, ,


( A six-minute read)

The idea that humans will always have a unique ability beyond the reach of non-conscious algorithms is just wishful thinking.

The fact is, as time goes by it will be easier and easier to replace humans with computer algorithms, not because they are getting smarter and smarter but because humans are professionalising.

One would have to say are we all such naive bonkers that we are going to allow algorithms dictate our lives.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of algorithms"

The answer so far appears to be yes. We are going to become militarily and economically useless.

Technical difficulties or political objections might slow down the algorithmic invasion of the job market but while the systems might need humans, it will not need individuals.

These systems will make most of the important decisions depriving individuals of their authority and freedom.

They are already assembling humans into dividuals ie. humans are becoming an assemblage of many different algorithms lacking a single inner voice or a single self.

Its time we realized that if we continue down this path allowing large corporations platforms to introduce algorithms willy nilly with no overall vetting as to whether they comply with our values we will be replacing the voter, the consumer, and the beholder.

The Al algorithm will know best, will always be right, and beauty will be in the calculation of the algorithm. Individualism will collapse and authority will shift from individual humans to autonomous networks.

People will not see themselves as individuals but as collections of biochemical mechanisms that are constantly monitored and guided by a network of electronic algorithms.

We are already crossing the line. Most of us use Apps without any thought whatsoever.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of algorithms"

You might say that every age has its organizing principles.

The nineteenth century had the novel, and the twentieth had TV; in our more modern times, they come and go more quickly than ever—on Web 1.0 it was the website, for example, and a few years later, for 2.0, it was the app.

And now, another shift is underway:

Today’s organizing principle is the algorithm. (Though you could productively argue that our new lingua franca will either be artificial intelligence or virtual reality.)

Algorithms rule the modern world, silent workhorses aligning data sets and systematizing the world. They’re everywhere, in everything, and you wouldn’t know unless you looked. For some of the most powerful companies in the world—Google, Facebook, etc.—they’re also closely held secrets, the most valuable intellectual property a company owns. 

Perhaps it is naïve to believe algorithms should be neutral? but it’s also deceptive to advance the illusion that Facebook and the algorithms that power it are bias-free.

They are not neutral.

Facebook is intended to be the home of what the world is talking about. Their business model depends on it, even if that’s an impossible goal. As such, with now well over a billion users, and still growing, it’s worth asking:

What role should Facebook play in shaping public discourse? And just how transparent should it be?

After all, Facebook is mind-boggling massive.

It accounts for a huge portion of traffic directed to news sites; small tweaks in its own feed algorithm can have serious consequences for media companies’ bottom lines.

What can be done? ( See previous posts)

Evolution will continue and will need to do so if we humans are to exist.

We therefore should welcome all technology that enhances our chances of this existence in as far that it equates to human values.

All Algorithms that violate these values for the sake of profit or power should be destroyed.

After all if humans have no soul and if thoughts, emotions, and sensations are just biochemical algorithms why can’t biology account for all the vagaries of human societies.?

If Donald Trump is the best that twitter Algorithms can produce it appears to me that there is a long way to go and it’s not too late to change course.

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the beauty of the earth"

All human comments appreciated. All like algorithms clicks chucked in the bin.









This is the first post to this blog .

 The purpose of this blog is to start a world mobile phone movement to effect change by Uniting the combined Communication Powers of us all into one world voice that will have to be listened to by World Organizations  and World Corporations.

These days we are  served up doom and gloom daily with the last decade leading us down the path to disillusionment. 


September 11 tragedy now turned into a convenient Excuse for any anti-people legislation denying civil liberties worldwide. The Arab Spring is a quagmire>The Euro a nightmare >The Afghan War a needless lost of life>The Israel Palestine Question a dark cul-de-sac>NATO a war machine>The United Nations a gum shield between the west and the rest>China a supermarket>Climate change a trading commodity>Football a religion>Austerity a goal>Economic Growth an aspiration that no one seems to know how to achieve.


By the year 2030 there will be 50% more of us-6 million a month.

Humanity will have to put aside the deep divisions it has maintained for thousands of years.

Find a new spirit of human co- operation. Stop spending trillions on arms. One-fifth of the world’s present days population live in the “rich world” consuming 86% of the world’s goods. While over half the people on Earth live on 2$ a day with the absolute  poor on a !$ making up billions. Where is the justice that the gross domestic product of the poorest 48 Nations is less than the wealth of the World’s three riches people.

You don’t have to look far to see why we have Terrorism. Poverty and lack of Education spawns it.

While we turn back the evolutionary clock pumping 8 billion tons of Carbon into the Atmosphere each year wiping out 50,000 species a year in collective denial.

There can be no trade-off between economic development and the protection of the Environment Even if it is possible looking back from the Moon and see no trace of human activities that show up.

Our Democracies seem unable to achieve any progress such as mitigating climate change, better managing ecosystems, creating a fair global trading system. However we have the knowledge, the data and the technologies to do all of these things.

The question is not so much ” How could we have learned so little in all these years after two World Wars? But ” How could we have learned so much and done so little?

So it’s time to stop supporting large World Corporations and the like that don’t show a corporate social responsibility and use the power of getting Smart with our smart phones.

Any comments, suggestions, are welcome.  My next blog posting will out line a plan to create a World Aid Tax to be applied on all World stock Exchanges.



, ,


( Three minute read)

We said that. We did not say that:  If you do that. If you don’t do that: Alignment, no Alignment: Agreed not Agreed: Explicable not Explicable: Phase one Phase two: This amount that amount, on the table off the table:  Deal or no Deal:  In our Out:  sets out the terms of the divorce and paves the way for Phase 2 of negotiations on future relations between London and the Twenty-Seven.

Anyone with an ounce of sawdust between their ears knows all of the above is total bollix. 

Just look at some of the blonker’s reactions.

“Theresa May won,” said Michael Gove, pro-Brexit environment minister who is eyeing his estate.

Philip Hammond, hailed the “boost for the British economy” that represents a text that lifts some uncertainties.

Nigel Farage, “the move to the second phase of humiliation” 

The only comment that might come true if the EU block his pension or at least have it payed out of the settlement. 

It time for some hard facts:

The ambiguity of Friday’s agreement on Ireland alone illustrates the difficulties that lie ahead.


Spain that argues that any agreement would require its blessing, because the area is not part of the UK, as is the case with Northern Ireland, but a colony with a disputed status. It is likely to wield a veto over any Brexit deal for Gibraltar after the EU-27 backed Madrid in its draft negotiating guidelines for forthcoming divorce talks between the UK and the bloc.

Both are a poisonous topic for the upcoming negotiations.

Not only has Brexit become a subject of confrontation between the two communities of Northern Ireland, but the insoluble Irish equation sums up the central dilemma, that of the choice between a “hard Brexit” and an agreement maintaining the maximum of links with the EU.

