This all started a little over a week ago with ‘Delete their asses’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/01/14/delete-their-asses/), I quoted the BBC who gave us “Despite our efforts, every year we do register a very small number of fraudulent transactions”. Now CBC gives us (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/organized-crime-groups-behind-gta-home-sales-mortgages-without-owners-knowledge-1.6719978) With the headline ‘How organised crime has mortgaged or sold at least 30 GTA homes without owners’ knowledge’ This does not invalidate the quote “we do register a very small number of fraudulent transactions”, yet I believe that they were already aware and at least 30 is not a very small number, as I personally see it, it is the use of the word ‘very’. You see, the issue is a lot larger than they make it out to be. Organised crime is not that intelligent (unless they have Filofaxes, making them very organised crime), what does happen is that some innovative scoundrel with a law degree, or perhaps even an intelligent law student who passed his Real Property is equivalent and a few other parts and then he or she realises that there is a gap, a loophole and whatever happens in Canada, in the UK will also optionally happen in Australia and New Zealand. I stated on the 14th of January that something had to be done yesterday, Now CBC shows us that something is essential to be done and it should have been done last year.
A larger review of housing and the need to create legal barricades, so that people can go on vacation knowing that they can go on vacation and when they get home their house will still be theirs. I still believe that a step towards mandatory actuary services could become a first step. Banks might add actuaries and add safety services and there could be a chance that when you go to the bank for a mortgage, they will insist on THEIR actuary services reducing the chance that they see their money gone on a false mortgage. I am not stating that this will be the case, but it could be the case. You see, the quote “CBC Toronto has learned that a handful of organised crime groups are behind these real-estate frauds — in which at least 30 homes in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) have either been sold or mortgaged without the real owners’ knowledge” shows these 30 events around Toronto, implying that Canada has a decent amount more of these cases. So how many happened in the UK, how many will Australia have? The people behind it would spread the setting as much as possible getting a much greater amount of profit. What is clear that 30 in Toronto is merely the tip of the iceberg and something needs to be done.
Because in the end, it will never rain when it pours, the question is will you in the end have a roof to shield you from that?
I saw the news earlier, but I had to consider a few things, one of them not so really pro-Turkey, another set to the stage of me wondering what was going on. It all started with the BBC article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64360528) where we are given ‘Turkey condemns ‘vile’ Sweden Quran-burning protest’, and as I was wondering what was going on I saw “Rasmus Paludan, a politician from the far-right Stram Kurs”, it made me wonder what was needed. And then it occurred to me, why was Turkey the only one protesting? What if Egypt, the UAE, Iraq, optionally Iran, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Saudi Arabia, Oman and Turkey all combined their protest? What if the EU had to deal with retributions from the OPEC nations closing the oil tap a little (500K barrels a day less for the EU), the other nations stopping import of Danish and Swedish goods? Would that wake them up? We might think that a person like Rasmus Paludan can insult islam again and again, but why allow it? We have rules and laws on religious prosecution, religious discrimination and should it end there? What if we make anti religious protests that continue to insult a religion (like burning a Quran) as well. Perhaps we need to state that they need to burn bibles as well, how does that go over?
I cannot claim that I have any solution here, but the levels of inactions that I see against Rasmus Paludan are getting out of hand. As such I think inaction becomes a larger issue and there is actually no real option, so what happens when the EU gets a 10% fuel rise, does that wake them up? I do not care what religion you like, and what religion you hate, but if you go as far as openly insulting that religion things get out of hand and it becomes time to act, inaction is no longer acceptable. If you allow a chaos and hatred seeder like Rasmus Paludan to continue, I reckon you get whatever is coming to you. I personally believe that when civility goes missing to this degree nations have failed on several levels. That whilst we need to realise that Sweden has 5%-10% Muslims, that is up to a million, Denmark has roughly the same percentage size, in numbers it is about half that size, but the population of Denmark is about 50% smaller. When you go out to insult that size of a population there needs to be consequences and even as people like Rasmus Paludan think that it is merely up to 10%, so that they can easily win such fights, they need to consider that there is a larger consequence and that needs to be shown to that kind of people and I reckon that Turkey alone cannot do that, it might block NATO access for Sweden, but a larger lesson needs to be taught and that is where OPEC comes in, where the bulk of its population is Muslim, so what happens when the tap is closed even just a little? For Sweden with its shortages it might become disastrous quickly, I am not sure about Denmark at present.
