Philosophy, Politics and Economics

Beyond GDP - Are the financial institutions listening?

2012-07-09T09:15:00.001+01:00

So this morning I have been scouring the website of the boerse, the Austrian stock exchange. Affiliating myself with some names, names of banks, securities companies, corporations and leading individuals was strangely comforting, despite the enormity of the task ahead, but it struck my attention, in the midst of by nation and by region growth forecasts that that is all it was, simply, growth forecasts. Now maybe that is the point of these financial institutions, simply to take into account relevant considerations that will act as determinants on growth and publish forecasts, and associated recommendations, but this seems to be strangely absent from a moral imperative. It struck my focus, again, that there is a paradox at the heart of this. On the one hand, it is the business of these organisations to make the most financially stable recommendations for its clients, but at the same time is there not an imperative, or at least should there not be an imperative to direct investment towards the most morally lucrative fields; in desalination, or renewable energy. Maybe this is what they have done elsewhere, and as my research on this is still in its infancy I will reserve any final judgement on the matter, however it is worth making a note, privately and publicly (for anyone who wishes to accompany me in this research) that on the articles I have read, discourse has been distinctly financial, with no normative aspect. Here is a link to the google document within which I have made a note (under Austrian News) of the articles I have read (minus the first one which is irrelevant to the stock exchange.) Alternatively you could always consider typing into Austrian Stock Exchange into google. Alternatively, as is tradition, you could do f.a. Email addresses underneath for editing access. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_hVkob1hQHzFnKj1vptYr6N2SOC8PlJRL4yW1_8lVu8/edit

I've fixed it

2012-05-14T18:35:00.001+01:00

1. Legalize weed 2. Stop making people go to work or uni. 3. Get people to work from home, or go to uni (or study) from home. 4. Universal Basic Income. Everyone gets food and water from locally sourced agriculture that will be improved through industrial projects in glass making and engineering.

Working in the Dark

2012-05-03T22:31:00.000+01:00

Sifting through papers past; will deliver in no harm. Only make mistakes, old friends, new and emerging be calm, disarm and arm to construction, whether sound or physical, shift. For pounds sterling or euro I'll twist and place together, for bread I tether never staying quite beneath the ether, but not burning to brightly either, I stay conscious of my brethren with neither food nor freedom, beneath the will of Good to deceive you now; we're so close but this isn't the time, I don't have reason to depart to a bunch of strangers playing dark presence, I don't have the need it's not clear what I benefit from starting unevenly I'll just leave these rhymes in digestible format, wiped my feet on the floor-mat, you know your mental when every moment has a reason/trying to stay ahead of season, seasoning my character with pearls from a bunch of different species' breathings/know when I say it's real, you can be like okay dude so what dimension we in? because I have more fingers in pies then a promiscuous Kali/

On Information that alters teleology

2012-05-03T18:57:00.000+01:00

The value of life. The regard to animals. The takers. Ways of giving. The Holocaust: Did Hitler really think the Jews were below rats? Is that speciesist? Are species morally comparable? Is a race of noble horses more worthy than a race of putrid human? But to be a putrid human, for the word has meaning is that discounting the worth of that existence? I pose this question on the back of serious depressive dominant cultural permeations, "OH this too, too solid flesh," - to all the others that show that we survive through destruction. Mowing our way through animals, in the vicinity of humans, what is loneliness but a place to work quietly, making middle ground, and in our excretion we give back the waste to the earth, and in our breaths we give back the vapour, the smoke, and in our deaths, our carbom, the liquids, flesh we contained becomes the earth. And so we, eternal recurrence.

Warwick University Vs Open University vs University of the Street: Re the Birth of Tragedy through the Spirit of Music

2012-05-03T17:53:00.001+01:00

A Comment on Drug Policy

2012-03-13T18:05:00.002+00:00

http://www.thestudentjournals.co.uk/comment/politics/780-synthesising-progresses-the-move-from-a-red-and-black-to-a-green-economy" and while you're there check out the rest of the website!! And don't forget, youtube's new versus section goes live at 7pm GMT -> a link is on the blog. Sammy

I have a virus

2012-03-12T02:52:00.000+00:00

Don't worry the last evidence of this virus doing its bad deeds was a while ago, when it sent some people a thing saying, "people are saying bad things about you," and then tried to link to a blog. Whether or not "I" also sent people stuff saying that they should open an account or interest or some shit is another point of plausible contention. But even, so I am trying to make up for it now. It may have started when I decided it would be a good idea to integrate software into my facebook, and in the process allowed some organisations to post as me. If I have posted random stuff that wouldn't likely have been me - i.e. without explanation - then please do tell me, and I will have a chance to revise the extent of the access that I give to the people who let me use their stuff for free. Hmm.

Macroeconomic Policy in the EU: EC307

2012-03-11T20:22:00.002+00:00

Admin notes: missed 3/4 seminars. Not attended too many lectures. In the news: Portugal moves to the front of the debt queue. Will post link on request. Greece agrees a deal whereby 75% of private creditors lose the value of their maturations by up to 74% http://www.euronews.com/business-newswires/1427798-greece-closes-offer-with-bond-swap-set-to-pass/ hmm Sevillian Oranges grew on me. Slightly acidic but sometimes that's ok. They are deceptively small as well, but with all that flavour it's not that important. As for other recently acquired knowledge (RAK) - CAP affects all EU - subsidies are going to decrease which will hit many farmers. Panorama did a documentary where they exposed some of the people claiming - including millionaires - tax payer subsidy. But what is the value of this 'agriculture'? Common Agricultural Policy is interesting though. It works as a system of entitlements. This may be separate from previously mentioned systems in which millionaires are claiming, but both deserve investigation. German efficiency has long been admired by the British.

Thoughts on War Children

2012-03-11T19:20:00.001+00:00

So Kony2012 is contentious. The 'army of peace' is essentially now, well an army. The money you help goes in support of the Ugandan army. Direct military intervention is their solution. Me being a pacifist, I am in favour of peaceful negotiation. The LRA being the LRA, they refuse to talk. I suppose if you are Joseph Kony, the only way out is death.

