Posts Tagged ‘Business’
A powerful reminder of ethical business practices.
First the background to today’s post. (You may want to settle down with a glass of something; it’s a bit of a ramble!)
In 1968, I emigrated to Sydney, Australia. In those days, one could get a sponsored one-way flight ticket to Australia for 10 GBP if one intended to make Australia your new home. Once there, I obtained a sales clerking job with the Australian division of the famous British company, ICI (Imperial Chemical Industries). I had previously been working for a UK part of ICI Plastics, British Visqueen Ltd, in Stevenage, Hertfordshire.
Going to Australia came about because in the UK, I had been dating a Finnish woman who, together with her parents and sisters, was living in Sydney. So when Britta returned to Sydney I thought ‘what the hell’ for a ‘tenner’ I can follow her out there. (We subsequently married and Britta is the mother of my son, Alex, and daughter, Maija.)
Via very circuitous circumstances, I ended up as a freelance journalist working for a Finnish magazine KotiPosti. Britta and I spent many months in 1969-1970 driving 30,000 miles all around around Australia finding Finns in the most amazing places doing the most incredible things, and me writing about them. Then I was invited to travel to Helsinki and in 1970, Britta and I decided to go to Finland via the Trans-Siberian Railway, all the way from Nakhodka in Eastern Russia, on the Sea of Japan, to Moscow, thence on to Helsinki. The route being via Vladivostok, Irkutsk (where we took 24 hours out to visit Lake Baikal), Novosibirsk, Moscow, St. Petersburg (Leningrad) and the short hop to Helsinki.
What on earth does this have to do with IBM? Hang on in there!
We initially travelled from Australia to Japan because in 1970, Expo 70 was being held in Japan, and KotiPosti had asked me to write about the event. One of the most impressive stands at Expo 70 was the IBM stand. Frankly, it blew me away.
So now fast-forward to Britta and me having completed our stuff in Helsinki and on our way home to Sydney, via London of course, because I still had family in England. A couple of evenings after we had arrived at Preston Road, Wembley, where my mother’s house was, I read an advertisement in the daily evening newspaper, The London Evening Standard, (still going strong) that IBM UK Ltd, their office products division, were looking for salesmen. I had been so impressed with IBM at Expo 70 that I seemed unable to resist applying for the job. To my amazement, I won a place in IBM’s sales team and was with IBM for 8 years – we never returned to Australia.
Fast forward all the way to present times.
A while ago, I signed up to the Current and Ex-IBM Employee Group (Unofficial) on Linked-In. Yesterday, a member of that group published, The Original IBM Basic Beliefs for those that have never seen them. They really are worth sharing because how much better would our corporate world be if all businesses subscribed to these beliefs. Here they are:
The Original IBM Basic Beliefs for those that have never seen them.
Respect for the Individual
Our basic belief is respect for the individual, for his rights and dignity. It follows from this principle that IBM should:
1. Help each employee to develop his potential and make the best use of his abilities
2. Pay and promote on merit
3. Maintain two-way communications between manager and employee, with opportunity for a fair hearing and equitable settlement of disagreements.
Service to the Customer
We are dedicated to giving our customers the best possible service. Our products and services bring profits only to the degree that they serve the customer and satisfy his needs. This demands that we:
1. Know our customers’ needs, and help them anticipate future needs
2. Help customers use our products and services in the best possible way.
3. Provide superior equipment maintenance and supporting services
Excellence Must Be a Way of Life
We want IBM to be known for its excellence. Therefore, we believe that every task, in every part of the business, should be performed in a superior manner and to the best of our ability. Nothing should be left to chance in our pursuit of excellence. For example, we must:
1. Lead in new developments
2. Be aware of advanced made by others, better them where we can, or be willing to adopt them whenever they fit our needs.
3. Produce quality products of the most advanced design and at the lowest possible cost
Managers Must Lead Effectively
Our success depends on intelligent and aggressive management which is sensitive to the need for making an enthusiastic partner of every individual in the organization. This requires that managers:
1. Provide the kind of leadership that will motivate employees to do their jobs in a superior way.
2. Meet frequently with all their people.
3. Have the courage to question decisions and policies; have the vision to see the needs of the Company as well as the division and department
4. Plan for the future by keeping an open mind to new ideas, whatever the source
Obligations to stockholders
IBM has obligations to its stockholders whose capital has created our jobs. These require us to:
1. Take care of the property our stockholders have entrusted to us.
2. Provide an attractive return on invested capital
3. Exploit opportunities for continuing profitable growth
Fair Deal for the Supplier
We want to deal fairly and impartially with suppliers of goods and services. We should:
Select suppliers and according to the quality of their products or services, their general reliability and competitiveness of price.
