Perspective

Whatever we do, wherever we go, whatever we think we carry our past with us. All of our thoughts and actions carry tendrils that reach back into the past. Most tendrils may only go back into recent living memory, a large number may go back a few generations, a few may go back a long way to medieval times, such as the times of the plague, and one or two may stretch way back into the mist of time, the stone age or even beyond. We are inescapably tied to our past. It shapes and determines how we think for the future.

Today we are plagued by short-termism. This country in particular has no long-term investment view. What is the least input required to be able take out the grosses benefit, that is the ruling mantra. Our ancestors took pride in what they produced, mostly, they put all their skills into making something to hand on to the next generation. What they produced was their measure of worth, their public mark of where they stood in their community. Not for them the quick cheap fix, stuff it in nobody will notice or care. We have inherited those quality products and now routinely trash them with contempt. Today the labour cost is king whilst thousands are idle or employed in lowgrade drudgery work. But hey technology is changing so fast there is no point in making things to last anymore and robots do a much more consistent and faster job than any human. What do I care, nothing to do with me, I will just buy the next model upgrade and see if that works any better.

Sitting on top of this economic model that drives our culture are the Supermarkets, exploiting to the very limits, promoting and using every psychological trick to encourage us to revel in this throw away society. Buy more, buy cheaper, buy because its not going to be there tomorrow, buy, buy. To placate the institutional shareholdings who only look for the percentage gain this minute to the next minute and most certainly have no stake in a week, month or even a years strategy let alone any long term goal. The Supermarkets need to keeping increasing the amount they sell day by day. Squeezing their suppliers and manufacturers to cut corners, to cut standards, to cut quality, anything to reduce costs by that pence here or there. Cutting until just before the point of customer drift. Maintaining high standards and expectations, promoting a strive to improve quality and experience just are not their agenda. Lulled as we are into this false security of trusting our run-of-the-mill supplier, the Supermarket outlet. They are doing what is best for us. Ha. In our name they are corrupting the quality of life we depend on. They do not have a balance sheet on the numbers of people kept in production employment, the plunder of raw resources, the wanton accumulation of discard's to be tipped, they are just exploiting the economic model. The model which states labour is an key expense and throwaway is cheaper then longevity. 

Just remember there is nothing intrinsic about labour being a dominate cost factor, just as there nothing intrinsic about cheap throwaway technology. We are bright enough and creative enough to devise alternative economic models, if we choose to. Models, just for example, that reward local production, that reward least use of raw materials, that have long shelf life's, that have upgradeable platforms or reusable core components. There are lots of other options to consider, if we had the will. If we chose not to treat our Earth as infinite landfill site and face the reality of diminishing natural resources. We could if only we cared. We might then rediscover a pride in what we passed on to our children.

Staking out who we are

In a barely scientific article I am indebted to the New Scientist "Imagine there's no countries" for opening up a new horizon for me. Enabling me to draw together several strands of posts that related but didn't appear to gel. In essence, the article proposes that, the idea of having a Nationality is a construct only a couple of hundred years old. Self identity is all about the pool of people you directly relate to and the lower echelons in the hierarchy of authority you are required to respond to. As Society became more complex, with the growing industrialisation and the Empire, so the need for an ever expanding bureaucracy. The idea of Nationhood emerged to symbolise this overarching administration. You deferred no longer to the Squire, or the Church or the local Lord but to Government. It hardly matters whether or not you accept this premise. Suffice that it raises the subject that there are alternative ways to view allegiances. What ties those allegiance's together is not some despot figurehead but the necessary administrative functions. What keeps the wheels turning, bringing in the finance, making laws and enforcing the rules of conduct. That is at the core of what bonds us, you to me and us to all the rest we recognise as being part of us. Our acceptance of being an essential cog in this great mesh of things that keeps us all healthy, safe and secure.

My fundamental starting point is that we are now a Matrix Society. Our allegiances are now multi-facetted between work, leisure, entertainment, family, friends, education, sport. Not one encompasses all our out there network of known people with all the separate obligations and expectations that arise out of all these disparate networks. Each facet will have its own distinct feel and set of rules. Where now our sense of one Nation?  In my Posts I keep coming back to exploring how we can have any sense of community, how that community has to learn to work together and how being a community can be the only answer to Totalitarianism. Just  dip into some of my past Posts that range over exploring different aspects of Community, living with each other:

• Keeping to Rules
• Checks and Balances
• Held to Account
• In Whom we Trust
• Centre Revolution
• Power to the People
• Of the Community

So the revelation is that we give up this novel idea of belonging to one particular Nation, it is far too limiting and restrictive. Instead under the umbrella of a European Convention we move in and out of differing communities. For example, our work world maybe global and that governs the where and how's of doing business. Our home life maybe regional and we look to the macro Region Administration for the provision of services we rely on. Our children's welfare and education may be District based providing the necessary access and contacts whilst our leisure maybe entirely local dependant on the immediate surroundings network of contacts. Each person with their own unique blend of communities, no rigid boundaries, differing sets of obligations and requirements applying to each community that in turn rely on its own specific authorities. Gone one Nation, welcome to a meld of Regions and clusters of Local Areas. Welcome to this New World.

Redacted

The BBC has lost sight of why TV was created and became so popular. The visual image adds so much more depth to the story that is told. A moving image enhances and expands that depth allowing the viewer to interpolate the sequences with all their own life experiences. What more so than the news stories, pressing home all the varied extremes of human life. Nowadays, more and more often, in the news we are offered a background and pair of shoes! Even worse the frames are deliberately set out of focus so nothing can be seen, just vague impression of, of nothing really. Just the denial of visual media. What is the worst of all are scenes where selected faces are pixelated to ensure that that person cannot be identified. This is all so wrong. If a story is important enough to be told tell it straight.

The news scenes we are shown are recorded in the public domain, out in the open. All observers at that location can readily see what we are prevented from seeing. Why? What are we so afraid of as a Society that we must hide our children away? For fear of what? What tangible dreadful act can be unleashed by showing the faces of our children? Is the location really going to be descended on by hordes of what, to do what, abuse them, vilified them, sneer at them for their social position, ridicule their fashion? No. If adults are out an about behaving in totally inappropriate manners, why should they be protected and obscured out of focus? If you are in public, no matter what the provocation or excuse, you have to conduct yourself with restraint. Incase Society will judge you. If you are empowered by the state to carry out official functions, policemen, prison guard, nurse, border controls, bailiffs, what ever role, why should you need or require to have your identity pixelated out? You are lawfully doing your work within the limits placed on you and carried out with integrity.

