflects the feelings and sentiments of many Americans as well. Good questions and true of popularity in general leaders are great but worship is not. Beatles a good illustration.
You writing is clear and to the point and cutting through the BS and this is good.
SJK on the US elections blogs
“Tony this is great!”
Steve on RomeUSA
“Tony, I hope you're getting pick up on this. The material is fascinating and imperative. “
Dick on IslamaConfusion
“Well done. Very interesting!”
K on Museum in Docklands
“Very interesting blog on the elections. I really like your blogs!
Sherry
“You should have a newspaper column!”
Harvey
I think you should have a column it would be wonderful - and you are a bright light when I get your blog
Chip
Thank God for tonybeingcreative and an end to all that uncertainty about the future. Keep being creative and here's to the next hundred.
Neville on 100Up
Many thanks for all your contributions, and for those of you who have made comments but not been included, maybe next time?
Thursday, July 31, 2008
FamiliesandWaterPistols
There are times when you are very lucky. For me, such a time is now. I have the joy of being surrounded by my family, for those of you who have shared such an experience you know what I mean, and I can only wish such an experience for those who haven’t been fortunate enough to share it.
On a recent weekend I had my four grand children staying over. Little Ollie is just a couple of weeks old, and is clearly going to be a little charmer. He smiles in recognition and the beginnings of focus as he greedily sucks in the world with his eyes as he drinks milk happily. Every part of him is a pleasure given to us by a generous nature, whatever name you give it. I don’t know about higher beings but I do know that if there is one he or she has been very generous to me recently. I looked up a dimly remembered quote by Robert Louis Stevenson; “I will make brooches and toys for your delight – Of bird-song at morning and star-shine at night.” If I could give these lovely children the world I would.
When I was a boy, two thousand years ago, we used to get on our horse and canter down to the corner street shops where such things were easily available. Now there are very few such corner shops, in fact there seem to be fewer corners!
Therefore I drove my fuel-eating car to purchase some water pistols at the ubiquitous Tesco’s. I suppose I was feeling the need to give the taxman some more money. You all remember that water pistols always came with a simple pump action and were made to look like mini guns whose purpose was to shoot a refreshing and annoying stream of water at our friends and enemies. No longer, now these are sophisticate apparatus, manufactured overseas. These devices operate on Double A batteries that are not supplied by the shop or the makers. You need a Philips screwdriver to open the battery compartment; fortunately we had the necessary equipment and batteries.
It only took a few minutes to undo the impossible packaging to gain access to the wonderfully designed guns that look more space revolvers.
Another few minutes of fiddling and unscrewing got us into the battery compartments where we inserted the batteries. We tested the device and noted it made all the right noises.
The grand children were, by now, hopping from foot to foot in excited anticipation. We filled the guns with water and, careful to go into the garden before soaking the general environment, we then fired the guns. Nothing happened, it was a wet fart on a sunny afternoon, no one can hear it and no one cares. In the kingdom of water activity this was a singularly wet squib.
The kids were distraught, looking at me as if I had intentionally and personally let them down. I was distressed as their perception of me descended from super poppa to my being slightly more evil than Stalin and Hitler combined.
Enormously relieved I handed the malfunctioning weapons to Mrs. Klinger, who is usually able to make anything work with just a withering look and a very strong, well chosen encouraging word or two.
No, even she who must be obeyed was unable to command performance.
It now fell to our number two daughter, Sarah, a frightening genetic hybrid between all that is good from the two of us. She can make a Mac do magic tricks, so she must be a genius. But even the smiling and serene Sarah, Deputy Director of a school no less, could not make these guns ejaculate their water.
Undeterred, the women advanced on the unfortunate supermarket to retrieve our money in exchange for their inoperative water pistols. The shop gave in without any resistance, plainly knowing that the pistols were defective before the women opened their mouths.
I wonder what John (Jack) Cohen, the founder of Tesco would have made of this approach, his slogan was, “Pile it high, sell it cheap” but he built an empire by delivering reasonable quality at a reasonable price.
Clutching this refund in hand the ladies then diverted to Toys R Us. Here they purchased bigger and better looking water pistols. In fact they look more like the water cannon the police use to break up particularly troublesome riots. Of course, you and I both know that the ladies had not learned their lesson. Just because these weapons were made of bigger and shinier plastic they still were doomed to fail the acid test, which is work how they’re supposed to. As Michelangelo said, “Trifles make perfection and perfection is no trifle.”
One of the water cannons didn’t work at all, and the other one’s batteries went down more rapidly than the elevator in the Empire State Building. There were a few moments of joy during which the water jetted forward in a long and happy arc, but it didn’t last. More sadness ensued, more promises given of replacements but kids want these things to work immediately, like us all, they are used to instant gratification. It isn’t much to ask is it, a water pistol that can fire some water?
