So Human Rights Watch are banging the drum about Gadaffi being shot. OK, someone who's blood was up, who has been fighting for his country's freedom for months shot a mad dictator like any normal person other than the hanky wringers at Human Rights Watch would shoot a mad dog.
Where were the HRW when Gadaffi was hanging people with electrical flex from lamp posts? How much attention did the wailing pacifists give that atrocity? Absolutely zero! So - Shut up HRW and go back to your discussion groups about how to not drop stitches in your embroidery.
Monday, 24 October 2011
Sunday, 27 February 2011
World Financial Crisis?
Hang on, I know I’m over sixty, so in the eyes of the teenager: why am I still breathing? I know I am a Westcountryman, which indicates to most British people that I am stupid, but I’m really confused over the cause of this economic crisis I keep hearing about and paying for.
As I understand it, the whole crisis was brought about by greedy bankers lending money at extortionate rates to people who had no chance of paying the loan back. They then packaged up parts of their loan book with some slightly better business, told a story of fantastic income streams and sold the package to greedy better-off-than-most investors by way of paying high commissions to independent investment advisors.
Before we go any further, just pause for a second. A group of greedy bankers have sold a pack of poo tickets to a group of greedy investors. The bankers celebrated by paying themselves magnificent bonuses, in many cases receiving in one year what most of us would not achieve in our lifetime. The investment advisors got fat commission cheques.
Then, as was bound to happen, the whole castle of sand came crashing down. The investors lost all of their money. That’s OK though, because the professional indemnity insurers of the investment advisors, who sold the packaged rubbish to the greedy investors, will make sure that the investors are not out of pocket. The investment advisor will change the name of his company and go back into business, so he’s OK too.
Someone has to pay for all of this and guess who it is. Yes, you, the tax payer.
The government bailed out the bankers saying that our economy couldn’t survive without them. OK, many of the functions of today’s banks are fundamental to the way our economy works, but it wasn’t that part of the banks’ operations that caused the problem.
So, my question is, why are we having a financial crisis? The government bailed out the banks in exchange for their shares. Simply because the government did that, the price of the shares rose. In fact, it seems to be that the government are now in profit on their deal. If they sold the shares that they own, the country would make a profit.
We’ve now seen the trading results of the banks and the bonus payments to the people who run them. Have the greedy bankers suffered from the crisis? No. Has the investment advisor community suffered from the crisis? No. Have the greedy investors suffered from the crisis? No. Have you and I, who had nothing to do with all of this greed suffered? Yes.
It appears then that a bunch of greedy people extended themselves too far and the rest of us are paying for it.
That’s right, isn’t it?
As I understand it, the whole crisis was brought about by greedy bankers lending money at extortionate rates to people who had no chance of paying the loan back. They then packaged up parts of their loan book with some slightly better business, told a story of fantastic income streams and sold the package to greedy better-off-than-most investors by way of paying high commissions to independent investment advisors.
Before we go any further, just pause for a second. A group of greedy bankers have sold a pack of poo tickets to a group of greedy investors. The bankers celebrated by paying themselves magnificent bonuses, in many cases receiving in one year what most of us would not achieve in our lifetime. The investment advisors got fat commission cheques.
Then, as was bound to happen, the whole castle of sand came crashing down. The investors lost all of their money. That’s OK though, because the professional indemnity insurers of the investment advisors, who sold the packaged rubbish to the greedy investors, will make sure that the investors are not out of pocket. The investment advisor will change the name of his company and go back into business, so he’s OK too.
Someone has to pay for all of this and guess who it is. Yes, you, the tax payer.
The government bailed out the bankers saying that our economy couldn’t survive without them. OK, many of the functions of today’s banks are fundamental to the way our economy works, but it wasn’t that part of the banks’ operations that caused the problem.
So, my question is, why are we having a financial crisis? The government bailed out the banks in exchange for their shares. Simply because the government did that, the price of the shares rose. In fact, it seems to be that the government are now in profit on their deal. If they sold the shares that they own, the country would make a profit.
We’ve now seen the trading results of the banks and the bonus payments to the people who run them. Have the greedy bankers suffered from the crisis? No. Has the investment advisor community suffered from the crisis? No. Have the greedy investors suffered from the crisis? No. Have you and I, who had nothing to do with all of this greed suffered? Yes.
It appears then that a bunch of greedy people extended themselves too far and the rest of us are paying for it.
That’s right, isn’t it?
