´óÏó´«Ã½

WHEN WORLDS COLLIDE

The fancy computer that converts an ape into a human, would probably dispense with all the mess and inconvenience if it could. Plenty of fiction to support that idea.

As things stand, the ape has urges and the computer is hooked on the coloured beads of cleverness. Add alcohol and religion - welcome to 'going nowhere'.

Makes climate change look a bit tame doesn't it.

"Could it be because India is a democracy and China is a dictatorship?"

How is China a dictatorship?

It's politicians are all elected!

It's a system of democracy which calls itself a dictatorship of the people because of how it works. It's system is democratic-centralism. That is how the Old Labour party more or less worked too. This works as a pyramid, where people vote for a party member to represent then at a local level and they then they vote for their leaders (much as our parties do here) and so on and so on all the way up the system. It's still a democracy, it just isn't a liberal democracy. Once a decision is made at the top level it has to be complied with down the system. That is the dictatorship bit. We don't have direct democracy here either you will note, we also have a representational democracy.

Stop writing falsehoods.

China has sports built into its psyche because of Chairman Mao's paper (in 1917!) that "It is absolutely right to say that one must build a strong body if he or she wants to cultivate inner strength." Hence the "ping pong" diplomacy with Nixon in the 1970's. Indians on the other hand, do not give any importance to sport, as they consider it to be a "bit of fun" and prefer to sit indoors and study. This leads to businesses not investing any money into sports (excluding cricket), so no one bothers with any of the olympic sports :o(

Perhaps Mr Hunt has - started - to say the right thing but not necessarily for all of the right reasons.

Parents responsibility is primarily to the well-being of their children, then - as a very, very close second - to society. The issue - not only from the financial aspect - of whether having more children pays for a six-pack or a boob job comes way past the bottom of the list for reasons to bring another being into this world.

Perhaps HMG should put aside the ‘purely’ financial aspect and consider other reasons as to why some people might have more children than is perhaps necessary stroke advisable? Could not this question be raised tonight?

Hint ....

The USA is reviewing the matter of dual nationality ....

.... and it’s long term consequences!



And ....

Why are ‘things’ “Embargoed?

Is this to allow the HMP’s, Party drones and right-wing hacks time to come up with the spin, scare stories and excuses?

Or is it to allow time to gauge possible responses and come up with ‘Plan B’?

Who on earth has written the introduction to tonight's programme? One of dictatorship loving bloggers? There have countless Commonwealth Games organised by democratic countries that ran very smoothly and efficiently , including by the UK.

Monika

Thoughts on yesterday’s post at .....

At 9:55pm on 06 Oct 2010, brossen99 wrote:


Perhaps she couldn’t cope with the the responsibility?

Did her Nanny had a couple of days off!

What is happening to the ‘beautiful’ sic game sic?

Is it in decline?

Are less of the GBP actually playing the game?

Is it no longer played in schools?

The situation is so bad the immigration cap doesn’t apply to Premier League Footballers!

Oh well!

That’s OK then!

Lifestyle choices

How many of you know girls/women who deliberately have several children with different fathers in order to live off the benefits system?

My experience is that without exception these wretched souls are desperate; desperate to find love/warmth/affection; vulnerable, usually due to a dysfunctional upbringing; and tragic, in that they proceed to replicate the origins of their own desperation by delivering a dysfunctional lifestyle to their own children.

How to break this dreadful cycle? Listen to some of the insights that IDS articulates and will incorporate into the reshaping of the welfare system.

If you are looking for examples of deliberate, calculating scrounging, then look no further than the directors of our major banks.

The more we fixate on the "crimes" of the "undeserving" poor, the more we ignore people like Sir Philip Green for example, who lives in Monaco so he avoids the bulk of the British tax system and then gets a job advising HMG on efficiency savings.

After all - fair's fair!

Finally - please explain Jazza's - and Lord Andrew Neil's - fixation on whether certain people knew certain things before they were publicly announced; would it not benefit us to hear more of the thinking behind the policy rather than "revelations" of who knew what and when?