On a recent weekend I had my four grand children staying over. Little Ollie is just a couple of weeks old, and is clearly going to be a little charmer. He smiles in recognition and the beginnings of focus as he greedily sucks in the world with his eyes as he drinks milk happily. Every part of him is a pleasure given to us by a generous nature, whatever name you give it. I don’t know about higher beings but I do know that if there is one he or she has been very generous to me recently. I looked up a dimly remembered quote by Robert Louis Stevenson; “I will make brooches and toys for your delight – Of bird-song at morning and star-shine at night.” If I could give these lovely children the world I would.
When I was a boy, two thousand years ago, we used to get on our horse and canter down to the corner street shops where such things were easily available. Now there are very few such corner shops, in fact there seem to be fewer corners!
Therefore I drove my fuel-eating car to purchase some water pistols at the ubiquitous Tesco’s. I suppose I was feeling the need to give the taxman some more money. You all remember that water pistols always came with a simple pump action and were made to look like mini guns whose purpose was to shoot a refreshing and annoying stream of water at our friends and enemies. No longer, now these are sophisticate apparatus, manufactured overseas. These devices operate on Double A batteries that are not supplied by the shop or the makers. You need a Philips screwdriver to open the battery compartment; fortunately we had the necessary equipment and batteries.
It only took a few minutes to undo the impossible packaging to gain access to the wonderfully designed guns that look more space revolvers.
Another few minutes of fiddling and unscrewing got us into the battery compartments where we inserted the batteries. We tested the device and noted it made all the right noises.
The grand children were, by now, hopping from foot to foot in excited anticipation. We filled the guns with water and, careful to go into the garden before soaking the general environment, we then fired the guns. Nothing happened, it was a wet fart on a sunny afternoon, no one can hear it and no one cares. In the kingdom of water activity this was a singularly wet squib.
The kids were distraught, looking at me as if I had intentionally and personally let them down. I was distressed as their perception of me descended from super poppa to my being slightly more evil than Stalin and Hitler combined.
Enormously relieved I handed the malfunctioning weapons to Mrs. Klinger, who is usually able to make anything work with just a withering look and a very strong, well chosen encouraging word or two.
No, even she who must be obeyed was unable to command performance.
It now fell to our number two daughter, Sarah, a frightening genetic hybrid between all that is good from the two of us. She can make a Mac do magic tricks, so she must be a genius. But even the smiling and serene Sarah, Deputy Director of a school no less, could not make these guns ejaculate their water.
Undeterred, the women advanced on the unfortunate supermarket to retrieve our money in exchange for their inoperative water pistols. The shop gave in without any resistance, plainly knowing that the pistols were defective before the women opened their mouths.
I wonder what John (Jack) Cohen, the founder of Tesco would have made of this approach, his slogan was, “Pile it high, sell it cheap” but he built an empire by delivering reasonable quality at a reasonable price.
Clutching this refund in hand the ladies then diverted to Toys R Us. Here they purchased bigger and better looking water pistols. In fact they look more like the water cannon the police use to break up particularly troublesome riots. Of course, you and I both know that the ladies had not learned their lesson. Just because these weapons were made of bigger and shinier plastic they still were doomed to fail the acid test, which is work how they’re supposed to. As Michelangelo said, “Trifles make perfection and perfection is no trifle.”
One of the water cannons didn’t work at all, and the other one’s batteries went down more rapidly than the elevator in the Empire State Building. There were a few moments of joy during which the water jetted forward in a long and happy arc, but it didn’t last. More sadness ensued, more promises given of replacements but kids want these things to work immediately, like us all, they are used to instant gratification. It isn’t much to ask is it, a water pistol that can fire some water?
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
MurdermadeEasy
One of the most dangerous aspects of modern British society is the poisoning, intentional or otherwise, of our judicial system, by its political masters. This country was always certain of its underlying democracy because it had a bedrock of case and common law that has, by and large, insured there was justice. This is no longer the case. There are some glaring inadequacies that are getting worse with every passing day.
The most recent mistakes are comically beyond belief. The Government has a politically correct agenda that is especially right on when it concerns feminist issues we now have laws being made by stupid and fixed agendas rather than by fairness or common sense. In these, the first major changes to the homicide laws for half a century, the government provides us with yet further proof of it being totally divorced from reality.
As a consequence it is seriously proposed in England that if a woman has an abusive partner and then kills him she could escape a murder charge, and pleading this in mitigation will only face a manslaughter charge. This would automatically ensure that the convicted woman will not face a life sentence for her killing. Under this proposal it will be sufficient to establish that the woman who killed was reacting to a “slow burn of abuse”. This is a murderer’s charter! All of us men had better watch out or we can be killed in future with very little chance of justice for us.
This will remove the present crime of passion defense, in which it was argued that a person could claim a momentary and sudden loss of control. In fact these two elements, when brought together, actually reverses the traditional wisdom of centuries of jurisprudence.
In addition to this ill-conceived measure it is further proposed that the long accepted “partial defense” of killing a wife because she was discovered to having an affair is also on the way out.
Apparently Ministers have ruled that many categories of killer, in addition to victims of domestic violence, will be offered partial defense of provocation. This will specifically include those “seriously wronged” by an insult.
