Which outcome will be best for the Greek people?
My starting point is the Troika bail out conditions are not motivated to help the Greek people. Any help the EU offers is self serving. The bail out is about the wider credibility of the EU project, reducing the risk of contagion particularly in the banking sector and keeping other indebted southern EU member countries in "austerity" line.
Greece is bankrupt. It can never repay its debts but the EU is prepared to sustain the charade that Greece can, in order to serve the wider EU interest above. The charade is an extremely painful and depressing one for Greece to maintain. The latest bail out is exactly that - it offers no long term solution to Greece. It ties Greece in to decades of austerity which offers no hope of the Greeks being able to learn lessons from their past, work hard to get their house in order and have a brighter future.
If Greece votes no in the referendum there is no doubt life in Greece could be dreadful for several years. There will be poverty. There will be the risk of anarchy. The Greeks will have to start again. However the advantage is they will be facing up to their situation and taking charge of it. They can build a collective brighter future. The Greek nation can rebuild their self respect and other countries are likely to respect them for taking charge of their destiny. They will not be without help. Many people in the EU will recognise their plight and be sympathetic and helpful to them - it could so easily have been us!
As an aside - I hope the Greeks vote no to the bail out. It will serve to give the EU the massive bloody nose it deserves. It will shatter the trough dipping, anti democratic, self serving complacency of the Brussels machine. The EU desperately needs this wake up call.
Monday 29 June 2015
Friday 26 June 2015
#Poverty actual or relative?
When most people think of poverty they think of poor people without enough to eat living hand to mouth day to day - fairly described as living in "real poverty".
In the UK apparently we have mass poverty and it is getting worse. However we know this is not true in terms of real poverty. It is probably true if you use the very misleading measure of "relative poverty". (relative poverty is the statistic that anti austerity advocates use).
Relative poverty is measured against society averages. If the average is to have a 40 inch surround sound TV and you don't have one then you are relatively poor - but you are not necessarily really poor. If the state pension goes up - then so does relative poverty as a measure! Someone relatively poor in the UK would be wealthy in terms of someone poor in Nepal because very few people in the UK are actually poor in Nepalese terms - in real poverty terms.
When the UK Welfare State was originally conceived its basis and intention was to tackle real poverty - a wonderful thing.
However the Welfare State has run out of control. It has increasingly set welfare benefits against a measure of relative poverty.
Some of the effects of this are :-
My view - no one in the UK (who is legally allowed to be here )should live in real poverty. However you should get out of relative poverty by hard work.( good for society but just as important - good for the individual and their families. Reward from work is the motivator for work. If you hand out a decent lifestyle without the need to work then many will choose not to work of course ).
One final point - State Pension. I have no issue with this being based on a relative poverty measure. If someone has had a full working life and qualifies for a state pension by having paid into to it then they should receive a decent pension. (working and paying into it is key). Similarly some one with a health or disability issue (as long as it is vigorously assessed and confirmed) should be allowed to receive a state benefit enough to provide a relatively decent lifestyle.
In the UK apparently we have mass poverty and it is getting worse. However we know this is not true in terms of real poverty. It is probably true if you use the very misleading measure of "relative poverty". (relative poverty is the statistic that anti austerity advocates use).
Relative poverty is measured against society averages. If the average is to have a 40 inch surround sound TV and you don't have one then you are relatively poor - but you are not necessarily really poor. If the state pension goes up - then so does relative poverty as a measure! Someone relatively poor in the UK would be wealthy in terms of someone poor in Nepal because very few people in the UK are actually poor in Nepalese terms - in real poverty terms.
When the UK Welfare State was originally conceived its basis and intention was to tackle real poverty - a wonderful thing.
However the Welfare State has run out of control. It has increasingly set welfare benefits against a measure of relative poverty.
Some of the effects of this are :-
- successive governments running huge deficits and building up a massive debt stockpile. The deficit and debt has become so large it could sink us if not addressed. (see Greece).
- the perversion of people choosing a welfare life style over work.
- people on benefits receiving more than people working.
- a morally bankrupted underclass.
- people having children without needing to think about financial consequences because state welfare will provide. Some argue young women are motivated to have children to secure a relatively good standard of living under current welfare (especially housing).
- an inability to help properly those in real poverty because valuable and limited tax payers resources are being squandered on maintaining an unrealistically small relative poverty gap.