It’s generally agreed that the “divorce deal,” setting out the arrangements for Britain’s departure from the EU, can be sealed by Brussels and London.

But Britain’s new relationship with the bloc is a different matter.

Under Article 50 an exit deal requires a qualified majority (72% of members states) to pass, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, whereas a comprehensive new partnership deal (or “mixed agreement”) requires unanimous assent in the Council and ratification by national or subnational parliaments.

If the deal “is being ‘loaded up’ with competencies of the member states, this would turn it into a mixed agreement [affecting both EU and national legislation], which would require unanimity in the European Council and the ratification of all member states for it to be sealed. Even a transitional deal could affect national legislation.

Therefore, any change of government or head of state near the deadlines for talks or ratification will introduce uncertainty into the process. 

There are another 12 elections scheduled across the 27 member states during the two-year negotiation period.

All countries work to slightly different time frames, but the systems of proportional representation and coalition politics in most EU states often result in extended periods following elections where there is no official government; the record being 541 days following the 2010 Belgian general election. For example, in 2013 it took 86 days to form a coalition government in Germany.

Will there be new faces?

If the national parliaments of the 27 countries remaining in the EU — and perhaps also some regional parliaments — are all to get a say, it could make the passage of the Brexit deal impossible. However the European Union’s 27 remaining national parliaments are unlikely to have the power of veto over a future Brexit trade deal with Britain.

One way or the other the best, the cheapest and the least complicated deal would be a no deal.

Transitional trade agreements are politically highly explosive.

Do not anticipate the perfect unity of Twenty Seven.  

England wants a level playing field so as to be able to do trade deals outside the EU.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the wto"

Blinded by their refusal to see the Europe as a project policy beyond the single market,

Let them do so .

However under WTO the rules are simple. It requires every country to reduce their tariffs and subsidies to the same level, but in reality these cuts are applied selectively in favor of rich countries.

There can’t be have your cake and eat it.

Al human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.















( A two-minute read)

England is gradually learning that their initial ambitions for Brexit are unrealistic and few will deny, the EU is in urgent need of reform.Findings show a growing disappointment with the Brexit process will not necessarily persuade voters to change minds.

Talks can now move on to their next phase with a two-year time capsule transition period with no proportional link whatsoever between IQ and wealth.

The EU has got rid of the UK but the UK has not left the EU. Brilliant! This creative ambiguity means big battles still ahead.

So where are we now?

If we believe that there is no deal till the whole deal is approved, we need our heads examined. Its taking shape whether we like it or not.

A deal which has everything and nothing to do with people.

Under the new agreement brokered Friday, EU and U.K. citizens will get to retain their rights “derived from Union law and based on past life choices, where those citizens have exercised free movement rights by the specified date.

That means they will get to keep their social security and health care, their employment and education rights, and their “tax advantages.” However, there’s a big downside too—they will be bound to the country where they’re living.

For Brits that already live in EU countries that aren’t the U.K., that means they would lose the automatic right to then move and live anywhere they like within the bloc. Basically for Brits in rest of EU: applying for a new passport is the only way to secure Freedom of movement.

EU citizens living in the U.K. will get to retain their EU rights after Brexit, the British courts will still have to defer to CJEU judgements that affect those rights.

When it comes to Northern Ireland and Ireland border the consequences of a hard Brexit are of little consideration as long as unionist objectives are met. Even more concerning is the free rein that Foster has in the absence of Executive constraint in Northern Ireland.

The Never Never party simple desire is to reassert unionism not to represent the people’s of Northern Ireland.

It is the party’s reasoning behind the rejection that is of concern – their willingness to jeopardise everything for a hard Brexit that secures their unionist identity.

The DUP argues that it does not wish to see a hard border between North and South, yet their actions in recent days clearly indicate a desire for a hard Brexit, which must mean installing a hard border.

Naïvely both the EU and England are overlooked the historical and contemporary politics and culture of the DUP.

On the border issue, the U.K. and EU have essentially agreed to kick the can down the road, in order to stop talks from breaking down entirely. But what’s new—and huge—is that if there’s no resolution to this question, the default position will be the U.K. staying within the single market.

This will ideally be the result of the overall U.K.-EU relationship that exists after Brexit, but if not, the U.K. will suggest a specific deal regarding that particular stretch of border.

If that proposal doesn’t fly, the whole of the U.K. will basically have to stay within the EU internal market and customs union—and there will be no new regulatory barriers separating Northern Ireland from the rest of the U.K.—unless Northern Ireland wants them. And whatever happens, Northern Irish businesses will retain “unfettered access” to the U.K. market.

On top of all that, everyone who was born in Northern Ireland will retain their right to EU citizenship (though this is less of a novelty, as Northern Irish people can already claim Irish citizenship anytime they like).

The enlightened ones in the EU should at least demand that Nigel Farage EU pension is payed out of the settlement figure. ( Twenty years @ 73,000 pa = 1,460,000) 

Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of hog hogwashing"

If we are not vigilant we could all end up as hog wash.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.



, , , , , ,

 ( A Fifteen minute read)

We are becoming less and less effective in the face of enormous but slow-moving crises such as the loss of biodiversity or climate change. Deforestation, Freshwater Species Extinctions, Climate Change and Destruction of Natural Resources, Large-scale Wars and Religious Conflicts.

“human cost” of the current system:

Not to  Mention Technology.

What we prioritize, the way we shape our lives, affects the evolutionary future of our species, so we would do well to start asking some simple question about the untended consequences of technology? 

Is it likely that in the near future humans are going to speciate? ( Humans one species and robots another. )

If you can’t explain Artificial intelligence/ Machine learning stored in the cloud and what it is doing to the public, there’s a good chance it doesn’t merit doing.

Mannequin heads sitting on a shelf in a factory The number of people on the planet is set to rise to 9.7 billion in 2050 with 2 billion aged over 60.

 That is only 30 odd year away.

We are entering the age of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, a technological transformation that is robbing us of the essence of our humanity.

Driven by a ubiquitous and mobile internet, we are perhaps witnessing the end of human evolution as we know it.

Up to now human evolution proceeded extremely slowly and within historical memory, man has exhibited aggressive territorial behavior. Even as we bask smugly in the comforts of our smart phones natural selection to-day still ensured that only the fittest survived.

However it may not be long before computers are hooked up to the human brain with genetic trade-offs till we can’t be improved any further,

Then evolution will really have come to a stop for us. We will be the only species to have put a halt to natural selection, of its own free will, as it were.

Stopping natural selection is not as important, or as depressing, as it might sound — because our evolutionary process will then be cultural.

One way or the other by the time we get there our current social, political and economic systems will have driven inequalities with profit seeking algorithms off the map, rather than reducing them.