Do we need to act? Yes, we all need to act. We cannot let people like Rasmus Paludan to spread hatred to the degree they do, the consequences are too dire to consider, as such I reckon it is time to fight such hatred by letting these nations be overwhelmed by shortages and make sure that everyone knows WHY this was done. You see if you hate muslims THAT much, you can get the oil from Russia or Venezuela or America. But that gets you into other deep waters, does it not? No matter how it plays out, we are too far beyond the levels of inaction we see now and consider that OPEC could close the tap by 1 million barrels of oil a day, or more. What does that give you? Not much and until summer that impact might end up being disastrous.
Yes, we do that at times. I use different ways, but the nightmare that formed in my mind is one that I wasn’t ready for and it shaped in one dream. You see, in intelligence there is a saying. If you want to sell a lie, cover it in truth. This is true for them and it is also true for story writers. Getting the audience invested in the story requires a stage where they can relate to and whatever truths they are given, the ones they an verify will work a lot quicker for the story.
So it started with the second thing I heard, but to each its place. The first thing I saw, source not recalled, mainly because I did not give it any value was “The US and UK are supporting Ukraine to stay in the war, but not enough to win” I cannot say who or why and I do not think it is true, but it stayed in the back of my mind. It was the second part that gave it a swing. The statement comes from a Dutchman named Rob de Wijk. He is the founder of The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies (HCSS). He stated “Hopefully unfounded wishful thinking about Ukraine’s chances will give way to more realism. This is necessary because the West faces a tremendous dilemma: the worse Ukraine gets, the greater the chance that NATO countries will become increasingly involved in the war. The risk of a direct confrontation with NATO is also increasing. The heavy weapons that the NATO countries will then need limit the possibilities of supplying them to Ukraine now. It is now forcing Western leaders to consider how to end this war quickly.” That started the rollercoaster. You see Russia and its Kremlin people have a new stage. With the oligarchs mostly gone and loads of their fortunes now confiscated, the sugar daddies of the Kremlin are falling away. It leaves these people with whatever they have and that is not much, or it is massively below what they are used to. Their defence is still falling short, their military aren’t hacking it and local problems are increasing.
So there we have greed driven Kremlinski’s and their need for more money, so how long until some of them strike a much larger deal with the Russian Mafia? The Russian mafia gets all kinds of support, in exchange for money and creation of Chaos all over the America’s and Europe. I reckon we can wait for that ghost to hit the brains of too many people. Now that is not enough, you see we need a plan to strike back and there I remembered a book by John Gardner called Golgotha, it was also released as the last trump around 1980. I believe that is where the scriptwriters from the New Avengers (Steed, Gambit and Purdey) with the second episode being House of Cards. That and Golgotha gives a new approach to sleepers. Added are within the team a seminole, the comm members are seminole. They are mostly outside of the team and their Mikasuki members are un-hackable. Not unlike the Navajo’s in WW2. But the larger setting is that these are 6 teams. One in the US, one in Canada, one in the UK and the other three all over Europe. They are facing Russians who are blackmailing all kinds of industry giants and governmental officials. Housing scams, grifting the rich and connected and blackmailing them in the process.
A setting where we have a counter, a Cheyenne approach to hit and run, something the Russian mafia has never faced and their orders are simple. Kill all Russians and destroy everything they have. A new lever of John Wick, but a little more realistic and within their actions we see Russian death and mayhem. I reckon that the first studio picking up this idea will have a nice sweet advantage. Anyway there is a little more but not much. I got all these elements in mere hours (whilst I was snoring like a sawmill).
Consider that nightmare whilst you leave your house untended for the day.
Before I connect to the story of today which BBC gives us is something from my past. In the 80’s I learned that there are 4 basic stances. Attack, defend, avoid and evade. The last two are not the same. In one we deflect here the attacker goes in the other we avoid where the opponent is expecting to be. It helped me in many of the stages I ever faced. It is the basic of being, that is how I saw it anyway. So these matters were in my mind when an article hit my eyes. It was ‘US-China chip war: America is winning’ (at. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-64143602), are they? Really?