This could be imagined to include whole new classes of those seeking to kill without the threat of a life in jail. Perhaps you have been in a long-term dispute with a neighbor, well now you can kill them!
It’s only human to want to kill the rapist that commits his crime and then laughs and taunts the victim, but this must not mean that its OK to kill him.
It cannot allow a woman who finds her daughter being sexually attacked to kill her attacker, but this law will allow such an action, and the charge will not exceed manslaughter.
It is feminist rubbish when we are faced with the proposed defense of “killing in response to words and conduct which caused the defendant to have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged.” This is lousy law, with no basis other than feminism.
This series of proposals is riven with contradictions and misconceptions which add up to a man not being allowed to kill his wife under virtually any circumstance, including not being provoked by an unfaithful woman.
This sounds about right, to any sane person, there should not be any excuses to kill another human except in self-defense or in time of war.
But on the other hand this law does allow women a raft of bizarre reasons for them to kill. Basically it would result in women being able to kill their partner and either getting away with it, or, at worst, getting charged with manslaughter. Whereas, if a man kills his partner, he will be charged with murder.
The woman responsible for this botched, ill conceived, and grossly inappropriate set of legal proposals is Harriet Harman, and she has to be the most inept Minister in a totally inadequate government.
The most recent mistakes are comically beyond belief. The Government has a politically correct agenda that is especially right on when it concerns feminist issues we now have laws being made by stupid and fixed agendas rather than by fairness or common sense. In these, the first major changes to the homicide laws for half a century, the government provides us with yet further proof of it being totally divorced from reality.
As a consequence it is seriously proposed in England that if a woman has an abusive partner and then kills him she could escape a murder charge, and pleading this in mitigation will only face a manslaughter charge. This would automatically ensure that the convicted woman will not face a life sentence for her killing. Under this proposal it will be sufficient to establish that the woman who killed was reacting to a “slow burn of abuse”. This is a murderer’s charter! All of us men had better watch out or we can be killed in future with very little chance of justice for us.
This will remove the present crime of passion defense, in which it was argued that a person could claim a momentary and sudden loss of control. In fact these two elements, when brought together, actually reverses the traditional wisdom of centuries of jurisprudence.
In addition to this ill-conceived measure it is further proposed that the long accepted “partial defense” of killing a wife because she was discovered to having an affair is also on the way out.
Apparently Ministers have ruled that many categories of killer, in addition to victims of domestic violence, will be offered partial defense of provocation. This will specifically include those “seriously wronged” by an insult.
This could be imagined to include whole new classes of those seeking to kill without the threat of a life in jail. Perhaps you have been in a long-term dispute with a neighbor, well now you can kill them!
It’s only human to want to kill the rapist that commits his crime and then laughs and taunts the victim, but this must not mean that its OK to kill him.
It cannot allow a woman who finds her daughter being sexually attacked to kill her attacker, but this law will allow such an action, and the charge will not exceed manslaughter.
It is feminist rubbish when we are faced with the proposed defense of “killing in response to words and conduct which caused the defendant to have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged.” This is lousy law, with no basis other than feminism.
This series of proposals is riven with contradictions and misconceptions which add up to a man not being allowed to kill his wife under virtually any circumstance, including not being provoked by an unfaithful woman.
This sounds about right, to any sane person, there should not be any excuses to kill another human except in self-defense or in time of war.
But on the other hand this law does allow women a raft of bizarre reasons for them to kill. Basically it would result in women being able to kill their partner and either getting away with it, or, at worst, getting charged with manslaughter. Whereas, if a man kills his partner, he will be charged with murder.
The woman responsible for this botched, ill conceived, and grossly inappropriate set of legal proposals is Harriet Harman, and she has to be the most inept Minister in a totally inadequate government.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
TheJewishParliament
It is said that when there are two Jewish people you will have three opinions. Imagine the British Jewish Parliament, which is known as the Board of Deputies of British Jews when there are several hundred Deputies; as a consequence there are many hundreds of opinions.
Boris Johnson, the recently elected Mayor of London addressed the Deputies at his first official visit with the British Jewish community. He said that he would not be making doing two things, pronouncements on international events nor would he be inviting people like Al Qatari to London. These both seem like very good ideas after several major mistakes in this area from his predecessor as Mayor, Ken Livingstone.
Voting in the Jewish community’s Board of Deputies validates its claim to democracy in action simply not seemingly found within the Muslim community, nor from the recent happenings at the Church of England conclaves at Jerusalem and now in England.
There is no representative body that can claim to speak for an entire community, especially one that contains diverse opinions and agendas like the Jewish community. But it does appear to have a legitimate claim to speak for the vast majority of the Jewish people of Britain.
As Henry Grunwald QC, the President of the Board of Deputies stated so accurately, “We are proud to be British proud to be Jewish and proud to support Israel, especially during its 60th birthday celebrations”.