My view - no one in the UK (who is legally allowed to be here )should live in real poverty. However you should get out of relative poverty by hard work.( good for society but just as important - good for the individual and their families. Reward from work is the motivator for work. If you hand out a decent lifestyle without the need to work then many will choose not to work of course ).
One final point - State Pension. I have no issue with this being based on a relative poverty measure. If someone has had a full working life and qualifies for a state pension by having paid into to it then they should receive a decent pension. (working and paying into it is key). Similarly some one with a health or disability issue (as long as it is vigorously assessed and confirmed) should be allowed to receive a state benefit enough to provide a relatively decent lifestyle.
Monday 22 June 2015
#Wellbeing and exercise.
A quick observation - nothing technical or heavy.
This morning I had my usual early morning bike ride along the sea wall and found myself reflecting on a trip to London yesterday ( to get an Indian visa - a blog to come on that one ). I actually spent much of yesterday people watching. The visa centre is in Paddington - it was a nice weather day - so I walked back along a stretch of the Grand Union Canal, Bayswater Road and the north of Hyde Park and then Green Park. There were runners everywhere and plenty of cyclists on park rides.
My reflection is it is quite hard to achieve a level of fitness and maintain it. Many fail - it seems most cannot even get started. One of the standout observations yesterday was obesity. Very evident - almost depressing.
However as was clear yesterday many people do try of course - runners and cyclists out doing their thing - striving under the pressures of modern city life.
This morning my thought turned directly to someone in my family. A few years ago he never did any real exercise. He played a bit of badminton - walked the dog - but never really pushed himself - never got to the bottom of his lungs.
I look back now - he was wheezy - you could hear him breath sat next to you even with the TV on!
Anyway to his great credit and with the support of his local club and family - especially one of his brothers - he took up running and has stuck with it over several years now. Running is part of his weekly life (not a 5 minute wonder).
The benefits that have accrued to him are obvious and massive. Gone are the pounds that were gradually accruing around his middle. His skin is clear. His eyes are bright. His lungs are clear. The lethargy has gone - he has vitality. It is also evident he is feeling good - and I am sure fitness is good for self esteem ( can you feel good about yourself if you are seriously overweight?). All these benefits are obvious and I am sure his long-term health prospects must have benefitted too.
The key is getting started and then maintaining it. The key is keeping it simple. The key is fitness is literally a marathon - not a sprint - to be really beneficial it has to be built into the rest of your life. Do you have the gumption - do you have the will power - or are you going to wimp out like the majority? What will the consequences be for the quality of your future life if you do?
This morning I had my usual early morning bike ride along the sea wall and found myself reflecting on a trip to London yesterday ( to get an Indian visa - a blog to come on that one ). I actually spent much of yesterday people watching. The visa centre is in Paddington - it was a nice weather day - so I walked back along a stretch of the Grand Union Canal, Bayswater Road and the north of Hyde Park and then Green Park. There were runners everywhere and plenty of cyclists on park rides.
My reflection is it is quite hard to achieve a level of fitness and maintain it. Many fail - it seems most cannot even get started. One of the standout observations yesterday was obesity. Very evident - almost depressing.
However as was clear yesterday many people do try of course - runners and cyclists out doing their thing - striving under the pressures of modern city life.
This morning my thought turned directly to someone in my family. A few years ago he never did any real exercise. He played a bit of badminton - walked the dog - but never really pushed himself - never got to the bottom of his lungs.
I look back now - he was wheezy - you could hear him breath sat next to you even with the TV on!
Anyway to his great credit and with the support of his local club and family - especially one of his brothers - he took up running and has stuck with it over several years now. Running is part of his weekly life (not a 5 minute wonder).
The benefits that have accrued to him are obvious and massive. Gone are the pounds that were gradually accruing around his middle. His skin is clear. His eyes are bright. His lungs are clear. The lethargy has gone - he has vitality. It is also evident he is feeling good - and I am sure fitness is good for self esteem ( can you feel good about yourself if you are seriously overweight?). All these benefits are obvious and I am sure his long-term health prospects must have benefitted too.
The key is getting started and then maintaining it. The key is keeping it simple. The key is fitness is literally a marathon - not a sprint - to be really beneficial it has to be built into the rest of your life. Do you have the gumption - do you have the will power - or are you going to wimp out like the majority? What will the consequences be for the quality of your future life if you do?
