Eldon-Online

It's Official - I AM Weird!

Well of course I always thought there was something odd about me. Others naturally spotted it a long time ago, and most were kind enough not to mention it to me directly, but now I have confirmation. I guess it's a bit like bringing closure to an awkward situation - and it's a bit of a relief really, to get the monkey off my back.

The cause of the classification? I have "chosen" not to sign up for Facebook and apparently devotees of Facebook have decided that anyone who abstains from joining the "social networking" site should be "filed under weird"! And before you jump to conclusions yes, despite my age, I am technically competent enough to sign up if I want to - but I choose for the time being not to do so.

Frankly I find Facebook and other so called social networks to be more anti-social networks myself. People seem to spend hours closeted away with any number of iPads, tablets, iPhones or laptops "talking" to or intruding upon people who have signed up as "friends", and looking at a range of photographs ranging, I suppose, from the truly artistic to the nauseatingly embarrassing. And I suspect more working hours are lost in a number of countries, despite the attempt by corporations to restrict the use of such sites during working hours, by facebookers and tweeters who have become hooked on these networks. And you only have to sit in any eatery (for want of a better word) to discover tables of people busily engaged in looking at small screens.

Whatever happened to the art of conversation for goodness sake?

The concept of being "weird", unfortunately, has been reinforced by the fact that neither the Norwegian mass-murderer Anders Breivik nor the recent killer of 12 people in a Colorado cinema, James Holmes, were on Facebook. So that proves it then!!

The British newspaper The Observer also highlighted those words of wisdom from Facebook founder (and now a less wealthy billionaire than he was at the time of flotation of the company), Mark Zuckenberg who apparently declared that "...anyone who prizes privacy over beloging to a social network is not only pretentious but dodgy". No self-interest there!!

Actually, I like my privacy and respect the wishes of those other human beings who have a similar desire, but I fear that at some stage I am going to have to succumb to something in the long term - even if it is not Facebook.

I asked my elder son a year ago about how I would communicate with my first grandaughter when she became a teenager (some years to go yet), if she grew up on a diet of "social networks", and I was not on Facebook. Without hesitation he said, "how you communicate with her in ten years time has not been invented yet". Scary thought, but quite probably true.

But having Facebook rammed down your throat now is becoming increasingly alarming. I am receiving more and more message from corporations who are saying - if you want to get full details of this or that you can read it on our Facebook page - but of course you have to sign up!! Well, no, in that case I don't want to get full details of something if that is way I am going to have to get it with no alternative choice - I will do without. Perhaps it's short-sighted but then I can be quite stubborn. 

It's already bad enough being bombarded by computer driven telephone calls offering you this or that service, and you take the darned call because you don't recognise the number, and are concerned it might be something important.

So, if that means I am on my way out - then I should subside gently into the elephants graveyard and spend my remaining years having real conversations with real people face to face in the real world, but still reading newspapers, magazines and the occasional book on my iPad! Weird!

What A Difference A Year Makes.

"...and there's a more worrying thing going on in London right now. It's you Brits. What's happened to this grumpy national identity? All this smiling is getting annoying." 

(Good-natured comment from Australian restaurant owner in London on the Olympics.)

Who would have believed it? From the London riots of August 2011 to the London Olympics of August 2012, what a difference!

There were plenty of naysayers who opined that the Olympics in London would be a disaster. They ranged, of course, from the inappropriately critical Mitt Romney who provided London Mayor Boris Johnson with yet another opportunity to enhance his own reputation with the British public, to the man in the street in the UK who until recently appeared to be disenchanted with the whole idea.

Not today! With the closing ceremony only minutes away as I write (no, not here for the ceremony, but a good view from television!) the unbiased view as far as I can tell is that the games have been a success - without serious qualification. Ticket problems? Yes - some. Empty seats - yes but only at the beginning as the "Olympic Family" were taken to task for not attending events for which they had been allocated seats. Bad attitudes? Nowhere in sight.

London's transport system defied the odds. It worked!! Yes, it was very crowded at times and I can certainly testify to that, but it didn't break down! A game of sardines would have been really appropriate.

The security arrangements - jeopardised by the failure of a privately enlisted security firm to live up to their contract - but saved by members of the British armed forces who stepped in with good humour and efficiency, and earned the respect and support of everyone.

The "volunteers" particularly have received plaudits from every quarter for their humour and their willingness to help visitors.

And the spectators, despite their obvious bias towards British athletes ("...very un-British", as one of my neighbours said), have been enthusiastic at all sports venues - witness the turn out this morning for the Marathon where British hopes were more aspirational than real - with spectators 10 deep in places cheering just anyone who went past.

And the smiles? Well - they have really been evident. It helps because Britain has done well of course, with a record haul of medals. And I am sure they are partly because most of the Olympics have been held during the two weeks of summer they have just had! The start was a bit wet - and the close might see some rain, and the rest of next week is forecast more rain - but the last two weeks..?