You see the article gives us “These tiny fragments of silicon are at the heart of a $500bn industry that is expected to double by 2030. And whoever controls the supply chains – a tangled network of companies and countries that make the chips – holds the key to being an unrivalled superpower.” I cannot disagree, but the setting is folly. You see for the most in the last 30 years that industry tried to be everywhere and there is a stage where we see them in many places. But is that a good thing, or can that truly be pushed everywhere? Think of it, think of the stage from let’s say 1996 and now 2023. Electronics got to drown everything else.
Now lets look at the simple image below
It is an abacus, and it comes from Persia about 600BC, there is enough speculation that they got it from somewhere else and that story goes back to the age of Mesopotamia. What is important is that a person truly versatile in this device can get to a result faster than anyone with a calculator and there is the solution, or perhaps the direction of the solution. The second strap is not what is out today, but what was out yesterday. In the older days we had Microsoft laptops, they outgrew their usefulness, or so that was what Microsoft wanted us to believe. The laptops were too slow, but guess what, those laptops became decently powerful Unix/Linux servers and that was a mere 10 years ago. The old PS3 could be broken into a Linux system, which was surprisingly powerful. They got a new lease on life and that is what we need to do, we need to consider other directions. Yes we see all the bla bla bla on AI and on what a powerful system can do, but guess what? AI does not exist. Machine learning does and deeper machine learning exists too and they are awesome. AI needs a lot more and these parts do not yet exist. In the first a real quantum computer is required and IBM is the closest to getting one. Once they get a handle on shallow circuits and the power is upped, that is when the system exists where a real AI could be, the second part is still a decade (at least) away. A Dutch physicist did find the Ypsilon particle and that is essential to get the shallow circuit truly going, but it is a decade away. You see chips are binary. It is either yer or no and an AI needs the Ypsilon particle. It is Yes, No, Neither or Both and these last two will evolve systems into closer to true AI and we are not there yet. So how does it all fill together?
That is the core and we see part of that with “The manufacture of semiconductors is complex, specialist and deeply integrated. An iPhone has chips that are designed in the US, manufactured in Taiwan, Japan or South Korea, then assembled in China. India, which is investing more in the industry, could play a bigger role in the future.” This is true, or at least it sounds true, but the real issue is what can be replaced with a chip? You think it is ludicrous, but is it? Do we need them? It is a serious question. You see any new technology is derived from the limits of others and as power is more and more an issue in many places, the idea of exploring the field of mechanical computer is not the craziest. What did we overlook? What did we reject because an American told us that their chip was better? They did it before with VHS, Betamax was highly superior, but VHS had the numbers, it is the only reason they won. So what else did we reject? If an abacus can equal a person with a calculator. A system with a time advantage of 3000 years, what else is possible? We forget to look behind us (which is where I found billions in IP) what else is there and what else could be done? And this is not done overnight, this will take years, decades perhaps but it would result in a new technology stream, one not founded on electronics and guess what, when the power falls away, so do your chips. So is my idea weird? Yes. Is it preposterous? Perhaps. Is it invalid? No! There is enough evidence all over the field and seeking replacement systems is not the weirdest idea, not in this day and age.
Consider one other system, in the old days (a little past WW2) someone invented the Knijpkap (squeeze cat) the torch had a small dynamo inside which sounded like a purring cat when operated.
The interesting part is that it needed no battery. So how many torches do you know that have no battery? What happens when batteries are not available? We can add a recharging battery to hold that power, or not. But one device completely without battery. So what happens when we adjust this to other means? These are two simple applications, now consider one where whomever invents it reuses a mechanical computer to take the load away (and revenue) for electronic ones? That will be the exercise and it is not an easy one. It takes one with serious brains and a decade at their disposal. But I reckon the spoils will be so worth it in the end.