Competing for firsts

2012-03-02T22:40:00.000+00:00

I just found out from Claire PG Tips Flaherty that our course might be weighted more heavily (60%) on final year. I got 48 last year and so I estimate I need 49.125% (equivalent of 52% on a 50-50 marked [second and third year]). Essays first, and I must crack on with International Economic System Since 1918. A broad topic, but that can be subdivided as follows: 1918- end of the war economy - *need to find stats* - leading to prosperity in the 20's (maybe only in US but unlikely) - crash of 29, leading to a depression. Then we must actively consider regions separately, and the way in which these economies integrated, competed and traded. This can be seen in terms of the major international agreements, and the actions that influenced them and resulted from them. The winners and losers exposited. But it is necessary to not consider the module as confining my study to post 1918, because the state of the countries at that stage was influenced by it's culture and the histories (as well as the economic indicators that define them.) I am doing my essay on the golden age in europe (1950-1973)l specifically the nature of the prosperity - which the question limits to the realm of policy (which is pretty ambiguous if you take politics to mean power, and thus policy as some loosely defined connection of the metaphysical realm of politics - i.e. abstracted not beyond physical formalisation). The nature of these policies is certainly a subject for exploration and it is certainly worth pressing the conventional view that policy is to be thought of as government policy, even though the reaction of the trade unions and other non-affiliated members of the electorate can also be thought of as being policies - unless the emphasis on parliamentary procedure being followed is a necessary requirement for the use of the term policy to be accepted. For the purpose of the essay I am cautious about drawing too much on that distinction as an important part of my argument, but I feel the making of the distinction is a good way to introduce all the relevant agents. In terms of my choice of countries..Obvious is Britain, Germany, France, Spain and Italy..Romania and Finland, as well as Sweden are worth noting too, as is Austria and Belgium, I need to establish which are considered core and which are considered peripheral, and I also need to think of a way in which I can transfer the most relevant information (which is likely dependent on my argument) about each country. The instigation of a table seems a useful step, and I need to figure out how to do that. Supplementarily I must add insight about the nature of this prosperity [oh and Poland) - so GDP figures, GDP per capita figures.... Below: Source wiki. Thanks wiki <3 Post-war international gold-dollar standard (1946–1971) Main article: Bretton Woods system After the Second World War, a system similar to a Gold Standard and sometimes described as a "gold exchange standard" was established by the Bretton Woods Agreements. Under this system, many countries fixed their exchange rates relative to the U.S. dollar. The U.S. promised to fix the price of gold at approximately $35 per ounce. Implicitly, then, all currencies pegged to the dollar also had a fixed value in terms of gold.[1] Under the administration of the French President Charles de Gaulle up to 1970, France reduced its dollar reserves, trading them for gold from the U.S. government, thereby reducing U.S. economic influence abroad. This, along with the fiscal strain of federal expenditures for the Vietnam War and persistent balance of payments deficits, led President Richard Nixon to end the direct convertibility of the dollar to gold on August 15, 1971, resulting in the system's breakdown (the "Nixon Shock"). Clue - the Golden age is not necessarily synonymous with prosperity. Definition of prosperity, obviously is hard to define. Shouldn't make it synonymous with standard of life, although it effectively is. Still used political rhetoric. Equality a form of prosperity? GDP per capita is a good starting point.

Finals

2012-03-01T14:33:00.002+00:00

Shortage of resources - specifically papers that are not on JSTOR yet are on syllabus - Nicholas Craft and Gianni Toniolo - Economic Growth in Europe since 1945 [1996] The inference about having to pay for access to academic work implies that the work may not be of moral value and therefore constitutes superfluous to survival-based requirements in a basic sense. This is not to mention the fact of the welfare of the author, who relies on his or her well-being for the revenue generated by those people who wish to access the research that was, with effort, produced. A system of Universal Basic Income, and publicly subsidised research together with a democratically negotiated syllabus could potentially be effective in coordinating research so that all pupils with an assumed level of disposable income can access the same level of material resources. This is a moral duty and appears to be the only way that one can establish a level playing field in the sense that everyone who wishes to access research can do so without excessive costs, especially when there has been an input of cost in order to get onto the course in the first place. The current system which treats everyone individually, assessing people and permitting their access to institutions based on their demonstrated academic prowess, may have its benefits, but at this current moment I will say that it could be fairer to allow everyone access to every academic institution and piece of research for a premeditated fee that is negotiated in accordance with the living requirements and negotiated value of their contribution to humanity. Thus the hard to access copy of "Nicholas Craft and Gianni Toniolo - Economic Growth in Europe since 1945 [1996]" - costing as it does £55 - should be subsidised on the conditions that there is a genuine academic interest and that the living costs of the authors are covered.

ways of knowing

2012-02-25T04:40:00.000+00:00

a methodology with a contingent flaw; that is the slow level of progress; confounded thoughts produce a misguided hawk who does not have the patience to let others provide wisdom for him, unless they're on the syllabus. The only way of knowing is solemn loneliness. This homeliness it is a sickness; but if there is infinite potential to be unlocked in wisdom then who are you to tell me to not pursue this mission of knowing what it truly is to be alone; what a way to show them a ridiculous ironique to be revolved again;

operor vos volo ut?

2012-02-25T04:25:00.001+00:00

do you want to - latin - true story (tbv)

Love this guy

2012-02-25T04:12:00.001+00:00

http://www.quickmeme.com/Good-Guy-Greg-/ Tis a bit sad though that we actually know nothing about him. The Royal We. Is that the grand portrait? I think not. But then I think so, so how do you compensate, for no show. MemorandumMiss BloombergMiss

Methodology and Method

2012-02-25T03:00:00.002+00:00

It is easier to distinguish, between methodology and method as is done in a paper with whom Kenneth Waltz was associated (though the distinction may not have been by him) between methodology; said to include the underlying concepts and ideas that power the implementation of the research method. This can be thought of, in my case, as the things which I choose, or have failed to remove, from my life. This can be analysed in terms of the justification for the acts that I undertake, and the ideals toward which they are heading. The speaking in will is an assertive notion, and is implemented under conditions of serious pressure, laden on by the ideologies and ideas that circle your's truly's human-individual throughout life; from the regretful aspects to the rejoiceable aspects of my history; to the aspirations of the future of similar nature; there is a serious element of diversion that is plausible as a strategy in this location.