Judaism is a role model for all the other minority faith communities and many, especially the Muslim community, perversely, some might say, consider the Board of Deputies of British Jews the template for how they wish their own representative organizations should operate.
The Durban conference on anti racism which last year was hijacked and became an anti Israel and anti Semitic festival is about to recur. Because of what transpired last year, Canada has refused to attend and America and Israel will lead the Western countries to do the same thing if there is a similar occurrence.
July 14, 2008, The Washington Times, Ed Royce
In this Op-Ed, Ed Royce of the Washington Times surveyed the anti-Semitic propaganda activities of Durban I, resulting in the United States’ withdrawal from the conference. He anticipates a similar outcome, and because of this the United States withheld its contribution to the UN, which is intended to fund the 2009 Durban Review Conference. Royce believes that Durban II could well be even more extreme than Durban I, with the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) setting its agenda, which includes the promotion of restrictions on freedom of expression, under the claim of Islamophobia. “Like the first Durban conference, some of the worst human-rights violators will serve on Durban II’s panel [Libya, chair, Iran, Pakistan and Egypt]. The hugely disappointing and worrying U.N. Commission on Human Rights - the same commission that only passed light condemnation of the regimes in Burma and Sudan, intentionally selected these member countries. Its passion, its all consuming pathological hatred is democratic Israel, which has been condemned 15 times over the past two years.” Royce concludes that the best way for the United States to handle this situation is by refusing to participate in the Durban Review Conference.
Isn’t it a terrible irony that this should be the case when the idea of the conference is supposedly the exact opposite of what they are now doing?
In the UK people of every type are confused by the different events centered on the Holocaust. There is Holocaust Memorial Day, Yom Hashoa, The Holocaust Memorial Day Trust and The Holocaust Educational Trust. This is an all year round program, holocaust visits by British school kids, which receives about £1.5 million in government funding. It promotes visits to such places as Auschwitz for the young, who come back, write essays, then tell their fellow non-Jewish schoolmates what they saw, felt and experienced.
Why this is relevant, and why it is pertinent?
In a world where Iran is permitted to say, “wipe Israel from the face of the earth;” and “The Holocaust never happened,” it’s vital that our British youth understands where such anti-Semitic behavior can lead, and what it means in a very real outcome.
There are lesson to be learned and remembered and the more means we have to do so the better. The numbers who participate in Holocaust Memorial Day or Yom Hashoa is dwindling because of it being populated almost solely survivors and descendants of victims and as one of these people emotionally stated, “you should come, you have a duty to come, and you should bring your children with you or this will become just an empty day with no one to be there.”
Another Deputy at the Board suggested that Commemoration and education and prayer should be differentiated. All of these serving different purposes for a diverse audience.
Meanwhile the Holocaust section of the Imperial War Museum is seen by many thousands of kids and others who don’t have a Jewish agenda and nevertheless gives a true perspective of what happened.
It isn’t just an old boring trotting out of Jewish memory of suffering to act as an apologia for whatever we as Jews might want to claim or Jew haters seemingly think we want to excuse Israel for. If we don’t remind our children and they don’t commemorate the holocaust then who will in a few years?
The dead cry out to you all to spend at least two hours once a year to attend the Yom Hashoa event. In an emotional and very moving speech Ben Helfgot spoke out on the behalf of the dead and to prevent it happening again, anywhere to anyone.
There is probably more publicity and awareness in the UK about the Holocaust now than there was when I was growing up in post war Britain. Moral relativism is sneaking in and being used against the Jewish people. The victims didn’t get the sympathy at the time for their suffering probably because most people didn’t believe or know what had happened.
Proof of this still sometimes being the case can be found when you hear seemingly well educated young people tell you that the total Jewish dead via the Nazis was 50,000 and not 6 million. The need for education can never end.
Sometimes the “Jewish Parliament” can seem an empty talking shop, but when put into the perspective of its use for the entire Jewish community it quickly becomes apparent that it is more than useful to its members. When you realize the respect the Board has with the politicians of the UK and the rest of the world’s Jewish organizations it becomes obvious that the Board of Deputies of British Jews still has an important future.
Boris Johnson, the recently elected Mayor of London addressed the Deputies at his first official visit with the British Jewish community. He said that he would not be making doing two things, pronouncements on international events nor would he be inviting people like Al Qatari to London. These both seem like very good ideas after several major mistakes in this area from his predecessor as Mayor, Ken Livingstone.
Voting in the Jewish community’s Board of Deputies validates its claim to democracy in action simply not seemingly found within the Muslim community, nor from the recent happenings at the Church of England conclaves at Jerusalem and now in England.
There is no representative body that can claim to speak for an entire community, especially one that contains diverse opinions and agendas like the Jewish community. But it does appear to have a legitimate claim to speak for the vast majority of the Jewish people of Britain.
As Henry Grunwald QC, the President of the Board of Deputies stated so accurately, “We are proud to be British proud to be Jewish and proud to support Israel, especially during its 60th birthday celebrations”.
