I was seconded earlier today to put up a Chrimbo tree. It came in a long cardboard box and was purchased from Argos. I took out the pieces and looked for the instructions, which were printed on a single sided piece of paper. In the corner of this paper it said those ubiquitous words "Made in China" and with them came dissolution. We have to to the point in the UK where it is easier and cheaper to make and import artificial Chrimbo trees from China rather than to make them here. What a sorry state of affairs I thought. I then began to assemble the parts, it didn't take too long, but as I spread the twigs apart on the branches I began to feel some kind of chemical or plastic like residual on my hands. In addition I really think the design of tree probably would not of passed British safety standards. It was poorly constructed and will likely get thrown away after Chrimbo than saved for the next year. So the carbon used to deliver it to the UK, the life use of the product and it's suspect design means it's nothing to be proud of. In an odd irony this is the prime example of a product which will help destroy the world, i.e. global warming.
There is now little choice in the UK to purchase goods made in the UK, made to British standards and by people living here. Just a walk into any super store will validate this point. The plethora of goods which come out of China are disconcerting. They have cheap labour and dire employee rights. It is from developing countries the Western world now resources the production of many goods of which India can now identify itself. They are moving from the production of poor quality goods into high end services. Another example of this would be caller centres. How annoying it is when ringing up a bank or British Telecom for example and finding you are speaking to someone who doesn't understand what you mean. OK I seen the programs on TV where they train these call centre employees to learn about the British common culture, as though this gives them some insight and ability to deal with queries on the phone. But this is ridiculous, it is like having a brand new graduate come into a company get fast streamed into management and then have the graduate tell lower graded employees how to do their job. You have to live here, and be part of this culture to really understand it. Let alone even consider comprehending regional accents. I know of one Scottish person who has always failed to get a point across to a contact centre based in a developing country. They just plainly can not understand a strong Scottish accent.
In a similar vein I heard on the radio this morning about Afghanistan. Where a flood of cash is being put from the UN. However, this money is not going to indigenous peoples. It is going to foreign workers who set up shop there and bid for contracts. It is equally a sorry state of affairs to believe the Afghan people do not have the abilities and skills to run their own businesses. But then this could all be down to politics. Maybe the people of Afghanistan should start doing caller centres for India and China. What have they got to lose?
Sunday, 6 December 2009
Thursday, 27 August 2009
Unemployed not being helped by A4E
I just been watching a TV program called Benefit Busters. Which seems just as much and advertisement for the organization which seeks to put people in works as for the plight of the unemployed. This weeks episode was people who had been out of work for some time, one man had not worked for the last 13 years. He then went on to get a job, but after only a couple of weeks was served his notice letter. I felt sorry for him because he seemed a nice enough bloke. However, what was disgusting was the help this supposed employment helping company gave their clients. It verged on the absolutely ridiculous, these unemployed people would be in a class and their task might be to build a bridge out of paper and sellotape, or a model from scraps. There was no structured process by which they set out a time table of constructive events which would help people in to real work. They offered them temporary jobs through contacts they had with employers, they gave them the Yellow pages and also let them write letters to prospective employers, oh yes lets not forget access to the Internet. To which most people just browsed and did their own thing. What they should of done they didn't.
They could of improved the prospect of unemployed people if they used a little bit of initiative and gave those unemployed the skills they would need. Simple role play exercises, for instance on interviewing, or maybe even putting the unemployed in a different frame of mind and asked them all to imagine they were employers, then to draw up a list of things they wanted as an employer from a new recruit. There was no injection of confidence, no inside help, no use of their time or facilities, it was abysmal. So now if anyone mentions to me the acronym A4E, I will just feel sorry for them. And unfortunately realise how they had been baby sited for a few weeks, not helped and not given any skills to help them in work.
An even more annoying point was when the program stated this organization had now been given a 700 million pounds contract with the government over the next 5 years. How the founder must be rubbing her hands together and smiling with glee.
They could of improved the prospect of unemployed people if they used a little bit of initiative and gave those unemployed the skills they would need. Simple role play exercises, for instance on interviewing, or maybe even putting the unemployed in a different frame of mind and asked them all to imagine they were employers, then to draw up a list of things they wanted as an employer from a new recruit. There was no injection of confidence, no inside help, no use of their time or facilities, it was abysmal. So now if anyone mentions to me the acronym A4E, I will just feel sorry for them. And unfortunately realise how they had been baby sited for a few weeks, not helped and not given any skills to help them in work.
