ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ

Jacqui Smith on today this morning really struggled to say what new ideas she is announcing today. I think this is just a way to announce something to continue Gordon's busy start to take away attention from all the problems- only problem is it seems she isn't actually announcing anything new. That food inflation story sounds good- it would be interesting to hear what prices actually are- many foods have come down in price over recent years so is food now more expensive overall?

Hello Carol,
Could I reiterate my suggestion made at the time of the Policy Exchange unpleasantness that lots of us might benefit from a crammer item on Think Tanks(When they originated/Purposes/Political and Financial links/Successes and Failures etc.) I'd find this helpful not only because the wretched things are so often referred to without explanation, but also because they seem to be taking an increasingly important role eg. Peter Hain's use of the alleged Progressive Policy Forum.

Hello Carol,
Could I reiterate my suggestion made at the time of the Policy Exchange unpleasantness that lots of us might benefit from a crammer item on Think Tanks(When they originated/Purposes/Political and Financial links/Successes and Failures etc.) I'd find this helpful not only because the wretched things are so often referred to without explanation, but also because they seem to be taking an increasingly important role eg. Peter Hain's use of the alleged Progressive Policy Forum.

Traffic must be high profile. The Times today raises many points but putting it simply, 20 years ago families had one car now they have 3 or 4. Yes, we are being forced on to Rail (40% up) and are being ripped off in the process, but why do we continue to pay the price of petrol and congestion?

I look out of my window and its pouring and not wishing to get wet or once again lose (Gift) my umbrella to someone,we hop into our cars.

The other new phenominum is that we have all taken to driving between Midnight and early morning to escape congestion. I hadn't realised on a recent trip there were so many insomniacs.
Government policy is to go for gridlock so then more of us can be ripped off by rail. Building no roads at least keeps our "Greeny" friends happy, so Brown is at least satisfying someone.

Go with TRAFFIC - this is very important.

Focus on how we got to a state where there are over 30 million cars on the road - basically from a time when the value of second hand cars dropped off a cliff, so often people had no incentive to use their old car as a deposit for the new one and kept both [or gave one away to a family member].

And the fact that privatising 'public transport' has led to huge fare increases, instead of being pushed down by competition.

i think a lot of these stories, and others favoured by news outlets tackle the symptons but not the underlying causes that bring them about

Whatever you go with, make it interesting. The last few programmes have been utterly dire:

- Diana Inquest (who cares? Plus it was already on R4)

- Polish doctor - yawn-o-rama, plus it was already on R4 (spot a trend here?), plus Paxo trying to be all outraged over something that wasn't outrageous

- Terror on the web - a posting from September 2007 is supposed to excite/frighten/intrigue us? That was Not News.

- Peter *&^%$ Hain! I really think you should all get out more. Who, outside of the Westminster Village, cares?

- Sark! Now that was interesting (compared to the rest)

I know you can't invent news, but some in depth reporting from round the world would be interesting, or current discoveries in science, or... anything but the stuff you've served up recently. Oh, and stop sharing reports with Radio 4. If they work on the radio, why pay for the cameraman?

DIVERSITY HAS INSIDIOUS IMPLICATIONS?

The rise in crime since WWII (almost linear) is, I have suggested, a direct function of the feminisation of developed world cultures/economies that we've brought upon ourselves in the last half century or so. Males have lower verbal IQs than females and this also differs significantly between ethnic (i.e. gene barriered) groups, so some males, from some groups, are more prone to crime than others (e.g. Black Caribbeans > Asian Muslims (especially West Pakistanis)). It is not just BME groups either:

This is not 'terrorism' per se, and its is not best conceived as low 'intelligence' per se either, it's alienation given that an ever growing number find themselves in what's now a 80% Service Sector based, highly verbal/symbolic, culture, which runs on rules which effectively exclude large numbers of them. Given fluid cognitive ability is largely genetic, one can not really say it's their 'fault'. What are they to do when the market demands one set of skills and they have another? We should also bear in mind that we invited large numbers of immigrants to meet a labour shortage. We still do.