All types of Idiot

2012-02-23T03:01:00.001+00:00

Let the provocative title not mislead you. I am not one of these people who considers themselves above other people unjustly. In those areas that I do consider myself above people, I can usually quantify it - in reference to comparative endeavours on issues considered moral. I am a debatist - that is to say I enjoy the arena of debate. Debaters may turn around to me and say, "hey! Sammy! You are not a debater - you never turn up to debating society!!!!" - not entirely true, I went to one in first year, and we had to discuss abortion - a topic I pretty much exhausted in Alevel RS...anyway I didn't say debater, I said debatist. The distinction is entirely conceived for the purpose of making this distinction. What I believe is that debate should be a feature of as many aspects of life as is safely possible, given the imperfect nature of the world...oh yeah..unless I am one day granted the authority to devise policy and pass laws.... Anyway onto idiots..all types of idiots.. Let me start with the idiot with a lack of memory. An old acquaintance of mine, I cringe to recall, once told me he admired the work I was doing. Though I filled his newsfeed with campaigning on public justice discourse, I was assured by his confiding in me about his low self esteem about the current state of his life that he wanted to get on board with the work I was doing. Oh how I was wrong. Upon writing this blog..which I do admit was as much for my good as it is for anyone else's, I invited him to read my blog..which was making some progress in just the sort of areas that we had discussed mutual interest. How surprised was I to hear the hostile reaction! And the abusive schadenfreude that declared his desire that I would come down with the illness he was suffering from. I was deleted from Facebook. One idiot gone. Onto idiot number 2: his (and nearly my) friend. Upon hearing (clearly half) of this story I was ditched that same evening. This guy is an utter douche:-goes to a dancing club, bigging up the music -> smokes all night - doesn't dance once. Now that may be common practice for douches who clearly have some desire to smoke themselves into the ground - and I know you are probably thinking that I should get over this :- And I have..i must admit though I am aggrieved at the way things played out..mostly because of the utter arrogance I was dismissed with. "Come back when you better your approach..." Or drivel to that effect...Now I don't know about you..but when campaigning on issues of political justice, you would expect a former sociology student and a politics student to comprend the omission of superfluous niceties..not to say I always did..often I was genial and jovial and all manners of subtle ways of expressing friendliness, but there comes a point when enough is enough. There comes a point when you roll your eyes in your head..think about the best way to achieve the goals you would like to achieve...and wonder why the hell you have chosen friends like these. That is why my approach was business-like. I hoped I could establish a mature and professional relationship with people whom I had shreds of respect for. Well those shreds have been shredded, and now all I am left with is a bitter sense of injustice, a confounded sense of rejection, and an enormous task that I am looking for support with. It is a sad state of affairs when you end a blog thinking.."maybe I should expect less from my friends.." but no, you shouldn't have to be the moral crutch for some neglectful idiots who are so concerned with their own futures they forget that the things I am doing are motivated, not by some malicious sense of schadenfreude, and misplaced arrogance, but a truly genuine, educated, and aspirationally authoritative sense of justice. You know who you are. You may not even read this. If you do, grow up - get your head on the game - and try to remember what is important. Try to remember that you are not the authority on issues of public justice. I am not either, but compared to you two - evidently - I have the upper hand. I was trying to offer my expertise for free. I didn't want to spell it out because it sounds so damn self-loving. But it is not that way. Honestly. It is like I have this grand theory that has stemmed out of (not my own genius) but the things i have read. Clearly you have not done the reading.. or if you have..clearly you consider it redundant now you are outside of university..but it isn't..you could be vital assets to the progressive movement..it would be hard to condemn u as pushing back progress..what u can be blamed for however not doing your part to ascend upon the progress i have made in this blog at least, offering your insightful, constructive (not sarcastic) comments that I know you can give. ______ Then, you have other idiots. Idiots like the people involved in running R.O.N for president..a facebook group aimed at reopening the nominations for SU president, in the hope that some Jesus figure will turn up with progressive policies...design a cool system that takes into account everyone's concerns and then lead us in glory to a utopian future. Now realistically I don't know why I am giving this cause publicity..other than the fact I enjoy blogging about it..but let's hope we can doom the mantra "all publicity is good publicity">>> These idiots decided it would be a good idea to set up this group with some vaguely referenced grumble about student fees going up. When I pressed how they planned on devising a policy for this, one redeemer referenced an alternative white paper...the rest (a bunch of philosophy students, clearly aggrieved with the limited applicability of their degree) took it upon them to call me a troll...the moderator deleted my comments and swiftly deleted me (after some serious "trolling" on my part) [this trolling was good trolling - all estranged bemusement about how a purportedly pro-democracy group can continue under that facade whilst simultaneously stifling debate by removing the comments of those who chose to take time out from work to contrbiute). I was seriously peeved at first, but when I saw the people involved in promoting it, I was relieved at how unthreatened I felt. Anyway luckily some lovely lady pointed out the irony in its proposed mission with respect to its censorship of constructive comments. I just wish I had a better platform to air my utter confusion at how a group of that intention can be so stupid. Ultimately we will see if the campaign is successful. There are a few powerful arguments. The first is that a lot of warwick uni isn't politicised, and so given a heat of the moment question :- do u want to reopen nominations, and a few arguments such as: the candidates are rubbish, there could be better candidates..I really hope this does not hold sway with the student population. If they do reopen nominations that is also fine with me to be honest, I am not bothered..I probably won't even vote...Union procedure is subject to national law which states that all official decisions must go through the official channels. Which means any debate that is had online is effectively invalidated and of no actual use. Therefore in order to have your say you basically need to turn up to a general meeting, sit in a crowded room and hope u get a say, at which point any radical motions..such as the abolishment of the necessity to attend lectures and seminars on campus (replaced by the provision of such services online) would likely be..i dunno how it will turn out..maybe i'll turn up to the next one to find out. Moral of the story. If you are a philosophy student and you want a route into politics, why not start a campaign with no real grounding, establish an ideology with no desire or capacity to argue ur perspective, and join R.O.N for president (Reopen nominations for President). Who knows it might just turn out to be a thing to do to pry you away from 17th century dogma. Beware the ignorant idiots. They may be clever sometimes, but unless you have a seriously watchful eye, they could run away with pent up baseless desire for change.