The challenge is to manage this seismic change in a way that promotes the long-term health and stability of the planet.

The writing has been on the wall for some time.Homo floresiensis

So where do we stand:

Since 1992 CO2 emissions have jumper 62% and the global temperature is up 29%. Fresh water is down 26%. Ocean dead zones up 76% . Forestland down 300 million acres. People up 35%.

You would think that we the biggest dimwit on the planet looking at this evidence would conclude that there is something very wrong. If you dont know what it is, we have evolved beyond our needs, trampling other species in the process.

We are now at a turning point we can either push ahead on our path to destruction or we can reshape our place in nature and prosper or we can face a humongous environmental crisis.

You would think that with everything connected by the internet, it would transform how we do business and help us manage resources more efficiently and sustainable.

As you can see this is not the result.

On the contrary the way we’ve set up corporations, world organisations, where even a majority vote cannot demand that a corporation’s or world organisation policies reflect the public good or preserve the environment for future use.

That’s because profit is the one and only motive.

It’s up to government and it’s up to people to protect the public interest. Corporations and world organisations are simply not allowed to.

Within the next decade, it is expected that more than a trillion sensors will be connected to the internet. By 2025, 10% of people are expected to be wearing clothes connected to the internet and the first implantable mobile phone is expected to be sold.

However today, 43% of the world’s population are connected to the internet, mostly in developed countries.

In a world driven by short-term profit, the connectivity theory is and will remain so far off the mark it can only be believed by artificial intelligence.

Growing unease over globalization, which is evident from the number of questions being asked about the power of corporations and the adequacy of the regulations governing employment, environmental issues and taxation, is causing economic and social ills, ranging from low consumption to social and political unrest, and is damaging to any future.

There is no need for me to tell you that we are living in turbulent times.

It is clear that the old stories are dying and if we continue to poison ourselves and the planet by self-interest, fragmentation and profit for profit sake there will be no point to the age of technology other than becoming slaves.

However evolution is going on invisibly all the time. Species evolve in response to whatever environment they encounter. No despots have ever set out to select for increased or decreased longevity in the populations they control.

By 2050, the world must feed 9 billion people. Yet the demand for food will be 60% greater than it is today.

The scale of the employment challenge is vast. Rapid progress in machine learning has raised the prospect that algorithms will one day be able to do most or all of the mental tasks currently performed by humans. These advances could lead to extremely positive developments, presenting solutions to now-intractable global problems, but they also pose severe risks.

This might be the most important transition of the next century – either ushering in an unprecedented era of wealth and progress, or heralding disaster.

But it’s also an area that’s highly neglected: while billions are spent making AI more powerful. The problem of how one might design a highly intelligent machine to pursue realistic human goals safely is very poorly understood. It is estimated that there are fewer than 100 people in the world working on how to make AI safe.

If AI research continues to advance without enough work going into the research problem of controlling such machines, catastrophic accidents are much more likely to occur.

It’s generally agreed that, among the forces that led to the immense sophistication of the human brain, the most powerful was a kind of feedback loop between the growing complexity of our ancestors’ physical and social environment and the ability of our ancestors to adapt to it. But why, you may ask, has the enormous increase in complexity of our recent technological environment not had a measurable physical impact on our brains?

The rate at which we are changing our environment now has outstripped even the fastest biological evolution.

However the ineluctable laws of evolution will continue to operate, probably even more strongly, in the overcrowded, ecologically damaged world of the future. And if things get really bad, the evolutionary consequences could be extreme. Any survivors of a nuclear holocaust or an ecological catastrophe are likely to be a small and highly selected subset of today’s population.

If, for example, destruction were so widespread that people could not form viable social groups, the evolution of our descendants would inevitably be driven in the direction of brutishness.

If our technologies fail to protect us against these forces of nature our genetic heritage could fail us too, meaning human evolution will return with a vengeance.

Then again if everyone had exactly the same set of genes controlling the brain’s development, there would be no genetic differences among people on which natural selection could act–and evolution really would come to a stop!

War then would be the strong life; it is life in extremism; war taxes are the only ones men never hesitate to pay, as the budgets of all nations show us.

There is no doubting the force of [the] arguments above, call me back in 3 million years time, because I may well be wrong on that one.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.









( A five minute read)

The huge choice facing Ireland is whether, given the circumstances,
the country can live with the likely post Brexit arrangements and so stay a full member of the European Union; or whether a radically different relationship with the EU is required, including the possibility of an Irish departure from formal membership, an Irexit.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of ireland map"

Whatever the outcome of the Brexit negotiations, there will be a price to pay.

For Ireland, there is really no upside to Brexit.

The question to be raised is what price is Ireland willing to pay to
stand in solidarity with the remaining 26 EU countries?

Namely, opting to remain with the United Kingdom in a customs and free
trade area, while negotiating as favourable as possible trade and investment terms with the remaining 26 member states.

Access to the Single Market need not be synonymous with full membership of the EU. In addition, the EU itself is facing huge problems and the future direction of that body is hard to predict and though uncertain, it is unlikely to be to Ireland’s taste or in its interests.


Brexit is going to happen.

If there is a hard border after Brexit, Ireland be next to exit?

The new pivotal position of the DUP at Westminster has only added to this concerns.

The Good Friday Agreement is all but dead in the water. One of the major attractions of the Agreement to the Nationalist/Republican side was the promise, given in exchanges by the two governments, that once the peace was secured and the threat level diminished, there would be no need for any fixed and/or permanent installations along the border.

Sitting on the side lines and allowing the EU to negotiate for Ireland is essentially untenable.

The first duty of the EU negotiators is to act on behalf of the European Union as an Institution. This is prioritised in their Guidelines, approved by the European Council.

The type of deal that Ireland’s interests requires, however, including free trade with the UK, is directly in contradiction with the Union negotiators mandate that anything relating to Ireland and her border which emerges from the Brexit negotiations, must “maintain the integrity the Union’s Legal Order”, i.e., no exceptions to the customs union.

While the details of Brexit remain to be determined, now is the
time for Ireland to choose its future path, that choice which will have profound consequences for all those living on the island of Ireland.

With the DUP pressing for a “significant” central role in the Brexit negotiations.

There is also a danger that any unfavorable Brexit agreement that the current Irish Government is handed by the EU at the end of the negotiations, will not get through the Dáil (Irish Parliament).

Hopefully, the outcome of Brexit negotiations will be benign.

However, if this does not turn out to be the case, it would be a brave Government in Dublin who would ask the electorate to re-instate a border in Ireland and erect barriers with our nearest neighbor Britain where most Irish people have family links.

The prospects of an Irish Irexit have certainly grown in recent days.

The country undoubtedly has a strong case for special treatment.

