Eldon-Online

You've Heard Of The Three "R's"? ... Read On

What does the phrase "the 3Rs" mean to you? Chances are, depending on your age, you will recognise it as relating to a comment coined in the late 1700s, when Sir William Curtis referred to them as: Reading, Writing and Arithmetic. (No, I was not around at the time before you ask!). But even if you didn't know the phrase before, I am sure you will have picked up the irony of the fact that they don't all start with an "R". But they sound as if they do!  Nearly. 

So, moving swiftly to the 21st Century, I have an alternative version - not of "R"s, but "U"s - although sadly two of them do start with the letter "U" - but then we're not all perfect.

I refer to Unemployment, University and You.

First of all, what I am about to write is less likely to appear as an issue in Asia for some time to come, but then who knows..., particularly if unemployment becomes a more serious matter than it is already. The pressure on educating children in Asia has become quite obsessive and stressful to both children and parents, all in the hope that a great education, as long as you get into the right university in some countries, will lead to the best jobs. That is, as long as there are sufficient jobs to go round. But if not, then what happens?

Let me try and make some sense out of where my line of thinking is going. Succinctly.

In case you think I am having a go at universities in particular, but education in general, let me state categorically that education first and foremost is essential. A well educated world, starting with the children, are generally less likely to be proponents of war. If we neglect our duties to educate everyone, boys and girls, every race religion, beliefs, and colour, we are setting a bonfire that someone will light at some stage in the future.This is something acknowledged by a variety of leaders, many of them presiding over poorer countries or at least living in their shadow. Although this will take a long time, generations indeed, to achieve, it must nevertheless be undertaken.

In this Blog, though I am dealing with something more immediate. I am focused for the present on well-educated children who are joining a real world where there is a lack of jobs, and a growing phenomenon in the West by some potential University entrants to try and beat the system. 

Simplistically, you earn good grades to secure a good University place. You work hard for three or four years to come out with a good degree. But you emerge into a market where jobs are hard to come by - and you have a pile of debt.

 

Unemployment in developed and developing economies is not a new phenomenon, but in many places it is too high and is stubbornly refusing to come down significantly. When you add to this the increasing use of technology in many workplaces, the cost of paying people, and therefore the substitution of jobs by "robots", you have a situation that is not going to add many jobs any time soon. But please remember I am being quite general here. I am not talking about the important specialisations such as the medical profession although even that over time will surely be taken over by technology. With unemployment in the USA and the UK both over 7.5%, France and Italy over 10.5%, Spain and Greece at a staggering 27% - and others, there are no "quick fixes". Factor in the demographics of the unemployed by age and you have a good number of young people making up a large percentage of the numbers.

So you come to the question of how are people getting round it. Easy. They are opting not to go to University!!

Now, if you speak to many people especially in Asia such an idea is almost heresy. (Heresy, as in any belief or theory that is strongly at variance with established beliefs or customs). And some Western friends are also somewhat sceptical that opting out of University is likely to work, but here's the thinking.

If you work hard at school and get good results, to the extent that you would have been offered a place at a decent University, you opt instead to go look for a suitable employer and immediately enter the work force. If you are lucky enough to find an employer of course. And heer we are back to the old system of learning on the job. You start the process of taking any relevant professional exams which, given a fair wind you should complete in 3 years. Then, when your peer group graduate from University straining under the burden of having to repay a large student loan and apply with the thousands of other graduates at the same time to your company for a job - guess what? They already have on their payroll a trained, qualified, bright committed employee (who is doubly happy because they have no debt!) Possible? Why not?

If employers get creative and open their doors to potential advancement for early joiners - rather than only fast-tracking University graduates - then I see the potential.

So, what is the You part of this? Well it can be you as in the potential University entrant trying to decide on a pre-emptive course of action to avoid the debt and unemployment trap, or it could be you as in a potential employer looking for talent early on in the workplace and not believing that only University graduates are the ones who can do a better job because they are supposed to be intellectually superior - or some such nonsense. 

Mind you, as someone who left school at the age of 16 I suppose I might be slightly biased, and I used to feel a little disingenuous when trying to convince all my children they needed degrees to even get an interview!!