For your information...

2012-02-20T03:56:00.000+00:00

I will be taking everything that I did not personally produce off this blog. That includes the module outline for PPE, or some of it, not sure I was 100% allowed to post that anyway, but I did so I could increase my exposure to it; drilling it in my subconscious for as close to perfect a reconstruction as I can muster up under exam-time conditions. There is also an exciting innovation I found on Flatter - through techdirt's website - who seem to have a close affinity with Reddit, an exciting bandwagon I have not ridden from the start I do admit. Anyway the point of Flattr is to generate income for content producers. With a Flattr account you make deposits every month (the default amount is €15) and then you stick a Flattr button on your website - so ideally I would do it here, or on a better version of what I have produced thusfar. Then, assuming usual roles of enhancement, you continue your life, reading articles and collecting information with view to collating as much useful information as possible. Only this time, those to whom you are particularly grateful, you donate to, as a sort of token of appreciation. I think this model is a success for two main reasons: (1) As someone who has produced a blog for a while now, and someone who has struggled to understand how over 1000 views but hardly any comments, I recognise that I must improve my blog. My own strategy for donations will have to evolve through a process of reflective deliberative evaluation, and the reality is that a very complex web of conditions determine our spending habits. How am I to ensure that I do not flattr people too early, and have no flattery left (besides the traditional type) for others to whom I am indebted. There is a strong cultural recognition, and the persistent journalistic sentiment around to ensure that those who do not flattr, are perceived less genially, and therefore it is good to get used to this system at an early date. It is certainly a good incentivising model for business. Why not keep thoughts private? I have been provided by my parents with an expensive education and maybe I should be more cautious when it comes to whom I allow to view this information. The flattr button therefore is that incentivising factor. This is not to say it does not give me great pleasure sharing freely the information I have learned, because I have stated before that I feel lucky and undeserving of this great fortune. Rather in the potentiality of my lack of employment (it would be good to have an income stream for work that I put into well meaning information providing projects). (2) It is certainly a good system for coordinating our indebtedness. In a culture that is shrouded in indebtedness, it is good to quantify this, qualify this, understand it. How better to do it than to make specific evaluations of the value of information. Thus... A system: I believe that the best way to approach this now for me [I have my account] is to work out how many articles I read a month, then categorise these articles. Then synthesising this information with other information I may have [personal information - such as my affinity to pursue a particular course of action based on the information that I have acquired] I can blog, should I wish to, (or make personal note of) the factors for consideration around the matter of the value of the information acquired. This then will have to be revalued in terms of euros, which will be the most baffling step, but it certainly seems to be an investigation which was not born in my mind. Indeed that is the impression I get about the role of big companies such as Goldman sachs, J.P Morgan Chase, Deloitte, and indeed other contingents of the Accountancy Profession who make it their jobs to account, since the 19th century or thereabouts, for depreciation in the value of assets. In this case the asset is information, and so there is attention that could be paid to the depreciation of the value of information over time. This is not the sole trait of information, for it may also appreciate in value, given the supplementary or complementary conditions, that also establish the value of the information and so there is also argument to suggest that the Flattr system will require modification, should an additional piece of information decrease or increase the value initially placed on an article or website. The degree of flattery or rather the degree of valued flattery relative to the degree of expected flattery of the content producer is an interesting source of contention, and will determine the extension of provisions by the content provider for free in the future. Such is the enticing appeal of this system. There is a serious need at this point for more thorough accounting practices. Such is the natural progression of ideas, along the lexical line of empirical rigour.

Getting Used to Cold Days: A critique of David T Breakers' article:Human Rights are increasingly the Enemy of Freedom Comment

2012-02-20T01:52:00.002+00:00

The title of this blog; getting used to cold days, reflects the consequence of experiencing a full day without heating. #firstworldproblems they may be, but I can't help but sigh with discontent at the familiar feeling of impression-reflection that occurs at the end of most nights. Our bill was £130 last month, for gas and electricity. For three students in a house in Coventry,that is too much. It does not help that I smoke weed, and this is another affirmation of the fact that this behaviour's unconventionality may have a purpose. I cannot fight the feeling that the illegality of this substance, makes getting over its addictive qualities that much harder. It is not an essential nutrient. It is not an essential nutrient. But why isn't it? Anyway David T Breaker, on conservativehome.com writes an enticing speech, speaking against, but not disrespectfully, of Trevor Phillips, chairman of the Equality and Human Rights commission concerning the case of Christian calls for exemption from human rights equality legislation. The explanatory anecdote included seemed to reference a passionate plea from the author to the human rights and equality commission board to allow for this exemption, on the grounds that equality encroaches on freedom. The equality cited was the obligation to accommodate certain individuals with reference to their uneasy presence around children.... It is an interesting read and I must continue. I will be back to edit this later. Bye for now. N.B Patience is a virtue indeed. Save it for a rainy day *

The blogging revolution. It's political nature and the frustration of speaking to yourself.