An even more annoying point was when the program stated this organization had now been given a 700 million pounds contract with the government over the next 5 years. How the founder must be rubbing her hands together and smiling with glee.
Tuesday, 18 August 2009
Lunch - not if they can help it
Getting lunch at lunch time is difficult, especially when all the schools are out for the summer holidays. My usual lunch time shops are brimming with people who would normally be at home and children at school. Every food shop is full up, there are ques and crowds. I eventually end up just going to the most convenient and instant places I can, these are Chinese restaurants or take aways. They serve fast and I don't have to que or wait around for my food. But as I eat each meal I now wonder what it does to my cholesterol levels and how much more weight will I put on. It's not good. I'm forced by other people to take these actions. So tomorrow I'm going to make my own sandwiches and stuff the lot of them.
There should be places where only working people can go. Where no tourist or shopper is allowed to enter. Places of sanctuary for the worker, off limits to others. Which require identity verification or something to show you are a worker and not one of the common mob out on a sight seeing tour, out because freedom has been given. I don't have this freedom, my time at lunch is limited. Further I want food which is not going to set me up for a heart attack in ten years from now. Is it too much to ask?
There should be places where only working people can go. Where no tourist or shopper is allowed to enter. Places of sanctuary for the worker, off limits to others. Which require identity verification or something to show you are a worker and not one of the common mob out on a sight seeing tour, out because freedom has been given. I don't have this freedom, my time at lunch is limited. Further I want food which is not going to set me up for a heart attack in ten years from now. Is it too much to ask?
Saturday, 15 August 2009
Fitzpatrick walked out of a wedding for good reason
It is amazing how people make snap decisions on very little information. Over the last couple of days the news has aired a case of an MP who walked out of a Muslim wedding. Predictably people were ready to state their opinions about Mr Fitzpatrick (also the Minister for food, farming and environment) without knowing the full story. He is the the MP for Poplar and Canning Town, which is an area with a high proportion of persons from different ethnic communities. Particularly those who are of the Muslim faith. I expect part of if not all of his constituency is in Newham Borough, this is a borough. Just do a search on the internet for further demographics, then you will understand yourself. As I sat listening to this program it was called Any Answers and was aired by Radio 4, the general consensus of callers was Mr Fitzpatrick was rude in walking out of the ceremony. With intonations he did not respect Islam and did not understand this religion. If men and women were segregated into different groups for a marriage ceremony, most of the callers accepted this was OK. The next thing which vexed me was how the broadcaster did not explain the situation further to callers, he basically let them come forward with snap judgements and so make it seem Fitzpatrick was a bad man who did not respect Islam.
A day earlier I had heard an interview with Fitzpatrick also on Radio 4, on the Today program. In this he was able to give his reasons why he walked out and explain he did so very discretely. This man revealed he went to between 2 and 4 Islamic weddings every month. Sometimes more sometimes less therefore for people to cast doubt Fitzpatrick new little about Islam is a spurious point. It seems to me those who said such things actually knew a great deal less. Mr Fitzpatrick stated in 15 years of going to such weddings, so he must of notched up quite a few, this was only the second time he had experienced segregate guests by gender. Doing the rough maths, lets say he goes to about 30 weddings in a year so 15 times 30 is 450 weddings in all. Now putting this little figure into the picture now shows his reaction in a somewhat different light. Fitzpatrick was in fact highlighting this is not the normal procedure for an Islamic wedding. It is in fact abnormal and is tending towards how a more fundamental version of Islamic preaching, which is trying to seep into the world. He explained the Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) were responsible for this version of Sharia and the wedding was taking place in their building. When the honourable MP left the wedding he did so discretely, not making any fuss or drawing any attention to himself. At the same time his wife who was in a different part of the building had also come to the same conclusion and she left. The whole incident was not a case of disrespect to religion or Islam, it was a case of a man who had made an informed decision on previous experience. Perhaps he believed gender segregation is discrimination towards the female sex, especially if we are to understand in the context of the different versions of Sharia. Of which I know one type states the wife will always walk behind the husband. To some people in the Western world this does not constitute freedom, but is rather a sign of oppression.