In this ever increasing rush to Totalitarianism just pause. Think back to East Germany and the Stasi reign of terror over the cowered a population, ever afraid of who was overhearing or reporting back on your every action. This rush to ever more define, regulate and consequentially reprimand for non-compliance all aspect of human activity obscures the core principle of all societies. What binds us together, are not laws, not GCHQ snoopers, not law enforcers, you cannot coerce citizens into becoming better citizens. What binds society together is our need for acceptance and the fear of disapproval from our social peers within our community. Not what the top dog of the day declares, just the nod of agreement from that neighbour. So faces do matter. They, not shoes, not body movement, not locations, faces are what we scan for clues to belonging, for hanging some sort of relationship onto. Do we know these children or can we relate to them? Are those misbehaving adults part of our group, if so can we express our disapproval? If not can we draw clues as to who in our network may too be inclined to stray. Faces are key. Even more so for officials going about their lawful business. Yes we do need to see them and to be able to recognise them. Yes we do need to be able mix their off-duty life with their official activities. To pass appreciation or reprimand on how they choose to discharge their duties. We should all be in fear of anonymous officials who do not need to account for their actions, are free to officiate without any constraints. When a policeman can choose to refuse to comment or worse lie about actions clearly taken yet still have their superiors support we are in deep trouble. If the face is known, their social peers will make it perfectly clear what behaviour is unacceptable. Quick, salient, efficient and so effective far beyond what rule books, tribunals, inquests, enquiries, reports, all the paraphernalia of top down control can possibly achieve.

Redaction in modern speak is the blackout of evidence which is deemed a risk, legal or security. Just a highfalutin word used to obscure a very nasty truth. Someone with a secret wants to hide what is actually going on because they fear adverse reactions. They wish to set themselves aside from the society they are part of so their society is not able to judge them. Frightening. Openness and having to account to your immediate social peers is the only thing that keeps us on the right track. Everytime you encounter someone deliberately concealing their identity shout out aloud, for all to hear, imposter!

What Commonwealth?

It seems like it should be a major and significant alliance of Nations from around the World, a driving force for good. The Commonwealth, 56 Nations with a shared history, working together. Helping our friends to raise their game whilst being challenge by them to exceed their expectations. Brilliant, or so you would think. Not if the BBC broadcast of the Commonwealth Games is anything to go by. Came across to me as totally imperialist. Look how good we the White Man is, we won all these Gold Medals, look how clever we are, GB is top dog. The air time given to non UK competitors was minimal. Considering the 56 Nations were competing, you would scarcely have realised. UK, Australia then a few also ran's. I was so looking forward to getting an insight into the sporting achievements, the trials and tribulations to be overcome, the progress even the setbacks across all of the competing Nations. Instead all I got was England's Gold count. A primary focus on UK entrants where a good medal was anticipated. The sense of taking part being more important than the winnings completely subsumed to this unsporting and immoral gloat of the winner takes all. So unBritish.

What shameful missed opportunity to glorify in our differences and celebrate that shared together. My head hangs in shame, the Commonwealth is dead, just a mocking shell of a long forgotten past.

Radicalised Youth

Way outside of my comfort zone but it strikes me that this current pre-occupation with extremist radicalising our youth is yet another twist on the old familiar gang culture. Teenage boys, boys with low self-esteem, boys with a disconnect from their local culture, boys without hope seem to seek out other like minded youth. It just takes some alpha male to offer identity, some, just any purpose, some bonding ritual, something that makes them special to stand out (as a group) to be taken account of. Within this special elitist (in their minds eye) group they achieve status, recognition and respect of their piers. Back turned to the society that nurtures and supports them. Their own secret group rules now are all that matter, nothing else is of any account. Whether it is a Jhad, fighting the next door gang, doing the Mod's in Clacton, it is just what Gangs do.

Once the answer was conscription, put them in the Army, let the Army act as a quasi Alpha Male Gang leader. At least there they were given identity, fellowship and some degree of  security, depending on how warmongering the times were, until they grew up enough to put silly boy gangs behind them and join the real adult world and look after their family. But we don't have the Army anymore. We do have an awful lot of disaffected youth with time, no aspirations in the their hands and no hopes of a better future. How do we go about giving these youths a sense of purpose, how do we connect with them on their terms in their language using their blinked view of the world?

No answers to offer except that without hope, without any sense of being able to better themselves, never losing this over-arching sense of unfairness, nothing will change. So our increasingly unequal society is just going to have to change instead. Stop the rot of only boys of rich families, who go to very good schools are the only ones to succeed, to get a job and a nice home and do all those things that nice people do. All boys should have that hope and chance to succeed. Without it I am very much afraid even more gangs, even more radicalised youth. Not even if every other adult was recruited into a snooper service are you going to be able to it stop. Simple. Give boys, and girls, hope.

Who is in charge?

You are put in charge. Someone has selected you above other contenders, seen some quality and has placed their faith in you, you are in charge. Keen to justify that faith you want to show leadership, you want to be seen to make a difference, you want those under you to now raise their game to match your own performance. You are in charge so you direct, you issue instruction, you resolve conflict, you are in control. Those under you begin to appear to have lost all initiative, they no longer make their own  sound judgement calls, everything is queried or requires your confirmation. You begin to suffocate under all the calls on your decisions as you bewail the lack of initiative of those working under you. Sounds all too familiar?

We are social animals, we perform at our best within the herd and with the herd's approval. That is who we are. We are also lazy, prone to just follow the next person rather than take the risk extra work or failure by going our own way. The worst performing societies, knee-jerk respond to the first skitter of reaction. The whole herd dashing off to follow that first change of direction. Like lemmings dashing off without forethought, panicking in response to some ill-define threat until they all leap off the cliff edge, following blindly that frightened first alarm call. The best performing societies the herd balances it responses with a measured view drawn across all the whole range of reactions, from the flighty, skittish, to the philosophical, the thinking out of the box, to the been there done that, to the plain weary to the stubborn not changing until it has to change. Choosing a course out of that gamut of reaction may at times be ponderous but with the wealth of experiences that range of reaction brings, may more often make a sensible lasting judgement call than the knee jerking at the first signs of a hiccup.

As individuals we bring our own unique style, experience and judgements to the task at hand. Not one of us will set about skinning the cat the exact same way as another. The variation in technique matters not. What matters is that the cat is skinned. Management may want to raise targets of time or quality or cat welfare. How those in charge of the task set about achieving a better output is vital. If they issue orders and instructions, then those doing the work switch off and submissively follow the order or instruction. More expansive orders and instruction then have to follow because those doing the work have not read the mind or seen the work the same way as those issuing the orders. The alternative is to empower those in charge to do the task their way whilst encouraging and supporting them to raise their standards to those targets. Those in charge offering gentle suggestions or meaningful comparisons along the way. Those doing the work, in the absence of direction will share experiences amongst themselves, support each other and will find a collective way to achieve the required result. Those in charge being left free to attend to other matters with just the occasional light touch to adjust output. This is collective societies working at its best, working collaboratively but accepting accountability for your own input.