Yes, Britain welcomed its visitors well.

But what now ...

I have never heard so much community spirit being expressed amongst people here, but can it be maintained?

And if you had told me that by 2012 the Monarchy would be respected, and even perceived to have a "human" side, I would not have believed you. But the wedding last year of Prince William and Kate Middleton, the outpouring of support for HM The Queen's Jubilee this year, and then her participation in the opening ceremony of the Olympics has certainly changed opinions.

Behind the beaming Brits at present - who by the way will continue to smile and provide support as the Paralympics get under way in a couple of weeks - is there something more sinister lurking? Will the smiles last?

The economy is not in wonderful shape, just like the rest of Europe, and unless there have been some great deals achieved by British companies during the last two week, nothing much has changed. The Americans are continuing to beat up the British banks, leaving a reputational issue out there, but frankly I think they may have overcooked it this time and people in Britain are getting pretty fed up with what appears to be posturing and electioneering by Americans with an eye on internal political positions.

Unemployment remains an issue in Britain, and there is no easy answer to that - you can't build Olympic venues all the time to provide employment.

The "trick" therefore, must be to harness the current good will, and provide some momentum and incentives to people who can create employment. I know that suggesting tax breaks is not welcomed generally in Britain today, but if they are well directed and not open to abuse they can create new opportunities. And I often wonder what the reaction would be to the abolition of death duties (inheritance tax) in Britain. I am sure that it would encourage wealth to be brought back into the country. If you have paid taxes all your life and met your obligations to the community, it just seems totally unfair that you should not be allowed to pass on your remaining wealth to your family, rather than having to hand 40% of it to the Government with no say over how it is used.

There is much to be done, and many lessons to be learnt for other countries out of the positive changes that have taken place in London over 12 months. Let's not waste them.

 

Illegal Structures - Much Ado About Nothing?

There can't be much news around these days in Hong Kong. Like a small terrier with an old rag, there are certain elements in the media and amongst certain parts of the populace who just can't let go of some issues, and illegal structures are among them.

When you have building regulations that appear to be somewhat outdated, why don't you just modernise them and provide an "amnesty" to whoever's illegal bits fall within the new code? That said, given the quality of some of our legislators, I imagine they would not pass any new regulations easily even if they made perfect sense - just so they could make a point.

(Just as an aside, we seem to have a sector of the public who think that "democracy" is portrayed by their view alone, and who get very agitated if the majority disagree with them).

So, we have had "illegal structuritis" galore which, together with apparent temporary amnesia in some senior quarters, has created a potent combination in our City for the media and "politicians". A City where we seem to spend more time debating these issues than getting on with improving the lot of our citizens, and creating a more professional external persona to attract inward investors.

Look. Asia in general has a slowing economy. We are not immune from the Western-troubles, which are beginning to filter through to Asia now, and we need to focus in keeping ahead of the game.

Britain, meanwhile, as beleaguered as the rest in Europe ( well okay, it's better than some) is coping with an Olympics, has dealt with a Jubliee for Her Majesty, and has even had some sunshine recently. Critics of the UK Government are plenty, to be expected I guess because it is a proper democracy - but they are still looking for ways to do business.

The point being, coming back to where I started, that we should of course investigate major breaches in behaviour - "illegal structures" that are truly beyond the pale, or have been so big as to have been covered up. Or where there is evidence that people have not genuinely just had a memory lapse over something they would have considered relatively trivial. We really have to keep going forwards, not continuously back-tracking over old news.

But if it makes you feel better, let me regale you with a couple of tales I have recently come across. The first concerns a legal structure and a loss of memory ... apparently. It seems that a local Councillor in Britain was against the introduction of wind turbines in his district, neatly ignoring the fact that he was putting an 88m monster on his own land. Once challenged, he said he didn't know anything about it - but then he remembered. (Sounds familiar?) In formulating his defence, he said at the time he was originally asked about the matter he was confused because he had also been talking about a 53m turbine somewhere else on his land!! He is still, of course, a Councillor.

And just in case you wonder how information sometimes goes "missing", there is also the tale of the police in one London Borough who have been searching for some important documents. Finding them might shed some light on how hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers money had been wasted on a job creation scheme. It was not the first time in that same London Borough, that police had also been searching for documents in relation to other failed schemes. Presumably because there is some large measure of doubt that the money had been used properly?

Fast forward to today, and it has been discovered that there are many sacks of old documents in the basement of the Borough's Town Hall, previously unrevealed. Containing the offending documents perhaps? But, guess what. The Council has declared that these sacks will need to be destroyed on health and safety grounds because the basement is contaminated with asbestos. The asbestos problem has been known about since 1984! Sounds as if it is more than the basement that is contaminated!!

So, perhaps Hong Kong's not so bad after all then, is it?