And You relates to every one of "us" really who is in a position to be open-minded about such a radical change, and also to do your bit to ensure we work towards an educated world.

New on the Menu - Rat of Lamb!

Oh dear! There I was, just about to settle down to write a really exciting Blog either on why University candidates are opting out of going to Uni, or a small note on "Big Data" - the consultant's latest buzz word that is sweeping through a Boardroom somewhere near you when, hard on the heels of my last Blog about food - and China's aspirations to ensure its future food supplies from other parts of the world - along comes a tale (tail perhaps?) of skullduggery in the mainland's kitchens. 

In case you missed it, recent news reports from China have highlighted the seizure of a gang that has been selling rat, fox and mink meat in the Eastern part of China - passing it off as lamb and mutton. Now I have never knowingly eaten a "joint of rat", but I don't care how much gunk and preservative you put on it surely a rodent would have a different taste and texture from what you were expecting? I would have imagined rat to be sort of stringy, even if it was thinly sliced - and surely the purchasers or users of the raw item must have ... well, smelt a rat when they saw the meat? 

China, of course, has had a run of scandals in the last few years over food items that have been tainted. The most notorious being tainted milk. This has led to such concern in China that demand for powdered milk from places like Hong Kong and, I am told, even London has led to a restriction on the amount of powdered milk that can be bought by mainlanders in those cities to take back to China. And then there were the thousands of dead pigs floating downstream into Shanghai a month or two ago, having been dumped in the river. And there are other examples ... all of which make the United Kingdom's "horsemeat for beef" scandal look rather tame by comparison.

For the genuine storekeeper, restaurateur or whatever, don't you think they would know that a rat is a small rodent that feeds from old food and smelly bins, and carries fleas (amongst other things!)? Sheep, or more specifically lambs on the other hand, are soft and cuddly fluffy animals that mostly eat grass! If you can easily get the two mixed up then I would guess you are in the wrong business.

That said there was always the rumour being circulated amongst Westerners that Chinese people would eat anything that had its back to the sun. This neatly prohibited cannibalism because most of us walk upright. But judging by some of the things I have eaten over the years, that would not be considered totally normal to Western tastes, I think that the saying may be pretty accurate!

All of which leads me to attach a drawing courtesy of a good friend wth a gift for cartoons, and with apologies for "amending" what has become a well known saying emanating from China,

But the serious message is clearly this. In a country where the vast majority of people eat to live rather than live to eat, playing around with people's food is not clever, given the potential consequences. And when it happens too often, with different food items, and the public begins to question what the Government is doing about it to provide safeguards, and the social networks start buzzing, there is a serious risk of unrest. Weibo, the micro blogging service in China has something like 500 million registered users of which around 10% are active on a daily basis. If 50 million people start complaining, you get some idea of the impact a site like this can have, for good and bad! Really the ball is now very firmly in the Leaderhip's court, and I hope that demonstrable progress can be made to improve this situation.

I have for a long time said that I am much more concerned at the impact of social unrest in China than I am about things like the economy. And if people are afraid to eat what is put in front of them for fear it is tainted, they will get angry. And guess what comes next .....

So, maybe some ratatouille with the rat of lamb?

 

"Where The Sun Never Sets" - Under New Ownership?

You may or may not be familiar with an often quoted phrase that reads "the Empire on which the sun never sets". The phrase was attributed to a writer in 1821 who was describing the extent of the British Empire as being a nation where at least some of their interests were in daylight at any given point in time. The origins of the phrase, historically, go back much further than the 19th Century of course.  The Persian King Xerxes is said to have used a somewhat similar expression before invading the Greeks in the 3rd Century BCE. And in the modern era around the 16th and 17th centuries the phrase was applied to the Spaniards and the Portuguese. But are we about to witness a new "owner" for the phrase? China!

In this sense I do not mean that China is intent upon invading various countries around the world and imposing their rule on them, in the manner of the Europeans, but it follows a similar pattern as China searches the world for resources.

It doesn't matter which newspaper you read in whatever country, or which conference you attend on whatever subject, there is often an underlying "sameness" in the topics that are top of mind in discussions, and they reflect our world today and the future. The sort of thing that I am working with colleagues on at present as we try to look forward, and which apart from issues such as technology, demographic change and the rise of state-directed capitalism (okay, economic nationalism) also looks at the "war" for resources. And where China is concerned it is this last element, resources, that is giving rise to their possible accession to the role of being the country with interests that will be in daylight for 24 hours.