2012-02-09T00:13:00.000+00:00

Writing is a constant revolution. Your mind churns the information you absorb and spews it out in rhythmic dance from finger tips to keyboard clicks; Revolving thoughts pass from left cheekbone through the eyes where the memory views it. Larry Temkin, and a bizarre blue(y) background decorated with a white staggered graph arrowing upwards; constant growth, expansion, such is the nature of human existence. We want to accumulate, we want to acquire. We want to have kids and we want to consume everything ourselves, but there are loads of people so how much can you realistically grab fervently, still leaving enough and as good for others, the Lockean Proviso, emphasised by Nozick and all but vacant from many of my peers' knowledge. "Leave enough and as good for others." This brings me onto a political theory lecture with Professor Ben Lockwood, on public choice. The distinction was introduced between rivalrous and non-rivalrous goods, rivalrous being goods that are competed over, such as with rare private goods, such as old champagne, and anything really brandished with the label as vintage and historic, a country manor, equipped with vacant fields....non rivalrous goods are goods that are not competed over, such as public goods: these can include global public goods, such as a good climate i.e things that everyone contributes to individually but that can effect us all collectively. The political nature of blogging is interesting in that it is similar to writing privately in the sense that you are articulating the thoughts, except that the occasion of blogging is complicated by the question of who it is that is trying to be reached. In blogposts that explicitly state the search for great assets for example, there can be a tendency to speak with view to reaching particular people who may be able to bridge gaps that would take me from an asset such as weed, to an asset such as a healthy life style....whatever that may be......It may also be noted here that blogposts which are academic in nature and serve to exposit moral correctness can be seen as all a self-interested blog, an altruistic blogs, and some near ambiguous mix of the two, weighted to the extent of particular focus away from the most abstract expression of a principle of justice, such as its form [i.e the way it exists as a series of principles and imperatives that guide with view to determining action, so that predictability increases - however this view seems to run contrary to notions of chivalry expressed earlier, when considered from the perspective of someone who has not read my blog - thus sudden ignitions of passion, demonstrated in sudden expressions of love, be it in a particularly physical or expressive or even an intimate sense, would come as a shock. However on the other hand, if anyone does read my blog and becomes obsessed with the calculative nature of my character, I have no shame in admitting my predictability, if this predictability is in accordance with a set of principles that still ensures a high standard of life. The subject of sex looms...this is going to be interesting....

Isn't it better to be provocative? Why play the waiting game?

2012-02-09T00:01:00.000+00:00

Random Facebook Post

2012-02-08T23:46:00.000+00:00

{After listening to Larry Temkin - Priority, Equality and the levelling down objection on Natural Reader and playing the chords - mostly chord varieties f, g, a b c, c...there are videos..anyway... Larry Temkin, Dennis Parfit, Thomas Nagel, John Broome, Theory of the Good, Views about plausibility, views about desirability (i) self regarding (ii) looking out with others - concerned with how you fair, concerned with how others fair - ism - esotericism. - the value of studying political theory - the value of esoteric knowledge is purely future looking - it makes no room for the self-indulgent revellions encouraged by mindless behaviour, rather it encourages a process of creation, and teaching to encourage moral responsibility among peers with view to the creation of accountable transfers from the circumstantially fortunate to the circumstantially unfortunate - if this is manifest in a campaign to overturn laws that promote oppression of some sort, then this is a task that looms on the horizon, and entails its own mode of behaviours, but this has to be balanced with a view of how the world should be according to ideal perspectives - however the transformation from ideal to non-ideal perspective appears more preferable, once the prospect of your own ideal fulfilment becomes more challengeable. In specific, if I smoke weed, I may have incentive to work on constitutional reform that incorporates a regulatory system for the production and distribution of marijuana in favour with a best interest of the interest-based community. Thus I must argue and study what dosage of marijuana I would like to consume daily with view to constant negotiation about the best price:-the current law favours dealers in that the blanket of fear created by the black market effect - the removal of policing forces in a moral sense - entails that certain actions, such as the negotiation by a consumer to a dealer is limited by the asymmetric information in favour of the dealer, and is contingent upon the number of dealers known in a particular area. I argue that the bringing this commodity in the light of the market determines the likely outcome that the consumer will increase his market choice, and therefore a fairer, and lower price would be acheived. This obviously has to factor in against the demand for land, and I foresee the purchase of a section of land that can be used to grow the crop. Sammy Dennison This however must be balanced against a concern for the protection of a routine that favours 'good health', and with status quo in favour of other modes of entertainment and relaxation; these methods appear as choices for the expenditure that I allocate. Therefore the things that must be considered are the agricultural effects of growing weed, relative to the fertility of the land that would follow a supply demand that could increase....the health effects of a population that could smoke more weed (it is likely that this need not be the case), smoking weed is a habit that is gotten in to for the fulfilment of a certain task, it is not a necessary part of a day, especially when those days include lounging around in a hot sun!

Video Games

2012-02-08T21:36:00.000+00:00

So Ben Howard is currently playing a rendition of one of the most beautiful versions of Video Games, whose lyrics go, "it's you, it's you, it's all for you..." I think I'll give it a re-listen, or stick on some Passenger whilst I deliberate through the jumble of books, torn pages, pads, books, booklets and clothes currently decorating my shelves. In sight, also, is a keyboard, a few basic sports apparel and notes, oh yeah and this apple mac.... I am currently in the process of recording most of my life. I feel that if I do so, I can recount, at moments of jumbled haze recent events of me doing the same thing, learning, and tidying...