1. Recognize the legitimate interests of both supplier and IBM when negotiating a contract; administer such contracts in good faith
2. Avoid suppliers becoming unduly dependent on IBM
IBM should be a Good Corporate Citizen
We accept our responsibilities as a corporate citizen in community, national and world affairs; we serve our interest best when we serve the public interest. We believe that the immediate and long-term public interest is best served by a system of competing enterprises. Therefore, we believe we should compete vigorously, but in a spirit of fair play, with respect for our competitors, and with respect for the law. In communities where IBM facilities are located, we do our utmost to help create an environment in which people want to work and live. We acknowledge our obligation as a business institution to help improve the quality of the society we are part of. We want to be in the forefront of those companies which are working to make our world a better place.
Thomas J. Watson, Jr.
1969! Coming up to 45-years ago. Sometimes one wonders if society has learnt anything in the last five decades!
Yet another guest post; about dog fences!
It’s fair to say that today’s guest author writes about a topic as far removed from yesterday’s eloquent post as one could imagine. Readers will recall that yesterday’s post from Georgiana was on the subject of Man’s best Friend. It was called Just love.
Today’s guest post is all about dog fences! As I said very different from Georgiana’s essay. Yet there is a link. Both guest posts are about dogs.
About a month ago, I received an email from a Rohit Agarwal offering to write “a well written and resourceful article on topic related to dogs.” When I discovered that the article was about underground fences, I was sceptical about the value of such an essay. Then when I read the essay it struck me as a very sensible topic; the one of keeping dogs safely within their own property.
I had no foreknowledge of Rohit, who described himself thus:
Author Bio: Rohit is a dog lover and pet enthusiast; he owns two adorable and wonderful dogs that include a German shepherd and a Labrador retriever. As work keeps him away from home, concerns arise about the safety and comfort of his pet friends, which made him try out various products that facilitate the same. Recently he was worried about leaving his dogs in the yard of his house and tried the underground fence for dogs, which worked great.
Rohit also made clear that he is a contributor to Petstek.com, the company behind the link in the last sentence of his bio. So here is the article.
Five Reasons Why an Underground Fence is Right for Your Dog.
Most of us love the company of a cuddly and playful dog, as dogs are the considered to be the best pets since their very existence. While it’s great to keep the friendly and loyal canines in your house, one often needs to take care of the dog and protect them from their surroundings while still making sure that the dog gets adequate freedom within your house’s boundaries without it feeling like it has been incarcerated in a concrete prison. We all have tried using leashes, chains and cages, but we know that those methods to contain are not only old fashioned but also to a certain degree, inhuman, especially for the dog that is so friendly and loyal to you. Modern technology today has brought forth a new revolutionary technology called in-ground or underground fence for dogs.
The underground dog fence is a virtual fence which is installed using a special wire that is buried according to the perimeter you want to set for your pet. The wire is coded with signals, and a special collar is worn by the dog, as soon as the dog approaches the buried wire, the collar around its neck makes a warning signal, and as soon as the dog gets too close to the virtual fence, it receives a minor electric shock via the collar which is technically harmless to the pet. Let’s discuss the advantages of installing this system.
1. Freedom To The Dog
Well, we like to have our pets without leashes or chain bound, and we’re sure that no one gets a dog to keep it chained all the time, the underground fence not only provides the dogs adequate freedom of movement but also is more effective and ‘humane’ than chains and leashes. It’s a great solution for the busy pet owners who get a little less time to take their dogs for a walk, but one cannot keep the dog on a leash or in a cage all the time, making it an effective solution.
2. Cost Effective As Compared To Real Fencing
The underground fence for dogs is certainly more cost effective than installing a real fence, which in turn requires really expensive maintenance. Not to mention its increase in cost depending on the material you choose and the installation cost is just a cherry on top of the icing that can totally topple your budget into smithereens. To make sure your pocket doesn’t come between the relationship that you share with your dog, the underground fence is a great option to save you from the regret of ever adopting a pet.
3. A Perfect Solution For Zoning Laws
In many cities or townships there are zoning laws that prohibit you from building fences around your house. If not the laws, then many a times your beloved neighbour might not like you building huge fences around your house and is often backed by the neighbourhood associations. An underground fence for dogs is a great option to keep your loyal guard away from them nosey neighbours.