The main difficulty for this scenario is that what Ireland requires, namely free movement of people, goods and services with the post Brexit UK, cannot be fitted into the present EU framework. It would require a very fundamental departure from EU structures and one which frankly the EU is not likely to sanction. It would break the central tenets of EU theology.

The EU is therefore is risking losing Britain and Ireland rather than concede on a core tenet.

The chances of obtaining a satisfactory outcome to the present Brexit negotiations for Ireland are faint.

It simply is not possible to reconcile the requirements of the country, with the EU’S need to maintain the integrity of the Union’s Legal Order. Also, there is little or no popular support for the further erosion of the Nation State, something that is now becoming more likely with the UK’s departure.

If that’s the direction the European Union goes in, it won’t last, because
small countries will leave. And that would be a tragedy, for the European Union as a project, but also for many of the countries that will be caught in that squeeze. We need to keep citizens with us.”

Therefore, given the circumstances, Irexit has to be the option for Ireland in a hard Brexit situation.

In any negotiation, there must be a bottom line and if breached, the option of walking away must always be there. Irexit is a definite option for Ireland, should the EU and the EU not arrive at a satisfactory deal.

It will be the ordinary citizens who will pay the price of the failure of its political leaders to put their welfare and that of the country first.

Ireland and its people have shown a great capacity to adopt to new conditions and overcome adversity. However, as in the Bailout situation, it has often been the young people of Ireland who have borne the brunt of those adaptations. Hopefully, the Irish Government will not sacrifice the well-being of its youth in order yet again to prove, its EU credentials. 

While I agree with the fact that the European Union needs to be bolder in
terms of its impact on the world and a force for good, don’t assume that the European Union can be run by two or three big countries and everybody else will just have to tow the line.

Indeed the EU if it is to do anything it should block the Pension of the biggest hypocrite Mr Nigel Farage.  Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of nigel farage"

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.



, , , , , , , , , ,


( A Twenty minute read)

They say we have free will, but there are many types of tyrannies in our world.

You could describe our hand-held devices which are keeping us connected to anything, anytime, anywhere as one. 

We now use our hand-held devices for almost everything. More importantly, they use us for everything.

The extreme availability of information has not led to a more enlightened population, but to more confusion.

Connectivity is both a blessing and a curse.

It has become the pathway for almost all we do as we have become helpless without technology and the need for immediate data at our fingertips. But this is taking its toll.

The number of times we look at our phones daily would shock you: some studies say 50 times, others as many as 75 to 150 times. Most of our e mails are reactionary.Tyranny of the Should

Information technology is all-pervasive in production and consumption.

Each time we look at the phone, we look away from what we should be or were focused on. Our collective ability to stay focused on anything is destroyed.

How does this connect to Growth.

It is too simplistic to attribute all of our economic problems to government: indeed, that sort of reasoning is counterproductive: it absolves everyone else responsibility.

Although part of the responsibility lies with forces that are outside a government, a significant share rests with the attitudes, preoccupations, we have to Artificial Intelligence that is now analyzing our every movement to the extent that advertising is becoming personalized.

I’m not saying that growth is bad but growth that destroys value just for profit is cancer that is driving inequality with a tendency to cluster around the short-term, issues while ignoring reality is going to bite us all.

I want to begin by touching on a crucial economy-wide factor
in the erosion of our economic strength which fosters short-term
thinking.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of social media advertising"


 It is a major driver of unnecessary consumption.

This hasn’t always been the problem. Advertising use to inform you of the useful qualities of an object. Now it manipulates your emotions like anxiety and promises to improve social acceptance or class distinction.

It is now with a frenzy of social media advertising attaching its self to saving the world  that is driving consumption to new dizzying heights.

Growth for growth’s sake, is an ugly word with even uglier connotations when it is using social media in the form of algorithms FOR PROFIT, regardless of the cost.

So what is driving it:

In the information age, time is compressed and events are squeezed into ever-decreasing periods.

We have governments encouraging a restless, fleeting mode of being, and a superficial, hurried culture, which is inimical to fundamental values.

They encourage growth programs, the benefits of which are available   immediately, but the costs of which appear only at a later stage. They are less interested in public investments that have to be financed now but do not payoff adequately before the next election.

It’s as if human progress depends on economic progress.

At minimum, the kind of short-term oriented cycle in which we find ourselves behaves as though tomorrow is forever. And, in fact, a series of tomorrows will create a forever — a very predictable one — and not a very desirable or promising one.

Rewards which are heavily focused on short-term results, even if they make some financial sense, often do not deliver the economic promise or the synergy which is anticipated.

Perhaps it is true that the landmarks in human progress — in the arts, science, government, or elsewhere — have rarely been reached in societies in which the economy was unable to free most of its members from a daily obsession with subsistence needs.

On the contrary, wherever the economy is feeble or stagnant for
a prolonged period, where most people see their basic material
needs as unfulfilled and the prospects for improvement as
unlikely, the result is almost invariably either a dull fatalism
or political upheaval, neither of which is likely to be favorable
to liberty and freedom.

However we are now looking at a unremitting focus on economic growth. The drive to achieve growth at practically any cost and to the exclusion of all other measures of prosperity.

This focus on GDP growth as the prime measure of economic success is out of date. It’s not how big it is that counts, it’s what you do with it.

The distance to the future – is no longer the next election, it will be how much you are willing to pay the Cloud for information. The cumulative effects of almost five decades of constantly accelerating reliance on government regulation to address social inequities and problems is coming to an end.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of social media advertising"

The linkage between ownership and participation is changing.

Social Media is not just eroding the meaning of democracy but effecting our critical thinking skills. Polluted with consumption advertising it is adding to global inequality.

While there are hundreds of different marketing strategies, only one can bring in consistent sales from day one. Social media advertising. This is why global social ad spending doubled from $16 billion in 2014 to $31 billion in 2016 and is projected to increase another 26% in 2017.

One of the fascinating things about social advertising is that there is virtually no limit to your ability to scale.You don’t have to wait for someone to search for your targeted keywords. You don’t have to wait for someone to run your promotion or read your blog.

( For Instance:

With more than 2 billion monthly users, Facebook hosts over a quarter of the world’s population, providing advertisers with an unparalleled opportunity to reach virtually anyone and everyone. It provides free lead magnet like:

  • Whitepapers
  • Ebooks
  • Product coupons
  • Sitewide discounts
  • Limited-time offers
  • Giveaways
  • Free shipping

These leads can then be nurtured with a targeted autoresponder. Offering free products, download-ables and predictable discounts and coupons for her audience. Doing so has earned Facebook more than $1,000,000 in annual sales in just 2 years. Facebook allows more advanced targeting than any other advertising platform on earth. Advertisers can target by location (within a 5-mile radius), job description, interests, past activity, and many other incredibly valuable criteria.

