Here’s a novel idea, let the Public Sector live within its means!
BBC Business Editor, Robert Peston
Robert Peston is the BBC’s Business Editor. I’ve read his Blog and listened to him on the Beeb for many years now. His latest Blog article hits the bulls-eye.
The smart solution would be to somehow depoliticise what’s known as fiscal consolidation, or the process of cutting spending and raising taxes such that the public sector can again live within its means.
Precisely!
A public sector that seeks not to burden society but to benefit it should not be an issue of party politics.
I’m not sure exactly what the political leanings are of the Learning From Dogs readership — I would hope that a variety of viewpoints are represented — but I know that often communitarian philosophies are held in contempt in libertarian or free market circles because of their association with historical attempts at socialism and communism.
Regardless, I’d love to hear your thoughts, as it’s a philosophy I’ve been thinking about a lot recently. I write:
…I have to admit that one of the key flaws I see in communitarian political philosophies is not so much the non-cohesive nature of the doctrines themselves, but rather the level at which they are prescribed. If communitarianism was only applied at the local level, could it really survive without an element of voluntarism? I feel that capitalist leaning nation-states are begging the question in saying that ideologies like socialism don’t work, because they are assuming that they must be applied at the nation-state level.
This involves the idea that the strictness of economic laws tends to lessen as they move further away from large-scale application, so anti-communitarian claims like the lack of an adequate price mechanism and lack of adequate information tends to become less of a problem for local communities because the nature of economic communication changes as the distance between actors closes. It also involves the idea put forth by such philosophers as David Hume that human beings are naturally sociable creatures, and a communitarian system at the local level would be able to use this sociability to its advantage.
[As a newcomer to Arizona with only a couple of months experience of living in Payson, North-East of Phoenix, I have no right to pass comment on what has been big news both inside and outside the State. I have observed that feelings run strong about illegal immigrants, with many reacting to the complicated process that I am going through applying for US residency by saying “It’s not fair”. Not fair in the sense that they see so many Mexicans just walking over the long border that Arizona has with it’s neighbour to the south.
Thus this thoughtful Post from Gordon Coons is a chance for Learning from Dogs to air a point of view from someone who does have a right to an opinion. Ed.]
My fellow Americans, friends and relatives:
I am writing you to express my concerns over the recently passed law regarding immigration in my former state of Arizona.
As most (if not all) of you know, I lived in Arizona for 10 years, my children still live there and Linda and I have been living in Mexico. I mention this only in that it gives me a certain perspective on the events that have transpired recently.
The Border
The spate of marches and protests around the country would lead us to believe that the state of Arizona has completely lost its collective and legislative mind. The feeling is that enforcing such a law would lead to rampant profiling of Mexicans (and other Chicanos) who DO live in this country legally.
First of all, let’s examine WHY all of those Latinos want to come here. There are 2 basic, and yet profound, reasons:
they want jobs and
they want their children to be born here so that they become naturalized citizens and are the beneficiaries of all of our rights.
Do I blame them? Of course not….if I were in their shoes, I would want to come here as well.
I do take exception to the growing group of “banditos Mexicano” who are bent on illegal activities on both sides of the border.
Maybe, just maybe, this is going to be real change!
I’m writing this at 9.30 pm US Mountain Time on the 6th, the equivalent of 5.30am British Summer Time on the 7th May. I’ve been watching the excellent live election broadcast online from the BBC.
There is no clear leading party at this time but the Conservatives appear to heading possibly to lead a minority Government.
It’s been the most puzzling set of results in my lifetime but maybe it’s showing that the British public have voted against one-party politics and voted for consensus.
Because the sorts of problems that are ahead for Britain (and so many other countries) require a new form of Government, a Government that truly puts the country first and not the Party!
Fascinating times. Let’s see what the next few days, weeks and months will bring.
[With this Post, Jon introduces a series of forthcoming articles looking at the inner person and exploring ways in which each of us can enhance our feelings of contentment and happiness. Ed.]
Stop the world, I want to get off!
Starting again requires giving up
Whichever way we look, there appear to be huge problems. Not insurmountable but, metaphorically speaking, sheer vertical cliffs without any easy way up.
One might ponder if the last 50 years, that post-war period of growth and prosperity, have, in reality given society real, sustainable, core improvements or whether all the ‘gains’ have come at such a cost that the net benefit is questionable?
