2007 October archive at Being Frank

Archive for October, 2007

Oct

certainty equivalence and prostitute rest homes…

By Tuppence 10 Comments

Categories: Being Frank...

This is not the ideal post conditions to write – its 2am and I am getting this done before hitting the road tomorrow. I am also attempting to combine two very different topics in one go…ah…always seek the impossible.

certainty equivalence – what’s that? well…its an economic concept used in the calculation of costs and benefits of a project (say, the preservation of a wetland…) to try to put a number to the value of a benefit/cost in light of the uncertainty surrounding it, by reducing the value in light of this uncertainty.

Why do I bother mentioning this? Because its the sort of concepts I’m encountering in my studies of natural resource and environmental economics. And would you believe, shock horror, that yes we talk about climate change…and greater shock horror..my lecturer (a director for a large non-government organisation in NZ working throughout the developing world, and a well-respected expert witness in the environmental court of NZ) has no qualms about telling us – “We don’t know…” As a humanity, we just don’t know what we’ve gotten ourselves into. We don’t know what it will cost in the future – the uncertainty is something that cannot ever be tamed by any ‘scientific evidence’.

Don’t get me wrong – the scientific research is vital, crucial – without reservation it is an absolute necessity. But do not be fooled into thinking that someone, somewhere has got it sussed – or more to the point, that anyone ever will. How are we to know what will be the tastes and preferences of tomorrow? The needs of tomorrow? resources are only resources because we find use in them – what is of use today, may be useless tomorrow. What is useless today, may be fundamental in the future. Where do you begin to answer the question of what, how and how much to preserve?

The awarding of the Peace Prize to Al Gore is acting as a message of the times, not just a recognition of Al Gore (however worthy or not he may be) – climate change as a challenge has taken hold and although his film may have contained a number of errors, that’s not to say they were entirely on the wrong track. For example, the mention of Pacific atolls and evacuation of these low-lying islands – it may not be some mass evacuation, but I can personally attest to knowing a woman from Kiribati (Ki-ri-bas) who is in the thick of this very issue – it is very real, and the reality is that it is those most vulnerable who are hit harder, if not first. Environmental refugees will soon (if not already…its 2am, forgive me for not checking my sources…see the Environmental Film Festival 2007…) outnumber refugees of political or other unrest.

I don’t agree with all that Al Gore stands for – and it does disturb me that someone of his calibre would take such a laissez-faire and simplistic view to ‘population control’ (the term alone makes me shudder…). But put aside all his potential biases and possible ‘ulterior motives’ and you have an issue that we cannot ignore. It is not just the hyped up media frenzy blowing a lot of hot air (scuse the pun)…though the often partial way in which they blow that air can be highly frustrating…there is really an issue to be dealt with and it needs to start in the homes, yes, but also in the communities – in council offices, government departments, corporate headquarters…

Right…done with that…and to finish off (in case you made it this far…) I was struck by this article on the BBC site (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7028449.stm) – the first ever rest home for former prostitutes, in Mexico. What struck me even more was the photo of one of the former ‘leisure ladies’ in her room, with her picture of Our Lady of Guadalupe and some rosary beads hanging over the top. Christ mixed with these folk – and what may strike us as odd (a prostitute with rosary beads) – is not at all strange in a deeply Catholic country like Mexico…hmm…we can learn a lot from that…

Ok…time for bed.

Oct

Al Gore – proving that we truly are part of an idiots’ parade

By The Dumb Ox 242 Comments

Categories: Being Frank...

In case you didn’t hear the news already, last week Al Gore was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

What for?

For preaching his own special brand of alarmist global warming propaganda.

Here are three good reasons why Al Gore doesn’t deserve the Nobel Peace Prize…

One:

Spreading the gospel of global warming does not deserve the Nobel Peace Prize – it has NOTHING to do with the work of peace!!!!

In fact, it’s like giving someone an Academy Award for being sportsman of the year – it makes absolutely no sense!

Two:

Al Gore’s famous global warming movie; An Inconvenient Truth, has been found to contain NINE scientific errors and as a result it has been ruled to be “alarmist” by a British High Court Judge in a court case that was decided just days before he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Here are the nine errors that the High Court Judge found in the film:

1. The film claimed that low-lying inhabited Pacific atolls “are being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming” – but there was no evidence of any evacuation occurring

2. It spoke of global warming “shutting down the ocean conveyor” – the process by which the gulf stream is carried over the north Atlantic to western Europe. The judge said that, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, it was “very unlikely” that the conveyor would shut down in the future, though it might slow down

3. Mr Gore had also claimed – by ridiculing the opposite view – that two graphs, one plotting a rise in C02 and the other the rise in temperature over a period of 650,000 years, showed “an exact fit”. The judge said although scientists agreed there was a connection, “the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts”

4. Mr Gore said the disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was expressly attributable to human-induced climate change. The judge said the consensus was that that could not be established

