walking backwards

Two-person play

Ragged Trousered Philanthropists

socialist book

old-fashioned? simplistic?

are we walking backwards?

Talk or action?

Labour seems to be all talk and no action on green issues. Not that any of the others are likely to be much of an improvement. I think Labour lost its soul when Tony Blair cosied up to big business, but that's hardly news.

See what they haven't done here . No wonder we're all so damned cynical.

Another Limerick

Protecting the honour and income of his family...

The honor of dear Bernard Madoff
made him claim only he ever played off-
side in the game
that brought money and fame
Such a shame that they called his parade off.

Two more limericks

How much are you worth AIG
With your clever obscure strategy?
Obama won’t stand it
He’ll make you unhand it
Big bucks rule, it's not his liturgy.

Exactly on whom is the onus
Of controlling the size of a bonus?
The boss of the bank
Or the file and the rank?
These fat-cats must think that they own us.

Not entirely happy with the first one, but for the moment it'll have to do.

Version 2.
Would you pocket the lot AIG
with a secret payout strategy?
I hope O wan't stand it
and makes you unhand it
No big bucks, please, in his liturgy.

Of course the AIG boss is asking them to pay back (half) their bonuses now.

Two Limericks

So, I didn't win the challenge, but here are my efforts:

Bernard Madoff
There was a rich guy, Bernard Madoff
Used new dosh to get the old paid off
The money swished round
Till it all tumbled down
Is penthouse for jail a good trade-off?

(So nasty to kick folks when they're down!)

Educational Choice
The idea that a school you must choose
Will leave lots with no choice but to lose
For those with the money
Will sup milk and honey
Let the choose losers sing the old blues

(are my politics showing? Ooops!)

Sport or politics?

Editorial from today's New York Times - I found it refreshing.

'So be it. We like to root for the home team as much as anyone. But with the federal budget deep in the red, the economy in the doldrums, a broken military in need of repair, and enormous unmet domestic needs, we can think of a lot better places to invest federal resources than in building a sports machine. Let some rich benefactors augment the $130-million-a-year budget of the United States Olympic Committee.

And if international respect is the goal, a collaborative, less arrogant diplomacy would help a lot more than winning medals.

If we are looking to invest in sports, we would be wiser to spend money on daily gym classes and after-school athletic programs. That would not produce a large crop of Olympians, but it would help combat the growing obesity epidemic among American youngsters and yield health benefits worth more than Olympic gold.'

Poverty, like obesity, is your own fault?

From Guardian article, today.
Or under this headline in the Times:
David Cameron tells the fat and the poor: Take responsibility

"I have not found the words to say it sensitively," said Cameron. "Then I realised, that is the whole point: we, as a society, have been far too sensitive. In order to avoid injury to people's feelings, to avoid appearing judgmental, we have failed to say what needs to be said. We have seen a decades-long erosion of responsibility, of social virtue, of self-discipline, respect for others, of deferring gratification instead of instant gratification."

Calling for an end to the "stultifying silence" about what mattered, he said: "We talk about people being 'at risk of obesity' instead of talking about people who eat too much and take too little exercise. We talk about people being at risk of poverty, or social exclusion: it's as if these things - obesity, alcohol abuse, drug addiction - are purely external events like a plague or bad weather."

Some truth in what he says, but I am worried that poverty has somehow found its way in there among all those variables we can control. Low wage jobs wouldn't have anything to do with it of course.

Nurses 'to be rated on compassion'.

A very quick reaction to a piece of news on the BBC website today:
Of course it's only part of what their new initiative will do, but it seems to me that there's too much admin, too many initiatives, and not enough support for those who do the work.


What price a smile?

So you’ll rate me on compassion,
give me grades from one to five?
Wanted – one compassion rater
to make this thing go live.

Never mind the fact we work hard,
we must look as though it’s fun.
Now, how much do you earn ,pray,
for getting this job done?

So you tick a set of boxes
as you follow me around.
Am I smiling and polite
though my feet don’t touch the ground?

Is my sweet smile smooth or plastic -
does it reach into my eyes?
Is the measurement elastic -
can I try it on for size?