This could be seen as pessimism gone mad. Undoubtedly, there have been some huge gains from a scientific point of view and we now enjoy lives that are greatly enhanced and longer. But not to ask such a fundamental question is to assume the alternative, that everything in the garden is rosy.
Now this may seem a strange introduction to a topic that is going to be deeply personal and private.
But both the private, individual world of the ‘self’ and the great, interconnected world of the planet are indivisible. Every aspect of our lives, our livelihoods, our environment and the future of our children depends on how well, and how sustainably, we manage our personal, local, national and international interests.
For example, if Prof. Lovelock’s theory on the planet being a self-regulating organism is correct, his Gaia theory, then possibly in the lifetimes of our children, and certainly in the lifetimes of our grandchildren, worrying about a job or repaying the mortgage will be irrelevant. Our descendants will be worrying about their very survival!
I called this piece Giving Up. Why?
Because the only way forward is to give up on the present. I will expand on this theme in future Posts.
The future depends on each of us being happy and contented with ourselves and avoiding looking out there for the magic cure to all our troubles. Being, as far as we are able, at peace with our circumstances and able to do the best, individually, as well as the best for our families, our friends and the larger world in which we work and play.
I have heard people ask the question before, “How can I best help the world?” The only truthful answer is to develop ourselves as individuals. In doing this, the field of consciousness that we are all connected to is also lifted or elevated to a higher level.
At this stage of history, either…the general population will take control of its own destiny and will
Noam Chomsky
concern itself with community interests guided by values of solidarity and sympathy and concern for others or alternately there will be no destiny for anyone to control.
-Noam Chomsky
By Jon Lavin
[Anyone who has been affected by this article and wishes to contact Jon may find his contact details here. Ed.]
One of the fascinating aspects of my new American life is seeing how loud the volume of dissent is from the American
Bill Moyers
people about the shenanigans on Wall Street and the Too Big To Fail banks. There is an intensity and passion that I can’t see happening on the other side of the Pond. Maybe this is the cultural legacy of a people that just a short time ago, relatively speaking, were opening up this giant country seeking a better way of life than the ‘old countries’.
This intensity and passion is why, in the end, I believe that the solution to the huge crisis that still awaits us will start from this side of the Atlantic. But it will get a whole lot worse before it gets better, such is the complexity and depth of the fraud that is being visited on decent, ordinary folks in this and many other fine countries.
Bill Moyers of the Bill Moyers Journal on PBS is retiring. He’s approaching 76 and that’s a grand age to be dealing with the workload and stress of a weekly television presentation. His last Journal was broadcast on the 23rd April, a week ago today airing two really important topics. My only regret is that I haven’t been here sufficiently long to view many more of his Journals.
William K Black
In that last broadcast on the 23rd, Bill had two key interviews. In this Post, I want to bring to your attention his first report, which was an interview with William K Black, now an academic but, just as importantly, a former bank regulator. William Black really understands what is going on in banking.
The interview is both fascinating and captivating because, well to me anyway, it explains in terms that us laymen can understand, exactly what is going on and why it is so terribly important that legislation and regulations are brought into force to stop this fraud ever happening again.
This interview has not yet made it’s way onto YouTube so I can only post the link to the Bill Moyers website.
But, please, if you care about what is happening to us in whatever country you live in, click on this link and watch the interview.
And if you want to watch the earlier interview that Bill Moyers had with William Black then here it is.
Due to my work I am one of the lucky people who has the opportunity to stay for short periods in various cities around the globe, and mostly the Hotels we stay in are the best around, and depending where we are, the flavour is often special.
I remember a stay in the Hilton Amsterdam where John Lennon had stayed, and had a week in bed to “Give Peace a Chance”, but a recent stay in the Marriott Eastside Hotel, New York caught my eye.
Georgia O'Keefe, 1918 photograph by Alfred Stieglitz
Georgia O`Keeffe lived here for 10 years!
I remember, she was the lady who painted the large scale flowers, and in particular “The Petunia”, and when she painted that particular piece, she was living in a suite on the 32nd floor of the very hotel I was staying in.
Georgia O`Keeffe was born in 1887 in Sun Prairie, Wisconsin. She studied art in Chicago, and New York, and became an Art Teacher at Columbia College, South Carolina.
One of her friends had shown some of her works to Alfred Stieglitz the photographer. She came to New York, and there the two eventually married, and moved later into the Shelton Hotel, Lexington Avenue, which is now called the Marriott Hotel, Eastside.
The Petunia picture was painted in 1924, and was one of a large number of her works that were exhibited in 1925.