Judaism is a role model for all the other minority faith communities and many, especially the Muslim community, perversely, some might say, consider the Board of Deputies of British Jews the template for how they wish their own representative organizations should operate.
The Durban conference on anti racism which last year was hijacked and became an anti Israel and anti Semitic festival is about to recur. Because of what transpired last year, Canada has refused to attend and America and Israel will lead the Western countries to do the same thing if there is a similar occurrence.
July 14, 2008, The Washington Times, Ed Royce
In this Op-Ed, Ed Royce of the Washington Times surveyed the anti-Semitic propaganda activities of Durban I, resulting in the United States’ withdrawal from the conference. He anticipates a similar outcome, and because of this the United States withheld its contribution to the UN, which is intended to fund the 2009 Durban Review Conference. Royce believes that Durban II could well be even more extreme than Durban I, with the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) setting its agenda, which includes the promotion of restrictions on freedom of expression, under the claim of Islamophobia. “Like the first Durban conference, some of the worst human-rights violators will serve on Durban II’s panel [Libya, chair, Iran, Pakistan and Egypt]. The hugely disappointing and worrying U.N. Commission on Human Rights - the same commission that only passed light condemnation of the regimes in Burma and Sudan, intentionally selected these member countries. Its passion, its all consuming pathological hatred is democratic Israel, which has been condemned 15 times over the past two years.” Royce concludes that the best way for the United States to handle this situation is by refusing to participate in the Durban Review Conference.
Isn’t it a terrible irony that this should be the case when the idea of the conference is supposedly the exact opposite of what they are now doing?
In the UK people of every type are confused by the different events centered on the Holocaust. There is Holocaust Memorial Day, Yom Hashoa, The Holocaust Memorial Day Trust and The Holocaust Educational Trust. This is an all year round program, holocaust visits by British school kids, which receives about £1.5 million in government funding. It promotes visits to such places as Auschwitz for the young, who come back, write essays, then tell their fellow non-Jewish schoolmates what they saw, felt and experienced.
Why this is relevant, and why it is pertinent?
In a world where Iran is permitted to say, “wipe Israel from the face of the earth;” and “The Holocaust never happened,” it’s vital that our British youth understands where such anti-Semitic behavior can lead, and what it means in a very real outcome.
There are lesson to be learned and remembered and the more means we have to do so the better. The numbers who participate in Holocaust Memorial Day or Yom Hashoa is dwindling because of it being populated almost solely survivors and descendants of victims and as one of these people emotionally stated, “you should come, you have a duty to come, and you should bring your children with you or this will become just an empty day with no one to be there.”
Another Deputy at the Board suggested that Commemoration and education and prayer should be differentiated. All of these serving different purposes for a diverse audience.
Meanwhile the Holocaust section of the Imperial War Museum is seen by many thousands of kids and others who don’t have a Jewish agenda and nevertheless gives a true perspective of what happened.
It isn’t just an old boring trotting out of Jewish memory of suffering to act as an apologia for whatever we as Jews might want to claim or Jew haters seemingly think we want to excuse Israel for. If we don’t remind our children and they don’t commemorate the holocaust then who will in a few years?
The dead cry out to you all to spend at least two hours once a year to attend the Yom Hashoa event. In an emotional and very moving speech Ben Helfgot spoke out on the behalf of the dead and to prevent it happening again, anywhere to anyone.
There is probably more publicity and awareness in the UK about the Holocaust now than there was when I was growing up in post war Britain. Moral relativism is sneaking in and being used against the Jewish people. The victims didn’t get the sympathy at the time for their suffering probably because most people didn’t believe or know what had happened.
Proof of this still sometimes being the case can be found when you hear seemingly well educated young people tell you that the total Jewish dead via the Nazis was 50,000 and not 6 million. The need for education can never end.
Sometimes the “Jewish Parliament” can seem an empty talking shop, but when put into the perspective of its use for the entire Jewish community it quickly becomes apparent that it is more than useful to its members. When you realize the respect the Board has with the politicians of the UK and the rest of the world’s Jewish organizations it becomes obvious that the Board of Deputies of British Jews still has an important future.
Monday, July 28, 2008
BrownedOff
The expectation surrounding Gordon Brown’s ascendancy to the Prime Ministership has only been outweighed by the disappointment in his performance since he got the job.
If you ask the average person in the UK how they would have rated his predecessor in the same job, if Iraq had not happened they begin to talk kindly about Tony Blair. If Blair had enjoyed the luck to have got in and out of Iraq after a quick victory, like Margaret Thatcher did in the Falklands, we’d be having statues erected to the man in Parliament Square.
It’s hard to remember that just one year ago Gordon Brown was considered a financial genius who was secretly running almost everything that was successful in the British government whereas Blair was then considered just a vacuous front man who did some foreign affairs work. Now it’s commonly perceived that Brown was the fortunate inheritor of ultra successful policies of his Conservative predecessors and his astuteness was largely the ability to do as little as possible to rock the boat. His own economic policies were a rehash of old Labour party mantras in which central government spends like a drunken sailor. Now that has come to haunt him as British government spending as a percentage of GDP is dangerously high after a long period of it being kept reasonably low.