4. Protection For The Dog And The Environment
It not only keeps your dog protected from straying into places you wouldn’t want it to go, but also is a great solution to keep certain areas of the house such as pools and your wife’s kitchen garden protected and out of reach of the ever curious dogs. Especially from that trash can you don’t want your dog snooping around and creating a litter you might have to clean up. It’s also a great way to keep your neighbours who often complain about the dog strolling and littering their yard.
5. Well Hidden To Maintain The Look Of Your House
While fences might work great for some, most of the time they look ugly, especially when none of the houses in your neighbourhood have fences. The underground fence is a great solution to such a problem. It works as a virtual barrier to not only keep your pet protected from straying in the hostile outside world, but also maintain that great look of your beloved abode.
The underground pet fence with the aforementioned advantages is a great option to keep your pet safe and well contained while giving it freedom of movement which is entirely unhindered and free from any leashes, cages or visible boundaries as we all know that ‘happy pets make happy owners’.
Thoughts from readers?
An opportunity to learn about dog food.
I have a policy of not allowing Learning from Dogs to promote commercial interests. I need those who visit this place to trust the integrity of what they find here.
Then back on the 19th December last, in came the following email.
Dear LearningfromDogs (I think Paul!),
Greetings from Florence, Tuscany!
We are sending you a piece that we hope will be considered for publication on your blog: we begin by talking about making pet food at home (and then go on to list some of the risks – essentially the message here is don’t do it!), we then talk about buying products off the shelf, and explain about food labeling and what different types of labeling will mean in terms of the meat content. I’ve also included some pictures that we purchased from DepositPhotos to help support with its publication. You can verify the usage terms on Deposit photos, but I can tell you that for your website they will be considered appropriate use.
Our shop first opened it doors in 1962 and we’ve just started an English website where we (wait for it!) are making dog beds, and collars to order. We’ve got the most amazing fabrics from a town in Tuscany that has been producing fabrics from the 13th Century. The quality is (as I hope you will take a look) of the highest standard.
Please take a read through the article and if you would like to publish it we would be thrilled.
Best regards from Tuscany,
The email offered me a potential conflict. Glyn was clearly promoting his company and yet the information struck me as valuable to pet owners. On balance, it seemed worthwhile to publish the article.
There have been substantial changes in the market of pet foods over the last decade, and so this article sets out to demystify pet food labelling in layman’s terms. We also consider whether or not preparing the food your pet eats in your own home is really a viable option, if you want to have a healthy pet.
Preparing food at home
If you have decided to undertake the mission of preparing your pet’s food at home, it’s important that you take some time to look up what exactly is needed in your pet’s diet. You have to ensure that your pet gets all the nutrients it needs, and that you don’t provide it with too much of one food group or another as this could cause it serious health problems (Hypervitaminosis A, Hypervitaminosis D).
Cats require a varied diet, consisting mainly of meat. One of the most important amino acids for cats is Taurine which is only found in meat – a lack of this in a cat’s diet could cause cardiac dysfunction, blindness, etc. Other essential nutrients for our feline friend include: arginine (also important for dogs too), arachidonic acid, niacin, vitamin A, vitamin D, vitamin E. You should not forget to provide the right amount of calcium, phosphorus, and magnesium. Reading this you probably get the sense that taking on the task of being your pet’s personal cook is not as simple as it sounds. Our pets have very specific dietary needs, just like us, and you wouldn’t want to risk endangering them with the wrong food. The plate of scraps after a large meal is clearly not enough.
Purchasing food off the shelf
As the vast majority of consumers opt for buying their food from either the supermarket or their local pet store, it’s important to highlight that the range of dietary foods being produced today means that, if you don’t read the label carefully, you can really do harm to your pet feeding them food that is not matched to their actual dietary needs. We’ve seen dogs that look emaciated and thin simply because they have not been given the correct advice when feeding their dog (we then saw the same dog a few weeks later looking great!).
For example, ‘ash’ is often included in the ingredient list of pet foods. This refers to the inorganic component of the food, and it shouldn’t make up more than 6.5%-7% of dry foods and 1%-2% of wet foods. The lower the concentration of ash, the higher the quality of the food.