Her husband Alfred Steiglitz died in 1946, after which she moved to an isolated ranch in New Mexico, but she continued to produce great works. Paintings of Desert Cliffs, Animal Bones, and Flowers are among the worlds most admired works of art, and she continued to draw, paint and sculpt until her death in 1986, aged 98.
Petunia - 1925
I rather liked a comment she made at the age of 90.
“Success takes more than talent. It takes a kind of nerve.”
…. is how Gavin Hewitt recently headed up a post on his BBC Europe blog. The headline caught my eye and then when I read the full article it seemed as yet another piece of western civilisation was sliding into chaos. Maybe it’s my age!
Gavin Hewitt
Gavin Hewitt is the BBC’s Europe Editor and as you can see from his bio, Gavin is a very experienced reporter. Here’s how this Eurozone article starts:
Friday [April 23rd, Ed] will be remembered as the day the euro needed rescuing. Sure it is Greece that has asked to be bailed out but it was still a day that the architects of the single currency had never envisaged. For when it came to it, there were no plans to save a euro member in trouble.
You see what I mean about grabbing one’s attention!
In fact the article is so powerful that I am going to run the risk of incurring the wrath of the BBC’s legal department by republishing it in full.
Stating the obvious? So why is the reality so different?
British Chancellor with his famous red budget box. Is he proud of his vast borrowing "requirement"? He seems happy enough .....
Like Greece, Portugal is terribly indebted. Not because dirt-poor Senora Tristeza who sells in the local market decided to vastly overborrow more than she could pay, but because her government did.
Likewise, I did not ask the Labour government of Britain to borrow vastly over our repayment possibilities so that my son will be in hock for decades to come.
What is this absolute rubbish about “the borrowing requirement”? The British Chancellor comes out with this glib statement every budget day as if there was some cosmic compulsion that there should be a “borrowing requirement”.
NO, there shouldn’t …. Nobody FORCES us to borrow money, except perhaps in wartime. No government, and especially the current one, EVER says “No, we can’t afford that, we haven’t got the money and NO, we’re not going to borrow it.”
They just up the “borrowing requirement” automatically to pay for all their pet schemes and shibboleths. It is NOT a “requirement”.
It is a giving way to cowardice and greed, taking the easy way out. It is trying to impress people by the clever way they spend our money. They “require” to borrow because they do not have to courage to say (particularly near to elections): “Sorry people – we just can’t afford X, Y or Z as the money just isn’t there. We must be patient and live within our means.”
But it is time everyone started living within their means.
Individuals have a hard time sometimes, especially those desperate to get a foot on the housing ladder or parents desperate to get their kid into a good school, but the government does not have these excuses. There is NO excuse for building up vast debt. You have to live within your means.
This is so stunningly-obvious I wonder why it has to be said, but vast borrowing has become so endemic people think it is normal. And the levels of borrowing involved here are absurd. What sort of endictment is it of capitalism that several European countries (on the richest continent on the planet!!) are in great danger of going bankrupt?
Or, to put it another way, of defaulting on the debts that they cannot afford to repay? And even if they CAN pay they are also paying staggering amounts of interest, all money down the drain to fat bankers somewhere …..
Borrow to build a new railway because you’ll get the benefits back in emissions and efficiency savings. OK.
But borrow to pay civil-service bonuses and index-linked public (but not private!!) pensions and £60 billion on unelected quangoes and you will never get the money back. Someone will have to earn it, but the milch camel is staggering.
We need wise, courageous and fair-minded government which thinks of the long term. What are our chances of getting it?
A week or so ago, the BBC under their Beautiful Minds series, screened a programme about James Ephraim Lovelock, more popularly known as Professor Jim Lovelock.
Prof. James Lovelock
(Picture taken from this article – in itself well worth reading.)
The programme demonstrated that Lovelock’s mind is more than beautiful, it is still capable, at 90 years of age, of thinking in ways that are very rare in today’s societies where conformity is such a powerful force.
As always, WikiPedia has an excellent reference on Prof. Lovelock and I encourage you to read it plus Lovelock’s own website which makes up in content what it may lack for presentation!
Luckily there is an extract from the BBC programme on YouTube – please watch this and reflect on exactly what Lovelock is saying.
And if you are up for more, then settle down for thirteen minutes and watch this next video.
James Lovelock is the Darwin of our times.
Now to put this into some context (this is me speaking as a layman!).
Learning from Dogs 