Perhaps they are both trying to prepare a way for their careers post ´óÏó´«Ã½ pension pots shrinkage towards a new life at Heat/OK/Hello?

Knighty knight.

IS THE CON-DEM ASSERTION, OF 'NO FURTHER POWERS TO EUROPE', VALID?

Did I hear Hague trumpet 'No abandon without referendum'?

I was vaguely of the view that the Lisbon Treaty allows the EU to make new laws THAT BIND US regardless. Is that not so? This seems to confirm:



I invite the informed among you to help me out here.

#7

What sick game are you talking about, ja?

I JUST WENT COLD (#9 additional)

What is EU-speak for 'Goldsmith'? If they have a Goldsmith, to interpret the 'precise' meaning of the Lisbon Treaty, WE ARE SUNK. Indeed - hoist with our own petard. How reassuringly nautical.

kashibeyaz wrote:

"How many of you know girls/women who deliberately have several children with different fathers in order to live off the benefits system?"

Yes I do know a woman who has had several children with different fathers at least largely in order to live off the benefits system. I don't know how common this is. But don't imagine that it doesn't happen.

Some people don't get married because they'd have to admit they're living together and lose substantial benefits. That also happens. I'm surprised the Tories don't talk about that problem.

re #12; I understand you, Newtonne; I become vexed by people who blithely pass judgement on others based on nothing more than what they've read in the papers or worse, on the internet.

It grieves me that so much time is spent on the "fairness" or otherwise of withdrawing child benefits from people earning 40k+ yet the plight of so many desperate people, young, mothers, old people is dismissed as some kind of "lifestyle choice".

Those eco fascists went a step too far with their latest little film.

"A British ad for a climate change campaign shows corporate workers, a famous soccer player and even school children being blown up for not agreeing to cut their carbon emissions, a blood-splattering display that has drawn anger from critics and sheepish embarrassment from its supporters"

"8. At 8:43pm on 07 Oct 2010, kashibeyaz wrote:
Lifestyle choices

How many of you know girls/women who deliberately have several children with different fathers in order to live off the benefits system?

My experience is that without exception these wretched souls are desperate; desperate to find love/warmth/affection; vulnerable, usually due to a dysfunctional upbringing; and tragic, in that they proceed to replicate the origins of their own desperation by delivering a dysfunctional lifestyle to their own children.

How to break this dreadful cycle? Listen to some of the insights that IDS articulates and will incorporate into the reshaping of the welfare system."

Do you speak as a Social Worker or allied professional? I suspect not.
To the best of my knowledge, human female mating behaviour is just like reproductive behaviour in other animals, i.e largely under genetic control, not environmental, i.e they are driven to behave the way they do by what they inherit. We can try to curb some of these behaviours by not giving them opportunity, i.e by not reinforcing them, but they will happen anyway at some frequency. It's very hard to tell why males leave their impregnated partners too. With some the females' behaviour is highly dysfunctional. What's definitely underestimated in our societies today is the extent to which dysfunctional histories repeat because dysfunctional behaviour is largely genetic, i.e. has nothing to do with upbringing as such, except that this too is under genetic control.

I hasten to add that this is not my personal opinion, it's just the way most animal behaviour is. We know that many dysfunctional behaviours (ADHD, Personality Disorders. Mood Disorders, Schizophrenia etc) run in families because they are largely genetic. We can't exert much control over any of it post natally, but we can just try to limit the frequency of some of these behaviours in the population by curbing the birth rates which give expression to them. Most people who are poor tend to be so because they don't have abilities allowing them not to be, the bad luck, being in their draw of genes. Tat's not their fault, but the price to society at large as they reproduce more and more like themselves can be devastating (see other nations which are failed states/basket cases economically and health wise)..

"13. At 9:28pm on 07 Oct 2010, kashibeyaz wrote:
re #12; I understand you, Newtonne; I become vexed by people who blithely pass judgement on others based on nothing more than what they've read in the papers or worse, on the internet"

Most people who have hard-nosed views about these dysfunctional breeders will be those who have had worked with them professionally. This will include, Social Workers, Probation Officers, Police, Forensic Psychiatrists/Psychologists, Magistrates, Teachers etc. What will annoy them is hearing about people with no experience of working with their dysfunctional clients apparently grieving about how unfortunate their clients are, mainly because grieving doesn't achieve anything at all, other than to make the griever look good to some naive people. What's worse is when they come to Britain just to have large families, taking benefits and then leaving the country. It does happen.