Instagram now boasts more than 500 million monthly active users and commands one of the highest audience engagement rates in social media, 58% higher than Facebook and 2000% higher than Twitter.

Twitter with 328 million monthly active users, it remains one of the most popular social media platforms. Brands don’t need to pay in order to reach their followers, which enhances the platform’s value even when running paid ads.

Pinterest: With 175 million monthly users is highly targeted toward women with an 81% female user base.

LinkedIn : Where you tend to find the highest average disposable income, has an estimated 227 million monthly active users.

Snapchat Advertising:    310 million users.   

All Social advertising is incredibly measurable.)

(You can, in fact, control when you choose to look at your hand-held device.)

In light of this one easy solution to over-consumption would be to ban advertising- at least in pubic places and on Social Media where Profit seeking Algorithms are used.

Much of’ the crippling of our economic systems can find its roots in Algorithms for profit. (see previous posts)

The consequences of elected government’s short-range perspective are not difficult to understand. They are seen as having succeeded in undermining the economy through overbearing regulation, tolerance of inflation, indifference to the cost of environmental and social programs, and a pervasive anti-business attitude.

Government thus diminishes the private sector’s sense of responsibility —
both in economic and ethical terms — for its own conduct and for its own performance.

While I appreciate that degrowth will not happen as quickly as we need it to do and it will take generations to move our collective consciousness on most issue, we don’t have that kind of time any longer.

Technology that ostensibly should help people save time, has instead led to a situation where time is scarcer than ever.

When an exponential growth curve becomes vertical, time has ceased to exist as duration.”life stands still at a tremendous speed”, with serious consequences for culture, intellectual life and the very fabric of society.

What we do not know today is what it will take to send us to
the pumps.

The struggle now concerns the right to be unavailable, the right to live and think more slowly.

Choosing to live according to one’s own self-made conception of reality, human nature, and happiness is a recipe for tyranny.

It is about time that we ask what wireless communications and the Internet are preconditions for. They are problems need to be understood well, in order to be dealt with the political upheaval that is around the corner.

Relying on averages generate by computers is worsening inequality

within countries, and the world as a whole.

So is there anything that can be done legitimately that will have a positive effect.

Becoming more grounded in ones own true feelings and perceptions is a primary indication that one has begun to free himself from the “tyranny of the should.”

Assuring that investment in future profitability is not sacrificed on
the altar of quarterly earnings growth. Refocusing our approach to economic decision-making, to benefit all not the few.

Willingness to pay the price today for the health and vitality of the country tomorrow is the ultimate test of stewardship. To live with a view to the regime should not be supposed to be slavery, but preservation.

Finally, it is as we all know easy to point the finger, however we are the will in any form or symbol and we are identifiable as water.  

However if we are to address any of our world problems and stop the self-perpetuating downward cycle, with all the suction of a whirlpool, from which there will be no escape we cannot and should not rely on technology to bail us out.

There is only one solution. Make Greed pay a World Aid commission of 0.05% ( See previous post)

Technology, if it has not yet become the de fac~o

decision- — . . . maker in the production process, has

certainly become a participant who cannot be


All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.








, ,

(A twelve-minute read)


The cake metaphors in the modern world have outlived their usefulness – if they are applied not only to spheres where they do apply (such as attempting to be an internal market member without the obligations of the four freedoms) it will destabilize what is left of good will in European Union.

A DEAL IS A DEAL:  WHEN ITS AGREED NOT BEFORE OR AFTER.   Britain's Secretary of State for Exiting the EU, David Davis, made a 'breakthrough' at the joint conference


England’s Brexit agenda is both contradictory and fantastical.

Enjoy unfettered access to the single market, WHILE implementing a deals that is one way or the other will be damaging to the EU.  Theresa May was praised by the EU leaders for helping create a 'new dynamic' from her speech in Florence

You don’t have to a genius to know that any shared history, shared challenges, or shared future is now pie in the sky.

The exact relationship the UK would have or will have with the EU during the transition is not clear.

The timescales for settling the future relationship are unknown  – and could make a significant difference to the final destination.

The UK guarantee that it would be time-limited, with a period of about two years – although this period could potentially change for different issues, is political hog wash.

Were negotiations to stall well beyond 2019, the politics of the final settlement would get mixed into the party politics of leadership transitions and the next General Election. Outcomes would then become much
more unpredictable, particularly given the very strong likelihood of a change of Conservative Prime Minister sometime between 2019 and 2021, which could push the current government into a harder position on Brexit.

Not to mention the Rock of Gib, Scotland and Ireland’s positions.

If the Article 50 period was extended, the UK would continue to be a member of the EU, when EU acquis on the Single Market applied even though the UK had left, and one suggestion is that this could be achieved through UK membership of the European Economic Area (EEA).

Another could be that the UK simply commits to continue to apply all EU rules and regulations.

Any TRANSIT period will have to be approved by the other EU leaders. Whether any such thing is negotiable is as much a question
for the EU 27 as for the UK.

All of the above scenario’s are a disaster in waiting to happen.


Because a transitional deal would also change the British politics of Brexit in ways that have not been fully anticipated.

For example:

A transition deal would end any realistic prospects of a ›referendum on the deal‹ in its predominant form, where it is a strategy of Remain advocates to seek a choice between a negotiated Brexit deal, and the status quo of remaining in the EU.

A transition phase is largely regarded as kicking the can down the road – and so not resolving the major choices about the long-term settlement.

The British do want a Brexit deal – but worry about the consequences of admitting this.

The UK government is proposing a ›special partnership‹ but this does not address some of the key choices which the UK and the EU will face over the next two years.

Continued insistence on talking about an ›implementation period‹,
on the grounds that all of the details of the future settlement will be included in the Article 50 agreement, and the language of Article 50 itself, which talks about the framework for the future relationship, perhaps
implying a political declaration as to the shared objectives of a future negotiation.

But beyond these, they become a barrier to the negotiation of what, if anything, can be negotiated, in an equitable way, between a full EEA-style relationship and a clean break on WTO terms.

If it is accepted that it is not possible to both have and eat cake, the question of whether and how it is possible to agree on how to slice a cake fairly could become more relevant.

In an ideal world, the British would prefer to have their cake and eat it on the markets / migration trade-off.

The orthodox view is that a transition simply delays all of the key decisions – but a transitional deal could shift the medium-term British politics of Brexit more than is appreciated.

The bespoke British ›Goldilocks Brexit‹ would be warmer than Canada, but cooler than Norway  – but whether such a possibility exist will depend on what the EU 27 want too. The British do not know what they want‹ is a common criticism among European politicians and officials.

If Europe wants to survive there can be no transition.  Everything must be settled in the current negotiations deal or no deal.

Stability begins at home.

Learning the lessons of the past decade, WE HAVE TO WAIT TO SEE HOW FAR THIS LOGIC GOES.

