January 14, 2012
Is it political? It is by its location and jobs of those concerned. Police appear to be taking to random street thuggery? That is hardly what we need to assure us all that we live in a democratic country and not a fascist one. The police must defend why they would pin down people without cause and intimidate and assault innocent civilians (who happen to work for Labour MPs making this political). And if it is not defensible, then something must change if we are to consider the UK a democratic land. Maybe a bit of self reflection on this as social commentary will become too embarrassing to the Government. It needs to change sharply, we do not require this culture of violent control.
Not at a civil level, nor at a parliamentary level either. In fact the conflict between super powers is counter intuitive and regressive.
December 10, 2011
On one hand we have 27 countries agreeing that there is a solution in unity, and on the other protecting London’s financial influence and therefore effectiveness – a crumbling cornerstone – a shambles of belief in a system that has massively artificially inflated the economy without deflating the currency because electronics and computer muscle provide a sea changing wealth of opportunities to create capital, that is financial obligations committed with regard to imbalances in the ratio of risk vs return when things went wrong.
A Unification of the rights and obligations of all European citizens is commended by all but the British. Mutualising the benefits of “state capital” to the benefit of Europe would require considerable contribution of raw capital power that London City is and unlike other major sponsor economies in the EU – Great Britain is reluctant to play ball. Being singled out as the new Switzerland is one thing.
Europe becoming what it will become is probably a better destiny for the entire zone with the UK integrated into it, but is what Cameron has done a bad thing for Great Britain? In the final analysis that is not what matters.
October 11, 2011
So many convoluted answers and the likelihood is that those we elect into power will have none of it.
The real answer is simple enough. The tax payer bailed out the banks, and now there is not enough cash in the system to stimulate demand. When we have demand we buy the stuff that is offered, investments that do not benefit the client as much as the provider because those providers are endlessly trying to dig themselves out of the hole they dug with securitisation assets that require an economy 100 times larger to support. It is not demand that is lacking, it is the ability to demand.
Cameron can achieve his blundering objective, make credit card interest illegal or fix it at 3%. Make all private mortgages fixed at 2% and regulate the hell out of bank ponzi schemes. Get back to a fair economic playground where the citizen is more important than the corporation and the dollar. Get back to a political environment where politicians serve the electorate, not the ruling elites. And do not bail out failing gambling banks. Put the bailout cash in the hands of the citizens to buy what they need and restart the engines. Make business that produce exports our priority. Reduce our reliance on gambling to get by.
We get two things remarkably wrong, both are our own purely human inventions: politics and economics. We just need to wake up one fine day and realise that all our assumptions about both are out of date and work out a way to do things that will work. We have the computers and can do the modelling. We need a financial revolution and to realise that capitalism and socialism, neither one, will solve it.
A comment added to this article:
April 6, 2008
“The man, Assad Sarwar, was said to be in contact with terrorist leaders overseas and visited Pakistan a month before his arrest as preparations for the airline attacks were being finalised.”
– quote from The Times article
Disturbing Trends Analysis
UK based terror operations busted by the state now in trial. Our assessments about Pakistan seem to unfortunately be bearing out. Although it is a vast society and may take years to change in any direction, politically, it had the expedient of military rule that eventually just succumbed to civilian rule, reluctantly. Or he should, if I understand this right, from Khaleej Times. It is PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif.
“Gen. (Retd) Pervez Musharraf will have to accept the verdict of the people given in the election and step down,” Sharif said in an interview with Indian TV channel Aaj Tak to be telecast today, according to a PML-N Press release here.
“We intend to bring the legislation in parliament for President’s removal,” he said, adding “Musharraf is isolated and will have to go.”
There is a terrifying sense of political entropy in Pakistan and Zimbabwe. The idea that the leader must change seemed not believed by the autocratic aspirations of leaders who deserve no recognition for their decisions.
Intransigent leaders who will not let go of power are subject to law to allow other minds time to make a difference. The result of no change of leadership is social sickness and intergenerational domination leading to decay. We must hope that the disease does not spread.