#14 kev

#16

Are you a hard vowed sniff-sniff, mr t'psychoologial table?

Mr sniff sniff has felt a whiff whiff
Of how a little fortune to make.
And so he started to build a great big zoo
Based on George Orwell's 'Animal Farm',
Claiming he didn't mean any harm.

He's probably now licking his wounds,
Wise have become he thought were fools.

Tonight: an illustration of all too typical dysfunctional (arrested
development) verbal behaviour after being told that the Government plans to cut benefits, a response that the Government will have to take responsibility for such people turning to crime!

One really can't get it through to some that other people do not owe them a living and that despite the Lisbon Treaty FCHR 'right to have a family', it does not entitle them to have children at other peoples'
expense.

The reason one can't it through to many people is that entitlement is a feature of pathological narcissism, and that's probably a feature of genetically arrested cognitive development.

It's very hard for normal people with a conscience to grasp this, but such criminogenic thinking is ever more common these days, and tends to go with entitlement to other people's property (as in robbery/burglary/rape). Sadly, it's largely incorrigible too (see the reconviction rates) and is I suggest, rising in frequency as a function of a changes in the birth-rate and immigration of the low skilled.

Why is India different to China? Again, it's the control of the birth rate. In China it is controlled. They now have a mean higher ability than Europe whilst India have a mean which is like that of Pakistan and Bangladesh (similar in fact to the poor Black states of the USA which also have high crime rates and poor employment levels etc).

It's all very unpalatable stuff, but the evidence is painfully clear. In the same way that large families can't afford to support their children if they don't have the cognitive skills to pay for what they need, countries are families writ large.

#22

Is it you then, table, who was behind yesterday's introduction to Newsnight on this website? I thought so. Though, 'deep down', it's only a 'profitable' joke, isn't it?

That's what Michael White of the Guardian wrote about Paxo's questioning Theresa May about the date she learned about the new child benefit policy announced by George Osborne at the Tory Conference this week:

'• Given the Michael Howard treatment by Newsnight's Jeremy Paxman, the home secretary, Theresa May, fought the brute off more successfully than Howard did. Repeatedly asked when exactly she knew of the child benefit cut plan, May eventually replied: "Jeremy, are you asking me for a date?" As Barbara Castle used to say, if you can't beat men rationally, then flirt with them.'

Jeremy 'brute' with TM? I didn't notice. He kept asking her the same question in a variety of ways but they seemed to me to be rather friendly with each other.

As for Barbara Castle's quote, well, in another context it could be used as a threatening 'invitation', doesn't it?

#22 tn01

I believe that the feeling of entitlement (pathological narcissism) has spread to the Houses of Parliament too! (and somewhile ago)

A flipping sense of entitlement


'No one doubts that most MPs and nearly all ministers work long and antisocial hours, but any temptation to sympathy is dissipated by the culture of entitlement that has been revealed by some of the correspondence that now sees the light of day. Such as the temporarily anonymous Labour MP who said that "natural justice" required that he be reimbursed £3,100 for a 40-inch TV because he had not realised there was a price limit.'

Could I just offer my congratulations to the Chileans for their hard work and tenacity in hopefully rescuing these miners



The bravery of these miners is remarkable, I just hope that it proves totally successful. But I can't see any of them wanting to go down a mine again. Two Australians said on the radio after being trapped for 2 weeks underground, that neither of them could do the job again, and couldn't stand being shut in anywhere now, especially in lifts.

I just hope the media will give these men some room, and not insist on poking into every corner of their lives! Some hope! : (

@ Ecolizzy #26 - that's great news :o)

#26

Is it just media that poke into every corner of one's life? I've heard of a case that suggests something different, Ecolizzy.

mim

Missed NN last night. RL got in the way.