The Dutch NOS is opening a storm-gate with the article (at https://nos.nl/l/2459559) stating that there will be a power shortage by 2030. Personally I think that he is overly optimistic. I would reckon that clear shortages will be visible no later than 2027 in the Netherlands. The UK will start showing these shortages no later than Q3 2024 and there are several nations in that same setting. The US was already showing them last year, not to a large degree, but enough to get noticed in California and Texas. It will get worse soon enough. I reckon that it will be horrid to live in these places the coming summer. With millions of AC units draining whatever power there is, the stage for these two places will not be a joyous one. I stated that danger in ‘Time as a factor’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2022/05/15/time-as-a-factor/) in may last year and several other articles over the two years preceding that. There was (optionally is) a solution and for that they all needed Elon Musk, but governments are not that intelligent. Instead of catering to Elon Musk, they catered to his anger and now the solution will come at premium price. His battery would have been able to decrease the pressure by well over 10%-20% in 2018 when I first made mention of it. But the overpaid civil servants kept on being inactive and that saving is now lost to them.
There still is an option for several places, but it will take immediate action, places like Texas and California, as well as the UK, France and Italy will have to act NOW to get something done, because Elon is not storing these batteries and when they have to produce 15-35 million batteries, they can sell at a premium but that will set you back so many billions, that the loss of Twitter is nothing more than a little blip on the radar. And there was a solution, but you all had to make fun of him, cater to fake news and cater to BS settings all whilst Jack Dorsey was given a ‘do not touch’ voucher. So how much can Jack Dorsey add? I’ll tell you nothing and now that you need Elon Musk, what will you do? Bully him a bit more? Consider that when these batteries go to India, Saudi Arabia, UAE and a few other places BEFORE they go to Texas and California. And when you realise that a place like Texas will need close to 1,000,000 Power walls at $17,000 each, the math becomes increasingly easy and it might not be enough. In that California would need in access of 3,000,000 walls. And that is before the added wind and solar collectors are added. One simple setting to overcome the loss of Twitter. And lets be clear, he has no obligation to any of you. He can charge premium prices, it is HIS right to do so. Sucks to be you now, does it not?
And in that setting Texans might still forgo power for 16% of the day when they need power for their AC, a stage that was clear in play since BEFORE 2018. All this before some might realise that a place like London will need well over 1,000,000 power-walls. The numbers start adding up and Tesla has the IP everyone needs. So how will you cater to that? Like a bully or will you realise that some people were overpaid by a fair amount and they did NOTHING. If I saw this almost 5 years ago, they should have been on that hobby horse a lot longer, but they were not. Why was that?
And the shortage will get worse for the UK soon enough. You see, Sweden (Vattenfal) is already showing shortages for winter, as such less and less can be delivered to the UK who will now feel the brunt a lot sooner and the solution I offered in ‘Will you feel frisky?’ On June 28th 2022 (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2022/06/28/will-you-feel-frisky/) now feels a lot more on point, does it not? So how many documents can the UK produce of efforts they made from 2018 onwards to cater to this need? And that is the setting now, but this pressure keeps on growing, so the worm that hesitates will get eaten in this setting, because the shortage is global and now that the pressures are showing will some ask, why did we do nothing? People have been BS’ing on power independence since the 90’s and when the moment comes, we see inaction. Don’t take my word, check and you will see I am right. The overpaid were inactive for far too long, let them explain why. Oh, and they come with something like ‘It was a complex issue’ feel free to dock their pay for over 40%, it was why they were there and even if that doesn’t solve the issue, it will feel good to see the worm squirm for his lost 40%. Do it, you’ll see you’ll feel better.
Sounds weird does it not, it sounds like I am inverting what is happening, but I am not. The media is exploiting Andrew Tate for every digital dollar they can muster. First off, I know very little of him and the little I do know and what I did find out started after the Thunberg issue. I honestly do not care about the man, why should I? We travel in very different circles. He is a former kickboxer, he went from nothing to $700,000,000 in almost no time flat. He communicates that a little too much in your face and that all makes perfectly sense. Yet when you take a moment to consider what he is saying, we see that he is making sense, he is making too much sense to some.