2012-02-08T00:44:00.000+00:00

So I went to 2/3 of my designated lectures today. That is OK considering some of the things I have been saying about the actual value of attending the lecture (if you want to judge me by my last result do so - but I see a more holistic picture from time to time :- NB note that this is not dispelling the value of the module, just the methodological structure directed from Warwick University), but the ones I did go to were interesting. At 2pm it was Ben Lockwood and Principles of Political Economy where the focus was public goods. There were interesting distinctions drawn between excludable and non excludable and rivalrous and non rivalrous goods, and a small matrix drawn up showing four combinations: excludable and rivalrous: private goods, excludable and non rivalrous: private public good, non excludable and rivalrous, and non excludable and non rivalrous. The

Philosophy Politics and Economics: Freewrite

2012-02-06T19:41:00.000+00:00

OK just to spell out the modules I am taking this term and a rough approximation of some scheduling. Think we'll start with "History of the International Economic System." I have not been to this module yet, which is quite alarming considering we are on the fifth week, but it is reading week next week, and my hope is to corroborate all the stuff I have learnt from Twitter and Facebook and other social media sources of news and information, approximate it to the module outline and course structure, and get to exam date with an abundance of information. It seems natural to divide this up by historic band; and so for the sake of free ascension I will start by providing the best round up of the state of the international system with view to economic theory at this point in time. Then we can work backwards, and hopefully landmark this with some big research projects concerning the various treatise, statistics, expressions of ideology, and other component determinants of the state of affairs, according to a variety of indexes. It bears mentioning that the index that springs to mind is the human development index, brought to my attention by Professor Hammond of the Warwick Economics Department, and developed through Amartya Sen's theoretical work in behavioural economics; the finishing touches, if one wishes, as I am sure he would to an extent, to negate the originality of his project, of a wider project, manifesting throughout human history, and picked up admirably by John Rawls, who I will also be discussing for a variety of modules, including Rawlsian Liberalism (which has a more weighty name), and Issues in Political Theory, which I will refer to on occasion as IPT, and Principles of Political Economy, likely for the economic and politics, and economics and philosophy thirds, that I have taken up. I decided not to take Politics and Philosophy, but honestly, it appears the distinction is in weight, not in inclusion, because even my P+E module, in its outline [as you can find below] expresses its objective as concerned with the subject of governance, and this in itself has philosophical influence.

What is the difference between Politics and Economics and Philosophy. Obviously this is a question which has a substantial answer, so I will first start off by noting the similarity that they all aim to provide abstracted knowledge about the nature of existence. What springs to mind is the fact that when I refer to these words, people are going to have different conceptions of what the word means; so when, as Andrew Neil urged Lembit Opik on The Daily Politics on BBC iplayer, to 'discuss politics', I was quite surprised when he submitted and then proceeded to engage in a way that didn't justify another intervention from Mr. Neil. I shouldn't have been particularly surprised; semantics as a subject is often dismissed in argument, maybe this is because the information often provided by philosophy, which I will consider semantics a branch of, provisionally, it does not provide any practical information, in the overtly materialistic senses that economics and politics seem to suggest: knowledge about the markets, for example, the dispute surrounding the true valuation of Facebook, is of practical use, in the sense that it could determine investment decisions. I am certainly wary of investment. The fact that there are people with access to a lot more information concerning the Facebook deal means that they are better placed to influence the proceedings of events than I am. This is clearly due to status and audiences, expressed succinctly as niche networks. I am not particularly authoritative when it comes to technology, or indeed insight into the market. I am merely a passer on of information - the extent to which I do determines my status within my own particular network, which I would describe as esoterically shy. On the point of esotericism, I find it more that people do not know what to do with valuable information, rather than the alternative concern, that they were not finding the information valuable. In order to reap reward from the knowledge-information that you have accumulated, you must do more than share it, you must have an insight into how the information that you produce can be received genially from your audience. You must also make reference to other people, who have themselves produced information, so that you have a note of your recognition of their contribution, with view to analysing it and working out its value and how that value can be maximised. I therefore take this opportunity to recommend http://daniella-thoughtsoutloud.blogspot.com, who has written some personal and quirky blogposts on subjects ranging from (obviously sexual) tension between herself and an Indian Quartz Studded Businessman on the train on her gap yah, and the Holocaust. She is a Politics Student from the University of Birmingham and is far too busy to meet up with me for a session. Also Latoya Mistral Ferns deserves a mention at dameblogalot.blogspot.com for typing out notes on ways of knowing.pdf - Knutzen (principles of political economy-politics and economics) -- here we may take a breath at the irony that she has only one blog post, and I hope this little siren serves as incentive to keep blogging. Quite a contrast between Politics students in our three blogs, I believe!

Anyway, so yeah, History of the International Economic System Since 1918..starting from 2012.

This is a good time to link to Macroeconomic Policy of the EU, of which the contemporary series of events that will serve as a gateway nexus into an abundance of information, is the current Eurozone Sovereign Debt Crisis. I have tweeted, favourited, and retweeted (less) today about Greece, in relation to Germany and Sarkozy. What we saw this morning was a nice little theatrical flattery session from Sarkozy to Merkel, saying that France has a lot to learn from Germany. He then referred to it as French duty to help those in Europe, which suggests that France are about to take on more burdens of debt, but a quick glance to the graph on my cover picture in my timeline shows that France are the most exposed country to Greek Debt, as a sum of both public and private lending. As it happens, Sarkozy is behind in the polls by about ten per cent, and so evidently the French public have as little fondness for him as I do at this point, although Merkel did declare her allegiance with him by stating that they are from the same political class. Maybe it was just me but this seemed to be an underhanded publicity stunt, to bring attention to their role in securing the unity of Europe. If any attempt seems to be made by Germany or France to lay blame on Britain for not coming to the further aid of Greece, I feel that this is an unfair statement, or at least it is not substantiated, for incentive to action, can reasonably be passed off as being justified in accordance with the degree of your exposure {public and private} to Greece's debt. The ECB seem reluctant to come to a deal to print more money, or extend credit any other way, to Greece, and the word on the grapevine is that Greece will not be able to access the Financial Markets for a long time. Italy was also mentioned as improving in some regard, and Portugal deserves credit for it decriminalisation project, the results of which were approved by the CATO institute. Portugal has also been suffering with Sovereign Debt. Spain was also in the balance at one point, but attention to it has dwindled. Greek funding is being negotiated with Troika.