5. The drying up of Lake Chad was used as an example of global warming. The judge said: “It is apparently considered to be more likely to result from … population increase, over-grazing and regional climate variability”

6. Mr Gore ascribed Hurricane Katrina to global warming, but there was “insufficient evidence to show that”

7. Mr Gore also referred to a study showing that polar bears were being found that had drowned “swimming long distances to find the ice”. The judge said: “The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm”

8. The film said that coral reefs all over the world were bleaching because of global warming and other factors. The judge said separating the impacts of stresses due to climate change from other stresses, such as over-fishing, and pollution, was difficult

9. The film said a sea-level rise of up to 20ft would be caused by melting of either west Antarctica or Greenland in the near future; the judge ruled that this was “distinctly alarmist”

Three:

The following statement speak volumes about why Al Gore’s ideas are totally contrary to the work of peace:

“[Climate change is happening because] Third World nations are producing too many children too fast… it is time to ignore the controversy over family planning and cut out-of-control population growth…”.

After making this statement at a global warming conference in 1997, Mr Gore was asked by a journalist from the Washington Post exactly how this population control should be achieved, to which he suggested that abortion and birth-control programs should be extended in developing countries.

Oct

How many hours?

By James the Least 3 Comments

Categories: Being Frank...

With it being Labour Weekend and all, I can’t help but follow on from eyeWitness’ post from yesterday.

Labour Day is fast becoming (if not already) another example of a holiday that the majority of “kids these days” don’t understand the origins of. What’s more, tell them that it celebrates the codifying of the 40-hour working week, and they’ll most likely ask why it is that their dad or mum (or both!) work so much more than 40 hours.

It’s a good question. I was reading an article in the Sunday Star Times which mentioned some pretty sad but entirely believable statistics. For example, about 40% of male workers aged 35-54, the vast majority family men, work 50 or more hours a week.

40%!!!

The article goes on to say:

Long work days have been blamed for contributing to truancy, youth delinquency, falling volunteering rates and a decline in community spirit, as well as a major cause of ill-health.

Yet we continue to do it. The article talks about legislation to enforce a 40-hour week (like that will ever happen), but I think that the real problem with this is summed up by the article:

…the eight-hour working day has been left behind by a society which demands things such as seven-day shopping.

I tend to agree. I think we have moved into a world where pace is everything, rest is something we talk about but rarely do, and we run the risk of living life without actually living it. How many of us really do treat the Sabbath as holy, for example? Is Sunday just another day? How many of you work no more than forty hours in a week? For those that don’t, is it by your own choice? If not, what compels you? Your boss? Your work ethic? Peer pressure? Career drive?

Here’s the kicker – does anyone reading this think they have a really good work-life balance? Personally, I try to see my employment agreement with my employer as them purchasing 40 hours of my week for an agreed rate. If they want any more than that, it will come at a hefty premium. :) It’s worked well so far, but that’s mainly due to my boss being a big proponent of a healthy work-life balance. Props to him if he’s reading this. ;)

Anyway, what can we do about it? Seriously – I am open to all ideas on this one. How can we reintroduce the importance of rest into our hectic, 21st century lives?

Oct

Work and rest

By eyeWitness 8 Comments

Categories: Being Frank...

Being the lazy person I am I don’t particularly like getting up for work each day. In fact one of my favourite thing to do is sleep in. For some reason my two flatmates (although generally wonderful) don’t share the same sleepy aspirations and are annoyingly noisy even on weekend mornings!

I think we’re supposed to work hard. Solomon understood the value of hard work and made it a major theme of the Proverbs.
â€¢ “He that gathereth in summer is a wise son: but he that sleepeth in harvest is a son that causeth shame.” (Proverbs 10:5)
â€¢ “Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise:” (Proverbs 6:6)

But it got me thinking about whether we rest enough to truly revive ourselves from week to week and feel refreshed for whatever work we have to do, and more broadly God’s purpose for our lives.

God did seem to set a cycle of work and rest in Him. Thankfully (in defence of my love of sleeping in) God did talk about a time for rest.

By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done. Genesis 2

Work six days a week but do not work on the seventh day, so that your slaves and the foreigners who work for you and even your animals can rest. Exodus 23

The fourth commandment is to observe the Sabbath and keep it holy. You have six days in which to do your work but the seventh is a day of rest dedicated to me. On that day noone is to work. Exodus 20

Do we even set aside the Sabbath these days? Most of us, especially with seven day trading, either work on Sundays or run around like headless chickens anyway doing everything we couldn’t get done in the week while we were working.

Perhaps more and more people would identify with the book of Ecclesiastes which sketches the experiences and thoughts of a man whose character is based on atheism, materialism and selfish ambition, leading to a purposeless and meaninglessness end?

Its easy to get caught up in being busy all the time, and not spending enough time resting. With such action packed lives our culture also seems to become bored very easily if we’re not occupied in some way. God does seem to proscribe a cycle of work and rest -and I’m quite happy to go with God on this one! But practically deciding to set aside time will probably take some planning…

Oct

Paternalism gone wrong?