In the scale of things, just tosh. Except of course that governments act and work like simplified people. Our Political Leaders exhibit that need to show they are in control and are seen to be acting divisively. Government rush in to be seen to respond to the latest emotive outburst. Control, followed by ever more detailed prescription of what is permitted and which sanctions will be applied to what defaults. We teeter, with the best of intentions, remorselessly to Totalitarianism. The citizens slowly surrender their will to think for themselves, to question, to challenge and sink into despair of just doing what is required, no matter how illogical, just for a quiet life. We lose all round. No one wins.
We have to empower people to think and act for themselves. We have reform our society so people take responsibility for their own actions. Government has to restrain itself, guiding on the long term objections but easing up on the desire to control the now.

Surely when the person in the street is baffled by the logic of the bedroom tax, penalising of the destitute, requiring access to everyone's electronic communication, official encouragement of zero-hour contracts, commercialisation of core state functions, to name but a few, then it is past time for a sea change.

Soccer Madness

The superlatives are in full flood about the greatest ever World Cup games. I am no football lover and scarcely can bring myself to watch a game through, at the most I peep at the highlights. So no football analysis here then. However two images do stand out starkly. These two images will remain as my recollection of the World Cup Brazil 2014. One image is of a 'player' lunging forward to bite into the shoulder of an opponent, the other is of a 'player' holding an opponent by his shoulders as he bring his full weight into his knee that he then jabs into the small of the back of the held opponent.

This later incident, to my knowledge received no reprimand nor was any penalty card issued. Yes the first instance did have some sanctions applied but far too lenient. What is the message that the controlling authorities; the media that reaps rewards by beaming out the content; the advertisers hoping for sales by association and all our young players watching eagerly shaping their hopes on the role models on display? It is perfectly okay to deliberately 'take out' an opponent, cripple him so he is not game fit, even at the very possible risk is that he will be wheelchair crippled as a result!

Soccer is a physical sport, with body contact an essential part of it, but lets not pussy foot around, neither of these two incidents were anything like an accidental, over eager, clumsy, miscalculated tackle. They were cold blooded and deliberate. Their clear unambiguous intention was to do harm. How can any sport condone this. These two players should be immediately disqualified from ever playing soccer for the rest of their lives. It is simply unacceptable behaviour. It should not be condoned. Except of course they represent millions of pounds of investment, receive enormous cash and life style incentives to achieve the required outcomes and success set them apart. Such disproportionate rewards that being left crippled by 'the game' is insignificant against the tangible rewards readily available. So that makes it alright?

Not in my book. What book are you reading from? So my lasting image of the 2014 World Cup games will be of a 'sport' where it is permissible reward savage brutal behaviour.

Speed Kills

Speed kills, we nod sagely to each other as we chant the mantra, speed kills. Utter tosh. If I walk at twice the speed of everyone else I do not kill. If I drive at 38mph on a 30mph restricted modern dry road designed for 40mph, in daylight with no parked cars, only occasional traffic and no pedestrians on the paths well set off to the side, I do not kill. If I am a Formula One racing driver, pushing my car to the limits, in excess of 185mph, I do not kill. If I am a Policeman on normal patrol duty, without any member of the public close to my tail, then bat along in a residential area at 40+mph I do not kill.

Walking at 3.5mph along a crowded train platform concentrating on the incoming train and getting to the usual door opening spot before it comes to a halt, brushing against a fellow passenger standing at the edge of the platform, then I could easily kill at 3.5mph. Driving at the permitted speed of 30mph on a dark night with wet roads in a congested city and thick traffic, vehicles parked either side on a narrow street with heavy pedestrian movement on the paths jostling to make headway, I might well end up killing someone at the permitted speed of 30mph. Speed does not kill, it is inattention to the road that kills.

When driving at the permitted speed limit of 30mph I do not suddenly slam straight into a sold wall that appears out of nowhere without some prior indicator, coming to an instant stop. No, the road ahead is read, avoiding action is taken, and as an experienced driver I can anticipate a sequences of events before encountering this sudden wall looming out of nowhere. That is the driving reality. Accidents, and fatal accidents are caused by drivers failing to pay sufficient attention to the road ahead. Failing to take avoiding actions earlier enough, asserting their right of passage contrary to the indications of any aggressive on-coming vehicle. That moments glance to check the next song on the playlist, to change radio channels, to adjust the air-conditioning setting, to read that automatic engine condition warning, to take that hands-free telephone call, to pay attention to the punchline of the passengers narrative, that glance to see the junction layout to make sense of the next junction turn, that glance at the speedometer to check on speed drift, these are the moments of inattention when, in that micro-second, something occurs on the road ahead that requires an immediate response. Then we are in the danger zone, with eyes off the road and concentration on anything other than the road ahead.

Being seen to do something in response to the emotional hysteria following a 'loved ones' death on the road is an easy vote winning political option. Play the mantra card, speed kills, then turn the screws yet again. A WinWin. In cash strapped times, cranking up the hit rate on the 'Safety Camera' cash cow bolsters the coffers whilst at the same times playing to the chorus of stop all these speeding motorists causing carnage on our roads. Never mind that the 'loved 'one' was that idiot who walked out, without any check, on to the road expecting the cars to instantly part leaving their passage clear, only to be overcome. More difficult if they are the innocent victim of that driver displaying a wanton disregard for other road users. So bring on all the latest technology, because we can, catch more and more drivers exceeding the speed limit, because no one will blames us if we do, for, as we all know, speed kills.

We have drifted from advisory speed zones to absolute speed limits. We have drifted from clarity with speed limit zones for set circumstances to a bewildering array of ever chopping and changing multitude of speed limits that no longer relate to their locations. We have left the discretionary waving down with a cautionary admonition to an automatic punishment from devices set up to trap any motorist whose speed should stray. But we do have choices. We can choose to regard all motorists as zombies and therefore encourage them to behave as mindless zombies. It will be so popular with the hysterical masses. That zombie drivers are more likely to be bored drivers, failing to react sufficiently quickly to any changes ahead, of course is not a problem because they are driving at a 'safe' speed. Or we can take a more difficult route, but with a better outcome, of treating motorist as responsible and attentive drivers., educating them on their failings, the common reoccurring judgement errors and employ discretion before penalising them. Encouragement to become a better driver is going to produce a better driver outcome than treating them all as the mindless zombie. We can all choose to be responsible attentive road users mindful of other users needs.

Next time you are out driving, who would you rather have in that car behind you or that oncoming driver, a driver concentrating on not exceeding the speed limit or a driver paying attention to the road ahead. It is a no brainer, unless you are a politician.

p.s. I now drive distracted, looking suspiciously at every parked van, or conspicuous car, looking at all road poles and mast trying to spot the latest technology camera's or checking every tree just incase that policeman with his speed laser is lurking there. My attention definitely is not on the road and I am not concentrating as I used to on the changing conditions, I am a worse drive now, but that is ok for as we all know 'speed kills'.

The Political Wilderness

There are two crisis issues staring at us. First the obscenely absurd wealth ratio between the poorest and the richest standing at 1 to 300 and ever rising. Secondly an economy based on ever increasing consumerism but founded on a World now showing that it has very finite resources and capacity to regenerate those resources. The two issues are of course inter-related but necessarily linked. Both issues need to be tackled, urgently. That takes courage, vision and political muscle. Courage because any solution is going to generate upset as toys are taken away. Vision to see through the mires of preconceptions, adherence to comfortable past practice, to look beyond to how a good Society might be solidly founded. Political muscle simply because there are some big heavyweight opinions or organisations who have a vested interest to maintaining the status quo and can call on inter-global support.