So when I now reconsider what the media did with headlines like ‘Did feminism create Andrew Tate?’, ‘Andrew Tate isn’t feminism’s inadvertent bastard child. He’s sexism’s last gasp’ (written by a girl of course), ‘‘Vulnerable boys are drawn in’: schools fear spread of Andrew Tate’s misogyny’ and that list goes on, for some time no less. You see, whatever Andrew Tate is, he is accused and anyone accused is innocent until PROVEN guilty. But the media seemingly doesn’t like self made multi millionaires (or billionaires) for that matter.
Tate, his brother Tristan and two Romanian female suspects were detained by Romanian anti-organised crime prosecutors on December 29 pending a criminal investigation. They have denied wrongdoing through an attorney and have challenged the arrest warrant.” Now lets be clear. The man was already a multi millionaire and he did this in numerous ways. So why would he exploit 6 women? What would be in it for him? I am not saying that this did not happen, I am asking if this might not have happened. We see the confiscation of expensive cars, we see all kinds of emotional reporting, but like that attempted murderer of 6 years old, when do we actually see facts? We got “In a news conference on Monday, police in Virginia said the child brought the pistol to school in his backpack” as well as “A six-year-old child used his mother’s legally purchased handgun to shoot his teacher at a US school” yesterday by the BBC. So where are the parents? Why are they not interrogated by police and the media? Too soft? Too many pussies in the media? How does a 6 year old get his mommies gun? The media left it untouched all this time and now we get back to Andrew Tate, it is all related. The media exploiting whatever they can to get the digital dollars. And Andrew Tate makes a fine target for the media. For 2 weeks the media did not dig into the accusation, merely focussing on misogeny.
So I tried to look up a few things. Now, this does not make him innocent of that claim, but I wonder how true some claims are. The first is the interview with Piers Morgan, the full interview of 45 minutes is there. He talks about the failing of the UK, why nurses are striking and he makes a lot of sense. And with the ‘in your face’ stage that he has (I personally think that is the kickboxer in him) he does get the interest of all the boys and men, but there is a truth that women should consider to a much larger degree.
You see, thee are those women who are truly self-sufficient and those merely claiming that they are. I reckon that this is set to 1500:250,000 so for every 250,000 women only 1500 are truly self sufficient, the rest is merely making the claim and calling the nearest man as soon as they can, preferably one that is either gay or one that they can tell that assistance is not agreeing to sex. Let be clear sex is never part of such a deal, but I get that women want to be clear about that upfront. So in a stage where only 0.6% are real self sufficient women, a misogenistic paint will aid the media in colouring a person so that the wannabe’s have someone to hate. Making them instant click bitches to coin a phrase. By the way ‘misogenistic’ means “strongly prejudiced against women”, and to be honest. The video’s I saw did not give the stage that he is AGAINST women. The videos do show that he is full of himself, but when you consider that he went from nothing to $700,000,000 whilst most people (well over 80%) never get more than 0.1% over twice the lifespan we can agree that he is allowed to be full of himself.
So there we have one setting. Then we get the image (from a YouTube video) below.
So is this true? YouTube is not a reliable source, and when we seek. We do get a lot of articles linked to Cosmin Gusa. But there is still no real evidence that this was Andrew Tate. In this day and age when we can see cyber transgressions in every direction. Does it make sense for someone like Andrew Tate to go ‘after’ the daughter of some mogul? And this is not America, this is Romania, as such a man like that has all kinds of connections. The math just does not work out. Any loser or non-wealthy might make a move like that. It does not make the Tate’s guilty, not innocent either. EVIDENCE is required and I have so far seen close to ZERO evidence on anything that could prosecute Andrew Tate. This could be a stage where connected people take over his business and that might be the case, but that also implies that we now have a decent setting where the media is jumping to the greedy needs of organised crime.
Tomorrow his case is decided whether he is to remain arrested, I wonder what will happen next. Because there is a lot wrong here and the media needs to do its actual job (implying not whoring for digital dollars). They need to look into the accusations which Al Arabiya actually did (most others did not), there we also see “The victims were then taken to properties on the outskirts of capital Bucharest and through physical violence and mental intimidation were sexually exploited by being forced to produce pornographic content for social media sites which generated large financial gains, according to prosecutors. Prosecutors also said one of the brothers raped one of the victims in March of last year, which is when the investigation started”, this is an actual accusation, this is something that needs to be investigated, but why did the western media avoid giving us this? It will be about the evidence, not some he said, she said setting and that is not the easiest case to have, no matter where it is. And it needs to be proven, not painted by the media. Time will tell how this ends, I have no idea what will happen next.