Labelling in pet food and what it means
Specifically regarding meat in packaged pet foods, there are a few things to keep an eye open for while studying the labels. The amount of meat included in pet food changes from brand to brand, but as a general rule the following serves as a guide:
- products that have the word ‘flavour’ or ‘aroma’ in their name contain under 4% of meat;
- when the product name declares ‘with meat’ it should contain over 4% of meat;
- when the name contains ‘rich in meat’ or ‘extra meat’ the percentage of meat is between 14% and 25%. Anything above 14% and 25% and the product takes on the name of the meat it’s made up of.
In dry foods, sometimes meat flour or fish flour are included. These sometimes contain offal and discarded meat so a better option is dehydrated meat.
Author Bi line
We hope that this article has provided you the reader with greater detail on some of the nuances involved in planning your pet’s diets. At ZEIPET in Florence, Tuscany, we have been serving customers in our little pet shop since 1962. We are most known for our luxury dog beds which are made to order and from some of the finest fabrics in Italy. So, after you pet has eaten and it’s time to stretch out, they are guaranteed to do so on a bed of doggie paradise.
Hope this has been helpful. If you have any questions, leave them as comments and I’ll ask Glyn to reply.
Second set of wonderful pictures, courtesy of Bob Derham.
(In case you missed the first set, here’s the link: Trust me, I’m an engineer.)
Don’t have a spoon?
I can fix that!
Seat belt broken?
I can fix that! (Is that a neck brace you have on?)
New TV too big for the old cabinet?
I can fix that!
No bottle opener?
I can fix that!
Room too dark using compact fluorescent?
I can fix that!
I can fix that!
Car stereo stolen?
I can fix that!
Bookshelf cracking under the weight?
I can fix that!
No ice chest?
I can fix that!
Can’t read the ATM screen?
I can fix that!
Car imported from the wrong country?
I can fix that!
Satellite signal goes out when it rains?
I can fix that!
Electric stove broken & can’t heat coffee?
I fixed that.
Wiper motor burned out?
I can fix that!
What the HECK!!!
Display rack falling over?
I can fix that!
I can fix that!
Car can’t be ordered with the ‘Wood Trim’ option?
I can fix that!
Exhaust pipe dragging?
I can fix that!
Need to feed the baby AND do the laundry?
I can fix that!
Cables falling behind the desk? (Now this is a Good One!)
I can fix that!
No skate park in town?
I can fix that!
And – last but not least – - – -
Out of diapers? I can fix that!
Wonderful, aren’t they! Mind you, please understand I am not encouraging anyone to copy these ideas!
Sent in by an old friend back in the UK.
I became confused when I heard the word ‘service‘ used with these agencies:
Pay TV ‘Service‘
State & Public ‘Service‘
This is not what I thought ‘Service‘ meant.
Then I visited my uncle, he’s a farmer, and he hired a bull to ‘Service‘ his cows. Suddenly WOW!!! It all came clear. Now I understand what all those agencies are doing to us!
Continuing the thoughts of Michael Klare.
(My apologies, this is a difficult week for me as I prepare for a course that starts on the 11th May. So posts may be a little thinner than usual.)
Yesterday, I wrote about an article by Michael Klare on the theme of the avenging planet. While researching for that piece, I came across a film that Klare has produced called Blood and Oil. It seemed worth mentioning it on Learning from Dogs.
Here’s the synopsis,
The notion that oil motivates America’s military engagements in the Middle East has long been dismissed as nonsense or mere conspiracy theory. Blood and Oil, a new documentary based on the critically-acclaimed work of Nation magazine defense correspondent Michael T. Klare, challenges this conventional wisdom to correct the historical record. The film unearths declassified documents and highlights forgotten passages in prominent presidential doctrines to show how concerns about oil have been at the core of American foreign policy for more than 60 years – rendering our contemporary energy and military policies virtually indistinguishable. In the end, Blood and Oil calls for a radical re-thinking of US energy policy, warning that unless we change direction, we stand to be drawn into one oil war after another as the global hunt for diminishing world petroleum supplies accelerates.
Here’s a trailer for the film.
A frank and honest assessment of the reality of the present economic situation.
The next two days see me publishing, in two parts, a recent article from the Blogsite, Washington’s Blog. Perhaps one can’t blame the efforts of so many of the western governments’ leaders to talk up the economy but at street level the vast majority of people feel pain about their circumstances.