It's also important to appreciate that this is not correctable through education, as these skills are largely genetic. In fact, efforts to redress this through 'education' are misguided and are just likely to make matters worse through increasing exclusion rates and attendance. This is why increased immigration and fertility in these groups is going to continue be a problem for the foreseeable future, and why all efforts to 'address' this through well meant education will not work. Most of our policy makers do not understand how 'learning' works. They genrally tend to be naive Lysenkoist 'bucket fillers' when all the evidence indicates that abilities are actually more like genetically programmed 'search-lights' which have to be selected and shaped in apposite ways. Failure to appreciate this will inevitably mean that schools will have to cheat on admissions rules, as this will be the only way in the end that they can improve results i.e by changing their cohort intakes and excluding poor performers. Both of which will be detected and no doubt lead to Special Measures and closures.

At least Ministers have finally seen the folly of that silly slogan 'War on Terror', but how long will it be before they wake up to the now well documented international empirical facts about human cognitive diversity (sex and ethnicity)? It will be a long time I fear, as those who run these cultures have been selected for high verbal ability and to make the required changes means a shift in their power. However, if these changes aren't made soon, given the differential birth rates, and our low TFRs, changes will, I fear, be forced upon them from below.

Barrie (#9) And what if their agenda has long been divisive/subversive in pursuit of devolution, ie. their conception of 'democracy of the people'? Would one not then expect first to see Scotland, Wales, NI break away, then England Balkanised as Regional Assemblies, as a pre-requisite to a 2005, 2007 EU Constitution/Lisbon Treaty where each region was about the electoral size of Eire, Finland etc? NI would be settled because there would be no UK, no England in fact. To do that, These New Lefties would have to break up the country like traditional Trotskyities/Wreckers/Levellers using any and every political force at their disposal would they not?

Perish the thought, but from that paranoid perspective they'd all think they were doing a very good thing would they not? Really they'd just be de-regulating for free-market anarcho-capitalist vultures like Tesco etc, but they all have our well-being at heart don't they?

The NHS needs to save money, so it is interesting that Patricia Hewitt, previous Minister of Health is going to a top drawer position in Boots the Chemist. Now, we can be sure she will keep a steely eye on the amounts charged for medical tests that have been dumped at Boots doors. Even STD and blood tests are entrusted to the white-coated high street workers. Eye tests, blood pressure, all together with the beauty creams! Ms Hewitt will make sure that Boots charge the cheapest prices for medicines and will not allow her position in what is a commercial concern to colour her judgement. If you believe this you will believe anything!!!

Anne (#11) Civil Rights (see Hewitt's background), Human Rights (see many of the New Left's background/expertise), and many years of campaigning/legislating for equality/freedom/choice were just a means to an invidious end for these Calvantists/Trotskities as it was all designed to erode the power of the (regulating) state, in pursuit of a less unfettered free-market, 'devolution' of power, i.e. less accountable business practices and greater profit as I see it. A couple of generations of (not very smart) idealists, half of whom now have 'degrees' have been seduced/suckered into voting/working for the destruction of what took a lot longer to build and required careful 'elitist' care and management. We now have hoards of incompetents in jobs they are, in reality, ill suited for. To have any hope of reversing this the electorate would have to have the sense look alsewhere than what the three main parties/clones have to offer in the way of 'liberal-democracy', and that's the worrying part given what's available and that they donm't on average seem smart enough to see through the attractions of quick fixes and the gratification of ephemeral, impulsive, hedonistic whims, or the ability to stand up to the bullying nature of polictcal correctness.

On the subject of gullibility, we were long told that the Soviet system was an abhorent economic/political failure. Given that Russia is 10x smaller in population than China, and that the West is now economically indebted to this Stalinist state and its NEP, what sort fo 'failure' is that? After the 1953 China was more Stalinist than Russia the USSR!

