A powerful idea with a simple execution


No need for words, just click


Words are no longer enough

How can three presidents say the same thing, spanning well over a decade and yet not have the balls do do anything about it?  How much leverage must one lobby group have for this to happen?

My sister lives in the US, in Connecticut no less and she is having to have conversations with her school about how they can prevent a massacre from happening.

I look across the pond and I think “What fu*king kind of world even contemplates such conversations with primary schools?”.   How is that a school’s responsibility?

They are fighting the wrong problem and promoting the wrong kind of solution.  Teachers carrying guns, bulletproof glass etc won’t stop this from happening again.  The problem isn’t that schools are ill equipped, it’s that there are crazy fu*kers out there who have been allowed to amass an arsenal of weapons for little money and with little fuss.

Guns don’t kill people.  People kill people.  And if you allow every bozo to carry a gun, sooner or later one of them is going to kill someone.  The only solution is to stop them having such easy access – be that through making weapons or bullets more expensive to doing some basic background checks (i.e. has this person been in prison before / do they have a history of mental illness or short temper?).

The right to bear arms is supposed to be about self defence but the types of weapons that are available to purchase are beyond the means of reasonable self defence – they are military weapons that have no place in a modern, civilised society.

The time for talking is over.  The world is watching America.

Hate the game not the player

David Simonds Starbucks 21.10.12Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you’ll no doubt have heard the furore around certain companies not paying what is perceived to be the right amount of tax in the UK.

You can read some of the articles on this from marketing publications here and here.

The crux of the argument seems to central around the morality of making such obscene amounts of money from the tax paying public and then not paying tax themselves.  Whilst I understand that view, the reality is that what they are doing is legal and if we could all afford it, we would do it ourselves.

My view is don’t get pissed at those who abide by the rules, get pissed AT the rules.  If the government really wants these companies to pay tax, it would close these loopholes but it won’t because it gives people jobs and the alternative has such deeper and costlier effects.

So don’t hate blame the companies, blame the politicians.

PS: there is a HUGE amount of irony hearing politicians decry the ‘spirit’ of the law when a few years ago they were affirming their innocence in the expenses scandals where their actions were largely deemed to have been legal.
How much tax is paid by major US companies in the UK?


A truth that’s difficult to dispute

Tolerance-Bumper-Sticker-(7103)I’m not religious in any sense, yet somehow I found myself recently spending about 3 hours on YouTube watching both Richard Hawkins and Christopher Hitchens take on many religious people with their views.  It made for some very interesting and at times amusing debate,  but the most poignant point was this

“With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.”
― Steven Weinberg

A new world view

On Saturday I bought the Guardian, but sure enough I was only able to look at it last night and this morning, so I’m a little behind.

Nevertheless, something jumped out at me from the Guardian Magazine.  It was a set of maps by Yanko Tsvetkov.

They were designed as a satirical take on stereotypes, and I thought they were hilarious, so thought I would share them.  There are many more here.

[NOTE: Apologies for the poor quality photos – camera phone and also some of the language used in the images is NSFW]

When PR wins over policies

So the government has once again backed down on one of its proposed policies as a result of public outcry and a perception of being soft on crime.

This must be the 3rd or 4th back reversal the government has performed in the little time it has been around all of which have been off the back of getting a bit of flack from voters about them.

I have a couple of issues with this:

  1. They were chosen to make decisions so make them, don’t dither.
  2. They need to man up. Criticism of any and everything is part and parcel of the job.  Give in too many times and people stop believing that (a) you know what you are doing and (b) you will actually follow through with any proposals
  3. They need to be honest about why they made the decisions they did – don’t hide behind spin.  Stop treating us like kids and give us the truth and the objective reasons why you believe this is right.  Your ideas are much more likely to be accepted if there is a perceived genuine will to improve things.  And even if they are not, at least they will be more respected.

In today’s world of increased transparency, we need our politicians to catch up and open up.  You want a Big Society, then include it don’t alienate or antagonise it.

Despite not leaning right or left when it comes to politics, there are some politicians who seem quite genuine and Ken Clarke is one of them.  Despite not always agreeing with him, you can see what his thinking was and he is fairly open and honest about it.  But if the price you get for it is to get chastised from left, right and centre then no wonder people respond by spinning things into incomprehensible psycho-babble.

I remember someone (Charlie Brooker I think) saying that because there is now such outcry at any opportunity, politicians are becoming vapid, with nothing to say on politics and policies and the lines between parties is fading away.  Is that really the political system we want?

At the end of the day you get what you deserve, and at the moment we are getting the crap governing we are creating with constant PR battles.

(Note: I don’t buy this ‘we didn’t vote for this coalition’ argument.  You know the system, how it works.  Sometimes this happens.  Now let them do their job.  If they f**k up, kick them out at the next election)