- FIFA is an absolute case study in corruption, official denial, and the dangers of monopolies.
- The UK has pledged $1.5 billion to India to help it meet the Millennium Development Goals. India has in turn pledged $5 billion to help African countries meet the MDGs. Andy Sumner argues that this form of ‘subcontracted aid’ may be a good thing.
- Simplicity Collective looks like a great like-minded blog – thanks Sharon.
- This week on 5am baby duty I’ve been enjoying All watched over by machines of loving grace on iPlayer. It’s a sociology series from Adam Curtis, sort of doing for the internet what Neil Postman did for television. It’s intelligent television (something Postman argued wasn’t possible) and well worth catching, even if it’s sometimes wrong.
The Earthbound Report 
Well I’m glad I only wasted 3:49 on that silly documentary trailer. Film school grads and sociologists apparently have forgotten that ‘Brave New World’ has been done. And done far better.
What I learned this week, and learned from Jeremy, is that rules are for others. 😉
Sorry you feel that way. But who are you and why are you here exactly?
And, re India, I argued that it’s a little odd that a country that is a major economic power house, that has nuclear weapons and a space programme, that has invested massively in the British economy and, above all, is raising millions out of poverty is the best place for our aid. I sense a touch of neo-colonialism here – or perhaps it’s hope of trade benefits. And recent experience doesn’t look too good. (See this)
Hi Robin! Although I can’t remember where I read it, I understand Tata (quite ironic that moniker) Steel is closing a couple or so UK steel plants. Am I mistaken?
It seems the Indian method of investment through ownership may make more financial sense.
No, you’re not mistaken. There’s a worrying (and controversial) story lurking here but I don’t think this is the place to review it in detail. Briefly, it’s been suggested that, by closing these (efficient) UK plants, Tata makes money by saving EU “carbon allowances”. Then, it ‘s claimed, Tata can expand steel production in India where, by replacing inefficient plant, it gets money under the UN “Clean Development Mechanism”.
Another result is that the UK’s CO2 emissions are reduced (hurray). But India’s are increased (boo).
Possibly, and I’ve argued repeatedly that UK emissions shouldn’t be ‘exported’ in this way. But this doesn’t have anything to do with the aid question.
Again, we’re in violent agreement about that – it’s ridiculous. If true that is – I think Tata has denied the story.
But surely there is a connection with aid? It seems (shall we say?) a bit odd that we’re giving aid to a country that is a major economic and industrial power, employing thousands of people in the UK and able to spend (and make) vast sums by moving massive industries around the world as indicated above.
And how does it make sense for the impoverished UK to be giving £1.3 billion in aid to a country that can afford buy carrier-based fighter jets from Russia (part of a $1.5 billion deal for aircraft for an ex-Russian carrier being refitted in Russia)? Story here.
One hour from now, 67 years ago we landed in Normandy. Lest we forget.