So in light of a few additional facts I wonder if those phone in callers who thought Mr Fitzpatrick was rude would change their mind. I wonder how many of them had been to as many Muslim weddings as he had, and I expect there would of been very few.
A day earlier I had heard an interview with Fitzpatrick also on Radio 4, on the Today program. In this he was able to give his reasons why he walked out and explain he did so very discretely. This man revealed he went to between 2 and 4 Islamic weddings every month. Sometimes more sometimes less therefore for people to cast doubt Fitzpatrick new little about Islam is a spurious point. It seems to me those who said such things actually knew a great deal less. Mr Fitzpatrick stated in 15 years of going to such weddings, so he must of notched up quite a few, this was only the second time he had experienced segregate guests by gender. Doing the rough maths, lets say he goes to about 30 weddings in a year so 15 times 30 is 450 weddings in all. Now putting this little figure into the picture now shows his reaction in a somewhat different light. Fitzpatrick was in fact highlighting this is not the normal procedure for an Islamic wedding. It is in fact abnormal and is tending towards how a more fundamental version of Islamic preaching, which is trying to seep into the world. He explained the Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) were responsible for this version of Sharia and the wedding was taking place in their building. When the honourable MP left the wedding he did so discretely, not making any fuss or drawing any attention to himself. At the same time his wife who was in a different part of the building had also come to the same conclusion and she left. The whole incident was not a case of disrespect to religion or Islam, it was a case of a man who had made an informed decision on previous experience. Perhaps he believed gender segregation is discrimination towards the female sex, especially if we are to understand in the context of the different versions of Sharia. Of which I know one type states the wife will always walk behind the husband. To some people in the Western world this does not constitute freedom, but is rather a sign of oppression.
So in light of a few additional facts I wonder if those phone in callers who thought Mr Fitzpatrick was rude would change their mind. I wonder how many of them had been to as many Muslim weddings as he had, and I expect there would of been very few.
Thursday, 6 August 2009
Ads on Hotmail - now fight back
Microsoft are now putting awful advertising on their hotmail accounts. It's odd, they designed Msn and hotmail in such a way as it is easy to report SPAM and to block it, but in a paradox Microsoft have now become the villans. Each of us has bought Microsoft products in our lives, there's no way of not purchasing them, and for me getting a free email account was really a small payback for being a customer of many of their other services. However I now have to re think and seriously consider whether I want any of their products at all, and if I can avoid them and get either freeware or an alternative third party product this will be the case.
It may seem a brash decision to take, but it is not when I consider how much hard money Microsoft has made from products I use. In my workplace their products are the norm. So a licence is purchased so I can use them. At home another licence is purchased. Although they may have the world in the palm of their hand, they can not control every single software writer on the planet. Only the ones they employ. So out there the world of freelance, freeware, and not to mention pirates are churning away the grey cells of find work around. Google is brilliant, just do a search and suggestions come up. Some might not work, but some do help.
If Hotmail is a piece of software which lets me read my email, but I can't read it because I am distracted by the adverts then I will stop using it. Microsoft you are not the only persons on the planet and really, isn't it time you just gave back to the people a small thing, after all its them who have made you so profitable.
It may seem a brash decision to take, but it is not when I consider how much hard money Microsoft has made from products I use. In my workplace their products are the norm. So a licence is purchased so I can use them. At home another licence is purchased. Although they may have the world in the palm of their hand, they can not control every single software writer on the planet. Only the ones they employ. So out there the world of freelance, freeware, and not to mention pirates are churning away the grey cells of find work around. Google is brilliant, just do a search and suggestions come up. Some might not work, but some do help.
If Hotmail is a piece of software which lets me read my email, but I can't read it because I am distracted by the adverts then I will stop using it. Microsoft you are not the only persons on the planet and really, isn't it time you just gave back to the people a small thing, after all its them who have made you so profitable.
Monday, 27 July 2009
No plastic bags, now what do we use?
It's growing difficult to get plastic bags now days when you go shopping. Odd when we spend so much money at the supermarket they now want to sting us for the purchase of a bag. Then those supermarkets who propound this actions is because they are going green, are just making up an excuse. Because if they were really going green then they would provide you with a paper carrier bag rather than plastic. Instead they prefer to charge and thereby extend their healthy profits by a few pence more.