The forecasts come at you from all directions. Diets in China are changing rapidly, and as a result there is a greater demand than before for foods that would not normally have been a part of the staple diet. The demand for meat, for example, is growing rapidly meaning that water resources and feed for the cattle is needed. And in relation to cattle feed, more than 60% of the world's soya bean production is going to China. And then there is food consumption generally. Recent figures I have seen suggest that already more than 30% of global rice production, 25% of the world's corn and 50% of pork products are being exported to China.

The urbanisation of China has meant the conversion of agricultural land to use for building, resulting of course in the decline of land available to feed a growing population. No problem you say, China is a vast country and has lots of land, but only about 15% of China's land mass has been suitable for agriculture, mostly in the eastern half of the country. Even in 2008 the China Daily was reporting that arable land was barely above the critical minimum. so, with the reduction in that land, the population growth, the diminution of water supplies and a population with changing tastes for food, no wonder China is looking around the world for sustainable supplies of food.

And where are they looking? Try Africa for starters. Nations that have arable land which is underdeveloped, relatively small populations and an appetite for an infusion of development funds. Step up, China (and places like Qatar, as well).

Cooperation agreements have proliferated between China and African nations which will help China to secure food supplies for some time to come. The unknown elements that exist with these agreements include how long it will be before the African countries decide that China is taking too much of their natural resources - in this case food. Or a change of African Government decides that previous deals were "unfair" and want to renegotiate new deals. And if China has done nothing to reverse its own land shortage, and therefore has to pay up, it could be held to ransom but that's a longer term story.

Africa is not the only continent that attracts China. In Latin America, both Argentina and Brazil in particular have attracted Beijing's attention, although there is a little more scepticism about land purchases by foreigners in both countries. On that continent you find flights going to all corners  of the region carrying Mainland Chinese on a mission. People ranging from the agricultural industry to their Bankers, singlehandedly searching out the best deals.

Of course it's not just food, it's other commodities too - minerals, high grade coal and, of course, oil. Do you ever wonder why China is not so enthusiastic about intervening in Iran or Iraq? They see a resolution to these issues as being better solved by diplomatic and political means - not by war, with which actually I agree, but their main eye is on the oil. Did you know that if car ownership in China ever reached the same levels per household as America, China would consume the total global annual oil supply to run them?

Just to keep itself fed, running, and earning money China is going to need to be everywhere. As a buyer of goods including raw materials and food, as a supplier of manufactured goods and services, as tourists, as consumers of products.

They will be doing business 24/7 on some continent or other. And it's going to involve the continents of Africa, the Middle East and Latin America like never before, ultimately creating a new trading region that will potentially put the West on the sidelines.

I think the title has moved on - a bloodless coup!

Hong Kong - A SAD City?

You have probably heard of SAD ... or Seasonal Affective Disorder to give it a proper name. It means basically that if there is a lack of sunshine people get depressed and I am sure you have noticed it yourselves. How much happier do the folk around you seem when the sun is out? Many countries because of their geographic position will have a higher percentage of SAD sufferers than others. If you are in virtual darkness for most of the winter because it just doesn't get light for many hours each day you can understand the depressed feeling it would create.  Others suffer a change in mood because of unusual weather patterns. Dubai today, for example has a lot of glum looking people around because it is - somewhat unusually for this time of  the year - raining. 

SAD, as the name suggests, is supposed to be a seasonal affliction, but I am getting a sense that in Hong Kong we are beginning to suffer from the syndrome on a regular, even annual rather than a seasonal basis.

Okay, maybe in Hong Kong I have to admit perhaps we do have a lot of things on our minds that could be distressing. Pollution is never pleasant. Striking dock workers, a recent phenomenon and by the way where did their Australian brethren come from to support them? (I wonder whether the Australian dockers union knew that some of their brothers had an all expenses paid trip to Hong Kong. And were trying to compare wages in Australia with those in Hong Kong - hello; real world!) There is the threat of a new Occupy Central movement in support of Universal Suffrage - this is going to be depressing for the many commuters who will have to thread their way past the debris of such a movement that seems to have been created to provide "grandstand" opportunities for the politicians involved. Perhaps the Government could consider hosing down the streets at night to keep them clean.