British people are not racist
Apparently the results of a new poll of the British people has the Little Miss Busybody sisterhood shocked. Searchlight Educational Trust has published the result of a poll that reports 63 percent of the white population, 43 percent of Asians and 17 percent of black Britons feel that immigration is a bad thing. In addition, 39 percent of Asians, 34 percent of whites and 21 percent of black people want immigration stopped.
But half a minute, why should they be shocked? Easily answered really. If they had stopped preaching to us about racial equality and diversity. Not branded anyone who questioned their policies as a racist and spent a small amount of their holier than thou time listening, they would have known how the majority of us feel. I mean all of us, black, white and every shade in between.
The truth of the matter is that the ordinary man-in-the-street British person is not racist. I’m not racist and I don’t know a person who is. What gets to us is that people come here, then try to change the way we are.
If you want your wife to wear a bag over her head in public and not be ostracised, live somewhere else. Don’t come to our country then tell us that we are somehow lesser people because our culture is different and certainly don’t form a mutual admiration society based on your religion and call it a parliament.
Far worse is the sisterhood of the righteous who talk down to us from a settee on a TV breakfast show, telling us that we have to accept this alien behaviour. We don’t have to accept it. We might not say anything. We are not going to get into a public argument over it, but that doesn’t mean that we agree with it. After all, who wants to spend their time listening to your strident hectoring about what we eat, what we drink, saving the planet and how we get on with our neighbours?
Madam, whether or not you inhabit a female body, we do not have to accept it. To illustrate my point – how often do we read stories in the press joining racism with Chinese immigrants? Hardly ever, if at all. Why? Because they understand that they need to blend in with the culture of their host country.
So maybe instead of spending your energy hectoring us, the British people, on how we should behave, spend it on teaching migrants about our history, language and culture so that they can fit in and have a much happier life.
You won’t do that though will you? Much too much like hard work. Easier to preach to those who can’t be bothered to argue with you.
But half a minute, why should they be shocked? Easily answered really. If they had stopped preaching to us about racial equality and diversity. Not branded anyone who questioned their policies as a racist and spent a small amount of their holier than thou time listening, they would have known how the majority of us feel. I mean all of us, black, white and every shade in between.
The truth of the matter is that the ordinary man-in-the-street British person is not racist. I’m not racist and I don’t know a person who is. What gets to us is that people come here, then try to change the way we are.
If you want your wife to wear a bag over her head in public and not be ostracised, live somewhere else. Don’t come to our country then tell us that we are somehow lesser people because our culture is different and certainly don’t form a mutual admiration society based on your religion and call it a parliament.
Far worse is the sisterhood of the righteous who talk down to us from a settee on a TV breakfast show, telling us that we have to accept this alien behaviour. We don’t have to accept it. We might not say anything. We are not going to get into a public argument over it, but that doesn’t mean that we agree with it. After all, who wants to spend their time listening to your strident hectoring about what we eat, what we drink, saving the planet and how we get on with our neighbours?
Madam, whether or not you inhabit a female body, we do not have to accept it. To illustrate my point – how often do we read stories in the press joining racism with Chinese immigrants? Hardly ever, if at all. Why? Because they understand that they need to blend in with the culture of their host country.
So maybe instead of spending your energy hectoring us, the British people, on how we should behave, spend it on teaching migrants about our history, language and culture so that they can fit in and have a much happier life.
You won’t do that though will you? Much too much like hard work. Easier to preach to those who can’t be bothered to argue with you.
Saturday, 26 February 2011
What is a trust?
Most people have heard of a trust but not many know what it is, what it does or even why it might be useful. Some people mistakenly believe that it is a thing only useful to rich kids, so I have decided to write a short series of articles explaining a complex subject in simple terms.
Simply put, a trust is a method of owning an asset other than either personally or by way of a company. It is an arrangement that is unique to English Common Law or to jurisdictions that have had their legal birth in that law, such as in Australia.
There are a few things that a trust needs that may or may not exist, but there is one element that it must have and that is the trust deed. This is the document that creates the trust and defines the powers of the trustees, who can be a beneficiary and how they might benefit. As trusts can no longer exist in perpetuity, the deed must also define how long the trust can exist before the final assets must be distributed.
This may sound very complex, but it isn’t when it’s broken down into its component parts. The longest journey starts out with the first steps. This series is designed to do exactly that, break down a complex subject into simple parts so that anyone with a modicum of intelligence can understand.