Have it on iplayer now - heard the opening line ‘....tells how many children you can have that the taxpayers will pay for’

Well, let’s correct a linguistic inaccuracy there to start with shall we?

The tax payer ‘contributes’ to the support of all children through universal child benefit - they do not 'pay' for them in entirety inmost cases. It costs a lot more than the current annual figure of £1055.60 for one child even if you are frugal.

Don’t commentators, presenters, journalists and politicians just LOVE to use vague, emotive and downright dishonest language.

And I support EcoLizzy in her wish for the Chilean Miners, once released, to be left alone with their families. But also, let's not jump the gun. I await news of all being safely recovered before the cheers begin.

And while I am at it, lts be slightly contentious here.

Let's assume MOST people agree, despite Jeremy Paxmans 'underserving' label, that those without the means to support their choices (having children x ???) should be actively discouraged from having more children whom THEY cannot support.

Several policies may be required here. And it seems that firstly one needs to look to the future. How to manage the numbers of children anyone has. Is the Chinese model of 1 too low. Is two (theoretically replacement level of the nuclear family) the optimum. Should all levels of society be restricted ?????? to no more than two regardless of any benefits or welfare state. After all, senior managers, politicians, journalists, doctors etc may find themselves without income unexpectedly and whilst one can withdraw from the tennis club, reduce the holidays and eat frugally, expenditure can still all too easily outstrip income and we all know what Mr Dickens, C had to say about that unhappy state of affairs.

However (JP) was right on another count. The children currently within such situations, however they have come about need the protection of the state. Don't they? They did not ask to be born to irresponsible, unlucky or unable parents. Did they?

Implementing some sort of barrier to excessive procreation as seen above (reduction of benefits to future - 12 months + - children may start the process taking a downward trend. But can we as a society be hard hearted enough, or tough enough to visit further deprivation on vulnerable young people with no means at present to help themselves?

How can they be helped?
Can one differentiate between the Can NOT, and Will NOT's. The Can Not's are far harder and more worrying a group. Aren't they? Who decides the level of support/cost in time, effort and money to be distributed to teh various need sectors. What, how much and for how long?

And...... whilst I am in this mood.......

Is what we are doing to our elderly (care homes, medication, isolation, starvation) a taste of the future or a return to our Victorian past of workhouse, orphanage or nuthouse? And can that model, brought into the 21st century be turned into a positive?

"23. At 09:00am on 08 Oct 2010, mimpromptu wrote:
#22

Is it you then, table, who was behind yesterday's introduction to Newsnight on this website? I thought so. Though, 'deep down', it's only a 'profitable' joke, isn't it? "

The people behind it are those comprising the Newsnight Production and Web Teams. Try taking a more actively critical interest in the programme day to day and looked into current events and their background.

What matters is whether the issues aired are the right issues to air, not where they originate surely?.It also matters that the issues are clearly understood.

Do you see how it is that if people who are not skilled/bright enough nevertheless have lots of children which they can't afford, they end up with problems just like those who buy goods on credit cards/liars' loans etc which they can't afford? Can you see how their expecting someone else to pay for that just leads to erosion of the very system which once supported the genuinely needy? They can't/ Can you understand why not?

"25. At 10:06am on 08 Oct 2010, DebtJuggler wrote:
#22 tn01

I believe that the feeling of entitlement (pathological narcissism) has spread to the Houses of Parliament too! (and somewhile ago)"

What do you expect. This is a Libertarian, liberal-democracy. where this behaviour is now considered de rigueur. Look at The Apprentice, X Factor and other programmes which select and reinforce this behaviour. Most of the population thinks success comes only at the expense of losers. They crave the limelight and then they wonder why their lives are so unstable and lonely! You see it in blogging too. Females are the worst for this narcissism, and they pay a higher price for it as a consequence. It all serves to make a dysfunctional society, but try to imagine an ant colony or bee hive like that. The key thing with that image is to grasp that there is no conscious planning, intention etc in colonies or hives. what you see is aggregate behaviour, and what we are seeing now in Liberal-Democracies is the growing effect of aggregate Personality Disorders which is the consequence of dysgenic differential fertility. The Fabians, and Berveridge tried to halt that well over half a century ago, but internal opposition thwarted it.