And then there is "Government" itself - that re-branded (but hard working) civil service that occupies the Governmental role, unelected and unremovable facing off against the elected  de facto and permanent opposition who operate with no accountability for their actions.

Okay, perhaps there is a reason to be depressed after all. But has nobody got any good news out there? If we do, it is getting increasingly hard to find.

How many times did I hear former Chief Secretary Anson Chan, in extolling the virtues of Hong Kong in her promotion of the city overseas and indeed within Hong Kong itself, point to one our greater strengths - a "can do" attitude. This has become a rather petulant "won't do" attitude now. And it's not doing our future any good at all.

I am in the Middle East at present, where I visit from time to time, and where the attitude to the future is just a little different - despite the rain!! There is a recognition here that the world is not sitting on its hands and doing nothing. Investments here and in Sub Saharan Africa and In Latin America are growing quickly, and those who sit on their hands too long will get pins and needles. We are undertaking an exercise that looks at the future of the world, and the impact it is likely to have on business here. Business that is going to be done by younger people using technology far in advance of anything we know about today. Few older people running companies today have any idea as to how their businesses will be done in 10, 15 or 30 years time, yet they have to start putting in place the framework that will enable them to face up to new competition. Where new market players without traditional baggage, will be fierce competitors.

This is the sort of thinking that Hong Kong needs. As a City, even, not just its individual corporations.

The business community doesn't speak up enough, I get told, because they fear being "branded" as uncaring or sympathisers with the present form of Government, or worse, the Chief Executive who has still not been given much of a chance lets be honest (no pun intended), then the media will have a field day saying that comments from the business community - yes, the same community that creates jobs - are self serving.

Is the business community really willing to push the Government to do something about pollution, and no it does not all come from China, even if there are costs involved? Heaven knows, we tried a few years ago. But how come Tokyo and Seoul managed to clear up their heavily polluted cities (and please don't tell me it's all because of the wind that we are where we are!)?

But if we carry on doing things the old way, and if we allow a bunch of disruptive and grubby tents to be erected in the business district of Hong Kong, and do nothing about the levels of pollution, then we will be a SAD city in more ways than one.

North Korea - How Near Is The Finger To The Button?

Much has been written about Li'l Kim in recent weeks as the world takes differing views on the seriousness of the threats coming out of North Korea.

 

He has certainly generated a lot of media attention, but as a good friend pointed out yesterday he must be a bit "miffed" about the death of Baroness Thatcher - seeing as how she has now taken pride of place in the media headlines.

What seems clear to most observers is that this recent spate of rhetoric is, as usual, less of a genuine threat. But the big difference this time is that no one really knows whose hand is hovering over the button marked "war".

Previous history might suggest that such threats were designed more to gain some sort of "pay-off", thereby enabling the country to stagger along from one famine to another. After all, no one really takes seriously the notion that North Korea has an armoury sufficient to pose a significant threat to the world at large, or over a sustained period of time. So, are the threats designed to make South Korea very uncomfortable? Sure. And China and probably Japan too and definitely the US. But, again, in general, troop movements in the North have not given rise to concerns that the rhetoric is likely to be supported by action.

To this unlearned observer there seems to be a power struggle going on behind the scenes. As I wrote a little over two years ago, in predicting the death of Kim senior, I suggested that Li'l Kim would fall foul of the generals and be ousted in a power struggle. He was young, untested, appeared to be uneducated and would not be able to stand up to a concerted effort by the generals to remove him.

Then, in a surprise to me anyway, Kim seemed to be gaining the upper hand when he purged his mentor, Ri Yong-ho, and sacked him from all his posts - including significantly, his position as Head of the Army. This happened some 9 months ago. But it now seems that this did not perhaps lead to the army heads into becoming more compliant, and heeding Kim's every word. And this, I believe, is why we are where are now. The Generals are revolting!! (You can take that comment how you like!)