Anne (#11) Civil Rights (see Hewitt's background), Human Rights (see many of the New Left's background/expertise), and many years of campaigning/legislating for equality/freedom/choice were just a means to an invidious end for these Calvantists/Trotskities as it was all designed to erode the power of the (regulating) state, in pursuit of a less unfettered free-market, 'devolution' of power, i.e. less accountable business practices and greater profit as I see it. A couple of generations of (not very smart) idealists, half of whom now have 'degrees' have been seduced/suckered into voting/working for the destruction of what took a lot longer to build and required careful 'elitist' care and management. We now have hoards of incompetents in jobs they are, in reality, ill suited for. To have any hope of reversing this the electorate would have to have the sense look alsewhere than what the three main parties/clones have to offer in the way of 'liberal-democracy', and that's the worrying part given what's available and that they donm't on average seem smart enough to see through the attractions of quick fixes and the gratification of ephemeral, impulsive, hedonistic whims, or the ability to stand up to the bullying nature of polictcal correctness.

We were long told that the Soviet system was an economic/political failure. Given that Russia is 10x smaller in population than China, and that the West is now economically indebted to this Stalinist state and its NEP, what sort fo 'failure' is that?

Anne (#11) Civil Rights (see Hewitt's background), Human Rights (see many of the New Left's background/expertise), and many years of campaigning/legislating for equality/freedom/choice were just a means to an invidious end for these Calvantists/Trotskities as it was all designed to erode the power of the (regulating) state, in pursuit of a less unfettered free-market, 'devolution' of power, i.e. less accountable business practices and greater profit as I see it. A couple of generations of (not very smart) idealists, half of whom now have 'degrees' have been seduced/suckered into voting/working for the destruction of what took a lot longer to build and required careful 'elitist' care and management. We now have hoards of incompetents in jobs they are, in reality, ill suited for. To have any hope of reversing this the electorate would have to have the sense look alsewhere than what the three main parties/clones have to offer in the way of 'liberal-democracy', and that's the worrying part given what's available and that they donm't on average seem smart enough to see through the attractions of quick fixes and the gratification of ephemeral, impulsive, hedonistic whims, or the ability to stand up to the bullying nature of polictcal correctness.

On the subject of gullibility, we were long told that the Soviet system was an economic/political failure, an 'evil empire'. Given that Russia is 10x smaller in population than China, and that the West is now economically indebted to this Stalinist state and its NEP, what sort fo 'failure' is that? After the 1953 China was more Stalinist than Russia the USSR!

Anne (#11) Civil Rights (see Hewitt's background), Human Rights (see many of the New Left's background/expertise), and many years of campaigning/legislating for equality/freedom/choice were just a means to an invidious end for these Calvanists/Trotskyities, as it was all designed to erode the power of the (regulating) state in pursuit of a less unfettered free-market, 'devolution' of power (i.e. less accountable business practices and greater profit) as I see it. A couple of generations of (not very smart) idealists, half of whom now have 'degrees' have been seduced/suckered into voting/working for the destruction of what took a lot longer to build up and which required careful 'elitist' management (and deference from others) to work. We now have hoards of (well-meaning) incompetents in jobs which they are, in reality, very ill suited for. To have any hope of breaking out of this nightmare, the electorate would have to have the collective sense look elsewhere than to what the three main parties/clones currently have to offer in the way of 'liberal-democracy', and that's the worrying part given what's available, and that they don't seem smart enough to see through the attractions of quick fixes and the gratification of ephemeral, impulsive, hedonistic whims, or the ability to stand up to the bullying, corrosive nature of political correctness.

On the subject of gullibility, we were long told that the Soviet system was an economic/political failure. It was allegedly an 'evil empire'. Given that Russia is 10x smaller in population than China, and that the West is now economically indebted to this Stalinist 'monster' and its NEP, what sort of 'failure' is that? After 1953 China was more Stalinist than Russia the USSR! It still is. The USSR was undermined by Gorbachev with help from the Chicago Boys, what's the betting that in years to come we will see the USSR and China plus others in the SCO comprise the dominant hegemomnic bloc, and look back upon '9/11' and Iraq as elements of a modern, cleverly crafted, Morgenthau Plan?