The MP Sir Richard Acland (who headed the "1941 Committee") wrote a book in 1940 during the war entitled 'Unser Kampf '(Our Struggle). On page 80 of chapter 6 "Russia and Germany" he writes glowingly of Russia (which at the time had a non aggression pact with Germany and had invaded Poland at the same time much welcomed by Russian Poles he wrote). He made the point that many people think of countries being divided by vertical lines between Britain, France, Germany, Russia etc, when in fact it is more helpful he suggested to think in terms of horizontal lines dividing people politically in each country (the idea that many countries have those groups in common). This divide is between those who want public ownership from those who want private ownership (defended via war if necessary). You can see where Acland's sympathies were. Note that the 1941 Committee played a big role in the post war Welfare State.

Narcissism, as petulant aggressive individualism, is an Infantile Disorder (Lenin), and I'll add that it's the hallmark of Libertarianism.
I remind you that Stalin had Trotsky expelled from Russia in 1928/9, and that Trotsky's colleagues were purged in the 1930s as being declared enemies of the people. Of the purged dissidents not executed for treason, where might they have sought refuge?

#31

Most people have problems, whether they are rich or poor. Don't you?

Hhhhmmm I do agree some Quangos are probably a total waste of money. But what of the ones that are necessary, and actually keep a watchful eye on government and council spending? Has the coalition worked out the cost of these jobs being put out to private tender? They will still be needed, and can anyone see a private firm doing it cheaper, because I can't! Why is the arbitrary axe falling it appears just anywhere. And have they worked out how many thousands they will be making unemployed? As a lot of these people are intelligent workers, will they get together in groups, and become a private company, and then charge the earth for their services, I can see it happening.

#32

Whether one's normal or indeed mental
One minute one's vertical, another horizontal.
That's exactly what happens before going to bed
Or going for a temporary or eternal rest.

mim

Oh Good Grief Rickenbacker.

According to some plummy mouthed lady on 'Daily Politics' Jeremy Hunt's message was largely ok, but the populace don't want to hear it from some public school educated ?????

The problem again is?????????????

fatherhood of the state

where are the fathers of the kids? the state should not have a blank check that working people cannot enjoy. fathers should have a legal requirement to to finance their pleasures. no mention of that because in the moral relativist philosophy that would be an 'oppression'?

this leads onto the state as landowner. why do mainly millionaires get 4 billion a year merely for owning land? in a copy of the child benefit the more land the more benefit. no talk of cutting that? millionaire landowners aren't pulling on the oars are they?

china 2nd largest economy in the world? if they obeyed international law and human rights and allowed their currency to float where would they really be? its a bandit economy like the somali pirates.

#36

Are you asking whether it's the 13th problem, caused by somebody identifying with 13 or are you simply asking the same question 13 times?

All the question remarks i'n your text above make the number 513, don't they? Is there a specific significance of 513?

Admittedly, I have my own favourite numbers which I use consistently but I don't flaunt them around. If they are known to anybody it's not my fault.

'don't have children unless you can pay for them' might also read 'don't own land unless you can pay for it?'

'Tonight Matt Prodger is on the Blackbird Leys Estate in Oxford asking families for their views on Mr Hunt's comments, and we'll be debating the issues with a senior minister and member of the opposition.'

Nothing like a good set-up, and I don't mean that as a compliment.

Have yet to catch up on iPlayer, but will the good folk of this estate be those working hard to pay for the family units they can sustain, and being taxed to fund those quoted by R2's Jeremy Vine yesterday in his lip-quivering, emotional show-end summary; the tragic tale of a woman with several kids by a few partners... seemingly worried about how her career of choice will be funded in future.

Or more of the ´óÏó´«Ã½'s endless daily, single issue supply of 'cuts' victims pleading exclusion like... and empathetically to a pension-obsessed public service employee?

#38

"Are you asking whether it's the 13th problem, caused by somebody identifying with 13 or are you simply asking the same question 13 times?"