Let me be clear! I write this not in support of any particular individual, but more as a request that we stop messing about with the minutiae, pick on the major issues to be dealt with, and for goodness sake let's concentrate on keeping Hong Kong afloat and ahead.

Olympic Gold Hangover

What is it about the Brits and Booze?

I enjoy a drink (of alcohol) as many others do who are so permitted. And seeing as we are into confessions, I have never taken drugs - unless prescribed, nor have I smoked - anything! Which I suppose in today's world makes me a bit of a wimp, but hey, it is my preference and I am happy with it. And I don't have to contend with "peer pressure".

But here we are in the middle of the Olympic games (I am NOT in the UK - yet), and already the headlines are about the masterful, seriously he is, cyclist Mr Wiggins - The British winner of the Tour de France winner and now with his Olympic Gold Medal, and a young man, Peter Wilson, who had a surprising but hard earned Gold medal in trap shooting, both talking about going off and getting drunk. Surely, if they felt the need to say something, why couldn't they just say they were going for a drink to celebrate rather than glorifying what is already a recognised major problem in Britain with young people particularly, and binge drinking?

To follow up on the "misdeeds" of Wiggo, we were then subsequently regaled with a blow by blow commentary in the newspapers of tweets from the man himself as he sank slowly into drunken oblivion! Call me a spoilsport if you like, but look, if people want to get drunk that's their private business not mine, nor frankly should it be anyone else's, but I think the example it sets to others is appalling. It says something about the culture of a country when this behaviour becomes not only front page news, but almost a "badge of honour". 

Just had to get that off my chest!

Silly and Serious

Almost sounds like a comedy act doesn't it? Like Morcambe and Wise or Zig and Zag ...

Actually I had started off intending to write something serious about North Korea but before I had started I came across a couple of things that made me smile, so I thought I might as well include them before the more serious commentary.

It's odd what people find amusing, which tends to make me very odd as I derive amusement from the silliest things. Like today's South China Morning Post headline that read "Japanese paper mill told to fold". Actually the story that followed was quite serious, but my initial reaction was that some far-sighted Japanese bosses had decided that ready-made origami had a market and they were changing their production lines in their paper mill. (Please don't make me explain origami -  it takes away the amusement!) 

Perhaps that made my senses a little more alert than usual, because I then came across an article in the Financial Times today (actually, I am really trying to demonstrate that I read more than one newspaper), again a serious piece and well written about the Free Syrian Army wondering why no one from the West will help them stop the massacre after they had helped Libya. Fair point, but given the topic and with absolutely no disrespect intended to the journalist involved I thought it just mildly ironic that it was written by a Professor Slaughter.

I know!!

Which only goes to confirm a point I stole from someone else a while back and have used before, that I have never really grown up but have just learnt how to behave in public; at least most of the time. 

So from Silly to Serious - or is it?

In December 2010 at an Economist function in Hong Kong, (The World in 2011), I had "predicted" the death of Kim Jong Il. An event that somewhat scarily came true in December 2011. I went on to say in 2010, and indeed have since repeated it, that I thought the young, apparently uneducated and obviously pictorially overweight Junior Leader or Dear Succesor would be gobbled up by the generals in no time at all. 

If I have to eat my words - so be it, but recent events do seem to be proving me wrong. I must say that the "ousting" of General Ri Yong Ho suggests to this unlearned watcher that something else is going on in the background. The Young 'Un appears to be behaving in a populist (was it ever thus), but somewhat naively "man of the people" role. Appealing to the younger generation, and now being seen in public with a young wife. But to counter that, North Korea is still belligerent in the case of the South.

I am an old cynic, and take nothing at face value until I can establish a degree of certainty, which is hard to do out of the Hermit Kingdom. But firstly, I have to believe at present that someone else is pulling the strings. If everything we have heard so far about the young Kim's intelligence is true, then surely he could not have masterminded the changes that have happened. And who is behind the popular "street level", sort of Disney-like image - Kim's idea? If it is then we have all been misled about his intelligence, not to say cunning.

If there is a puppet master involved, how did he (or she?) become so powerful to have outflanked the General? Is there a greater "plot" involved, designed to make Kim the more acceptable face of a despotic regime, so he can eventually emerge blinking into the sunlight and join at least some of the rest of the world? If so, that's a high risk strategy, but it might prevent the Kim family being murdered for the sins of their ancestors for having kept the North Koreans bottled up in poverty, starvation and misinformation for the last 60 years. Or is the master planner even stronger and bolder than this, planning for Kim to be all sweetness to the outside world, saying a few encouraging words to the world at large, and allowing more aid to be provided in return for a genuine and commensurate reduction in war-mongering, and for him to then leave the country with his family, with a reasonable chance of protection and thus save his skin?

The multi million dollar question - who would we get then?

Silly, or Serious? I wish I knew, but the removal of one more dangerous dictator can surely only be a good thing.