Now it’s David Cameron, the leader of the British Conservative opposition, and Barak Obama, the American Democratic presidential hopeful, who bonded this weekend, and who look like tomorrow’s leaders, whereas Brown looked like he was trying to gain something by association with Obama, and not, as you would anticipate, the other way around.
A great deal in politics is about perceptions rather than reality, and the clear feeling is that Brown is knackered. He looks old, beaten, puffy and aware that he’s lost the election well before it’s happened.
As if Gordon didn’t have enough problems the latest opinion polls have his party at their lowest point in collective memory. They’re behind in the marginal seats, amongst voters of every social demographic sector, and even in their core heartlands, the normally dependable poorer city centers. It’s inconceivable that they can come back from this position. It would be the equivalent of me winning a beauty pageant, the Pope winning Rabbi of the year, a bear not doing its business in the woods; and yet?
There was a time when Margaret Thatcher was in exactly the same situation when she was Prime Minister. She was, at that time, described as the most unpopular Prime Minister in the history of the UK. I am not describing her ignominious exit as leader, when the political pygmies from her own party did their best impressions of the midget sized Lilliputians bringing down Gulliver. No, her moment of transcendence came when the Argentine leader, General Galtieri, instructed his army to invade a forlorn piece of rock in the South Atlantic, that his people call the Malvinas, and which the rest of the world still knows as The Falkland Islands.
Through luck, bold political decisions, that could have gone horribly wrong but went gloriously right, Thatcher not only won that war but also restored British self belief after it had been a long time in the freezer of history. Maggie Thatcher’s popularity went from zero to hero overnight, and she became unbeatable politically. The country owed her, and it knew there was a moral debt for this achievement.
From that point in the UK’s modern history until now there has been a growing crescendo of British confidence as success on the world’s battlefields has been echoed in economic terms. The country became richer and with it came comfort and a long term feel good factor that peaked towards the end of the Blair years, and is now, very rapidly ebbing away.
Gordon Brown, whatever bad news he is presented with, comes back with the television sound bite in which he says words to the effect of; “the country wants me to get on with the job, so that’s what I’m going to do.” He smiles without conviction before hurrying off to his unremitting schedule, crushed by what he can’t seem to do, which is to improve the country’s luck. Actually Gordon, the country doesn’t want you doing the job at all. You look like a school bully who has just found out that there are bigger and stronger boys than you out there, and that you need to improve those listening skills.
It became clear yesterday that his own party chiefs harbor enormous doubts about Brown’s leadership becoming acceptable to the British public. There are two schools of thought about this. Either they hang onto him so that they get beaten at the next election, but hopefully not too badly. Then they get rid of Brown immediately thereafter, and give his successor a number of years to resuscitate the party’s fortune. Or they move against Brown immediately after the summer and replace him with a safe pair of hands type leader, so that the consequential damage to the party during the election isn’t an annihilation. Either way Gordon gets to take the long walk off the short plank. It seems probable that it will be the Prime Minister who will make the choice when the going gets even tougher. The fact is that his people are even more scared of Brown than the Conservatives were of Maggie Thatcher, and they were terrified of her until she was politically finished.
So Brown needs a miracle or a small winnable war, in which Britain can get in and out fast. Neither is probable, or even likely and the man looks like he needs the rest that fate is probably going to give him. You see Gordon, it doesn’t matter how clever you are, it doesn’t matter how hard you work, if you’re a loser and fate isn’t on your side, then the best plan you can make is what to pack in your bags and when to leave. The country is telling you the quicker the better, why don’t you listen?
If you ask the average person in the UK how they would have rated his predecessor in the same job, if Iraq had not happened they begin to talk kindly about Tony Blair. If Blair had enjoyed the luck to have got in and out of Iraq after a quick victory, like Margaret Thatcher did in the Falklands, we’d be having statues erected to the man in Parliament Square.
It’s hard to remember that just one year ago Gordon Brown was considered a financial genius who was secretly running almost everything that was successful in the British government whereas Blair was then considered just a vacuous front man who did some foreign affairs work. Now it’s commonly perceived that Brown was the fortunate inheritor of ultra successful policies of his Conservative predecessors and his astuteness was largely the ability to do as little as possible to rock the boat. His own economic policies were a rehash of old Labour party mantras in which central government spends like a drunken sailor. Now that has come to haunt him as British government spending as a percentage of GDP is dangerously high after a long period of it being kept reasonably low.
Now it’s David Cameron, the leader of the British Conservative opposition, and Barak Obama, the American Democratic presidential hopeful, who bonded this weekend, and who look like tomorrow’s leaders, whereas Brown looked like he was trying to gain something by association with Obama, and not, as you would anticipate, the other way around.
A great deal in politics is about perceptions rather than reality, and the clear feeling is that Brown is knackered. He looks old, beaten, puffy and aware that he’s lost the election well before it’s happened.