We simply do not have a single political leader with the balls and charisma to sell a solution. I do not care particularly which solution, which view of outcome success. The issues are so big it may well be impossible to define one comprehensive approach. I personally doubt that a single strategy is possible, but nibbling away multi-directionally, but always consistently in the 'right' direction, is not only possible but essential if we are to ever stop this slumber walk into the abyss.

Instead all the Political Parties are pre-occupied with throwing sweeties to the voters. Hoping to come up with the 'best' colour wrapper and flavour combinations that will win voter support and give them their majority. Sweeties like 'immigration', 'EU', 'welfare', 'cost of living' in fact such an array of sweeties that are known to have mass appeal. In the absence of any vision of a just and equitable society it is no wonder the voters will hoover up the sweeties on offer, something, even a sweetie, is better than nothing.

With the Election hype escalating around us, all the Parties on offer are digging deep into their sweeties reserves hoping against hope they can differentiate themselves enough to win out. That their nuance's of colour and flavour will standout sufficient to get that crucial vote that puts them in power. The voters will no doubt be bewildered by the sameness Me To sweeties on offer. For me, there is only one possible vote, "None of the Above". I just hope enough of us can make that one sane choice so that the small voice of reason can be heard over the clamour of sweetie distribution. We all need to hear the voice that talks to these big issues facing us. Put sweeties behind you, time for the big boys to come out.

When bullying is OK

We all agree it is clear cut, if you are told do what I say, do it now or else. If that else is a clear an unambiguous something far worse that is going make you endure emotional stress and or financial hard ship, you have unequivocally been subjected to bullying. Right? Wrong, not if it is carried out by the State. Now the State has to pursue ten of thousands of miscreants who are trying to evade the law of the land. It is only right and proper that they can stop these miscreant in their unlawful tracks swiftly and efficiently. We don't want to be wasting our time and resources on these repeat offenders. Swift efficient restitution and compliance with the law of the land is what we all want. Particularly if those miscreants are the unemployed. It has entered into our unquestioning social psyche, as our political leaders have told us often enough, all unemployed are shirkers, time waster only in it for easy money living off the State. It is therefore entirely reasonable that they should be subjected to coercion, real and implied threats and official harassment. Got to make them work irrespective. Entirely reasonable that they should be made to forego searching for a real job and be made, under duress, to commit to a job that offers nothing other than promises. Harassment from over-stretched officials, who have heard it all before so many, many times and in anycase have their own performance targets to meet else they too might receive an unfavourable report. Apply the department instructions to the letter, no deviation, no pause for thought, no scope for discretion, just the tick box, onto the next. Yours is not to reason why or to feel any compassion.

Not just the unemployed, naturally, anyone who has the misfortune to depend on the State can be a prime target for State bullying. These are the unwashed masses beneath contempt so it is perfectly alright. Brought up a family now living in a home too big for you, out on the streets or pay a rent increase way beyond your already stretched finances. Do not bleed broken here to us, the smug comfortable, about lack of alternate choice, having to move away from a work/family support network to a distant strange town or your pathetic special caring needs. Get over it. Greater needs must. The greater need is that untouchable Ministry, the Treasury, beyond any reason or argument. When they say 20% budget reduction. Jump to it, comply. When they say reduce welfare costs, cut, slash, importune what the hell it is only the unwashed masses that no one cares a fig about. When they say increase income, turf out lifelong sitting tenants so the now vacant property can be sold at a premium prices to ex-yuppies. Never mind that these same properties were bequeathed to the Nation for the Nation's custodianship of its cultural heritage. Nope, Treasury says raise money, compliance is the only acceptable response.

Just keep in mind that the Government's tactic for the past decade or more is it to defuse blame to some lower level quango's, pseudo government offices or other administrative functions whilst retaining the moral high ground of making decision for the good of the people. Look at us see what we have decided, then failing to make money available to properly implement that decision. Then they can look down at those diffused lower administrations, tut, and say what failure, how under resourced, making such bad judgements calls, a disgrace. It is called a Government WinWin. What ever results comes out of their short sighted policies, they are Teflon coated, nothing sticks on them!

Of course if manner by the Government conducts its affairs is right and proper for them, so it is also for those large conglomerates set up to provide us with essential services. They too have huge numbers of users all out to defraud them, they too need to use fast effective methods to maintain their income stream, irrespective of consequence. Good enough for the Government, good enough for them to. No doubt you will have received those peremptory notices warning you have breached some terms of supply, that requires immediate compliance  within some short timescale else some variant threat of bailiffs to seize goods, your life essentials, or of a court appearance where there will be a fine added to any amount owing together with their court costs estimated at some ridiculous eye watering number. It is just state endorsed bullying, no matter what way you look at it. The usual expectations of fairness and justice are unilaterally set aside by a superior organisation who consider that they are above such niceties. The simple niceties such as no prior presumption of guilt, of a right to offer a defence against an alleged offence and an impartial body, representing those twelve decent men on Clapham Bus, to adjudicate an outcome when disputed and on the appropriate retribution, cash or kind. That is our birth right.

Next time a political leader stands before you pontificating on the horrors of child bullying demand they ensure that all legislation they endorse enshrines the principle of fairness to all with no bullying no matter what age, creed, race or social status.

All the World is a lie

Should I be the cause of a car accident I am required to lie and not admit to being the cause of the accident otherwise my car insurance will be repudiated. I know I caused the accident but cannot say so. The injured party/ies may protest and may clearly elucidate the sequence of events but I am not allowed to agree with them. Obviously I understand that in all the pent up emotions at that moment of an accident my perspective on the events may be distorted. Clearly unscrupulous 'victims' may seek to take advantage of that vulnerability and push events to demonstrate their 'innocence' to their insurance companies advantage. So yes there are grey areas  and we need to be on guard against free admissions where there might be elements of doubt. But not to the point of requiring me to institutionally lie against the plain evidence. When the sequence of events, the facts of the case, are clear to all and witnesses, when does a no comment become a lie. It is a lie if you know the true cause but choose, or are required, not to admit it.

We see time after time, exemplary investigations into corporate failings of one ilk or another, be it meat not as described, irresponsible lending to clearly insolvent clients, to plain manufacturing defects or flawed materials or staff failing to provide the level of care required, and the institution at the centre, twist and turns, shifts focus, counter claims against another party, anything other than admit they failed to act in a timely fashion. In this litigious world we now live in any slight admission will be the staring pistol for a host of damage claims, real, exaggerated to the pure fanciful. All of which would have to be defended at considerable cost even should not guilty as charged be the final outcome. Any admission, no matter how slight, inflames the counter case, hinders the assembly of a not guilty argument. No wonder companies are loath to admit. The end result, the victims, those who suffered as a consequence of bad decision made by others, are left without restitution, with the stigma of blame left in their laps, unable to overcome the mountainous costs of initiating actions against well-heeled corporates. Corporates who can afford to weather the storm of claims, knowing few can succeed against them and that time with eventually erase any suspicion's, so long as they do not concede to any failings. Despite all the clear unambiguous contrary evidence. Dissemble, misdirect, be economical with the truth, even bare faced lie rather than agree to the truth. Company policy.