Kim is having to pump up the stakes, create front page news, make people nervous and demonstrate through Kim-controlled media that he is a no nonsense leader, and he is focused on the "enemy" outside his borders. By doing that he reduces the internal tensions that seem to exist, as anyone who protests will be seen as unpatriotic.

But this is turning into a high stakes game of brinksmanship. But it is being played by a potentially impetuous juvenile whose finger may just slip and hit the wrong button! After all, where does he go from here? He has warned foreigners to leave South Korea because "he doesn't want foreigners to be harmed". That suggests he is prepared to bomb, or otherwise harm the ONLY country that could possibly help North Korea reach some sort of economic model for growth. Where's the logic in that? Of course, not a lot of what is happening is, in fact, logical.

He may test a nuclear weapon, but testing does not of itself achieve the goals established by the rhetoric. Thus his only last resort, in a power struggle where he has publicly set out his intentions, is to actually do something. If he fails - the Generals win, and I have no idea what that means for the country. Or there is a very high profile diplomatic solution, engineered probably by China which enables Kim to remove his hand from over the button without losing face. But that seems to be a long shot.

I am hopeful that it will all come to nothing, once again, but I am more nervous this time about the boy and the button!!

So It's Not Just Me Then ...

An article in today's edition of The Times carries the headline "Too chummy by half? Why we don't want to be on first-name terms".

It seems that I am not alone in my dislike of being addressed by my first name by someone I don't know. A survey by Ask Jeeves, a search engine, discovered that overall 55% of responders to the survey preferred to be addressed by their title when spoken to, written to or emailed by a stranger. An even higher percentage disliked this "personalised impersonality" when it came from someone who was cold calling on the telephone.

I don't know, at the time I included my distaste for the practice in a recent Blog I thought maybe it was just me. Or perhapse it's the reserved Brits who don't go for this feeling of "We're all mates together" syndrome, or "fake friendliness" as it is referred to in the article. And as the article concludes, "There is nothing wrong with friendliness but it just doesn't wash when it comes from someone you have never met or even spoken to".

Hear Hear!

 

Direct Property - Direct Sales - Direct Pain!

If you were hoping to find a “rant” regarding some recent experiences I have had about a company involved in direct sales of property, then I must disappoint you.

Following the posting of my Blog, the company took the trouble to get in touch, and to apologise for the experience I had with them. Also, and although not as a result of my Blog, I understand the person who made the telephone call to my PA is no longer with the company. A known problem apparently.

The company has expressed a concern that my Blog may damage their business, and have requested that I remove the post. I am flattered they think I have such influence over the business community; I don’t see it myself.

Nevertheless in view of the apology, the change of personnel, and in the interests of not wishing to stifle what is a legitimate and successful business, I have agreed to the request.  

 

What's In A Name?

Hong Kong, in common I guess with other countries, allows a system of personalising car number plates. In Hong Kong however it is a profit generator. The process allows you to apply for a number plate which is then auctioned. As the originator you rather hope that no one outbids you, but I suppose it can happen.

These personalised plates are in the English language but they seem to be largely unmonitored by the Transport Department – and can lead to some irritation or misinterpretation.

I used to have a sense of humour failure myself when I saw my family name used as a "number plate".

Only because people kept asking if it was my car. Now the only satisfaction I derive is that if someone is looking for me to exact revenge for some wrong doing I may have committed, they might plant a bomb in the wrong car first, thinking it was me!! 

But this lack of "thought" if you like when the Transport Department approves the names in the first place can lead to other rather more unfortunate consequences. For example, as my rather smutty mind was working overtime a few years ago, I commented in my Blog on the wisdom of allowing a car to be registered with the plate “Fuk Hing”. And now I see we are at it again. In the last list of personalised plates up for auction that I saw is one with the name of “Lady Kaka”. Puzzled?

Kaka, it is true, is the name of a Brazilian footballer so the name does exist in another part of the world, although it might be worth pointing out that the person concerned is male rather than a "Lady". And maybe the owner of the car that will bear the "Lady Kaka" plate has the nickname of Kaka. If so, again no real harm and I must point out that I certainly mean no disrespect to her in what follows. But in the more “slangy” end of the English language “kaka” means, politely, faeces. I am quite sure that the licensing authority really doesn't know what it is accepting sometimes, and why should it - English after all is not their first language.