That happens, we meet kids and some are nice, some are actual and factual shits. So what do we do about them, just feed them to the wolves? So what about one of them who at the age of 6 shoots their teacher? That is what we are left with when I saw the Dutch NOS and a few others give us (at https://www.npr.org/2023/01/06/1147629793/shooting-virginia-elementary-school-6-year-old) ‘A teacher shot by 6-year-old in Virginia is showing signs of improvement’ with “He also would not comment on how the boy got access to the gun or who owns the weapon”. In my view this case stinks. The parents have not been arrested for questioning. The gun is not currently identified to an owner. A six year old shit got a gun and gunned down its teacher! Even if he is not responsible under the law through doli incapax, there are a few who are and I point at the parents in the first instance. So far NO report shows that the parents were arrested, or interrogated over the case. If that is the stage, the US has earned the right to see many more shootings in schools until they fix this mess. They have the gun, so they can trace (to some degree) the owner, where it was sold and so on. In addition, we see the press avoid all kinds of places here. The lack of press is almost impressive. If Kim Kardassian breaks her bra clip on TV, we would have the retailer as well as the fashion designer on TV within the hour being interrogated by the media. Now we have close to nothing. Someone is orchestrating here, there is pretty much no other explanation left.
I saw some of the news, they do not know how it got past the detectors. Well, if you have seen one 6 year old you have seen dozens of them, all with their favourite metal lunch box. It is speculative, but there was intent here, so put the sandwiches on top and the security guard will think nothing of it, and lets be fair, a six year old with a gun? After that it is simple. But it is not entirely that is it? A six year old shot a teacher. That took mindset, stupid mindset, but mindset none the less. The press is not looking into this, optionally merely trivialising it. So what part do the parents play? Well, as I see it the mindset tends to come from parents, not peer pressure, not at that age. But no one is looking at the parents, why not?
The lack of information leaves me with a lot more questions and I wonder what we will hear in a few days, but I intent to take another look at all this down the road, I have to.
I got alerted to something via Twitter. It has two sides and a friend of mine had one side, as such I give you the tweet below. This of course made me look at the YouTube by Simon Pegg (the Hot Fuzz man).
He was emotional and he has a point, but so does my friend. Optionally they do not realise that they are both a side of the same coin, one cannot exist without the other. It is a flaw in those heralding science as the one solution, it never is. It merely becomes some Theranos creation, all science and too much of it debatable. You see my friend had the answer in her tweet. Alan Turing created something from nothing. A setting that is utterly impossible. He got there through an artsy side in him. Alan Turing created the foundations of computers and AI, both required an art element to get there. You see, even when we realise it was all science, his brain had to make some leap of faith and that requires art, science alone will not let you do that. He created these two and his foundation of AI is still used today, over half a century later, with all the elements of evolved science, his artsy side overcame what did not yet exist. It is one of the reasons that (even if I was not eligible), I would have voted for Brian Blessed to become Chancellor of Cambridge in 2011, but I was not eligible. It became Lord Sainsbury of Turville, my issue here is that science was taking too big a chunk of what was almost an even Steven setting. I personally believe that Science without art is pointless, art without science is useless. It is not completely true, but as an axiom it often works. Science without art cannot grow because science for the most relies on previous data and as such NEW technologies cannot evolve. Alan Turing created (for the most) the foundations of electronics. It required investigations into the electron as well, but when you see that Alan Turing created AI half a century before we had any partial foundation of that is optionally evidence enough.