Our elected representatives, appointed to promote our well-being are now schooled in the craft of avoiding answering direct questions. Anything that might give rise to concerns, or might put in doubt past decisions, that may give an opponent a free scoring point, might upset an important voting or funding cadre, anything that does not have a positive upbeat outturn is to be side-stepped. Far better to answer your own question you are comfortable in answering than answer the actual question posed that might lead you into troubled waters. Of course the baying pack of hyena media is there snapping at your heels just waiting for that  gaff. Any gaff, ill at ease posture or unfortunate turn of phrase, waiting to maximise and ridicule to their waiting audience. Never admit to any mistake, no matter how small as it will be turned into defacto incompetence of government, leadership, policy flaw, loss of voter confidence, anything that may help mud stick. When you speak as an MP the credulity of your party is on the line, so keep to safe issues which will have a favourable reception. Never mind what you actually think, did or did not do. Keeping voters loyal is far more important than esoteric concerns such as honesty or truth.

Our past choices make the Society we now live in. Nothing is immutable, we can change what we have chosen, we can choose to go in different directions from now on. Language is so clear, yet so fickle. The words I speak, or write, will resonate differently to each one of you. You will each form your own unique interpretation of my words. The words are the same, but being unique individuals with our past we bring our own different levels in meaning, experience and judgements to the self same words. What each of us does have to do is seek to choose those words which are as close to the truth, the essence, of what you want to say as you can. The more serious the subject area the more rigorous we have to be. We cannot afford the dashed off but instantly regretted Text or EMail. The recipients reaction to a careless choice of phrase cannot be brushed aside with an oophs, the damage can be lasting, tainting the relationship well into the future. We owe it to each other to be as truthful as we possibly can with each other. I don't buy the white lie, (see also my It is not important) the truth will out, eventually, meanwhile you live in a sham, concealing, obscuring your true thoughts, (see also News Propaganda). No one will ever know? Do you believe that you too are so inept at reading people that you could be fooled?

We live in a matrix society, having to deal with a wide range of peoples from all sort of alien, to us, backgrounds. If you can no longer trust anyone to speak the truth, to be honest, just how are you going to negotiate your way in this Society? Truth is the core trust that binds our Society together. Trust in the truth is what empowers us to make contracts with all those strangers we daily encounter. The next time you witness a Politician, a Company Executive evading giving a direct answer or you are required to agree to lie, pause and ask yourself, "Is this the Society I want to live in?"  
Answer truthfully.

Lift the Skirt

Adolescence marks the onset of another of our most powerful driving forces brought in with the raging hormones of puberty. If you are lucky a few dry matter of fact explanations are on hand to help understand these experiences felt but not recognised. Except the huge curiosity generated by these hormones into everything sexual are fuelled by widely available, indeed inescapable, provocative sexually charged raunchy images. Used to sell anything as only virtual erotic images can.  Images that promise and tease yet are governed to reveal nothing. An implicitly sexually charged forethought expressed in a straitjacket of prudish conformity. So where do our adolescence go to get see and imagine what this burgeoning sexuality means to them? As Society deems they are too young to explore, naturally, amongst theirs peer group.

It is normal for youth to turn to their elders for guidance. We, the elders, have surrounded ourselves with sanctimonious prudery, false moral judgement strictures. We are unable to offer good wholesome, true to life presentation of our naked bodies, shorn of all exploitation, let alone that culmination of love and emotion expressed in the sexual act.

Bye the bye who is this person, that is so above moral corruption, that they can view material that I must be shielded from seeing because I am so more corruptable they they are. Material, not prurient nor voyeuristic, but carefully, thoughtfully crafted by another decent person who spent considerable time and effort to offer it for adult viewing for them to make judgement on its relevance.

No, the only alternative we leave our youth to explore their inevitable normal and natural curiosity is through the only freely accessible material left, pornography. Nasty, crude, totally false images of how humans relate. Even though we distant ourselves, and our youth, from this obscene unpleasant material, the crudity of its unreal images now feedback into our santisied morally correct depictions of sexual engagement, tastefully stripped of any explicitness. The self same pornographic cliques are now the soundbites norms used to signify 'intercourse', the lunge, the sucking of entrails and the pelvic ramming whilst tearing off of clothes. These are the images we give our adolescents to learn from about what their raging hormones are urging them to do. Unless of course you are of the old school brigade with a cold shower and total abstinence beliefs of cloud cuckoo land.

Time we all grew up and recognised that love, emotion, nakedness and sexual intimacy are powerful and natural forces capable of beautiful, wholesome and wonderful emotions and expressions.  Time we learnt to live with our sexuality, explore its complexities and celebrate in all its richness whilst helping our youth grow up surrounded by good example and natural normal outlets for their inevitable curiosity.

Of the Community

At the time we were too pressed with the urgency of bringing up children, holding down jobs and keeping a wheel on the wagon to notice or comprehended. Those twice a day rituals of meeting at the school gate to drop off or pick up the children were crucial. There were many other subsequent meetings, whether at youth activities, secondary school, sports days, village fetes, but this one, the meeting at school gate was decisive. Now much longer in the tooth, having gone through the many stages of maturing, I have the records to look back at. I can see so clearly how our paths, our children's paths, their friends paths and the social network that I find myself working within are to a very significant degree derived from those early school gate gatherings. This is when we met, got to know each others names, found out about where they lived, gained an inkling of their work and lifestyle. Through these early contacts we got to meet up with others all moving around in similar related circles. This is our community dynamic, the social network of interconnected families with some commonality of past experience or interest linking us together. I not saying lasting friends, I am not even saying companions sharing mutual values, just people who know and can recognise each other and have some basic instinct of the others likely response. Sufficient to give us a common bond, our community, we know you and you are part of us.

Of course in my lifetime we have gone from a plurality of community meeting opportunities, sharing a convivial drink together, to the routine church attendance, to of course the schooling, but also the village shop, doctors surgery, the village social life, to our present state. Even the gathering of parents at school gates is now to be discouraged, children are dropped off out of cars, closure of so many village facilities transferred to remote detached outside communities, a withdrawal from localised activity and diversification to remote anonymised centres. Before my time it was even more intense, you worked where you lived, you seldom travelled beyond your own community and your employer was your load and judge about your moral conduct. I am not bemoaning about changing times, but we do need to understand the processes that meld communities together before we can hope to plan how to reforge community connections in this new dissipated age. Dissipated, because we are longer bound to place but follow our economic fortunes, we are not tied to family and now have serial families and our place of work can be anywhere around the globe working at anything from a smartphone to a command centre. How in a loose fit society do we develop any sense of community? Is it even possible we can find anything we can bond too? Is the only resolution a drift to Totalitarianism, when some detached remote authority determines and controls each and everyone of our freedoms to act. A total loss of all independence because without a tying in to a community the options are only Anarchy or Totalitarianism.