The particular post that appeared on Washington’s Blog on the 28th April was entitled Gallup Poll Shows that More Americans Believe the U.S. is in a Depression than is Growing … Are They Right? You can link to it here. It is detailed and comprehensive, which is why I think it will be more easily digested as two parts presented on Learning from Dogs over this week-end.
Here’s the first part.
Consumer confidence is, well … in somewhat of a depression.
Reuters reports today:
The April 20-23 Gallup survey of 1,013 U.S. adults found that only 27 percent said the economy is growing. Twenty-nine percent said the economy is in a depression and 26 percent said it is in a recession, with another 16 percent saying it is “slowing down,” Gallup said.
Tyler Durden notes:
That means that more Americans think the country is in a Depression, let alone recession, than growing.
How can so many Americans believe that we’re in a depression, when the stock market and commodity prices have been booming?
As I noted last week:
Instead of directly helping the American people, the government threwtrillions at the giant banks (including foreign banks; and see this) . The big banks have – in turn – used a lot of that money to speculate in commodities, including food and other items which are now driving up the price of consumer necessities [as well as stocks]. Instead of using the money to hire Americans, they’re hiring abroad (and getting tax refunds from the government).
But don’t rising stock prices help create wealth?
Not really. As I pointed out in January:
A rising stock market doesn’t help the average American as much as you might assume.
For example, Robert Shiller noted in 2001:
We have examined the wealth effect with a cross-sectional time-series data sets that are more comprehensive than any applied to the wealth effect before and with a number of different econometric specifications. The statistical results are variable depending on econometric specification, and so any conclusion must be tentative. Nevertheless, the evidence of a stock market wealth effect is weak; the common presumption that there is strong evidence for the wealth effect is not supported in our results. However, we do find strong evidence that variations in housing market wealth have important effects upon consumption. This evidence arises consistently using panels of U.S. states and individual countries and is robust to differences in model specification. The housing market appears to be more important than the stock market in influencing consumption in developed countries.
I pointed out in March:
Even Alan Greenspan recently called the recovery “extremely unbalanced,” driven largely by high earners benefiting from recovering stock markets and large corporations.
As economics professor and former Secretary of Labor Robert Reichwrites today in an outstanding piece:
Some cheerleaders say rising stock prices make consumers feel wealthier and therefore readier to spend. But to the extent most Americans have any assets at all their net worth is mostly in their homes, and those homes are still worth less than they were in 2007. The “wealth effect” is relevant mainly to the richest 10 percent of Americans, most of whose net worth is in stocks and bonds.
I noted in May:
As of 2007, the bottom 50% of the U.S. population owned only one-half of one percent of all stocks, bonds and mutual funds in the U.S. On the other hand, the top 1% owned owned 50.9%.
(Of course, the divergence between the wealthiest and the rest has only increased since 2007.)
And last month Professor G. William Domhoff updated his “Who Rules America” study, showing that the richest 10% own 98.5% of all financial securities, and that:
The top 10% have 80% to 90% of stocks, bonds, trust funds, and business equity, and over 75% of non-home real estate. Since financial wealth is what counts as far as the control of income-producing assets, we can say that just 10% of the people own the United States of America.
Indeed, most stocks are held for only a couple of moments - and aren’t held by mom and pop investors.
How bad are things for the little guy?
Well, as I noted in January, the housing slump is worse than during the Great Depression.
As CNN Money points out today:
Wal-Mart’s core shoppers are running out of money much faster than a year ago due to rising gasoline prices, and the retail giant is worried, CEO Mike Duke said Wednesday.
“We’re seeing core consumers under a lot of pressure,” Duke said at an event in New York. “There’s no doubt that rising fuel prices are having an impact.”
Wal-Mart shoppers, many of whom live paycheck to paycheck, typically shop in bulk at the beginning of the month when their paychecks come in.
Lately, they’re “running out of money” at a faster clip, he said.
“Purchases are really dropping off by the end of the month even more than last year,” Duke said. “This end-of-month [purchases] cycle is growing to be a concern.
And – in case you still think that the 29% of Americans who think we’re in a depression are unduly pessimistic – take a look at what I wrote last December:
The following experts have – at some point during the last 2 years – said that the economic crisis could be worse than the Great Depression:
- Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke
- Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker
- Economics scholar and former Federal Reserve GovernorFrederic Mishkin
- The head of the Bank of England Mervyn King
- Nobel prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz
- Nobel prize winning economist Paul Krugman
- Former Goldman Sachs chairman John Whitehead
- Investment advisor, risk expert and “Black Swan” author Nassim Nicholas Taleb
- Well-known PhD economist Marc Faber
- Morgan Stanley’s UK equity strategist Graham Secker
- Former chief credit officer at Fannie Mae Edward J. Pinto
- Billionaire investor George Soros
- Senior British minister Ed Balls
States and Cities In Worst Shape Since the Great Depression
States and cities are in dire financial straits, and many may default in 2011.