Broadly I think we have landed in the right place and I take some comfort from being flanked on both sides of the argument. In or Out.

Doing all of these things efficiently and effectively relies on a strong degree of trust and co-operation between England and the Eu.

But the EU must plan, in a proportionate way, for alternative outcomes.

Just imagine two-year of;  We did not agree to this or that.  Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of a transit period"

The real difficulties will be over the shape of Brexit. The British need a transition – so can (probably) make the compromises needed to get it.

All human comments mush appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.






, ,


( A ten minute read)

It’s true that her role as the British head of state is largely ceremonial, and the Monarch no longer holds any serious power from day-to-day. The historic “prerogative powers” of the Sovereign have been devolved largely to government ministers. But this still means that when the British government declares war, or regulates the civil service, or signs a treaty, it is doing so only on her authority.

The Queen’s consent is necessary to turn any bill into an actual law.Image associée

The United Kingdom, England, Great Britain? Are these three the same place? Different places?

Part of the confusion is that the United Kingdom is not a single country but instead is a country of countries. It contains inside of it four co-equal and sovereign nations. England, Scotland,Northern Ireland Welsh all ‘British.

’They have their own devolved Parliaments and are allowed to vote on English laws. However, as the four constituent countries don’t have their own passports, they are all British Citizens, like it or not.

The European union is not dealing with Great Britain as it is only a geographical term rather than a political term.

However this is not completely true, as all three constituent countries have islands that are not part of Great Britain, such as :The Isle of Wight, Isles of Scilly and Lundy which are part of England, the Welsh Isle of Anglesey and the Scottish Hebrides, Shetland Island, Orkney Islands, Islands of the Clyde.

In Wales  (52.5%) voters chose to leave the EU, compared with 772,347 (47.5%) supporting Remain.

In Northern Ireland (56%) voted to remain in the EU, 44% voted to leave.

In Scotland (38.0%) voted to leave, 62.0% voted to stay.

With the exception of Gibraltar and the sovereign areas on Cyprus, the British overseas territories are not part of the EU.

Gibraltar,voted overwhelmingly to remain. The Falkland Islands? 90 per cent of its exports go to the EU 27.

Commonwealth migrants from 54 states – including ­Australia, Canada, India, Pakistan and Nigeria – could join the electoral roll as long are they are residents in the UK.

Citizens from other European countries – apart from Ireland, Malta and Cyprus – did not get to vote on whether the UK remains part of the EU.

So I ask again, just who are the European Union negotiating with.

 Is it the Crown? or the DUP 

Who created the Crown?  God Did.

God however – not wanted to be bothered with micromanagement – conveniently delegates his power to an entity called the crown.

Who created the DUP?  England did. Résultat de recherche d'images pour "the rev ian paisley speech never never"

It’s a useful reminder that the United Kingdom is still technically a theocracy with the reigning monarch acting as both the head of state and the supreme governor of the official state religion:

In the end the United Kingdom is a country situated on the british isles and is part of The Crown which is controlled by the monarchy.

Also part of the crown and the British isles are the crown dependencies.

The independent nations of the former empire that still recognize the crown are the commonwealth realm and the non-independent remnants of the former empire are the British overseas territories.

To London and Theresa May, the Irish don’t matter much as she and her government are held to ransom

The people of Northern Ireland and Mrs Foster remember this.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "how much did t may pay the dup"

This shoddy DUP deal will ultimately cost Theresa May and England

far more than £1bn“

DUP will be back for more again and again. They have previous in such


However, both the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom are members of the European Union even though England often likes to pretend that it’s an Island in the mid-atlantic rather than 50km off the cost of France.

Border or no border the Eu and any country doing a deal in the future would do well to establish just who are they are dealing with before any agreement is agreed.

But that’s a story for another day.


All human comment much appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.








, , , ,


( A twenty-minute read)

The world is in a mess.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of the world from space"

What the hell are we thinking?

The myth with or without Artificial Intelligence is beginning to crumble. It seems that it is not just capitalism itself is in conflict with the pressing need to stave off a planetary emergency. It is the model that we pursue.

The economic system that we have put in place over the last few decades has rendered us incapable of meeting the most serious challenges of the 21st century.

Take hunger for example:Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of hunger"

It was to be eradicated within a decade. Instead according to the most conservation measures there are about 800 million hungry people. In reality this figure is around two billion, nearly a third of all humanity. How is this so when we produce enough food to feed 7 billion with left overs to feed another three billion.

Take Poverty for example:Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of poverty"

We told by the United Nations that millions have being taken out of poverty. This may be so but most of those millions are in China. A dollar a day is I am sure you would agreed is simply not adequate for human existence, to say nothing of human dignity. Even if it was five dollars a day there would be five billion people still be living below the poverty line. About 60% of humanity.

Take Inequality for example:Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of inequality"

The World Economic Form met in Davos recently where Oxfam announced that the richest eight people in the world had as much wealth as the poorest 3.6 billion.

Take Social media for example:Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of social media icons"

Despite mounting evidence that it is tearing society apart ( It contributed to Nine Eleven, to the Axis of Evil, to the Iraq? Afghan war, to the creation of the Arab Spring,  to ISIS, to the Syrian war, to recruitment of terrorist, to bullying, to undermining elections, to the election of Trump, to populous politics, to mining our social anxieties, to selling ads, to competing additive Platforms, to non connectivity, to sow discord, to plundering privacy. ) it remains unregulated.

Take Development and the World trade organisation for example:Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of world trade organization"

It enshrines policies to suite their own interests. It is estimated that for every dollar of aid developing countries receive they lose 24 in net outflow.

In 2012 developing countries received a little over 2 trillion dollars in all Aid. 5 trillion flowed out of them a net lost of 3 trillion. Since 1980 this adds up to a whopping 265 trillion out flow. 4,2 trillion of this is in interest payments.

The mobile phone has done more than all the western Aid to the third world.

Take Climate Change for example: Résultat de recherche d'images pour "pictures of climate change"

CO2 admission turned into carbon credits bought and sold on the stock exchange. We are pumping 40 gigatons of carbon dioxide into the earth’s atmosphere each year. The Paris pledges don’t kick in til 2020. The Arctic is melting leading to a massive release of methane.

Certainly anyone who still thinks development is just a matter of increasing GDP growth and thereby CO2 emissions has yet to come to terms with the brutal facts of climate change. It seems that capitalism

Take the Arms trade for example:

The world spends some $1,000 billion annually on the military.


Ten countries are responsible for the vast majority of all major arms exports, accounting for 90 percent of global sales. The top five major arms exporters are the United States, Russia, Germany, France and China. Together, they account for 74 percent of the total volume of exports.

The US with a 33 per cent share of the global market.