I talk of village life. A town and even a City is but a collection of villages, the collective of villages have another dimension, their relationship with the greater whole of the Town. There are finite limits to how wide a group of people you can relate to and still feel sufficiently close as to bond as a group of Us against Them, the outsiders. No hard and fast figures, different for each of us, the individuals that we are. But there are limits, that number, that distance, that crossing of the line is just that too far. A finite village is clear and simple, a Town is a lot more ambiguous with a lot more factors coming into play. In the end we have up until now related to the place we recognise as our place that we stayed in for some length of time, sufficient to have made some contact with other members of that place. As we withdraw more and more inwardly, within the secure four walls we inhabit, we have less and less connection to the community. The communal actions appear to become increasingly irrelevant. We are isolated islands and Others control all things beyond our island. This then is our challenge. How do we in this fast changing age break down the island defences and help people to reconnect with all those around them that they actually do depend on for the quality of their actual life? Clearly not by central Them government. The Us of the Community have to be given back meaningfully the reins of their own destiny. Not the current government vogue of tokenised responsibility whilst the real control and purse remains tightly held by Westminster, but actual devolved power and accountability. If is important enough to tangibly affect their quality of life, then just maybe the island drawbridges might come down to see what they can influence.

My island person

I had always understood that my one inviolate sanctuary, where I had to account to no one, were the thoughts in my mind. It seems that just because they can our Government have decreed that our personal thoughts are too important and must be monitored. Not just monitored of course, but reacted to should they imply what they consider to be inappropriate. Over any period a gamut of thoughts surge through my mind, shape shifting, getting stronger, weaker, changing focus, convolving to tangent ideas, narrowing down to a focus then off again. To manage my thoughts, to challenge them to see whether there is any substance in them, to consolidate them so they can be subjected to review, I need to try to set the more important ones down. Many people need to share ideas, to test the air, to see where the consensus lies, to confirm a mutual concurrence, to reassure a commonality of experience. Whatever, people chatter, nowadays they bounce words around, just a flux of ideas bouncing around responding to or creating stimuli for other ideas or tired old just going round doing the rounds. Our Government have given themselves the tools and taken the right to monitor all this electronic chatter, shifting for data trends, hotspots and of course making judgements on inappropriate ideas, who might be making them and jumping to (informed?) guesses on possible outcomes.

It is crystal clear to me that there are three key distinct stages, the initial thought which then translates into an intention and finally becomes an idea that is implemented. That tip over point, no longer an abstract thought but an actual observable committed deed that can be held up, scrutinised and the perpetrators of it held to account, for good or bad. So amongst the medley of thoughts that rummage around in my head are the concern about the homeless, hankering for expensive kit and annoyance at a prominent role model so shamefully brushing aside any self-restraint. These shapeless thoughts morph into ill-defined intentions; to donate 10% of my income to charity; to become a millionaire and to proactively promote a Republic State when Prince Charles gets to succeed. 

With their routine surveillance of all us, our government monitors may well pick up on all these intentions of mine and flag me as a person who needs to closely watched. Pre-emptively, so they can get their water cannon in place before any protest kicks off, for the security of the greater good, of course. But intentions can be all, or more often, nothing, anything from empty boasts, still born at inception all the way to imminent implementation over a timescale of immediate to never in a million lifetimes. Logistically how are our government monitors to evaluate me, along with all the other huge number of daily potential targets? No matter how sophisticated their data mining is in identifying hotspot, fluxes of interest there is no algorithm to convert an averaged potential into an actual tipping point of action. Knowing with statistical certainty what the median of that personality profile may do, does not translate to the actual behaviour of any one individual in that sample. Whilst we may all conform to some stereotype or other we are each unique individuals with our own unique set of reactions and triggers. We are not interchangeable, I may be similar to you in shared interests but my responses will produce a different outcome to yours. 

Now my ill-defined intentions may spark off a search for information to firm up my intentions into plausible courses of action. Still no commitment, still on the fence, open minded just looking around to see what options are out there. My wish to donate to charity might take me from the usual frontline providers to looking into the politics of poverty, how it arises and how others think Society needs to change to minimise poverty. My intention to become a millionaire may take me quickly from evaluating all the free-ride tickets games of chance, to assessing the distribution of wealth and who controls access to it, to spending a lot of time in my local Banks getting to know all the front office staff on familiar terms. As only a tepid monarchist I will easily find all the other dissent groups who oppose the monarchy and very easily become familiar with all the alternate society models together with all various routes, tacit to active dissent, as ways of changing the status quo. With such an array of potentially highly suspect contacts and potential alliances with groups out to thwart government authority I must surely pose a security risk? With all those alarm bells ringing how is any risk analyst going to know with any credence whether I have become radicalised or remain aloof to counter cultures? A presumption of guilt unless proven otherwise can only have one outcome, a ballooning of potential targets followed by a ever burgeoning security monitoring service increasingly hyper-active and hyper-sensitive. 

The only reliable safety valve we have, is the community we live within. That community has a past knowledge, a current expectation and a fairly robust future prediction of where I am and what I might be capable of at any period of time. No amount of data trawling can get anywhere near close to that level of community introspection. There is a catch, of course, as being one of us, part of their community, the community will cut me slack and make allowances for me, if challenged by Them (the Them of an outside of the community authority), for some transgression. A level of latitude that would not have been offered had I transgressed against the Us of the Community. An insider Us is protective of the outsider Them, (think again about a Locally Based Policemen being one of us as versus a visiting Policemen coming in from Them of the outside).

Intentions are ephemeral, to chase the ephemera of electronic chatter is as mindless as the Inquisitors chasing down Witches. Instead of yesterdays Witches we have the now current bogey of the Terrorist. Prove to me you a not a Terrorist is just as inane as proving I not a Witch! Only tangible discrete actions can be examined, challenging intentions leads to only to the morass. Anything that distracts or diffuses from that key transition point when an intention morphs into an action is to be deplored. When my charity intention is translated into actual action, dropping a 50p coin into a tin; hoisting a republican flag in my garden or strapping on a pretend body bomb to hold a Bank hostage, then you need to stay alert, to be on your marks. Not wasting resources chasing fantasy ghosts of your own creation. What we do all have to fear and remain ever vigilant to is the maverick loner. The loner living beyond reach of the community he lives within. Rather than expend wasted resources monitoring all electronic chatter, far, far better by miles is to trust in the local community. For the community to know and police their members. Do everything conceivable to reinforce, encourage and dissipating culture barriers so the connections within any community between its members, can flourish. 