Thursday 18 June 2015
#OCD
In my last blog I wrote about decision making and stress. For some reason I am still on the stress theme and thought I would set down my layman's observation of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) particularly as seen around the home.
OCD is very common - maybe we all have it to some degree! For most people it might be described as habit - for most people it might be described as a foible - but for some people it is a huge issue in their lives - affects them and the people they share their lives with in a stressful and therefore negative way.
The type of OCD I have seen and observed particularly - is obsessive tidiness. Everything in the room has to be perfect. The sufferer sits ill at ease, "keeping an eye" on everything and everyone and cannot contain themselves from tidying and worrying that something might be marginally put out of place or a crumb dropped on the work surface! This is no way to live - can be corrosive and destructive - and certainly creates stress for all those involved.
My observation is OCD is often treated as something funny - when in reality the true feeling is the absolute opposite. I also think it is often progressive with the sufferer becoming more and more neurotic unless something changes to break the cycle. I have seen people become anti social because they cannot cope with the potential of someone else "spoiling" their perfect environment.
So what to be done. My solution!
OCD is very common - maybe we all have it to some degree! For most people it might be described as habit - for most people it might be described as a foible - but for some people it is a huge issue in their lives - affects them and the people they share their lives with in a stressful and therefore negative way.
The type of OCD I have seen and observed particularly - is obsessive tidiness. Everything in the room has to be perfect. The sufferer sits ill at ease, "keeping an eye" on everything and everyone and cannot contain themselves from tidying and worrying that something might be marginally put out of place or a crumb dropped on the work surface! This is no way to live - can be corrosive and destructive - and certainly creates stress for all those involved.
My observation is OCD is often treated as something funny - when in reality the true feeling is the absolute opposite. I also think it is often progressive with the sufferer becoming more and more neurotic unless something changes to break the cycle. I have seen people become anti social because they cannot cope with the potential of someone else "spoiling" their perfect environment.
So what to be done. My solution!
- Acknowledge you have OCD.
- Accept that unless you do something to break the cycle it is likely to get worse and ultimately has the potential to be totally debilitating.
- Want to break the cycle.
- Rationalise OCD. Look at it objectively. It is illogical. It is silly. It is materialistic. It is pointless. Give yourself a severe talking to and telling off. What a stupid way to spend your life!
- Force yourself to be untidy (or slightly less tidy). Resist tidying. In the same way you can eventually get used to not having sugar in your coffee you can get used to your environment not being perfect (as the sufferer sees it).
- Get out more. Spending too much time in a particular place often leads to or encourages OCD. Your world becomes too small.
Monday 15 June 2015
#Decisionmaking and the stresses of life
Probably one of the biggest contributory factors to poor health - mental and physical and no doubt to mortality is the negative effect of stress and worry.
One of the prime reasons for stress is the need to make decisions. In an evermore complex world we are often faced with choices and options. Choice no doubt is fundamentally a good thing - very often in the form of buying options - lifestyle choices - work choices - but if it leads to undue stress and worry as it seems to for many - then it is clearly not.
The processes behind how we make these personal choices and decisions are different for everyone. Like most human characteristics or traits I think they are part given as our inherent nature and part learned - nurtured in our environment and from our life experience.
There are evidently masses of books written about dealing with making choices in life - how to be happy - how to be healthy - how to get on etc etc. I admit to knowing little about the contents of these books. Why - because I have never felt I had a problem with decision making and therefore have had no motivation to read them. I am certainly not claiming to have always made good decisions - far from it - but what I can say is I have always found it relatively easy to make decisions and have been able to do so without undue stress either pre or post the fateful decision - ha!
I will share with you my typical thought processes if you are interested - ha again!
First of all I would cast myself as a rock solid optimist. This I am certain is by nature. It is an unthinking state of mind. No one has taught me to be optimistic. Can you learn to be an optimist - if you are by nature a pessimist - I am not sure. Some say pessimists live in the real world. I am not having that. The world is as you see it - that would be my take. It is likely you can learn to be more optimistic - whether to your core though I don't know. It might seem mad to some - but whatever I do or decide I think things will work out - more specifically -eventually work out for the best! That takes a lot of pressure off any decision making.