The UK is the sixth largest exporter of arms in the world, with a 4.5 per cent share of the global market. Arms exports from the UK increased 26 per cent in the last five years.  British sales of military equipment to Saudi Arabia topped £1.1bn in the first half of this year.

Take Fresh Water for example:Résultat de recherche d'images pour "the position on fresh water in the world"

1 billion people facing water scarcity.

As the global population grows, so does demand for fresh water. Many water systems around the world are currently overtaxed, and some have already collapsed. According to one estimate, by 2030 our planet’s need for water will outstrip its reliable supply by 40%. Fresh water makes civilization possible.​

Take Deforestation for example: Résultat de recherche d'images pour "the position on Deforestation in the world"

An estimated 7.6 million hectares of forests are lost each year. Forests play key roles in the water cycle, soil conservation, carbon sequestration, and habitat protection, including for pollinators. Their sustainable management is crucial for sustainable agriculture and food security. The predicted future length of time in which rain forest destruction alone will release more carbon into the atmosphere than every flight from the dawn of aviation until 2025

Today, deforestation is increasingly driven by a growing worldwide demand for different globally-traded commodities, including soy, palm oil, beef and timber. 150,000 km2 of tropical rain forest is destroyed every year.

Take pollution for example:

Pollution from human activities, especially agriculture, washes into streams, lakes, estuaries and oceans. Already, nearly 60% of U.S. lakes are too polluted. Our oceans are full of plastic.

Take Energy/Power for example: Energy

The world uses over 500 million terajoules of energy in one year.

Liquid fuels—mostly petroleum-based—remain the largest source of world energy consumption.

Total world energy consumption will rise from 575 quadrillion British thermal units (Btu) in 2015 to 736 quadrillion Btu in 2040, an increase of 28%.  Most of the world’s energy growth will occur in countries outside of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

World consumption and production of renewable energy is dismal, fossil fuels will still account for 77% of energy use in 2040. Our use of energy will grow by about 35 percent between 2011 and 2035. If nothing changes, most of this increase will be covered by burning more coal.

In just 71 minutes the Earth is hit by enough solar energy to power the world for one year. If we could exploit just one tenth of one percent of this energy we would have more than enough energy to meet the world’s total energy demand.

Percent renewable energy use globally, right now

Take Algorithms for example: Algorithm, complex mathematical formulas, are playing a growing role in all walks of life: from health, to shopping, and jobs (AFP Photo/ROSLAN RAHMAN)

The new form of unseen Capitalism. Profit seeking algorithms run Wall street and other world stock exchanges. Algorithm, complex mathematical formulas, are playing a growing role in all walks of life: from health, to shopping, and jobs.

Algorithms are being used — experimentally — to write news articles from raw data. Algorithms are not inherently fair, because the person who builds the model defines success.  They will be uses as scapegoat for societal ills.Résultat de recherche d'images pour "video explaining the woes of the world"

The list of woes is endless and there is little hope of a global transformation of the way the world manages itself. We’re already close to points of no return.

I say why take the risk?  We may have entered the most challenging and exciting decade in the history of the planet but if we don’t find a way of collective action there will be no point to any history. 

The only way to make a global difference is by harnessing Greed.

A WORLD AID COMMISSION OF 0.05% ( See previous posts)

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.




, , , , , , ,


( A six minute read)

It would be fair to say that most of us live in a cloud of our own importance.

However that cloud is disappearing into any other cloud which we are all creating with little or no control.

Our Ideology of normative beliefs, conscious and unconscious ideas, that are individual, group or society are under attack by this cloud. The reality is that temporary outages and slower-speed broadband that are a minor nuisance today can and will become a critical issue.Image associée

It represents the consummate disruptor to structure; a pervasive social and economic network that will soon connect and define more of the world than any other political, social, or economic.

It is the first mega trend of the twenty-first century, one that will shape the way we will address virtually every challenge we face for at least the next 100 years.

It is where we will all live, work, and play in the coming decades.

The Cloud is where your kids go to dive into online play. It’s where you meet and make friends in social networks. It’s where companies find the next big idea. It’s where political campaigns are won and lost.

You might think that this is all hog wash.

( But it appears that New Zealand does not have any politicians with brains of their own that they can rely on.

It has just recently appointed the worlds first AI virtual politician with the wonderful name of SAM. “Sam your man ” with a memory of an elephant he never forgets. ” Sam considers everyone’s position when making decisions.”

Well F… me Nick Gerristen ( The creator of Sam) there is a lot of bias in the cloud and AI algorithms are riddled with it.

You say “SAM is an enabler.” I agree.  Make sure you feed it as no doubt Google will want to buy it. I see you love BIG ideas, so perhaps you should introduce Sam to Sophia and you might have a bunch of little Samson’s.

Make sure he knows all about NXT Fuels, and by all means give him a bash. I am sure the Maori would be delighted. By the way, being a politician I would have named it, Ākina.  ( A Māori word meaning a call for bold action. It also conveys a spirit of watchful and active encouragement, helping others to identify pathways through their challenges.)

Back to the more serious subject:

It is time that we started to recognize some of the risks associated with this cloud technology, so as to avoid the possibility of future issues being decided by Sam and his like, who are servants of the hardware and software resources made available on the Internet as managed third-party services.

The world and us who live on it are becoming highly dependent on our Internet providers, so much so that it wont be long before we will have a fully cloud-based world.

Since no proper standards for cloud computing are set yet, it becomes almost impossible for anyone to ascertain the quality of services they have been provided with. So in the near future we will not be able to make wise decisions while choosing your personal service provider.

This, in turn, enables providers to charge customers fees proportional to their network, storage, and processing utilization.

Most issues start from the fact that the user loses control of his or her data, because it is stored on a computer belonging to someone else.

Many cloud providers can share information with third parties if necessary for purposes of law and order even without a warrant.

Although cloud computing enhances content accessibility, this access is “increasingly grounded in the virtually monopolistic privatization of the cloud which provides this access”.

This access, necessarily mediated through a handful of companies, ensures a progressive privatization of global cyberspace.

So we must ask the question why are we and our governments sustaining the quasi-monopolies that filter what we see depending on commercial and ideological interests they have.

The legal and regulatory landscape around cloud computing is by no means static. There are new laws being proposed that could change the responsibilities of both cloud computing tenants and providers.This creates new challenges in understanding how laws apply to a wide variety of information management scenarios.

As with all things surrounding profit it’s inevitable that some could will burst or simply stop providing the service if they deem it isn’t profitable for them. Often, large companies will enter the market but leave it once the expected profit doesn’t materialize. If this is the core business of the cloud supplier, it might be willing to continue operating for longer with a smaller profit.

Surely if we use a cloud infrastructure sourced from a cloud services provider, we must impose all legal or regulatory requirements that apply to any enterprise.