Will you interview the patients?
Your job could take all day -
will it really solve our problems
and make them go away?

More baby steps

Moondreamer made the suggestion and now we've acted on it. We've started a new blog Towards 2011 - 100 Years of International Women's Day. (I'm not putting a link to the IWD home page because some script on it keeps crashing my AOL connection.)
We hope to include articles about gender differences, facts about women - our achievements, areas where inequality still reigns, along with areas where men and women are crossing the old boundaries. We're also looking for feminist humour and cartoons. I don't mean jokes about men.

On another tack, a friend from Writers' Dock has started a petition to the PM on an ecological and aid issue. Another baby step, but hell, you have to start somewhere.
We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Covenant Foreign Aid where Ecological Resources exist, such as endangered rainforests, fisheries and reefs, so local populations are directly compensated for conservation. We urge the Prime Minister to acquire renewable leases on such areas for UK monitoring rights to ensure the money is spent effectively.
The aims of this petition are to advance anti-climate change measures, to ensure Aid is spent effectively and fairly, and report to the Public on its effectiveness.

Why Women should rule the World - Dee Dee Myers

The Guardian review by Sharon Krum of a new book 'Why Women should rule the World' by Dee Dee Myers looks interesting. No, she's not banishing men from positions of power. I'm tagging it to remind myself of the ideas put forward. More later.

OK. Long post - condensed from the article above .

Dee Dee Myers was the White House’s first female press secretary. A comment made by her daughter of nursery school age inspired the book. The child said that only boys could become President of the USA, though girls could be presidents’ wives. In fact women are still under-represented in public life and account for only17% of members of national parliaments.

Myers is not interested in knocking men, but in investigating why so few women take powerful positions alongside them. Hillary Clinton’s quest for office has exposed wide-spread sexism. Though not all Clinton’s problems have been gender-related, misogynists have had their moments during her campaign, heckling her with signs that read “Iron my Shirt”, for instance. Clinton has also found herself faced with the classic dilemma: women in power are expected to act like men, but when they do they are accused of being unlikeable.

Myers feels it is important to acknowledge certain differences between the sexes, for example, according to recent research into male and female brains, women are hard-wired to defuse conflict. “I think many differences are rooted in biology and reinforced through culture,” says Myers, “ If you say men and women are the same and if male behaviour is the norm, we will never be as good at being men as men are.”

She finds that while sporting prowess is considered a key indicator of leadership potential in the US, bringing up children - which builds skills such as diplomacy, team-playing and flexibility - is undervalued.

However, it is not just sexism that keeps women out of power. At times, she says, women undermine themselves. “We don’t raise our hands for promotions, we don’t take credit for our accomplishments.”

Researching her book, Myers interviewed a number of successful women, including the late Anita Roddick, who said that women are not comfortable with the concept of power. “They see what it’s done to men and they want no bloody part of it,” Roddick said. When Myers asked women if they considered themselves powerful, they tended to reject the term. “But if you asked them if they like the ability to make a difference, they loved that.”

She is optimistic that younger women will step on to the public stage, motivated partly by seeing other females in power. “Women in senior jobs still represent all womankind and aren’t allowed to fail quite as much [as men], but I am encouraged to see women are being elected in Chile, Argentina, Liberia, Ireland.” She pauses briefly. “More is more.” •
Why Women Should Rule the World, by Dee Dee Myers, is published by HarperCollins on April 7, priced £14.99

Condensed from Sharon Krum's article. I hope I have not misrepresented her in any way.

Cynicism

It occurs to me as I've been thinking about things recently. I want to have opinions. I want those opinions to be based on the facts. Yet I feel that I can never be sure of the facts.
So, I ask questions, but rarely find definitive answers.
Is it just because 'they', i.e. those with economic and political power, like to blind us with excessive information? Like 24-hour news, too many facts flying around, over-analysed, from all sides.
So I switch off, and feel inclined to think that 'they' know best.
It suits 'them', as they build their own empires, and leave the rest of us wondering. Or cynical.