The best advice I can offer on decision making is to understand and accept there is rarely a clear cut choice. In so many situations there is not a right or wrong answer. Often you hear people say I must make the right decision and anguish over it - delay making a necessary decision with stressful consequences. My approach is to make an optimum decision - the best decision I can make based on the information or feeling I have. I do my best. It might be a marginal choice - a decision on balance - that is the norm in the real world. Once the decision is made I go with it. If it goes wrong I do not give myself a hard time or even dwell on it - I made the best decision I could at the time - end of story. I then look at the situation I am in and make the next decision - forward momentum - the future - you cannot turn clocks back - there is no point on dwelling on it - regretting it - nothing changes but stress undoubtedly can be piled on.
A few other thoughts about decision making. These thoughts are strictly personal and in no particular order :-
One of the prime reasons for stress is the need to make decisions. In an evermore complex world we are often faced with choices and options. Choice no doubt is fundamentally a good thing - very often in the form of buying options - lifestyle choices - work choices - but if it leads to undue stress and worry as it seems to for many - then it is clearly not.
The processes behind how we make these personal choices and decisions are different for everyone. Like most human characteristics or traits I think they are part given as our inherent nature and part learned - nurtured in our environment and from our life experience.
There are evidently masses of books written about dealing with making choices in life - how to be happy - how to be healthy - how to get on etc etc. I admit to knowing little about the contents of these books. Why - because I have never felt I had a problem with decision making and therefore have had no motivation to read them. I am certainly not claiming to have always made good decisions - far from it - but what I can say is I have always found it relatively easy to make decisions and have been able to do so without undue stress either pre or post the fateful decision - ha!
I will share with you my typical thought processes if you are interested - ha again!
First of all I would cast myself as a rock solid optimist. This I am certain is by nature. It is an unthinking state of mind. No one has taught me to be optimistic. Can you learn to be an optimist - if you are by nature a pessimist - I am not sure. Some say pessimists live in the real world. I am not having that. The world is as you see it - that would be my take. It is likely you can learn to be more optimistic - whether to your core though I don't know. It might seem mad to some - but whatever I do or decide I think things will work out - more specifically -eventually work out for the best! That takes a lot of pressure off any decision making.
The best advice I can offer on decision making is to understand and accept there is rarely a clear cut choice. In so many situations there is not a right or wrong answer. Often you hear people say I must make the right decision and anguish over it - delay making a necessary decision with stressful consequences. My approach is to make an optimum decision - the best decision I can make based on the information or feeling I have. I do my best. It might be a marginal choice - a decision on balance - that is the norm in the real world. Once the decision is made I go with it. If it goes wrong I do not give myself a hard time or even dwell on it - I made the best decision I could at the time - end of story. I then look at the situation I am in and make the next decision - forward momentum - the future - you cannot turn clocks back - there is no point on dwelling on it - regretting it - nothing changes but stress undoubtedly can be piled on.
A few other thoughts about decision making. These thoughts are strictly personal and in no particular order :-
- Listen to your own advice. If it feels wrong it probably is.
- My first reaction is usually the most accurate one.
- Procrastination can be a good thing - ie not making a decision you do not have to make at this time. Sometimes an answer emerges - clarity emerges almost without consciously thinking about it.
- Procrastination can be a bad thing. If a decision has to be made - if the facts will not be different in the foreseeable future - give yourself a break - make a decision - otherwise you go around in circles - argue with yourself - add pointless stress.
- Put (keep) a decision in context. What is the worst that can happen.
- When it comes to buying choices you can anguish over saving a few pounds - but then waste those few pounds and more somewhere else without thinking about it. Not very logical.
- Wishful thinking is a waste of time. If you cannot change a fact or a decision made it is pointless. Cut to the chase.
- Challenge yourself to be objective - retain your balance.
- Have a plan in your head.
- Have a list to differentiate and prioritise but be flexible too.
- Make your decisions in the right sequence - bad timing often creates problems and stresses. It is probably unwise to buy the furniture before you know the size of the room you have to fit it in!
- Generally you do not make the best decisions when you are tired. Similarly while alcohol can appear to create clarity - and in many instances it is the truth drug - it can lead to rash decisions so be careful!
- Avoid necessarily taking the advice of the last person you talk to. Ask questions yes - but make your own mind up.
- Some decisions seem to have an unstoppable momentum. If you are not happy be strong and do what you have to/want to do. Stand up.
- Relationship decisions are a whole different ball game. I am not giving advice - definitely not - ha! but two thoughts however - 1) be aware (beware) of the first 100 day euphoria. 2) the point above regarding unstoppable momentum particularly applies. (beware).