As if Gordon didn’t have enough problems the latest opinion polls have his party at their lowest point in collective memory. They’re behind in the marginal seats, amongst voters of every social demographic sector, and even in their core heartlands, the normally dependable poorer city centers. It’s inconceivable that they can come back from this position. It would be the equivalent of me winning a beauty pageant, the Pope winning Rabbi of the year, a bear not doing its business in the woods; and yet?
There was a time when Margaret Thatcher was in exactly the same situation when she was Prime Minister. She was, at that time, described as the most unpopular Prime Minister in the history of the UK. I am not describing her ignominious exit as leader, when the political pygmies from her own party did their best impressions of the midget sized Lilliputians bringing down Gulliver. No, her moment of transcendence came when the Argentine leader, General Galtieri, instructed his army to invade a forlorn piece of rock in the South Atlantic, that his people call the Malvinas, and which the rest of the world still knows as The Falkland Islands.
Through luck, bold political decisions, that could have gone horribly wrong but went gloriously right, Thatcher not only won that war but also restored British self belief after it had been a long time in the freezer of history. Maggie Thatcher’s popularity went from zero to hero overnight, and she became unbeatable politically. The country owed her, and it knew there was a moral debt for this achievement.
From that point in the UK’s modern history until now there has been a growing crescendo of British confidence as success on the world’s battlefields has been echoed in economic terms. The country became richer and with it came comfort and a long term feel good factor that peaked towards the end of the Blair years, and is now, very rapidly ebbing away.
Gordon Brown, whatever bad news he is presented with, comes back with the television sound bite in which he says words to the effect of; “the country wants me to get on with the job, so that’s what I’m going to do.” He smiles without conviction before hurrying off to his unremitting schedule, crushed by what he can’t seem to do, which is to improve the country’s luck. Actually Gordon, the country doesn’t want you doing the job at all. You look like a school bully who has just found out that there are bigger and stronger boys than you out there, and that you need to improve those listening skills.
It became clear yesterday that his own party chiefs harbor enormous doubts about Brown’s leadership becoming acceptable to the British public. There are two schools of thought about this. Either they hang onto him so that they get beaten at the next election, but hopefully not too badly. Then they get rid of Brown immediately thereafter, and give his successor a number of years to resuscitate the party’s fortune. Or they move against Brown immediately after the summer and replace him with a safe pair of hands type leader, so that the consequential damage to the party during the election isn’t an annihilation. Either way Gordon gets to take the long walk off the short plank. It seems probable that it will be the Prime Minister who will make the choice when the going gets even tougher. The fact is that his people are even more scared of Brown than the Conservatives were of Maggie Thatcher, and they were terrified of her until she was politically finished.
So Brown needs a miracle or a small winnable war, in which Britain can get in and out fast. Neither is probable, or even likely and the man looks like he needs the rest that fate is probably going to give him. You see Gordon, it doesn’t matter how clever you are, it doesn’t matter how hard you work, if you’re a loser and fate isn’t on your side, then the best plan you can make is what to pack in your bags and when to leave. The country is telling you the quicker the better, why don’t you listen?
Sunday, July 27, 2008
PastPresentFuture
When you spend some time with your children and grand children it’s natural to reflect on the past and look to the future.
As a baby boomer I have lived with some rationing in post war Britain, and especially remember not being allowed all the sweets (candy) I craved for. I well remember the American Air Force Sergeant who lived downstairs and my uncle, who lived in Los Angeles, arranging for me to receive different flavor chewing gum.
Dad came home with two Vauxhall Wyvern cars, a red one and a blue one, whilst I balanced on a table watching through the window. This was the time when no one could get one car in England. My father was, in the Cockney slang, ducking and diving, trying to make some extra money where he could. Times were a lot tougher in fifties England.
Then came the exciting 60’s which really did swing for my family and me. I had a terrific time, as the world re-discovered color and excitement and music. Everything was moving forward and seemed to have a reason. Cars were better, planes were faster, and homes were becoming more luxurious, seemingly by the day. We still had televisions without color, it was just starting in England, and there were only two channels, then three and finally four.
Most homes were beginning to get freezers and washing machines but dryers and dishwashers were yet to arrive everywhere.
The 70’s to the 90’s were even better for me and mine, now we had all the material possessions that you have come to expect in every modern home. Our family was growing, the children were getting exceptional educations, at a comparatively low cost, food, travel and entertainment and housing were excellent and we had them all.
This century started with great promise but soon was marred by Islamic fundamentalism, the additional scourge of regimes like those in Iraq and Iran and the uncertainties brought about by the collapse of Soviet style communism. These all brought about reactions which still resonate and continue to cause seismic shifts and some instability in the oil industry which underpin our already unstable global economy.
What of the future? It’s very easy to project forward from where we are in the mistaken belief that progress is straightforward and linear. It is not. There are always surprises, and as the name implies, we won’t be expecting them and therefore we can’t anticipate or predict them accurately.