In the end, this is the only reliable safety net we have. Meanwhile I must have the freedom to think the unthinkable, so I can arrive independently at my own moral judgements, yet safe, with the knowledge that the community I live amongst will keep me rooted in what is acceptable. No amount of electronic eavesdropping while ever provide a better secure safety net.

Axis of Power

It is absolutely clear China with a developing independent space programme, including its own GPS system, having been highly proactive in buying up or obtaining primary access to most of the key materials and rare materials around the world and with most of the developed nations credit held by China, China has entered the World Stage in a major way. They are not bit players on the sidelines but has put itself in a position to dictate terms to the rest of the World. When the rest of the old Western former powers eventually pull themselves out of their stupor they are not going to relinquish their previous world dominance. We have the classic power struggle building up with China determining its allies to form its axis and the rest of the west developed nations lumbering into some coalition axis of opposition. The key questions are the buffer nations caught up inbetween these two axis, the Middle East and Australia/New Zealand, naturally a western alliance but too close to the China axis and too far for close support but perhaps most of all Russia sharing common borders.

We are not talking political arm wrestling, the west will not accept subservience to China without a fight. Can you really imagine the USofA meekly submitting to China's terms? I think not. We are talking about a walk towards WWIII. The only possible setback to China's progress to world dominance, planned or coincidental, is whether it can successfully continue to exercise total authoritarian rule and sit and contain the bubbling ferment of all their numerous minority racial groups. A resentment against the power and privilege the ruling Hans have surrounded themselves with.

Working with it

Maybe we just cannot remember far enough back or maybe unprecedented, which ever we will have to learn to live and cope with weather extremes we are now experiencing. Does not matter what you attribute the cause to, no point kidding ourselves, this past six weeks of continually showers and gale winds is not a one-off freak. This is our new weather pattern, but how do we live with it? Re-learning past forgotten lessons, for one. Farmers of old who lived, worked and spent their lives on the land, knew their land, knew where water collected, where ditches worked and where to create courses to take water off their land and away. Modern farmers take profit out of the land, hiring contractors to do the bulk work and from their tractor cabins surrounded by technological aids have lost that direct contact and feel for their land. So we have to rediscover that direct contact with our land again, watch and listen to what it tells us. Point one, clear out all your ditches making sure that their outfall is clear beyond your own borders. Next is to dredge your rivers to stop them getting choked up with all the sediment taken off the fields. But we know that is not sufficient, fast off the land means fast into water courses then fast down to the next settlement along the water course. We have to reinstate flood plains to absorb that initial fast run-off giving the now reinvigorated rivers a chance to do their work. Hopefully flood plains that just have to take flood waters for a week or two and not for the months the Somerset Levels are having to endure. Managed and controlled flood plains. Or natures random flood plains generated by Beavers cutting down trees that choke the streams and rivers. Either way, but slowing down the run off into the rivers. Lest we forget, we have covered vast areas of our land in hard impermeable surfaces, that too is adding to our problems of a lot of water wanting to flow downstream and all at once. 

The rain will come as it comes, we have to learn to live with it. One solution to softening the impact we should have done hundred years ago. But it still not too late to act now for our grandchildrens benefits. Plant lots and lots of trees. Trees take the sting out of the wind, calm down its energy and diffuse the rain, softening it impact, increasing the prospect of it being absorbed before it runs off. Trees can be our giant country wide blanket soaking up the wind and the rain. Not solving but helping to dissipate the wind and rain, giving our flood plains, ditches and rivers a chance to work. Trees can take a long time to achieve any stature but not all. Some trees, that people might know as hedgerows, such as Elder, Damson, Wild Cherry, Crab Apple, Hawthorn, Sloe or Blackthorn are fast growing. We just need  rethink how we go about growing our crops, perhaps between harvesting lines of 'trees' but what ever we do need to plant a huge number of trees and right now. We will of course also learn how to manage them better so we do not flail them to within four feet of life.We can get smart and learn how to live with our new weather or procrastinate, hold on to our old comfortable ways, hum and haw while Nature just carries on and determines our future. Better to act, anyone for Elderflower Presse, Damson Cheese,
Crab Apple or Hawthorn Jelly or maybe some Sloe Chutney?

Caring for Customers

The Media churn out another lazy rehash of the old familiar story, Mr Good trying to save money whilst Mr Bad wants to stop him firing all his workers, in this case all the London Underground Ticket Sales staff. If like me, you are an infrequent traveller to London, you always use the Underground as it is the only way to get about. As an aside, in fairness the Buses are getting better organised, (fantastic 'London Journey Planner' App)  but still the dilemma of  which Bus, where to get off and electronic display saying next due in 5 minutes whilst you wait for 25 minutes and still no Bus in sight. Back to my theme. A welter of overlapping tiers of travel options and an automatic ticket machine with an interface devised by the Devil himself, evil incarnate. I regard myself as reasonably technically competent, an average commuter, but my lack of routine familiarity with all the London travel options means I am defeated each and every time I attempt to use the automatic ticketing system. I need the human, even if scowling, face of the Ticket Sale Office to translate my simple travel plans into a sensible Ticket to Travel. Unless London has decided to commit suicide and turn its back on all those tourists that flood the Underground every day, what is it thinking.

Our Society is being driven top down by Accountant Rules. Sure, absolutely, the Money In has to exceed the Money Out, no argument. But Accountants do not have any formula to tell when Customers have had an unsatisfactory experience that they choose not to repeat. In the real commercial world out there, struggling to get by in the ongoing recession, they are highly tuned to the customer experience. They go out of their way to ensure the customer's residual recollection is favourable to them. Not that mistakes do not happen, of course they do, but it is someone's job to proactively respond with more than a smiley face and 'Have a Nice Day' to ensure any problem is fixed and they are left satisfied. Not so our quasi-private companies running our essential services. They are only in it for profit, customer, or consumer, satisfaction is of no account. Sure a stone-walling complaints procedure that at most logs the complaint then dead files it away. Their remit is not to provide a good quality service that meets the needs of the users, just to return a profit. Not just London Underground but a plethora of quasi-private service provider have all been hitting the news for failing to address their 'customers' needs. Take the water utility boards, responsible to safe discharge of sewerage, brushing aside one of several householders that have repeated (five times), raw sewerage flooding into their homes; or Environment Agency with responsibility to manage our natural resources, failing in their duty of care by allowing the Somerset Levels to be inundated for weeks on end; or our treasured NHS failing to provided basic care robbing their elderly patients of dignity; or Local Authorities not allocating sufficient Care Hours to enable carers provide a decent quality of assistance and so on, rail failings, postal failings and on and on. Staffed by dedicate people who joined to serve the public but in the end are undermined by administrations that can only see the profit line and have no motive to meet the needs.

As I argue elsewhere, (All Change)(Time to Stand Up) quasi-'competitive' private companies have no place in running essential services. The 'competition model' is an entirely false fabrication, no real viable alternate options exist, the customer is stuck and stuffed. Nothing wrong, in fact overwhelming reasons why, essential services should be State organised. Just a new leaner model of how to go about organising and arranging them and making them accountable. There is hope that we can get back to providing all the customers, that is us, with services that aim to at least meet the needs of its customers. Now that would be a refreshing change.