Monday 8 June 2015
#EUreferendum UK
The need for a UK referendum on our membership of the EU is overwhelming. The last time the electorate voted on our participation in the EU was over 40 years ago and since then the scope and impact of the EU has vastly changed and increased. For democratic reasons alone we need this referendum. The Conservatives should be congratulated for giving one. Labour get no credit for now supporting one (because that is just cynical political expediency) and the Liberals have got what they deserve for blocking a referendum in coalition.
The Conservative government position seems entirely logical.
We could have an in out referendum tomorrow but the Conservative government is correctly not indifferent to the outcome. There are many benefits to being in the EU - the principle one is it facilitates a "common market". We do not want to give up this advantage unless we have to.
However it is a widely held view that there are aspects of the EU that are not working, there are the prospects of further integration that might not suit us, there are things we do not like, some want sovereignty back in some areas that have been devolved (or assumed), some want to change the extent welfare can claimed by migrants and some want better control of our borders etc.
Mr Cameron wants a chance to negotiate away or secure exemptions from the things that the mainstream Conservatives do not like or feel suit us. (some Conservatives want more - some like UKIP seem to want out regardless of renegotiation). He wants 18 months or so to work on this. He may or may not be successful but he is going to try and make a yes vote more appealing to those with reservations about the benefits in the round of UK membership. This is not unreasonable - was in the Tory manifesto - and he therefore has an electoral mandate to do it. As far as I know all Conservative MP's are supportive of this strategy.
It then seems obvious that when the negotiations are run and we know is what is on the table - there is a free vote on yes to stay in - no to pull out. This will happen in 2017 - (although it would be so much better if it could be before because it does create market uncertainty and cannot therefore be good for business and trade.) Campaigning should not be a party political matter. I see nothing wrong - in fact it is highly desirable for every individual - including government ministers - to make up their own minds and campaign accordingly. The outcome has to be fully democratic and a good clean debate - otherwise the issue will remain divisive for years.
For what it is worth I am at this stage a floating voter as I suspect the vast majority are. I want to vote yes but today I am pretty sure I would vote no. (especially as a yes vote would give the EU the mandate to run ahead with the European project unfettered and I definitely do not want that).
If the other EU members do not respond reasonably to Cameron there is every prospect of the UK ultimately leaving. Everyone will lose from that including the EU. Are you listening Mr Hollande!
The Conservative government position seems entirely logical.
We could have an in out referendum tomorrow but the Conservative government is correctly not indifferent to the outcome. There are many benefits to being in the EU - the principle one is it facilitates a "common market". We do not want to give up this advantage unless we have to.
However it is a widely held view that there are aspects of the EU that are not working, there are the prospects of further integration that might not suit us, there are things we do not like, some want sovereignty back in some areas that have been devolved (or assumed), some want to change the extent welfare can claimed by migrants and some want better control of our borders etc.
Mr Cameron wants a chance to negotiate away or secure exemptions from the things that the mainstream Conservatives do not like or feel suit us. (some Conservatives want more - some like UKIP seem to want out regardless of renegotiation). He wants 18 months or so to work on this. He may or may not be successful but he is going to try and make a yes vote more appealing to those with reservations about the benefits in the round of UK membership. This is not unreasonable - was in the Tory manifesto - and he therefore has an electoral mandate to do it. As far as I know all Conservative MP's are supportive of this strategy.
It then seems obvious that when the negotiations are run and we know is what is on the table - there is a free vote on yes to stay in - no to pull out. This will happen in 2017 - (although it would be so much better if it could be before because it does create market uncertainty and cannot therefore be good for business and trade.) Campaigning should not be a party political matter. I see nothing wrong - in fact it is highly desirable for every individual - including government ministers - to make up their own minds and campaign accordingly. The outcome has to be fully democratic and a good clean debate - otherwise the issue will remain divisive for years.
For what it is worth I am at this stage a floating voter as I suspect the vast majority are. I want to vote yes but today I am pretty sure I would vote no. (especially as a yes vote would give the EU the mandate to run ahead with the European project unfettered and I definitely do not want that).
If the other EU members do not respond reasonably to Cameron there is every prospect of the UK ultimately leaving. Everyone will lose from that including the EU. Are you listening Mr Hollande!
Sunday 7 June 2015
#Grexit and the cancer of an anti austerity mentality
I write this blog with compassion. I have nothing against the Greek people. The Greek's are in a miserable position. They are in reality - bankrupt. They will have to leave the euro or there will have to be a massive "fudge" with debt effectively written off.