While on the subject of names, and language, I had the privilege of attending a talk recently by the author Lynn Truss, who wrote a great book called “Eats Shoots and Leaves”. She is very entertaining and is known as the "Apostrophe Warrior" for her defence of punctuation and the comma in particular. If you have an interest in grammar – no matter how fleeting, the book is a wonderful refresher and reminds you of the correct use of punctuation marks.

I must say that one of the irritants in my life today is getting letters (yes, and emails) that are written badly. Now I am the first to admit I am not perfect, but some things I get to read, signed by people for whom English is their first language, should actually be taken out and burnt. The authors, I suspect, in every case know exactly what message they intended to convey, but they don’t put themselves in the position of the reader. With the result that the letters often contain misspelt ambiguity. In addition this obsession with using first names in a letter is, frankly, offensive and rude. If I am happy to be addressed as “Dear David..” in a letter or email, which more often than not I prefer, I will let you know. But don’t take the liberty yourself of assuming you are already my bosom buddy.

In fact, I spoke to Ms Truss after her talk and said that I had found her book a great “refresher course”. It was not supposed to be a “Teach Yourself Grammar” book, but it certainly put me back on track, after I had fallen off the rails by employing some bad practices. (Such as I still do in these Blogs).

In our modern technologically driven world, there is still room for politeness – and for using language that is easily understood by some of us dinosaurs. Even the younger generation will benefit. It is the sloppy use of language that leads to ambiguity, ridicule, and therefore to misunderstandings.

Change ... Or No Change. Part III.

I think I have come to the conclusion that my last Blog on this subject wandered too far off the original theme. Muddled thinking helps no one, and even if I knew what I was writing about, a re-read persuades me that others reading Part II might be getting lost.

I started down this road of Change or No Change on the premise that we may think the world around us generally is changing because of the amount of activity taking place. But the reality is we are not changing very much at all. You can be in an induced coma-like state for ten years and when you wake up although things like fashion will have changed, the world around us generally has not done so. To recap, I think this is generally true of Europe ... lots of activity and not much action. North and South America, in a similar position although North America does seem to be translating some of their actions into progress. Africa meanwhile remains in the grip of corruption, and nothing positive will change on that continent until tribal issues get resolved (difficult), and the countries are run by people who will attempt to eradicate corruption (unlikely, in my view).

But what of Asia; is there change here? On the face of it, of course yes. New leaders in China, Japan and South Korea for a start, but will they create real changes?

In the case of South Korea the evident change is their first ever woman President in a country known to be a male dominated society, but Ms Park's newly sworn in administration is already beginning to hit some speed bumps. Her Defence Minister nominee has quit, and she herself has been singled out for some pretty unpleasant rhetoric from the North Korean "boy" who is starting to walk down a dangerous path of brinksmanship that might go badly wrong. Of course it seems that Ms Park's relatively narrow victory in the December election was largely due to the vote from the older members of the Korean population who remembered her Father. A military dictator, who was assasinated in 1979, was credited with growing the Korean economy but disliked for his policy of crushing dissent and preventing democratic development. One wonders how much of the father has rubbed off on the daughter.

Japan has returned to a former leader who seems to be promising to do all the things he promised to do previously as Prime Minister - but he only lasted a year on that occasion. The rather hawkish and nationalistic Mr. Abe might wish to leave more of a mark this time - and I am not sure that the consequences will be good for North Asia, or the Japanese economy that remains in recession.

China has now formally had its change of leadership. Some people I speak to are clearly unconvinced about China and what the new leaders will bring, but initial signs seem relatively positive. As with many developing economies, corruption has plagued China for years but the appointment of the no nonsense Wang Qishan to the role of Secretary of the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection might bring about some major changes in that area. The new President Xi Jinping, and new Premier Li Keqiang, at 59 and 57 years of age respectively could make some significant changes to China as it continues the process of emerging into the world, but it's not going to be easy. Much remains to be done, although I get a real sense that the new leaders are serious about doing what is necessary to create a "fair and just society" as Premier Li said the other day.