Dunno. I think it's just about finger pressure on the keyboard.

"All the question remarks i'n your text above make the number 513, don't they? Is there a specific significance of 513?"

Er............. No!

IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS IT ALWAYS COMES DOWN TO ??????????? (#36)

The truth that dare not speak its name, eh Elsie?

Animal imperatives are by far the most powerful, behind the facade of 'humanity'.

What is more, the Ape finds it very easy to hijack cerebral finesse to its own ends. Power, be it expressed sexually, aggressively, politically, commercially, in sport or whatever, is not slow to annexe cerebral cleverness to animal ends. Only wisdom grounded in self-awareness can control the Ape. That prize now looks to be beyond reach.

#37 fatherhood of the state

where are the fathers of the kids?

Speaking of my distant relative JC, all hell would break out if all 3 fathers were in the house at the same time! But don't worry she's getting by on the £24,000 a year she recieves. Oh that also includes 3 ponies, 2 dogs, 3 cats, various rabbits and ferrets, oh and a car.

#37 The rich are always with us JC



I wonder how much tax he'll pay and where? I suppose all the time men squander their money on watching football and wearing the ubiquitous T-shirt there's still plenty of money to be made. ; )

Response to .....

At 8:48pm on 07 Oct 2010, mimpromptu wrote:


Nice one!

Your question brought a smile to my face!

#45

Was it a noughty smile, ja?

46. At 3:26pm on 08 Oct 2010, mimpromptu wrote:


Apologies .....

I didn't measure it's diameter!

Next time!

30. At 10:54am on 08 Oct 2010, LC2 wrote:

"Should all levels of society be restricted ?????? to no more than two regardless of any benefits or welfare state. After all, senior managers, politicians, journalists, doctors etc may find themselves without income unexpectedly and whilst one can withdraw from the tennis club, reduce the holidays and eat frugally,"

1) Income used to be a proxy ( here a euphemism) for intelligence.

2) The Beveridge Report talked of a subsistence level safety net.
Is £2000 a month subsistence level?

3) See the Fabians and Eugenics Society pre 1945 for much rational and practical discussion, i.e the reality behind the Welfare State. Ignore all the For expediency, just ignore all the nasty Nazi propaganda associations after WWII as a tool which was used to undermine statism aka socialism in favour of free-market privatisation/Libertarianism.

[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
.
4) The Chinese implement eugenics, i.e family planning and differential fertility control. This, I suggest, is why their society economy and political influence will continue to grow (Chinese are very pragmatic) whilst ours in the UK, like the rest of the Libertarian Liberal Democracies, will continue to decline. It's been a slow process, but gene pool genetics is the only operative process which matters, and so long as the majority of our educationalists ignore this reality (which every farmer knows), in favour of the largely feminine witchcraft of talking to people and their 'minds' as a means of changing mass behaviour for the better, we are doomed, as there's just no good evidence that education improves intelligence, that treatment cures the mentally ill, or that programmes reduce offending behaviour. It's all negative, honest. All we ever do professionally is MANAGE these behaviours, and as they are growing, the professionals are snowed under as the dysfunctionals are talking over the society.


33. At 11:47am on 08 Oct 2010, mimpromptu wrote:
#31

Most people have problems, whether they are rich or poor. Don't you?"

Clearly all you want here is attention for its own reward, you don't care how you get it, and you probably don't even see yourself doing it or what's wrong with it. See archetypal human female (it's in some male's makeup too) behaviour more widely, it is designed to attract. I'm clearly just reinforcing your inappropriate behaviour by responding to it in this way, so I will try to make more of an effort to do so less frequently in future. I suggest others look 'narcissistic supply' and how it is related to paranoia and scanning for supply/slights etc. I hope the moderators take note of this analysis and appropriately limit your opportunity to further abuse this board and the good will of others who have tried to help..

The People's Daily in 2005



Their government is bound by law to uphold this. How will they read the ´óÏó´«Ã½ pejoratively describing their country as a dictatorship with no explanation?

Might they find ways to retaliate?