The electorate in Greece have recently elected Syriza - a left wing party - promising to end austerity.
Ending austerity actually means in day to day practicalities - continuing to spend money you have not earned and do not have unless by some means you can rack up evermore debt. (your legacy for your children and their children to deal with because you were too selfish and weak to deal with it yourself).
These are simple but relevant analogies :-
Your son or daughter are running up credit card debts. They come to you for a loan or ask you to guarantee another credit card. What advice would any parent give. What common-sense measure do they have to take?
A couple get into financial trouble because they have been profligate or at least out of touch with reality or badly advised. A sibling has worked hard and made good decisions. Not for the first time they go to him/her for a loan to bail them out. What would be a reasonable and sensible decision?Probably no - or a conditional yes (providing they undertake they are going to change their lifestyle and spending habits.) Alarmingly however they also ask the sibling to forget about previous loans he has made to them. (they argue he should not have made them because they had no realistic way to repay it). The sibling believes if they cannot service their debts formal bankruptcy is the only option and the couple will have to start again from a low base. However they believe the sibling would be too embarrassed by the public humiliation of a bankruptcy in the family and will eventually bail them out on their terms.
This is Greece. However they want to continue to pay themselves money they have not earned and do not have - they want to continue to spend at an unsustainable rate. They want other countries and institutions to fund it with little or no prospect of it being repaid. In fact they are asking for some of their current debt to be written off.
Is that realistic - is it sensible - is it fair ?
Thank goodness the UK has rejected the anti austerity mentality. Thank goodness the British people fundamentally understand a strong economy gives you the income to pay for public services and welfare.
The key to a strong economy is optimism - optimism that makes businesses invest and optimism that encourages people that it is ok to buy. What fosters optimism? Economic reality. People in the UK understand increasing debt to create "stimulus" is only creating false optimism. In the main real meaningful optimism will only come from a deep felt knowledge you are doing the right thing, getting your house in order and paying your way. Anything less we might not like to admit but deep down we know is false optimism - built on sand and sooner or later the house will fall in.
It will be sad to see Greece fail - many people will suffer hardship. However in many ways it is the shock that needs to happen. There is a cancer in western society. It will emphasise to every politician and their electorates that austerity is reality.You cannot expect someone else to pay. You have to get your house in order, earn your living, be entrepreneurial, reward success, collect your taxes and don't overspend on welfare. This is a message many countries in the EU still have to accept.
On the subject of welfare - I need to say this. I really believe in the Welfare State. I really believe we should help those that are in real need through no fault of their own. However our welfare has gone too far. It has made possible a white underclass. It has underpinned indolence. It has rewarded people for not working and penalised people that do the right thing. It has made a route to financial security just by having children and doing nothing else. It has to stop. It has to stop because we cannot afford it but it has to stop because it is bad for society and it is particularly bad for those people who have been able to live a life on benefits that gives them free housing, welfare and education for their kids - which they see as ongoing entitlement and do not appreciate. The Tories are right. Cut benefits and people will get jobs. Take things away so people have to work for them and they will and they will be the happier and more fulfilled because of it.
The electorate in Greece have recently elected Syriza - a left wing party - promising to end austerity.
Ending austerity actually means in day to day practicalities - continuing to spend money you have not earned and do not have unless by some means you can rack up evermore debt. (your legacy for your children and their children to deal with because you were too selfish and weak to deal with it yourself).
These are simple but relevant analogies :-
Your son or daughter are running up credit card debts. They come to you for a loan or ask you to guarantee another credit card. What advice would any parent give. What common-sense measure do they have to take?
A couple get into financial trouble because they have been profligate or at least out of touch with reality or badly advised. A sibling has worked hard and made good decisions. Not for the first time they go to him/her for a loan to bail them out. What would be a reasonable and sensible decision?Probably no - or a conditional yes (providing they undertake they are going to change their lifestyle and spending habits.) Alarmingly however they also ask the sibling to forget about previous loans he has made to them. (they argue he should not have made them because they had no realistic way to repay it). The sibling believes if they cannot service their debts formal bankruptcy is the only option and the couple will have to start again from a low base. However they believe the sibling would be too embarrassed by the public humiliation of a bankruptcy in the family and will eventually bail them out on their terms.