Battle Lines

The rich elite, and their aspirant hoping to join them politicians, continue to enjoy the products of the financial squeeze on all the rest of us. A squeeze that is due to tighten even further, as our government, elected to promote and protect our interests, draws up plans to combat the anticipate civil unrest! Officials are actively looking into the purchase, the deployment and how best to utilise water cannon  to be used against their own citizens. This would seem to be a perfectly okay, matter-of-fact and reasonable step to consider. Obviously if your citizens are rioting, you need to be able to control them, perfectly logical and commendable, maintaining law and order is surely a prime purpose of government.

Pause for one moment and ask why the government anticipate their own citizens might rise up and riot? The government policy of squeezing ever harder the lower income groups, slashing essential benefit, castigating all those that fail to endure their imposed restrictions as cheats, fraudster, idle and lazy, is central to this growing unrest. The government with head in the sand pursues the 'proven' past practices of avoiding recession by encouraging consumer spending, by taking out more loans which inflate house prices even further. Their only other action is to frenetically cut their own spending on the easy targets, why of course, all  those wilful people who refuse to get jobs and look to the State for support. Cut back on all those wasteful and unnecessary social support measures. If only those people got off their backsides and worked they would get along just fine. Mean while the government must encourage consumer spending, what better way then ensuring those successful people with money to spend are shielded from the economic savings being made else where, so they can get on and spend even more.

People will put up with hardship and endure intolerable conditions providing it is fair and equitable, we are all in it together, each taking their own share of the burden. Clearly this is not happening. You only have to lift you head a fraction to see all the evidence that we are in an ever growing unequal society. Never has the gap between those that have and those who cannot survive been so large. The government, instead of rushing to halt this growing gap, is intent on ensuring its increase, because, in their view, that is the only route to economic recovery. Hence a growing ground swell of intense dissatisfaction with an unequal society on one hand and the government taking steps to contain civil disorder on the other. Use Water Cannon on your own citizens to prove you are right. So Vote to support or Revolt to find a better solution.

Takes Two to Tango, or not

There are two sides to a partnership, so it is really annoying me that the Scots seem to consider it is solely up to them whether they leave the Union or not. No, we too are part of the Union and we too have opinions on whether it is a good thing or not. Our future as England is going to be radically changed so we too should be asked, is this something we welcome? The weight of our views on keeping the Great Britain together is just as relevant as the Scots desire to split apart. Sure if a partnership is under stress, is tearing itself apart, separating might be the only possible outcome but before that, when you have hundreds of years invested in a Union, it might be worth both sides pausing and seeing if the differences can be reconciled. Not the one side walking off in a huff. Beside there is so much invested estate to disentangle, at the least both sides could think about how they might sunder that estate before stepping over the line.

For me we have so much to gain if the Scots leave. Just think, at last we would no longer have to fund a 'National' postal services to all those remote sparsely populated regions, pretending the Outer Hebrides had anything to do with us! Not just Post, but Rail, Telephone, Broadband, suddenly the economics look so much better when you dont have to factor in a hostile terrain, distance and low population per square mile. I have no doubt that many other organisations from such as national chains like supermarkets to airlines would all benefit from not having to be seen to cater for a 'National' area and could just concentrate of the profitable densely populated south. Of course it is not all win, Scotland does have the upper hand in hydro-electric, deep sea harbours, with the off-shore oil fields still proving a useful stream and, no doubt many other things. But as we thrust pros and cons lists back an forth, all it serves to prove is that our United Kingdom is far greater than just the sum of each individual part.

 It would be great shame if some short-termism led to our Nations splitting up out an of egoistical pique. Our past proves our united strengths, each benefiting from the individualism of the other component nations. I hope we can continue to stand together, face up to the EU as a Great Britain and help it to move towards a better place.


.

My House is my fortune

Once my house was my castle, the bastion of security and stability. The solid core binding the family together and the fortress to repel all invaders or those seeking to undermine our chosen way of life.
No longer.

My house is my fortune. Just an asset to be exploited, a transitory thing with no emotional ties to be dumped when the next opportunity presents itself. No point spending time or effort, investing in the properties future, unless it can be shown to produce an immediate return increase. So quick-fix, eye candy, on trend solutions, never mind getting to the bottom of the rot or decay. Several problems emerge out of this differing attitude. For a start house are not short-lived consumer goods to be re-cycled at the next fashion of technology change. They will outlive us by hundreds of years, we do need to keep them in good shape and relevant to the society of the time. That may require more than a quick immediate return, someone might have to invest in a longer term outcome.

A house is also a home, a home to a family. Family ties are not just those between each member of the family but with the wider community. If we are all doomed to be rootless, migrants, always on the move, never having the time or inclination for other than shallow superficial connections with our neighbours, what sort of sustainable society is that? We have to root ourselves and engage and care about the community that we live within. It is that community that shapes and defines us. It is what makes our family a family, the network of connections to those around us and the environment within which it is set.

So why this urgent need to move on, to move up the property ladder, to get to the next plateau of possibilities? It is fear, the fear of missing out of the ever remorseless spiralling upward of house prices. Fear of being left behind, fear of falling off and not being able to get back on. A fear generated and inflated by all the media, ever harping on about the latest price rises and easy sales to made. But houses are not consumer goods.Their price rise has nothing (or at least very little direct connection to) to do with the cost of land or the floor area or the actual cost of construction. Remember house prices are established by some bloke with a clipboard walking up and down a street, comparing this one to the others and to the prices similar houses have sold for. The price of a house is not its cost, but a reflective valuation of something deemed to be everlasting, someone's guess as to what it might sell for. So long as someone is prepared to pay that price then that is its worth. And why not when we are constantly reassured house prices can only go up. In this present very uncertain economic world where else can you put money that will grow? Houses are the only assured place because their value just goes on going up and up. The bubble just gets bigger and bigger, what is not to lose? Well for one thing, the bubble is so large it has cut off its renewal source. No new players can afford to come into the bottom of the market to sustain the chain. Second thing those player that do manage to join take on debts well beyond a sensible ratio to their income. Thirdly there is a rapidly diminishing pool of punters able to buy at the top end. Fourthly the only thing keeping the bubble growing is confidence, the expectation that the price will rise tomorrow and all the tomorrows.


I cannot think of any clearer indicators that the bubble is poised to burst. All such seemingly unstoppable bubbles have always burst in the past, there is no reason to believe this bubble is going to be any different. The fact that the world economies are dependant on the bubble continuing, their 'growth' coming from the increase in house loans, will not stop it happening despite various governments desperate attempts to shore it up. Their concern at the financial mess it will cause is not sufficient rationale to stop the burst, but just makes it louder and messier. When the inevitable burst comes and we somehow claw out of the ensuing mess perhaps we can once again get back to our house being our home and castle, a place of permanence and security.