I was waiting for a flight to London one day in January, a spare seat opposite me at the table in the lounge.
A middle-aged German woman asked to sit down. She was she stopping briefly in Dubai on her way back from Australia and it seemed from the conversation that her month long trip had been some sort of possible life changing experience. By her simple back pack and even her shoes I could tell she was an individual with character.
In the minutes that passed by she talked about Tasmania and how different life was there from the one she knew at home. I don’t recall exactly what I said to share the pleasure of her trip but did agree that it was possible to make major changes in one’s life; it obviously struck a chord.
Not so long after this brief meeting, I received an email. She had made those big changes and she sent me a picture that she took in Tasmania as a thank you.
A Tasmanian bird greeting the morning sun
You never know how sometimes people just need someone who can see that their dreams are possible!
My daughter turned 17 years of age on 4th February, and has been excited about the possibility of being able to drive for some time, apart from a period of concern when the British Government hinted at raising the driving age to 18. Fortunately that passed.
I likewise always wanted to drive and at age 17 moved from two wheels to four and in 10 days had passed my test. The car insurance giving nearly minimum cover was £26 a year, my first car having a 2.6 litre engine. The next was a Jaguar 2.4, and the third, another Jag, this time a 3.8 XK 150S, for which I probably had to pay an extra £10 a year, all while I was 17. (1969 ) Continue reading “What a con!”→
Back in 1955, air travel was an adventure and the age of the jet airliner had already dawned in the UK, albeit with some major setbacks along the way.
As the US prepared to enter the market that summer, there is the well known incident of Boeing test pilot “Tex” Johnston rolling a prototype Boeing 707.
From today’s perspective, under those circumstances , the integrity of the people involved was impressive. As the pilot describes, he was called into the office of the president of Boeing to explain his actions. For me, the most telling comment is his final line:
Here’s one person who doesn’t agree with the President.
The President seems to believe that he can say whatever he wants and no one will hold him accountable. He now claims that “every economist, from both sides of the aisle, believes that the stimulus program created jobs.”
I am an economist, Mr. President, and I know, based either on simple first principles of economics, or on a more rigorous controlled study of labor markets in each major sector of the economy, that the unemployment rate would have been much lower today had the stimulus program never occurred.
You are either woefully unaware of the facts, Mr. President, or are purposefully distorting the facts. Neither is good. When are you going to realize that just because you say something does not make it so? The world does not contort itself to support your version of the truth.
Some little time ago I wrote about the word “fair”, which I tongue-in-cheek referred to as a Word of Mass Destruction (WOMD) insofar as if one REALLY put into place practices that were truly “fair” then western capitalism would break down completely. (The story of the CEO of Goldsmiths and his $100,000,000 bonus is for another day ….)
Well, my OTHER WOMD is “rationing”.
I was drawn to this topic by the words of a British minister about the desirability of introducing rationing into AIR TRAVEL. The thinking goes (and to be honest it is in fact obvious, isn’t it?) that IF we are serious about reducing climate change (a VERY BIG IF!!) then we cannot continue to hope to fly where and when we want to as in the past. For aviation is a growth industry despite the current crisis, and as people in developing economies in Asia in particular grow more prosperous they will want to travel more and more. I have seen estimates to suggest that within a decade ONE HUNDRED MILLION Chinese will be travelling to Europe EVERY YEAR.
This is of course totally incompatible with any hope of doing anything serious about climate change. The logical conclusion is that (until some boffin invents an emission-free jet) we MUST reduce flying. This is likely for most adults to be about as palatable as denying burgers and chips to British teenagers, but I really cannot see the alternative IF Global Warming is to be taken seriously (which it probably won’t be until it’s too late).
But let’s for the moment remain positive …. supposing it is decided by some courageous government (are there any?) that we must reduce flying then there are two ways to do it.
A) TAX it so highly that only the rich can afford it
B) RATION it – everyone has a quota of air miles per annum.
Now option A is the usual free-market/capitalist way. After all, Ferraris are rationed by their price; otherwise all males over 18 would have one, or in my case several. But – much as I recognize what the free market has done in terms of wealth creation – we are in a new scenario, aren’t we? Can we really hope to say that only the rich can fly? I think not, and therefore rationing is the only way to do this.
Now, there is a minority of people that abuse anything, and no doubt rationing would be abused by some, somewhere, somehow. But it is the only FAIR way to go about it, isn’t it?
In London and other big cities we are now seeing a TAX imposed on driving into the city centres. Yes, very sensible, but of course, the RICH aren’t bothered. In effect, schemes like London’s are simply a way of excluding the masses from the city centre. The same idiocy is seen on French motorways, which are becoming increasingly expensive. The rich are not bothered by the tolls but the less well-off certainly ARE and so drive on other roads which are less safe; survival of the richest …….
No, the free-market is not going to work in the Brave New World which we are entering. If you have a birthday party for your kids then EVERYONE gets an equal share of the cake. This principle is going to have to be applied in other areas of life, otherwise we are going to get serious social unrest. Besides, any other way is just not FAIR, is it?
Of course, once you concede the point on AIR TRAVEL there is – in a world of increasing populations and diminishing resources – no way of limiting the concept purely to air travel, is there?
I am just old enough to remember my Mother’s WWII ration card, which she used up to the very early 50s I believe. Will we soon start to see a modern reincarnation, and not only in carbon credits?