I can understand the need to reduce plastic bags, because it is a wise green thing to do, however, there has to be an alternative. You just can't take away the use of a carrier, it's vital. Then not come up with a valid strategy to replace it with an alternative. But this is exactly what is happening at this time. There is no such alternative. There is now a market out there for the alternative to a plastic bag. It's got three important criteria. It must hold shopping, of various weights and sizes, it must be green and lastly it must be cheap. If there is anyone who can come up with this alternative they could be the next billionaire. Otherwise it then becomes a matter of re educating the entire country. However, seeing how difficult it is to get many people to consider education of any kind as a benefit this become a literal no brainer.
Personally I've always been careful with the plastic bags I've had. Always put them in bins, taken them home and re used as often as I could. Yet it's the other idiots out there who just throw their bags in the street and not care. These are the ones who have given plastic bags a bad name. To some extent it's a bit like the American use of guns. Anyone can buy a gun, but it's the person behind the gun who kills. The gun is just a tool, a convenient and easy to use murder weapon yes. Which like a plastic bag is convenient and easy to use carrier. It's bad use however is now leading to it's demise. Seems odd though, regardless of how many lives guns take, how many families they destroy and how bad lead is to the environment I don't see them being banned. Certainly not in America.
Perhaps there should be a plastic bag justice league. Where only the honest and truthful can use plastic bags. The people who take an oath not to abuse them. I'll sign up straight away. I'm sure it would be a lot less damaging than carrying a gun about. Free plastic bags to the righteous please and leave the lead on the roof thanks.
I can understand the need to reduce plastic bags, because it is a wise green thing to do, however, there has to be an alternative. You just can't take away the use of a carrier, it's vital. Then not come up with a valid strategy to replace it with an alternative. But this is exactly what is happening at this time. There is no such alternative. There is now a market out there for the alternative to a plastic bag. It's got three important criteria. It must hold shopping, of various weights and sizes, it must be green and lastly it must be cheap. If there is anyone who can come up with this alternative they could be the next billionaire. Otherwise it then becomes a matter of re educating the entire country. However, seeing how difficult it is to get many people to consider education of any kind as a benefit this become a literal no brainer.
Personally I've always been careful with the plastic bags I've had. Always put them in bins, taken them home and re used as often as I could. Yet it's the other idiots out there who just throw their bags in the street and not care. These are the ones who have given plastic bags a bad name. To some extent it's a bit like the American use of guns. Anyone can buy a gun, but it's the person behind the gun who kills. The gun is just a tool, a convenient and easy to use murder weapon yes. Which like a plastic bag is convenient and easy to use carrier. It's bad use however is now leading to it's demise. Seems odd though, regardless of how many lives guns take, how many families they destroy and how bad lead is to the environment I don't see them being banned. Certainly not in America.
Perhaps there should be a plastic bag justice league. Where only the honest and truthful can use plastic bags. The people who take an oath not to abuse them. I'll sign up straight away. I'm sure it would be a lot less damaging than carrying a gun about. Free plastic bags to the righteous please and leave the lead on the roof thanks.
Sunday, 26 July 2009
Being Shafted
I'm getting angry quite a lot lately. But for me it's other people who are the reasons for this anger. For instance finding big Moma would rather get her in the house-maintenance-business boy friend to do a little painting, for which he'll charge her an extortionate rate as well. What makes me angry is she is allowing herself to be shafted. Although I said to her there was nothing a bit of paint could not fix and I had already bought the paint for the job. She'd made up a reason to say there was something wrong with the wood. Considering she's not been up a ladder her entire life and knows nothing about wood doesn't actually enter her mind. She wanted to go out and let herself be financially shafted. This of course enraged me, but particularly because the job was a simple one.
I had the paint and loan of a ladder already at hand it was my intention to sort it out. Not considering also the circumstances of a fellow Shafter to the boyfriend. A bloke who spoke to one of Big Moma's Grand son's and said "so and so (boyfriend) is screwing your nan, how'd you feel about it?" The Shafter is a devious and probably mentally disturbed individual who takes gratuitous pleasure out of teasing in a malevolent way. It is therefore no wonder I was angry and in these circumstances I think justifiably angry. To the point of feeling physical violence towards this individual. In the meantime Big Moma has the demeanour of living walking victim just waiting for the next person who feels like it to just take advantage of her. Why she acts in this way I do not know. Which leads me to think I must of been swapped at birth and am not really related to any of my family at all.
