Monday 30 March 2015

Above all else, profit rules

The government has decreed that pension annuities can be cashed in. With stagnation in shares, next to nothing in interest rates where is this money released to go? Why, to buy houses to rent of course. It just so happens the developers have been given more or less carte blanche to build on any green belt, common, SSSI reserve, public open space or good agricultural field they choose. Just happens that first time buyers can no longer afford to buy the houses for sale. So the retired generation, using their pension  funds are snapping up, at highly preferential government incentives, any house for sale to rent out, to these first time home couples. UKplc economic 'recovery' is founded on building more houses. More houses means more furnishing, more white goods selling more means everyone feels better and jobs are generated to build the houses in the first place then all the goods needed to fill them. So simple! All boxes ticked, no one can possibly complain and everyone is happy. UKplc is all fired up.

Except it is not that simple. Another super container ship leaves China to restock all those emptying shelves. What we do not have is a resurgence in UKplc manufacturing for a world wide market. Worse still, to raise the money to buy the houses for rent requires new 'private' loans to be taken out, increasing our national indebtedness. Interest on those loans requires even more spending on stuff to pay the interest to keep the wheels turning. This then is the economic miracle that UKplc recovery is based on. Increase loans taken out so you can spend more. Developers are only in it for profit, profits come from quick turn round on easy green sites, take objectors out of the sequence and they can are performing miracles. House are shooting up all around the wealthier parts of UKplc. Towns are expanding at unprecedented rates just not necessarily houses to suit the homes needed nor necessarily in the right places.

Once apon a time UKplc used to have a vision, a view for a future and how to reorganise and arrange itself. How best to look after all its people and how to foster communities and encourage production. All swept aside. Now the only deciding factor is profit. Where can you make most profit and more quickly? These are the new ground rules that determine the future that we will pass on to our next generations. Scant else to pass on to them as all the inherited wealth we were given custodianship off has or will be sold off. National Park for sale, Stately Home for sale, Crown Estates for sale, national collections for sale. Any takers? You can name your own terms! This is not some Orwellian nightmare. This is reality, here and now.

Saturday 21 March 2015

going forward

Just read a lengthy wordy article. Inequality at a dead end. Setting out yet again the case for the damage being done by the growing economic inequality. Then, significantly moving on to assess whether or how the existing institutions could bring about the changes necessary. The conclusion was they could not, we are doomed to stalemate, there is too much invested into the status quo. However it then when on to explore the new ways that people are coming together to tackle one aspect or another of the impact of inequality. Hurrah.

Far from claiming to have any solutions, what my blogs over these years have been grappling with is, seeking out suggestions for alternate ways that we can work together. Smack on trend. Not solutions but indications of where and how. Looking back over my blogs you will see that I have been exploring different ways to raise finance, different ways to benefit and protect our resource, finding a different relationship to big corporation but most of all how we can come together to look after ourselves, locally driven, not imposed by a central authoritarian government.

This exploration in an age where we are all (largely) self-centred, seeking instant gratification and indifferent to the wider social needs. Yet despite this, I do believe, we do have to rediscover a new community connection, relevant to the 21C, where we can come together as a caring community and forge solutions meaningful to us.

To find those new solutions means having the courage to join the debate, exchanging views, sharing experiences. learning from each other and slowly working out answers together. United we can own the world. Silent or as individuals, we are at the buffers, going nowhere. So your view is............

Monday 2 March 2015

Trust v Control

Control is by far away the easiest option. Lay down your parameters, set up monitoring systems and then apply punitive measures on selected defaulters. In principle. In practice entirely a different matter. Parameters have to hit a broadband of human activity which, because it is human and we are all unique, has to cover a wide range nuances. Being human each of us will challenge the parameter as to why it does not apply to us because our own circumstance is different. As individuals we need to be differentiated from the crowd. By claiming that difference we assert our distinction from the crowd we are lumped into. Monitoring has to find that fine line between being too overt, thrusting control too upfront, challenging all comers to defy it or so covert as to be missed, encouraging mass defiance. Then punitive measures have to be applied to carefully selected defaulters, too broad a sweep and the administrative systems are overloaded, to few key representative defaulters and too many other defaulters will consider they have immunity. Being inventive and creative humans, long used to labouring under the choke of authority, we too apply our skills to evade, avoid, confuse, misrepresent or dissemble, anything other than just accept to being controlled by that parameter.

Trust is entirely another matter. Just a broad parameter is all that is needed then each person interprets it application to them within their own framework of experience. All those nuances reflecting individual difference are no longer needed. Maybe an occasional dialogue, indicating some extreme of interpretation, might have to be initiated to remove common misplace understandings. The beauty of trust is that each person does their own self-monitoring but there is the downside. Being people most will comply scrupulously, some will get away will as little restraint as they dare and a few will flout and exploit any apparent laxity. Any overt monitoring will quickly be seen as confounding the trust. If you are going to be checking up then there is no point in my restraint. Come on, lets see how far we can push this. Equally if abuse is too wide spread then dissatisfaction rapidly sets in. "Look they are all getting away with it why should I bother" become the norm of the day. So there has to be covert monitoring to pick out those most public and extreme abuses. Engage in dialogue and it can become almost self-policing. Complaints will readily identify where and almost inevitably the who of the more troubling abuses. Then it is either a matter of corrective dialogue or punitive measures to make a public example of non-compliers. Rather than over-loading the administration with large numbers of defaulters to be processed, all that is needed is a showtrial which has wide spread circulation picking out a blatant defaulter receiving just and equitable punishment.

In the end we do have choices, we do all decide which type of society we want to live in. Either by silent submission or by the clarity of our voiced wishes. What is your choice? Monitors at each and every street corner with ever more draconian rules or a relaxed society able to live with itself and adapt to change?