The unacceptable face of the big agricultural businesses
Another wonderful link from Naked Capitalism. This one refers to the way that the definition of ‘organic’ as in organic milk is being twisted and distorted to favour the huge indoor milking herds, up to 10,000 cattle, that in any sensible mind could never be regarded as the organic production of milk.
This to me is a picture of organic production of milk:
An English meadow
This to me is NOT! Yet the milk from these cows is defined as organic!
Organic milk?
This last picture is courtesy of The Cornucopia Institute, another web site worth a visit whether or not you take an interest in farming – after all, one presumes that you do eat!
The debate about the Christmas Day Bomber continues. The pundits continue to define “success” in this case as finding him guilty in a court of law. They go on and on, repeating over and over again, how the evidence is so strong, how the civilian court system is so reliable, how the shoe bomber was tried in civilian court, and how a guilty verdict is virtually certain.
This is so wrong. The definition of success is not whether we find the Christmas Day Bomber guilty in a civilian court. This man intended to blow himself up on Christmas Day, and take hundreds of innocent Americans with him. The fact that he is alive today, facing a jury or a judge and possible jail time or, at the worst, the death penalty, is a mere footnote to him.
Has it occurred to anyone that if the military had interrogated the shoe bomber as the failed terrorist that he was, that the odds of the Christmas Day Bomber getting on that plane with those explosives would have been diminished? And interrogating the Christmas Day terrorist instead of shipping him off to the local prosecutor — for reasons Eric Holder, the U.S. Attorney General, has yet to articulate– diminishes the odds of some future terrorist act?
Eric Holder
We are at war!
These people attacked us as part of the ongoing war with terrorists. No one should “rest easy” because some lawyer is going to sleepwalk through a trial that may or may not successfully reach the painfully obvious conclusion that the Christmas Day Bomber is guilty! On the contrary, it makes me very uneasy that he is in the civilian court system at this point in time at all, because every moment spent reading this man his rights is a moment that could have been spent gathering intelligence from a terrorist. His punishment will come in due time. In the meanwhile, we have to extract as much information from his as we can in order to defend ourselves.
An interesting story on the BBC recently. It seems that growth is now “bad” and incompatible with reducing global warming.
I have to say that this always seemed obvious to me (and despite appearances – or indeed pretentions – I am not that clever) since IF industrial production and emissions are creating too much CO2 then it is surely obvious that more of the former will produce more of the latter. Any flaws in this argument will surely be pointed out to me pdq, but I won’t be losing any sleep – or indeed I suspect – the argument!
Well, the theory that growth is bad has now been confirmed by a scientific study ….. of course, we have learned to take some of these studies with a pinch of salt, and it doesn’t help when scientists on the “we are doomed” side sex up their findings to make their case, as was revealed just recently. I found this hilarious!! Once again, a dishonest intention to achieve ONE kind of result (boost the doomsayers’ cause) actually achieved the OPPOSITE!!! When will they ever learn?
An aerial view of the Siachen Glacier, which traverses the Himalayan region dividing India and Pakistan. Photograph: Channi Anand/AP
As for the evils of growth, I am wondering if the British Prime Minister has been informed? His entire strategy (if that is not too noble a word to use in this context) has for well over a decade been based on growth (indeed growth triumphantly trumpeted in advance as likely to be at a level far higher than it actually turns out to be) bringing in enough money to pay for his humungous over-spending.
He must be urgently rearranging his matchsticks in an effort to cook the books once again ….
And there is another side of the “no-growth” movement. YOU may very well decide that in the cause of saving the planet you will keep your consumption where it is, but – logically – that also means people in the developing world who are incredibly poor keeping THEIR consumption where IT is. That is one hard sell. Of course, YOU may then decide to REDUCE your consumption down until it meets theirs coming up ….. No? Oh well …..
The way I see it, growth is inevitable, whether it is good for the planet or not. Which is a bit of a poser if growth is going to doom us. Still, I remain an optimist – some genius will find a way out of this enigma …. but please make it soon before we grow too much!!
Another example of the very tight bonds between man and dogs.
A couple of weeks ago Learning from Dogs published a series of videos originally broadcast by the BBC Horizon programme called The Secret Life of the Dog. It revealed a hitherto unknown depth of understanding of dogs by man and man by dogs. Part One of those six parts is linked to here.
Now it turns out that Russian Muscovites are fascinated by stray dogs and it is estimated that there are 35,000 stray dogs in the Russian capital city.
Interestingly, because we tend to associate the newspaper with financial matters, the British Financial Times had a fascinating article a couple of weeks ago, from which is quoted:
Where did these animals come from? It’s a question Andrei Poyarkov, 56, a biologist specialising in wolves, has dedicated himself to answering. His research focuses on how different environments affect dogs’ behaviour and social organisation. About 30 years ago, he began studying Moscow’s stray dogs. Poyarkov contends that their appearance and behaviour have changed over the decades as they have continuously adapted to the changing face of Russia’s capital. Virtually all the city’s strays were born that way: dumping a pet dog on the streets of Moscow amounts to a near-certain death sentence. Poyarkov reckons fewer than 3 per cent survive.
Do read the article as it is a revealing piece about our interest in dogs in all corners of the world. Indeed it mentions a web site devoted to stray dogs on Moscow’s Metro railway.
Learning from Dogs 