All technology must be vetted to ensure it complies to humanity core values.

It should be compulsory for it to carry a ATR World Certificate.

Accountable, Transparent, Reversible. Image associée

If we are to have any hope of tackling  any of Social, Political, Economic and Environmental Issues That Affect Us we need a beanie Cloud not a cloud for profit.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.



, , , , ,

( A twelve-minute read)

If we look at England going headlong to join Greece, (which has olive oil and sunshine against cider and gray skies) one has to wonder why all those that voted to stay in the EU have gone silent.

Eu cost

Why is this?

Where are the 48% that voted to stay in the EU?

It seems that England’s pending departure from the European Union, is driven by memories of the Empire rather than its people.

We all know that it built a fortune on the British Empire, however it used it to create pervasive banking and finance institutions, including many large value traders. It is this trade potential that made such a large economy.

Now just because it was unwilling to fight its corner we are witnessing a form of collective up in the clouds lunacy. As if Democracy is unable to reconsider a decision once vote on.

If anything one has to admire the bull dog determinism of a country that has giving many things to the world both good and bad to enact the result of a non legal binding Referendum that was won by 52% to 48%.

What can one say other than, you might like to turn your thoughts to the millions of people who will be directly affected but weren’t allowed to vote. (Not just the under-18s, but also the UK residents who come from other countries in the EU, and the UK nationals living in other parts of the EU…) The 10 million or so remain voters who didn’t show up to the polls should feel ashamed.

While Brexit likely does not reflect the sentiment of the entire electorate the result of the referendum reflects how democracy works in England.

Once the largest empire in the world its is now a shell of what it once was.

It’s too late now, but on such an important decision one would have thought that voting should have been compulsory, with a minimum majority of at least 60% to win.

Who in their right minds would run a yes-no one-off vote on such a big and complex issue? Only mad dogs and English men in the noon day sun.

Did the outcome really represent the will of the entire electorate?

Not by a long shot.

If only more_____ (fill in your choice of young people, ethnic minorities, Londoners, Scots, university graduates, etc.) had voted, then Remain would have won.  At least that’s the argument.

Of course, UK voters did not have one million chances to vote to stay in the EU.  They had one, and a majority of those who cast a ballot opted to leave.

There is a longstanding unwritten constitutional principle in England if you don’t participate, your voice is not heard.

Yet, when Britain renegotiates its status, with the European Union the borders will not change.European Central Bank

Do you know why?

Because Britain needs an open line to Europe. The most that will happen is a limit placed on immigration, something that the didn’t need to leave the EU to achieve.

So I ask where is the voice of the younger generation – which voted overwhelmingly in favor of remaining in the EU – that ultimately will bear the cost of the xenophobic pipe dreams sold to their parents by cynical politicians.

Have you all being seriously duped by a dream that wants you to believe that your standard of living will rise as a result.

What you are seeing is less secure employment, more social disease and mental health…and generally a cost of living that very few people can afford unless your one of the top 10%.

Which begs the question, is this what happens in a limited 2 party ‘democratic’ state (first past the post being the least democratic of all voting systems) when the people have lost faith in both parties?

Without the EU apparatus, your trading leverage is massively weakened, meaning that many of the free trade agreements you will sign outside of Europe will end up being less beneficial, especially in the extent that they impact upon the young.

I’m curious about exactly what England (notice I didn’t use the term UK) has to offer Europe or any free trade partner.

Heavy industry and mining is a shell of what it once was, as is the textiles industry. The auto industry is in many ways being propped by their EU agreements. Every one of your rural industries has another source within Europe itself.

You don’t have many natural resources, and even those you do have like North Sea oil will have its boundaries tested when you leave. I’m assuming this will extend to fishing boundaries as well. England, the entire UK for that matter, will be a pretty small place.

London’s status as a banking capital may be worth squat now as well. Banks will leave England as quick as they can buy new buildings in other cities.

The lost of the clearing of euro-denominated derivatives, will ultimately force tens of thousands pounds in revenue out of London and break off a key part of the City’s infrastructure.

On top of all of this  we are now witnessing what I happen to think it a VERY bad idea to hand your laws into the hands of the politicians, especially when they are already rich autocrats.

All this assumes that the legislation that would be required goes through either of the houses, which is in and of itself an iffy proposition, especially with Scotland promising to block and obstruct and rest assured that the Northern Ireland DUP will more than likely be looking for additional bribery blood money to vote on any agreement.

Throughout the course of human history, wealth, or the lack thereof, has driven social unrest. The frenetic pace of change has caused enormous social disruption as entire industries and employment have migrated to lower cost centers in Asia and other developing regions.

Perhaps England should take a leaf form Isaac Goldberg, who said

” To blind oneself to change is not therefore to halt it”.

This is what England can look forward to, deal or no deal.

Your politicians say;

It simply isn’t possible to wind back the clock. The forces that have been unleashed cannot be restrained. Turning inwards, however, will not solve the problem.

A disunited Europe alienated from a disunited UK can only lead to sorry state of affairs.

With profit seeking algorithms, Capitalism as we know it is going underground, isolation will not stop this taking place.

Perhaps now is the time for the European Union to consider jettisoning the UK relationship altogether. However the EU has shown it tends to move with a glacial pace, so the thaw will be over several decades that will bleed not just your productivity, but the aspirations of the young. 

The blow dealt to European unity may prove fatal but it is beyond a doubt that England will certainly feel the chill winds from the UK’s new isolationist policy.

I have always felt the UK should have try again to renegotiate the terms of its membership rather than an either / or referendum.

Now it appears that this is not possible as the damage has already been done, to an almost irreversible extent, the conditions of re-entry would not be favorable, and the cost of rejoining would be high.

The gap in EU-UK positions is wide, the risks of escalation high, and the room for compromise limited.

In or out will now weigh on Britain’s economic prospects for years to come.

If Brexit talks collapse the most likely reason will be not be money. (One way or the other the UK will pay a hefty bill for leaving EU.) The main reason is that any future relationship between Britain and the EU will take years to negotiate. The architecture of this relations depends on whether England honors the commitments which England entered into freely.

autumn statement brexit black hole

UK politics are now in a state of chaos, with European politics following suite so it is highly unlikely (whether England honors its commitments or not) that the twenty remaining EU countries will agree to anything other than to agree to disagree.

You only have to look at the Irish/ Northern Ireland border.

No other country is going to feel the fallout from the UK’s vote to leave the European Union more than Ireland.  It remains at the mercy of the unfolding drama in its closest neighbor and the consequences are mind-boggling.

Brexit is not occurring in a vacuum.

Public opinion is being reshaped by Brexit however it will be the cost of inflation that will cause panic, with corporations shift their bases of operation to Europe, costing thousands of jobs it will result in more than disturbances on the street.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks chucked in the bin.