In a huff I sent a text message this morning to Sparkling. Then later on when I have a break I try and chat via MSN. I am chilled at this point. But Sparkling almost immediately accuses me of being in a mood when I am not in a mood at all. This kind of behaviour makes me wonder if there is actually something wrong with me. If I really am Mr Angry and it's me who has the problem, if it weren't for the fact I knew I was chilled while drinking my cup of tea and eating a dark chocolate digestive biscuit then I'd of thought I was crazy. But the fact is I wasn't.
Yesterday I spoke to Green Car man, the first time in about six weeks or maybe more. I had enough of the little Oriental fellow and had told Green Car man the reasons why. Then Green Car man says it's me who is sounding aggressive. Yes I was aggressive and angry, but it was justified, there was reason for my reaction. Does this mean I should not react? I should just sit still and accept the inevitability of being constantly shafted. Should I just go to prison and find a cell inhabited by the biggest gayest tattooed convict, bend myself over and say "come and shaft me buddy, coz every other fucker has." Should I? When it is other people who do these things to me I have no control, so I am going to get fucking angry.
Anger is usually caused by something, in which case it is justified, letting it out is a release valve, storing it up is mentally dangerous. These are facts and should be common place and known to every individual in society. So if someone shows aggression or anger then there is a reason for it and they should be listened to in an empathic way (not sympathetic which is quite different). They should be allowed to let it out, then they will feel better for the whole experience.
At times like this I can easily reason it is better to do with no friends, no family, nobody to rely on in any way possible. Then to die at a clinic in Switzerland when old but not quite infirm, because being a burden to any other person in any way would be relinquishing independence. And communicating with anyone else could mean interpreting an action from me which would make them think I am angry. However, were others not trying to shaft me then I'm sure I would be fine. Yes this is such a beautiful world.
I had the paint and loan of a ladder already at hand it was my intention to sort it out. Not considering also the circumstances of a fellow Shafter to the boyfriend. A bloke who spoke to one of Big Moma's Grand son's and said "so and so (boyfriend) is screwing your nan, how'd you feel about it?" The Shafter is a devious and probably mentally disturbed individual who takes gratuitous pleasure out of teasing in a malevolent way. It is therefore no wonder I was angry and in these circumstances I think justifiably angry. To the point of feeling physical violence towards this individual. In the meantime Big Moma has the demeanour of living walking victim just waiting for the next person who feels like it to just take advantage of her. Why she acts in this way I do not know. Which leads me to think I must of been swapped at birth and am not really related to any of my family at all.
In a huff I sent a text message this morning to Sparkling. Then later on when I have a break I try and chat via MSN. I am chilled at this point. But Sparkling almost immediately accuses me of being in a mood when I am not in a mood at all. This kind of behaviour makes me wonder if there is actually something wrong with me. If I really am Mr Angry and it's me who has the problem, if it weren't for the fact I knew I was chilled while drinking my cup of tea and eating a dark chocolate digestive biscuit then I'd of thought I was crazy. But the fact is I wasn't.
Yesterday I spoke to Green Car man, the first time in about six weeks or maybe more. I had enough of the little Oriental fellow and had told Green Car man the reasons why. Then Green Car man says it's me who is sounding aggressive. Yes I was aggressive and angry, but it was justified, there was reason for my reaction. Does this mean I should not react? I should just sit still and accept the inevitability of being constantly shafted. Should I just go to prison and find a cell inhabited by the biggest gayest tattooed convict, bend myself over and say "come and shaft me buddy, coz every other fucker has." Should I? When it is other people who do these things to me I have no control, so I am going to get fucking angry.
Anger is usually caused by something, in which case it is justified, letting it out is a release valve, storing it up is mentally dangerous. These are facts and should be common place and known to every individual in society. So if someone shows aggression or anger then there is a reason for it and they should be listened to in an empathic way (not sympathetic which is quite different). They should be allowed to let it out, then they will feel better for the whole experience.
At times like this I can easily reason it is better to do with no friends, no family, nobody to rely on in any way possible. Then to die at a clinic in Switzerland when old but not quite infirm, because being a burden to any other person in any way would be relinquishing independence. And communicating with anyone else could mean interpreting an action from me which would make them think I am angry. However, were others not trying to shaft me then I'm sure I would be fine. Yes this is such a beautiful world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