The immediate past points towards a confused future buffeted between an ever increasing consumerism fuelled by the habit of brand purchasing on a greater scale set against the potential cataclysm brought about by global warming in which we might have to cut back on our carbon emissions between 50% and 80%.
If the latter were to come to pass our lifestyles will have to change drastically and fast, and not for the better. It will necessitate rationing of fuel, transportation, heating, cooling, manufacturing, clothing, food and possibly, even housing. In such a society there might also have to be martial law, mass identification programs, including biometric data and restrictions on travel.
There will be increased use of virtual meetings, working and studying from home to eliminate use of fuels and resources. The lack of going out from our houses will decimate businesses that rely on our presence, such as restaurants, cinemas and retail shopping. Only the rich and powerful will travel freely. These decreases of social interactions, especially with people who live far away, and therefore become inaccessible and unknown, will have results none of us can know.
There is every chance that, for the first time since the collapse of the Roman Empire, and the world’s slide into the dark ages civilization will actually go backwards. There is real concern that we will see medical pandemics, flooding of our major low lying cities caused by global warming and a lack of a choice of food in the first world and starvation in the third world.
Of course this apocalyptic series of visions could be total nonsense and we have to hope and work for this outcome. I remember working as a production assistant on a 60’s television magazine program in the UK. On it there was a projection scientifically calculated by the high gurus of academia that London’s population would double by the end of the last century and that we’d have to walk sideways to have enough space. It didn’t happen and we’re still not walking like crabs. Maybe we’ll continue to struggle but find answers, somehow, just in time, as we’ve usually done throughout history. When we didn’t, as with the dark ages, it can be a very long time before we can recover.
As a baby boomer I have lived with some rationing in post war Britain, and especially remember not being allowed all the sweets (candy) I craved for. I well remember the American Air Force Sergeant who lived downstairs and my uncle, who lived in Los Angeles, arranging for me to receive different flavor chewing gum.
Dad came home with two Vauxhall Wyvern cars, a red one and a blue one, whilst I balanced on a table watching through the window. This was the time when no one could get one car in England. My father was, in the Cockney slang, ducking and diving, trying to make some extra money where he could. Times were a lot tougher in fifties England.
Then came the exciting 60’s which really did swing for my family and me. I had a terrific time, as the world re-discovered color and excitement and music. Everything was moving forward and seemed to have a reason. Cars were better, planes were faster, and homes were becoming more luxurious, seemingly by the day. We still had televisions without color, it was just starting in England, and there were only two channels, then three and finally four.
Most homes were beginning to get freezers and washing machines but dryers and dishwashers were yet to arrive everywhere.
The 70’s to the 90’s were even better for me and mine, now we had all the material possessions that you have come to expect in every modern home. Our family was growing, the children were getting exceptional educations, at a comparatively low cost, food, travel and entertainment and housing were excellent and we had them all.
This century started with great promise but soon was marred by Islamic fundamentalism, the additional scourge of regimes like those in Iraq and Iran and the uncertainties brought about by the collapse of Soviet style communism. These all brought about reactions which still resonate and continue to cause seismic shifts and some instability in the oil industry which underpin our already unstable global economy.
What of the future? It’s very easy to project forward from where we are in the mistaken belief that progress is straightforward and linear. It is not. There are always surprises, and as the name implies, we won’t be expecting them and therefore we can’t anticipate or predict them accurately.
The immediate past points towards a confused future buffeted between an ever increasing consumerism fuelled by the habit of brand purchasing on a greater scale set against the potential cataclysm brought about by global warming in which we might have to cut back on our carbon emissions between 50% and 80%.
If the latter were to come to pass our lifestyles will have to change drastically and fast, and not for the better. It will necessitate rationing of fuel, transportation, heating, cooling, manufacturing, clothing, food and possibly, even housing. In such a society there might also have to be martial law, mass identification programs, including biometric data and restrictions on travel.
There will be increased use of virtual meetings, working and studying from home to eliminate use of fuels and resources. The lack of going out from our houses will decimate businesses that rely on our presence, such as restaurants, cinemas and retail shopping. Only the rich and powerful will travel freely. These decreases of social interactions, especially with people who live far away, and therefore become inaccessible and unknown, will have results none of us can know.
There is every chance that, for the first time since the collapse of the Roman Empire, and the world’s slide into the dark ages civilization will actually go backwards. There is real concern that we will see medical pandemics, flooding of our major low lying cities caused by global warming and a lack of a choice of food in the first world and starvation in the third world.
Of course this apocalyptic series of visions could be total nonsense and we have to hope and work for this outcome. I remember working as a production assistant on a 60’s television magazine program in the UK. On it there was a projection scientifically calculated by the high gurus of academia that London’s population would double by the end of the last century and that we’d have to walk sideways to have enough space. It didn’t happen and we’re still not walking like crabs. Maybe we’ll continue to struggle but find answers, somehow, just in time, as we’ve usually done throughout history. When we didn’t, as with the dark ages, it can be a very long time before we can recover.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