Domestic politics obviously has integral impact on International Politics and seeing as we are in the UK we will start there: Warwick Language has been running a campaign that aims to encourage learning lots of languages; with the possibility of my doing an internship at the Austrian Economics Centre, the pressure is on for me to learn German, and what catches my eye is being translated through Google! Nietzsche (from Post Kantian Continental philosophy) has a book called the Gay Science - A prelude in German Rhymes and Verse, which should help - Schopenhauer and Schroder spring to mind. Anyway back to languages. Could it not be the case that monolingual people will be conspired against by the forces of international trade. With a whole variety of products to access, how is it that we are to get the best deals for certain products if we are not aware of the full extent of the market. It can also be fun to view the various interfaces across different language barriers. I was nearly coaxed into buying audial software for supporting movies and music by it's impressive design, but the price and the split of components vis a vis the original incentivising screen-shots means that I just downloaded some pretty much incoherent setup word document, equipped as it always is with a variety of incomprehensible scribbles.

Back to Domestic Politics: David Cameron's attendance at the meetings in Brussels was described as a failure from a lot of contingents, especially from hostile forces in Germany and France, who basically want more of a commitment from him to Europe. Britain has a complicated relationship with Europe and is not considered at the very core of it:- our interests appear to be towards the Far East and certainly the success of Japanese Cars, and the competitive nature of the East Asian Financial Markets, especially its innovation in technology, means that we are capable of utilising a wide range of networking tools; there is an argument against currency union, that is growing increasingly strong. In previous decades when the world was less openly globalised [I mean the world is not perfectly globalised even now, because of higher fuel costs from further afield nations - however this could become worthwhile if the wages are low enough, and the profits are high enough] *note to look at British Imports. Apparently however we do 40% of our trade with Europe and as this is less than half surely that is evidence in itself, from a purely economic standpoint to not sign up to the most intensive band of commitment to Europe. However from a political standpoint it is evident that there is call for a backlash of sorts to be aimed at Britain, vis a vis access to these most pedestaled meetings concerning the future of Europe, for not subscribing to this monetary Union. The notion here is that if there is a central bank in Europe, that can make decisions to print money, then the power of devaluation is delocalised, and the purchasing power of your savings is decreased relative to the beneficiaries of the influx of credit; which at the moment seems to be Greece and all debt stricken nations. The malaise of debt is a tricky one, because those who seem to have quite expensive tastes, such as countries with large requirements for external investment, obviously expect (as an aggregation of public demand - assuming that public demand is expressed through protest against government as we saw in Greece, and not just an element of frustration) are then capable of receiving funding from international organisations, and devaluing the savings of someone in another country. The element appears quite contentious, until it becomes one of trust, and you realise that in real terms the choice between trusting monetary policy makers in the UK and trusting monetary policy makers in Brussels is just as opaque.

The MPC is the monetary policy committee for the bank of England that is supposedly "independent" of the Government. The degree to which this is the case is debatable [and bloggable], but the absolute nature of the term independent, renders the claim of its absolute independence ridiculous in essence. There is ongoing dialogue between the Bank of England and The Government, and this dialogue is both direct and indirect, and is filtered through a variety of communication, often miscommunication channels, depending on the capacity of the agents involved in negotiation to communicate coherently and effectively the full quantity of the information that they know. Key players include: Andrew Oswald, Andrew Posen, Mervin King, George Osborne, and David Cameron, as well as Ed Balls and Ed Miliband from the Labour benches. The economic climate is one of strong claims against, and strong claims for. David Cameron and George Osborne initially had the backing of the IMF and the OBR but with a few downwardly revised growth predictions, this confidence seems to be dwindling. What is good is that we still have a low interest rate, meaning we can borrow easily on the bond markets, and this ensures cheap credit flow to businesses, which is the Tory drive, although they do not specify in Parliament, at least what sorts of innovations would be particularly lucrative, and so there is room for criticism when it comes to their outlook on jobs and unemployment. U and especially Youth Unemployment has received significant attention, with Balls and Miliband claiming that the removal of the Future Jobs fund and EMA is hurting young people, however Conservative Minister has been in the press to state that there are around 400,00 jobs available, but there is a fear of work. Could this be to do with the uneasy jobs climate? People do not enjoy working, especially in menial jobs, but someone has to do it? Or do they? A system of universal basic income would eradicate this need for a jobs strategy that puts employment at its focus. If growth is what we want, could it not be an increased efficiency to harbour specialised skills through communicative development, and we can collectively come to the choice for investment in innovations of our own choice. One could be a freelance administrator, paid by the name or information set, inputed monotonously onto a data system for big organisations. This would increase flexibility in the labour market but it is likely that laws would have to be changed, and so innovations must enhance in accordance with that change, and the privacy of customers' information would have to be made open to freelanciers, whom may be more unaccountable due to their disconnect from the company. However with the increased transparency offered by services such as Facebook and Twitter, it shouldn't be too arduous to track down these people; there is also a business opportunity for any middle-men who know the legal basis to track the way in which freelanciers pass on information they have received. Either a confidentiality agreement could be reached between the freelancier and the company who wish to outsource administrative jobs, or the customer can negotiate with both the freelancier and the company in order to work out a value of that information. The turmoil surrounding privacy is itself a subject that requires deep and committed investigation, and I will attend to this later.