By Filia Day 17 Comments

Categories: Being Frank...

This week has been a bit of a rollercoaster ride in New Zealand with the arrest of 17 Maori activists for supposed terrorist activity. Apparently the Terrorist suppression Act has been invoked. For those who are not familiar with the Act, it was ratified into New Zealand law in 2002 in response to September 11. The Act is orientated towards foreign terrorist organisations as well as people in New Zealand who support or finance terrorist activity. It seems to me that the original intention of the Act has a worthy purpose, to protect New Zealand society from a legitimate terrorist threat.

However, I don’t think it was appropriate that the Act was invoked, in fact I think it is outright symbolic of how our freedom of speech is gradually been curbed by the current government. It was originally not intended to deal with an domestic threat, let alone to deal with political activists.

Despite the fact that it was touted by the government that it would not affect activists, it appears that the Act actually has. I’m not saying that the actions of those involved were morally just or anything, I just don’t feel comfortable with invoking the Act in the name of terrorism, when from what I can see it clearly wasn’t. If the activists were taking their direct action strategies too far (doing something illegal) then they could be charged under criminal law and until the police prove that the activists were conspiring to commit acts of violence towards property or people then the police don’t have a case. To put it simply, I don’t think the symbolic use of violence for political effect comes anywhere close to the definition of terrorism. So why invoke the Act?

In my opinion, there seems to be a trend with the New Zealand Government at the moment that they want to silence political opposition; not only has the terrorism suppression act been invoked but also the Electoral Finances Bill is before Parliament at the moment, which will effectively suppress criticism of the government, MPs, parties and policies we don’t like.

Correct me if I’m wrong but don’t we live in a liberal democracy? – one of the key tenets of this theory is that we have an absolute right to dissent. It’s only dictatorships that criminalise dissent and make such terms as terrorism synonymous with dissent.

My point (and question) is what constitutes legitimate state paternalism? Clearly what the NZ Government is doing at the moment is no just at all, and is far from what I would deem to be legitimate paternalism. Both Communism and the Laissez faire state go a little too far for my liking. So I’m guessing the appropriate balance lies somewhere in between. I do realise that there is a degree of subjectivity involved here, but I’m genuinely interested to find out what everyone thinks.

Happy Feast Day of Our Lady of Mount Carmel everyone (I mention this because the Carmelites seem to organise their communities quite well!)

Oct

It’s Beginning To Get To Me

By Methuselah's Beard 16 Comments

Categories: Being Frank...

If anyone knows any bus drivers whose morning routes take them down Albert Street then, turning right at the lights at Customs Street West (by that countdown to the World Cup final), please tell them it’s not a good idea to think their bus is a mini when making that turn, especially when the lights are orange or when the lanes they are turning into are already full of cars. Because they invariably get stuck when the lights go red and hold up traffic on both sides of the road. Is that so difficult to understand? Do these drivers not think before they drive? Is their bus going to magically shrink? It is so very annoying when the lights are green but you can’t move because a bus is sitting in the middle of the intersection.

Another thing annoying me at the moment is the state of locally made shows… well not all of them… but the ones like ‘Downsize my Pet’ or ‘Are you Smarter than a 10 year old’. Downsize my pet?? Which genius thought this would be a good idea? The bottom of the barrel is really being scraped there. I’ve watched a bit of ‘Are you smarter than a 10 year old’ and… what can I say… what would tourists think of us if they, God forbid, tune in to these programmes?? One of the kids on that shows has a mullet for goodness sake.

One thing I am undecided on is liturgical dance. Now I’m sure there are lots of people out there who do like a dose of liturgical dancing, either as performers or spectators. Personally, I don’t really like it. It’s great that people are finding different ways to express themselves… but what’s next, liturgical mime around the altar? I don’t even know (and haven’t found out) if liturgical dancing is smiled or frowned upon by Church authorities. I’m sure it’s ok in New Zealand because things like ‘Downsize my Pet’ are allowed.

Well it’s a long weekend so I guess I’m prepared to let a few other things slide! Safe driving to anyone going out of town!

Oct

Get over yourselves

By The Captain 45 Comments

Categories: Being Frank...

It would be fair to say my top “pet hate” has always been condescension (not to be confused with condensation – though why you would make such a confusion is beyond me…).

It’s not unusual for me to hear the question/comment: “If people in developing countries had fewer children, they wouldn’t have half the problems they do.”

Of course, as a Catholic, I find this insulting. But more than that, as a human I find this insulting – and yet it comes from all corners, from all sectors.

The question was put to me just last week, in fact. I suppressed the obvious rage I felt in response, and answered as best I could but the issue has been with me since.

Then I read this - what is it about people that they honestly believe God created them as superior? That they, in all their wisdom, are so advanced as humans that they deserve to have as many children as they like, they deserve to be recognised as intelligent and important, and millions of others don’t?

Even if you don’t believe in God, doesn’t this approach to life defy logic?

I so often wonder what God’s got in store for these people…