California is issuing IOUs for only the second time since the Great Depression.
Things haven’t been this bad for state and local governments since the 30s.
Loan Loss Rate Higher than During the Great Depression
In October 2009, I reported:
In May, analyst Mike Mayo predicted that the bank loan loss rate would be higher than during the Great Depression.
In a new report, Moody’s has just confirmed (as summarized by Zero Hedge):
The most recent rate of bank charge offs, which hit $45 billion in the past quarter, and have now reached a total of $116 billion, is at 3.4%, which is substantially higher than the 2.25% hit in 1932, before peaking at at 3.4% rate by 1934.
And see this.
Here’s a chart summarizing the findings:
(click here for full chart).
Indeed, top economists such as Anna Schwartz, James Galbraith, Nouriel Roubini and others have pointed out that while banks faced a liquidity crisis during the Great Depression, today they are wholly insolvent. See this, this,this and this. Insolvency is much more severe than a shortage of liquidity.
Unemployment at or Near Depression Levels
USA Today reports today:
So many Americans have been jobless for so long that the government is changing how it records long-term unemployment.
Citing what it calls “an unprecedented rise” in long-term unemployment, the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), beginning Saturday, will raise from two years to five years the upper limit on how long someone can be listed as having been jobless.
The change is a sign that bureau officials “are afraid that a cap of two years may be ‘understating the true average duration’ — but they won’t know by how much until they raise the upper limit,” says Linda Barrington, an economist who directs the Institute for Compensation Studies at Cornell University’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations.
“The BLS doesn’t make such changes lightly,” Barrington says. Stacey Standish, a bureau assistant press officer, says the two-year limit has been used for 33 years.
Although ”this feels like something we’ve not experienced” since the Great Depression, she says, economists need more information to be sure.
The following chart from Calculated Risk shows that this is not a normal spike in unemployment:
As does this chart from Clusterstock:
As I noted in October:
It is difficult to compare current unemployment with that during the Great Depression. In the Depression, unemployment numbers weren’t tracked very consistently, and the U-3 and U-6 statistics we use today weren’t used back then. And statistical “adjustments” such as the “birth-death model” are being used today that weren’t used in the 1930s.
But let’s discuss the facts we do know.
The Wall Street Journal noted in July 2009:
The average length of unemployment is higher than it’s been since government began tracking the data in 1948.
The job losses are also now equal to the net job gains over the previous nine years, making this the only recession since the Great Depression to wipe out all job growth from the previous expansion.
The Christian Science Monitor wrote an article in June entitled, “Length of unemployment reaches Great Depression levels“.
60 Minutes – in a must-watch segment – notes that our current situation tops the Great Depression in one respect: never have we had a recession this deep with a recovery this flat. 60 Minutes points out that unemployment has been at 9.5% or above for 14 months:
Pulitzer Prize-winning historian David M. Kennedy notes in Freedom From Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929-1945(Oxford, 1999) that – during Herbert Hoover’s presidency, more than 13 million Americans lost their jobs. Of those, 62% found themselves out of work for longer than a year; 44% longer than two years; 24%longer than three years; and 11% longer than four years.
Part Two tomorrow.
Five minutes of pure sanity
I can’t recall how I came across this wise Professor but it was in recent times. Not going to say any more at this stage. Just watch the following.
There will be more from David Ehrenfeld over the coming weeks.
Humanity is on the march, earth itself is left behind.
David Ehrenfeld, The Arrogance of Humanism, 1978
What a wonderful and talented man he was!
Many, many years ago I was a salesman with IBM UK; their office products division. I found it a wonderful job in a great company and was very happy. The annual reward for meeting one’s sales targets was the 100% Club. I seem to recall that at one of these lavish events, one of the guest entertainers was Peter Ustinov. Indeed, somewhere deep in my belongings is an autograph of the great man.
Anyway, as a nice alternative to the posts on Learning from Dogs this past week, here’s a wonderful compilation of interviews of Sir Peter taken by ‘Parky’ otherwise known as Sir Michael Parkinson – ah sweet memories!