But change takes time. That is why it often appears that there has been no change. Who actually remembers the Kyoto Protocol on Climate change? Did anything substantive really come out of that? I am sure that we all remember the Basel rules for financial institutions. After many iterations of the rules, countries seemed to make up their own minds as to whether they would adopt them or not. Therefore, I would argue, why do we spend so much time, effort and indeed money on debating issues of "change". At the end of the day the changes that take place as a result of the activity are - little or no change.

Change ... Or No Change. Part II.

... as I was saying, sort of, are things around the world changing due to there being a lot of apparent activity, or does that activity result in nothing more than a gentle re-shuffle? As a result little moves too far away from where it started? 

In Part I, I had a quick look at the Middle East and Europe, of which the latter region in particular is looking clearly unwell ... but now if we hop the pond to the USA, perhaps we do have some real change. Okay we have had the re-election of President Obama so no change there then, but what about the economy? 

Fiscal cliff or no fiscal cliff, here we do have a country of which one might say the shoots of spring are beginning to show. Not consistently across the piece perhaps, but there are some positive signs that I find encouraging. Having said that, as the USA was the source of the Global Financial Crisis I suppose one should expect the earliest afflicted to have the earliest signs of the virus leaving. First in, first out. 

Anyway, America's unemployment level is down which is a good change, corporate results are selectively doing well - especially in the financial arena, and Warren Buffet has bought US household name Heinz. All signs that corporate America is raising its head positively. Hopefully it will last, because whether we like it or not, what happens in the USA still has an impact on other parts of the world. But lurking in the corner remains the ever present ultimate threat of inflation once interest rates start to rise, and that could be a harder task to manage. But overall, clearly here is a case where some of the activity that has taken place has resulted in some actual positive change.

Is Latin America changing? I am not sure it is much. Certainly Brazil is continuing to progress and Chile has been quiet and steady for quite a few years now. Argentina remains difficult, as do other areas of Latin America. And although nothing much stands out, look at the amount of commercial activity in the area of acquisitions being made by Chinese and Middle Eastern companies, as well as sovereign wealth funds. With the death of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez perhaps there is some scope for real change, in that country anyway, but much will depend on who gets elected - hopefully in free and fair elections. (Unlikely say some of my Venezuelan commentators)!

To Africa, and what can one say about leaders with very dubious human rights records being elected (Kenya), a region providing a fertile breeding and training ground for terrorist groups (Somalia and Mali). A region steeped in poverty where inward investments are chanelled to the few and ignore the mass (Most places). Where investments from China tend to provide jobs for imported Chinese labour and the output, be it agricultural products or minerals, go to satisfy the needs of China leaving little behind in the host country. Nothing wrong with that strategy from a Chinese perspective - rather clever in fact, but will it be allowed to last? Lots of activity bringing about unwanted change in many cases.

But look, when I started on this current tour d'horizon which is deliberately brief and probably considered to be superficially generalist, (and currently missing Asia - of which more later), I came to realise that it does not address some fundamental issues that impact all of us. The most important of which, to me anyway, is the future.

If the suggestion I am making through the title of these two pieces is at least on the right lines, that despite all the apparent activity going on around the world there is in fact little change coming out of that activity, is it always going to be that way?

Don't get me wrong - there has been phenomenal change particularly in certain areas of technology, medicine, manufacturing processes and others. But there are also negative changes taking place in food and water supplies, and population growth. Putting a strain on our limited resources.

So I wonder whether the political and economic structures of the world today, such as they are, can actually cope with these changes? Are companies, those generators of employment and wealth, considering where they need to be in 20 or 50 years time to remain competitive? Do we in fact run around re-arranging the deckchairs on the Titanic believing that the traditional ways in which we do things today are going to prevail, or are they going to be swallowed up by newcomers who think and do things differently? It is all very well talking about the way things "should be done", but the new competitors will do things differently whether you like it or not. And what will be the role and impact of governments who think in terms of four and five year election cycles? Will those other political/leadership structures that exist elsewhere actually provide a different, and maybe more successful - model from the one we grew up with?

There are some really interesting studies out there today. Information that is readily available from a variety of sources but put together in one place so you can see almost at a glance where the problems and the opportunities exist. To enable you to consider the future, and think about how you can remain competitive.

But more of that - and Asia - in the third and concluding part.