So, as a start, who are the classes of people involved with a trust and what do they do? The classes of people are:
· The Settlor (Not a settler who is a person who claims some virgin land.)
· The Trustees
· Life tenants
· The Remaindermen
What do these people do?
The Settlor is the person who gives the original assets to the trust. An idiosyncrasy of trusts is that they can exist, but own nothing.
The trustees are the people who have the power and responsibility to manage the assets. Their powers are defined by the trust deed and their responsibilities to the beneficiaries are usually also defined in certain ways by statute. A settlor can be a trustee, but doesn’t have to be.
Life Tenants are the people who may benefit from the trust in certain ways but are not entitled to the capital assets of the trust. The settlor can be a life tenant, but that usually has detrimental tax implications.
The Remaindermen are the classes of people who will receive the assets when the last of the Life Tenants has died and the trust is “Distributed.”
That is enough for now and is your first step into understanding trusts. Just as a caution, this series of articles is just a rough guide to trusts. Their history is steeped in time and there is therefore a great deal of judge made law applying to them. It is important that you get proper advice from an expert before taking any action, but I hope that what I say may help your understanding.
Simply put, a trust is a method of owning an asset other than either personally or by way of a company. It is an arrangement that is unique to English Common Law or to jurisdictions that have had their legal birth in that law, such as in Australia.
There are a few things that a trust needs that may or may not exist, but there is one element that it must have and that is the trust deed. This is the document that creates the trust and defines the powers of the trustees, who can be a beneficiary and how they might benefit. As trusts can no longer exist in perpetuity, the deed must also define how long the trust can exist before the final assets must be distributed.
This may sound very complex, but it isn’t when it’s broken down into its component parts. The longest journey starts out with the first steps. This series is designed to do exactly that, break down a complex subject into simple parts so that anyone with a modicum of intelligence can understand.
So, as a start, who are the classes of people involved with a trust and what do they do? The classes of people are:
· The Settlor (Not a settler who is a person who claims some virgin land.)
· The Trustees
· Life tenants
· The Remaindermen
What do these people do?
The Settlor is the person who gives the original assets to the trust. An idiosyncrasy of trusts is that they can exist, but own nothing.
The trustees are the people who have the power and responsibility to manage the assets. Their powers are defined by the trust deed and their responsibilities to the beneficiaries are usually also defined in certain ways by statute. A settlor can be a trustee, but doesn’t have to be.
Life Tenants are the people who may benefit from the trust in certain ways but are not entitled to the capital assets of the trust. The settlor can be a life tenant, but that usually has detrimental tax implications.
The Remaindermen are the classes of people who will receive the assets when the last of the Life Tenants has died and the trust is “Distributed.”
That is enough for now and is your first step into understanding trusts. Just as a caution, this series of articles is just a rough guide to trusts. Their history is steeped in time and there is therefore a great deal of judge made law applying to them. It is important that you get proper advice from an expert before taking any action, but I hope that what I say may help your understanding.
Thursday, 24 February 2011
Into the valley of death
Half a minute. How did this happen?
I have been designing, adapting and modifying databases for about thirty years. I’ve been doing other things as well of course, but the theme running through all of it has been writing databases.
With the advent of The Cloud, small businesses are no longer really interested in the kind of databases that I came to know and love. They want their database online and they want parts of it to be available to their customers. They want their data to be available from home and elsewhere through their smart phone. I needed to learn some new skills and quickly!
Now I have to admit that I’ve always been a bit dismissive of the guys who design web sites. After all, that’s what kids in college do for pocket money, right? But, if I was to embrace this new world, I had to quickly learn so that I could apply the knowledge of decades to this new world, then make a quid from designing databases that live in The Cloud.
OK. I did the work. Went up the learning curve, then into the market. What I found was that there is a great disparity between what First World designers try to charge and what Emerging Economy designers get paid.
I had thought I would market my old skills with a new twist through the quickly growing freelancer sites. I quickly discovered that it would be stupid of me to spend days or more designing an online database application to find that I still had to dig into my shrinking pocket to take my wife out for the evening.
But every cloud has a silver lining. I noticed that there were a lot of jobs for people to rewrite website material that had been written by a person from an emerging economy. That makes sense. Most of those guys have English as a second or third language. English is probably the most difficult language in the world to master. It’s an amalgamation of Latin, Old German, Norman French and Greek, just to mention a few. Some words sound the same but are spelt (Not spelled) differently. Some words are spelt the same, but pronounced differently. For example: It grated on him as his gait was not great as he carried the grate to the gate.