This is Greece. However they want to continue to pay themselves money they have not earned and do not have - they want to continue to spend at an unsustainable rate. They want other countries and institutions to fund it with little or no prospect of it being repaid. In fact they are asking for some of their current debt to be written off.
Is that realistic - is it sensible - is it fair ?
Thank goodness the UK has rejected the anti austerity mentality. Thank goodness the British people fundamentally understand a strong economy gives you the income to pay for public services and welfare.
The key to a strong economy is optimism - optimism that makes businesses invest and optimism that encourages people that it is ok to buy. What fosters optimism? Economic reality. People in the UK understand increasing debt to create "stimulus" is only creating false optimism. In the main real meaningful optimism will only come from a deep felt knowledge you are doing the right thing, getting your house in order and paying your way. Anything less we might not like to admit but deep down we know is false optimism - built on sand and sooner or later the house will fall in.
It will be sad to see Greece fail - many people will suffer hardship. However in many ways it is the shock that needs to happen. There is a cancer in western society. It will emphasise to every politician and their electorates that austerity is reality.You cannot expect someone else to pay. You have to get your house in order, earn your living, be entrepreneurial, reward success, collect your taxes and don't overspend on welfare. This is a message many countries in the EU still have to accept.
On the subject of welfare - I need to say this. I really believe in the Welfare State. I really believe we should help those that are in real need through no fault of their own. However our welfare has gone too far. It has made possible a white underclass. It has underpinned indolence. It has rewarded people for not working and penalised people that do the right thing. It has made a route to financial security just by having children and doing nothing else. It has to stop. It has to stop because we cannot afford it but it has to stop because it is bad for society and it is particularly bad for those people who have been able to live a life on benefits that gives them free housing, welfare and education for their kids - which they see as ongoing entitlement and do not appreciate. The Tories are right. Cut benefits and people will get jobs. Take things away so people have to work for them and they will and they will be the happier and more fulfilled because of it.
Friday 5 June 2015
#Corruption
Of course corruption is a bad thing - we are all against it - it is illegal! That is stating the obvious.
However my trips abroad this year have really brought the issue of corruption to the fore in my mind. Trips to Tanzania (http://www.business-anti-corruption.com/country-profiles/sub-saharan-africa/tanzania/snapshot.aspx) and Portugal (ex PM Jose Socrates - the only Socialist Leader to get an absolute majority arrested for fraud and money laundering http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-30252411) and particularly, Nepal ( http://www.nepalvista.com/features/about-real-nepal/corruptions ,) Turkey ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25637710 ) and South America (the worst of all) have served to demonstrate that corruption at government and corporate level is not just a bad thing - it is a terrible, corrosive, wicked thing.
In every South American country I visited the people I talked to are typically dispirited. The common theme - an inability to rid the country of politicians who turn out to be self serving and invariably in cahoots with the rich and powerful rather than helping ordinary people as fair and as promised.
Consequently people stop believing in their future. They feel powerless. In many instances it seems the attitude adopted is if you can't beat them join them - which is why corruption that starts at the top filters down so it becomes a national characteristic. Corruption and feathering your nest becomes endemic - affecting the police and fostering petty or even violent crime. The feeling is everyone else is on the make so I will take what I want if I cannot earn it legitimately. I will avoid tax too.
FIFA is a fantastic example of how perverted things can become. How both individuals and large corporates and even countries can be self serving - turn a blind eye to corruption, or join in the corruption. Clearly the only way to win the world cup was to be corrupt - to pay back handers - to grease palms. It also shows once corruption gets a hold how difficult it is to eradicate.
Russia is corrupt. Putin is corrupt. The oligarchs are corrupt. How will people ever be able to turn them over now they control everything. There are so many countries in the world like them.
Corruption is never far away and we have to be so vigilant. Who would believe our banks would be capable and willing to rig markets, or our supermarkets and energy companies capable of entering price fixing cartels, or our police entering into cover ups or our hospitals manipulating statistics.
I am not the biggest fan of the BBC but investigative journalism is clearly crucial - absolutely vital. Our free press whatever their political motives is something we must always protect and cherish - it is the only way to secure a free society - it defines it.
Thank goodness for magazines like Private Eye - their "Rotten Boroughs" section has done so much over the years to expose fraud in local government - particularly councillors taking back handers to look favourably on planning applications. Social media is also helping and we now have the "whistleblower" act and "duty of candour" enshrined in our law.