Besides that in Domestic politics we have the High Speed Rail palarva, the NHS debacle, and then a complex bout of humanitarian foreign policy agendas that permeates the tranquility of a Twitter stream, turning it into something of a flood. The UN this week vetoed a Resolution that would have elevated the prospect of intervention in Syria. France, Britain and America seem to be onside for another bout of support for the rebels, and with Bashar-al-assad and his support from Christians getting bloody in defending his primacy, Russia and China feel it is better to not get involved in Civil Affairs - which is rich considering their territorial pursuits. Russian history with the Kosacks is an interesting one, and there seems to be an eery classism decorating the walls of the Kremlin; surely an argument for a remelting and redistribution of luxurious assets; Ronald Dworkin would substantiate this claim theoretically, I believe, through applying the envy test to egalitarian issues, a word that doesn't seem to make it onto the lips of Russians in my knowledge. That being said I know very, very little about Russia. Lots of what I do know comes from a documentary on the BBC entitled Putin, Democracy and the West. The foreign minister shared his shared love of ballet with Condoleza Rice. But that is side-tracking, or is it? I have not watched the full series, so at best my knowledge of Russia is limited to school accounts of the Cold War, during which issues of security, defense, propaganda, the space race, and territorial influence remained prominent. Russia's involvement in Afghanistan was pushed back by the Taliban, who were supported by America at the time. Then they left, and now they are hostile towards America. I guess there is a thin line between colonialism and progressivism. You don't often hear of people supporting the Taliban's right to self-governance. Maybe it is true that they are very backwards, revenge-seeking, dogmatic, anti-women's rights, or maybe it is true that they are just at a tension with Western economic dominance and imperialism. The relative quietness of Afghani women is certainly a sore issue and one that requires attention from a moral perspective. Such a treatment can be found in democratic peace theses; there is a stipulation that there is a peace between democratic nations. With the very english nature of that word, but the Greek foundation *demos, it is interesting to consider what form of organisation is actually desired. Friedrich Nietzsche believes that Greek Culture was superior to the culture that he experienced, mainly because of its exposition of Dionysian Culture, which mixed dramatic music with intellectual wit and flair. He believed that in a lot of cultures this was lacking, however his views alternated throughout, and this is something that also requires further attention.

Furthermore, on the domestic and international scene, there is still a move tt Sorry about the abrupt end, I will get back to that in due course. Issues in Political Theory - beginnings of an essay: In the work of Kylimcka, regarding Rawls and Dworkin, there is dispute about the best way to organize society’s resources. What is aimed for is a general quality of egalitarianism, that there be a sense of justice or equality in the manner in which resources and assets are manifest throughout the various agents in society. For this distinction to become comprehensible, it is necessary to specify that resources can refer to abstract resources, such as the resource of liberty - manifest in political rights, such as the right to vote, to have a fair trial, and mobility (in Rawls’ eyes) - or material resources, such as income and wealth. Rawls prioritizes this egalitarianism, in prioritarianism, a concept formalised by Larry Temkin and Dennis Parfit. Rawls makes a few of these clarifications, but the one that Temkin refers to is the priority of the least well off. Now this may seem confusing and it is, because what we are in effect doing is mixing a load of similar ideas and intuitions - often relating to specific anecdotal arrangements - in order to establish what is the moral thing to do. To leave a question as open ended as this is a precarious matter, but with a little organization and clarity it should become clear that all these political theorists have something unique and insightful to say about particular situations. It is therefore noteworthy that Kymlicka points out the influence of Rawls by stating that, although people do not agree with him, theorists since Rawls have often placed their theories in contention with Rawls. The subtlety in this observation must be stated. Kymlicka is not here explicitly stating that theorists since Rawls disagree with Rawls, but rather that there is not complete agreement, a very different condition. The inference of this choice of words by Kymlicka is what led me to believe, having very little comparative depth of knowledge of political theory - relative to the authors whom I read, in any case - to ascertain without empirical checking that there are probably not any great and tragic disagreements in political theory, as I had imagined that there had been in the past. Clearly this is not the case, and politics is one of the most disputable topics, however in my conception of things, politics itself, as a subject of high empirical rigor is not as destructive or divergent a subject matter as religion, for example. Many conceptualizations of the field of politics would include religious discourse as a form of political discourse. The extent to which religious leaders separate themselves from the arena in public discourse reflects the widespread desire to distance oneself from the politicians, who receive bombardments of negative press routinely. Whilst there have been serious malpractices, at least legally speaking, with the claim of public resources for private expenses, I have witnessed one MP speaking routinely and without apparent shame at the private public expense he claimed to fund his election. There is a current debate that centers around this matter - the call for state funded election campaigns certainly would put the power-ball more weightily in the hands of the taxpayer, at least economically speaking - the degree that this could be shifted by rational leadership appeal is another matter I intend to investigate. The point of this tangent is to clarify the point, at this stage, that there is a serious dispute over what is considered political. The working definition that I go with, for brevity of wit, is to establish quite clearly, that, regardless of stated belief, the high standards of scientific proof entail that those who stick with concepts, regardless of how useful they may be in promoting ideals of liberty and equality - that are quite particular, but that contain principles that hold within them a great deal of rhetorical and incentivizing power - are in fact simply politicians in religious dress. Now this dress itself is clearly specific, and is not to be dismissed - but as it is we are made to believe that the people who follow this life style are to be respected and revered, it is only right that we subject these people to the same analysis and critical evaluation that we seek to apply to ourselves. It is therefore a worthwhile endeavour, though it may not be at this stage (if it is not on a module) to investigate the religious political ‘leaders’ of our generation. I also hypothesize that the term leader is ambiguous, and in fact what these ‘leaders’ convey is a disciplined set of skills that make them suited to that role. To the extent that this discipline legitimizes their claim for higher income, will be the focus of this essay. Primarily it is necessary to set out the different contingents of societal order. Although I do not profess there to be any intrinsic hierarchy of value - all humans are equal in essence - there is clearly apparent hierarchy, in the order of income. Rawls’ condition is that there should be equality of opportunity in the original position, so that everyone has an equal chance of filling offices to which are attached higher shares of wealth. Kymlicka, Dworkin and Rawls all show how the ‘prevailing intuition’ of ‘equality of opportunity’ is ‘fraudulent’ or in Rawls’ case, needs qualifying. Rawls does so by establishing the difference principle, which maintains that differences should originate from circumstance not by choice. This point goes to emphasize the nature of the problem, that is to say that there is not a de facto equality of opportunity, even if you do, as Kymlicka says, remove social inequalities, there are always going to be those endowed with less natural talents or assets. I aim next to establish what is meant in these works of political theory by the terms ‘natural talents’ and ‘natural assets’.

Things I shouldn't eat

2012-02-06T18:04:00.000+00:00

Seafood.
My ego, because burps are ugly.

OK; now onto serious stuff, like the correlation between letters and music. OK so we have Facebook, which clearly reminds everyone straight away of F#, which obviously takes me onto Twitter, but then how do we get to ♭logger?