So I have found a new opportunity. The only thing that never changes is that everything changes. I’ve always liked writing but mostly did it for my own amusement. Apart from being paid for a few local paper and magazine articles, I’d never really made any money at it.
Now out of the valley of death rides ........................
Friday, 14 January 2011
Why wasn't I told that before?
We have been working with databases for over 30 years and with small business for over 20.
It is amazing how many times we have been called into a small business to help with their database requirements and having analysed the problem, hear the wail of "Why did nobody tell me that before?"
The truthful but cruel answer is that either you didn't ask or were fed on bulldust. You can glean some comfort from the fact that somewhere like 90% of all other small business owners didn't ask either.
The biggest problem that small business owners have with data management systems is that they do not have a high priority in the early days, and rightly so. Then, when the business takes off, there are other more important things to think about.
Then comes the time when data capture and management can't be ignored.
"OK, I have to do it but it must be cheap." or "Just do it."
Both of these courses are building up trouble for the future. Doing it cheap may be an off-the-shelf package. A great deal of staff time and effort goes into adjusting systems to make the software suit, but it fails in the end. An additional problem then is that the data has to be transferred to a proper database application. That will cost a lot more than the original cheapskate package!
Then there is the database leach waiting for the too-busy manager. You will get what almost works, most of the time. What you won't get is what always works all of the time.
That makes sense. How much maintainance fees is he going to get out of you if he designs you a system that works all of the time?
So, what is your answer? Employ a firm that has the experience and the track record to help you. How will you know who is right? Talk to them (Or us.) You will quickly guage whether they can do the job or not. Go with your first instincts. Good developers are not good salesmen. In fact, we are very bad. If you feel any kind of flim-flam, talk to someone else. A person that is more interested in your data than your bank balance is a good indicator.
Technical details are not your area of expertise and should not be your concern. Flim-flam men will try to tie you up in knots about such stuff whilst pushing up the price. Ignore that. You know what you need. Tell them and ask for a fixed price. If you can't get that, move on. Then, you might want to talk to us?
Which database engine?
We have been working with databases for over 30 years and with small business for over 20.
During that time we have had many discussions with business owners and managers about which database engine they should use. Whilst those discussions have mostly been enjoyable, they have been a waste of time. The decision is quite easy to make:
Anyone reading this article is unlikely to be a database engine decision maker in a large business. We can therefore ignore SQLServer and Oracle. That leaves us with MySQL and Microsoft Access.
If you are a small business and want an on-line database, a web host who provides Access or SQLServer is going to be relatively expensive, with no obvious advantages. You can therefore safely decide on MySQL.
If you need a database that lives on one machine, there is no doubt that you need Access.
We are now faced with the decision of if we need multi-user access on a private network. Access and MySQL will both do this job exceptionally well. In addition, if you use the right developer, the cost of each will be the same, as will speed and ease of access.
Access is easy to install on a server but if the job isn't done properly, grief is the only result. The installation of MySQL requires more work which usually can't be undertaken by an amateur. In any case, the front end needs to be engineered by a professional database designer who is fully aware of your requirements.
Of course, the ultimate choice is yours but if you don't want to store up trouble for the future, discuss your requirements with your database developer.
Database development is not expensive. Mistakes are.
During that time we have had many discussions with business owners and managers about which database engine they should use. Whilst those discussions have mostly been enjoyable, they have been a waste of time. The decision is quite easy to make:
Anyone reading this article is unlikely to be a database engine decision maker in a large business. We can therefore ignore SQLServer and Oracle. That leaves us with MySQL and Microsoft Access.
If you are a small business and want an on-line database, a web host who provides Access or SQLServer is going to be relatively expensive, with no obvious advantages. You can therefore safely decide on MySQL.
If you need a database that lives on one machine, there is no doubt that you need Access.
We are now faced with the decision of if we need multi-user access on a private network. Access and MySQL will both do this job exceptionally well. In addition, if you use the right developer, the cost of each will be the same, as will speed and ease of access.
Access is easy to install on a server but if the job isn't done properly, grief is the only result. The installation of MySQL requires more work which usually can't be undertaken by an amateur. In any case, the front end needs to be engineered by a professional database designer who is fully aware of your requirements.
Of course, the ultimate choice is yours but if you don't want to store up trouble for the future, discuss your requirements with your database developer.
Database development is not expensive. Mistakes are.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)