The UK is a beacon of hope for so many people who have to live with the wicked effects of endemic corruption. We should be proud of that - although we should have stood up to Blatter much earlier!
Brazil is an example of how it can go all wrong for a country. The current President Dilma Rouseff was formerly in charge of Petrobras - the state owned oil giant. While she was in charge $60 billion dollars was lost in fraud. She claims no knowledge! There is no sign of the money. Brazil staged the world cup. No legacy - just debt - all the money that came into Brazil has disappeared. No one wants the forthcoming Olympics there other than the rich and powerful. Ordinary people see it as a vanity project that the country cannot afford and truly believe the ordinary citizen will be ripped off again. Brazil is going backwards. The feeling is we cannot overcome corruption at the top - so we will have to look after our own interests - whatever that takes - which invariably is lower level corruption, fraud, tax evasion and of course crime.
Corruption is a terrible cancer in a society. We must be aware of it - it is never far away - we must stand up to it - because once it gets a hold it is so difficult to eradicate. Ask Italians about the Mafia!
However my trips abroad this year have really brought the issue of corruption to the fore in my mind. Trips to Tanzania (http://www.business-anti-corruption.com/country-profiles/sub-saharan-africa/tanzania/snapshot.aspx) and Portugal (ex PM Jose Socrates - the only Socialist Leader to get an absolute majority arrested for fraud and money laundering http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-30252411) and particularly, Nepal ( http://www.nepalvista.com/features/about-real-nepal/corruptions ,) Turkey ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25637710 ) and South America (the worst of all) have served to demonstrate that corruption at government and corporate level is not just a bad thing - it is a terrible, corrosive, wicked thing.
In every South American country I visited the people I talked to are typically dispirited. The common theme - an inability to rid the country of politicians who turn out to be self serving and invariably in cahoots with the rich and powerful rather than helping ordinary people as fair and as promised.
Consequently people stop believing in their future. They feel powerless. In many instances it seems the attitude adopted is if you can't beat them join them - which is why corruption that starts at the top filters down so it becomes a national characteristic. Corruption and feathering your nest becomes endemic - affecting the police and fostering petty or even violent crime. The feeling is everyone else is on the make so I will take what I want if I cannot earn it legitimately. I will avoid tax too.
FIFA is a fantastic example of how perverted things can become. How both individuals and large corporates and even countries can be self serving - turn a blind eye to corruption, or join in the corruption. Clearly the only way to win the world cup was to be corrupt - to pay back handers - to grease palms. It also shows once corruption gets a hold how difficult it is to eradicate.
Russia is corrupt. Putin is corrupt. The oligarchs are corrupt. How will people ever be able to turn them over now they control everything. There are so many countries in the world like them.
Corruption is never far away and we have to be so vigilant. Who would believe our banks would be capable and willing to rig markets, or our supermarkets and energy companies capable of entering price fixing cartels, or our police entering into cover ups or our hospitals manipulating statistics.
I am not the biggest fan of the BBC but investigative journalism is clearly crucial - absolutely vital. Our free press whatever their political motives is something we must always protect and cherish - it is the only way to secure a free society - it defines it.
Thank goodness for magazines like Private Eye - their "Rotten Boroughs" section has done so much over the years to expose fraud in local government - particularly councillors taking back handers to look favourably on planning applications. Social media is also helping and we now have the "whistleblower" act and "duty of candour" enshrined in our law.
The UK is a beacon of hope for so many people who have to live with the wicked effects of endemic corruption. We should be proud of that - although we should have stood up to Blatter much earlier!
Brazil is an example of how it can go all wrong for a country. The current President Dilma Rouseff was formerly in charge of Petrobras - the state owned oil giant. While she was in charge $60 billion dollars was lost in fraud. She claims no knowledge! There is no sign of the money. Brazil staged the world cup. No legacy - just debt - all the money that came into Brazil has disappeared. No one wants the forthcoming Olympics there other than the rich and powerful. Ordinary people see it as a vanity project that the country cannot afford and truly believe the ordinary citizen will be ripped off again. Brazil is going backwards. The feeling is we cannot overcome corruption at the top - so we will have to look after our own interests - whatever that takes - which invariably is lower level corruption, fraud, tax evasion and of course crime.
Corruption is a terrible cancer in a society. We must be aware of it - it is never far away - we must stand up to it - because once it gets a hold it is so difficult to eradicate. Ask Italians about the Mafia!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)