The other side needs to be illuminated as well. Simon Pegg did this (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHEpywFCtwA) in his own emotional way and he does have a point, but so did my friend. The artsy people tend to ignore that science is their friend. Take any movie, the lights are set up to maximise the effect, it is not art, that foundation is science, science created the camera and a lot of other parts. They use that technology and they use it well. But it supports art and that is forgotten. That being said that children need maths, but they need art too and the science pushers are all about ‘forgetting’ the art and that power. You see, if you have all science and no art, you end up creating Theranos minded creators. The ones that are convicted for fraud and end up well over 11 years in prison. Art might have prevented this (and created an actual solution). In that same setting it might be the flaw that created FTX and the $33,000,000,000 losses it ensued.
I myself tend to grasp back to an old Market research credo. “The scientist, or mathematician will show you the course of best margins of profit, or best results. The presenter, or politician makes sure that you look forward to the attached invoice” it is a bit artsy but therefor not any less true. We need to realise that art and science are to sides of the same coin. Science made it circular and the artsy people gave it a nice image. We need another and there is one part we should all agree to, if Rishi Sunak wants to imbue a sense of science, he better be ready to imbue an equal measure of art in these people, because Simon Pegg is right about that part. Science without the art will have far reaching negative impacts. We need one another to see it, one shows us, one presents it and that has been the case from before that writer William Shakespeare became a reality. It goes back all the way to the outdoor Theatre of Dionysius where in 500BC Sophocles, Euripides, Aeschylus, and Aristophanes performed, but we forget that science created the stage for over 15,000 people to enjoy, that part was science, not art. And it was there centuries before Christianity became reality.
Growth, we all seek it, in mind, in business, and in setting and there is a stage that is evolving at present. The Guardian reported early this morning ‘Record warm winter in parts of Europe forces closure of ski slopes’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jan/04/warmest-january-ever-forces-ski-slopes-across-europe-to-close). Now there is the expression that one swallow is no identification of Summer. Yet there is no guarantee that next year will be better. Consider the stages France, Switzerland, Austria and Italy. That is a stage that gives them a pool over well over 2 million people who do want snow, who want to taste the slopes. They will soon need to seek or at least consider other venues. In the Northern Hemisphere that gives them Norway, Canada and China. Finland has a lack of mountains, as does Sweden. Norway can grow as can Canada. I reckon that there are too many anti-China sentiments at present. Norway and Canada have good vibes on the slopes and I reckon it is time for them to consider new settings. Some places in Norway can grow, but they will need at least one more place for now, as does Canada. Yes Whistler is a great destination, but it is overcrowded. The 2022/2023 movies are mostly ab out the horrendous waiting times, the amount of people trying to get up. Whistler is full and Canada either creates an additional place where the people now going to Whistler can g, or bleed tourists to other nations. I reckon that they will see that another Canadian field (most likely in British Columbia) makes sense. There have been abandoned places (near Calgary) that offer a good setting, yet that stage need work as well as anything new. Every field will grow, but only if all the amenities are there. The same for Norway, who is seen as an excellent place to visit, but the call of Whistler is strong. So, as I see it They both have good chances, but the one with a better option and a cheaper one (Whistler is really expensive) will get that cluster of people. So there is risk. If a strong winter gets back in the next year, their issues are saved (France, Switzerland, Austria and Italy), if not the early bird will get the collection of worms and it will be a lot more than mere thousands. Thi will affect plane travel as well as accomodations. There is of course a lot more and even as I cannot give you all the answers, there is clear place to grow, not merely to get the overrun to Whistler, the failing of places we never expected to fail will call for more answers, some we might never get. But the overwhelming stage is that snow is lacking in places where it should not and the places that could benefit might never have seen this coming.
That is not on them, but next year will be and there they need to find ways to either take the risk that they miss out, or see what they could get because a group of millions of tourists in this day and age is a strong call. Personally I have no interest, but there is a second stage, one that is not a given. We can get that Paris and Milan–Cortina d’Ampezzo are places currently set for the Olympics. I hope it goes well, but if this bad winter stage continues, someone has to step in. Who? That is anybodies guess. But there is room to grow for several reasons and several places will have the option to grow, will they take it? I cannot tell, but even if there is added revenue, it comes with a decent amount of risk. No one denies that, but no one saw the really bad snow weather of this season come, especially when places like Canada is drowning in the stuff.
Early this morning I was alerted to news from the BBC (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-64082923). There we see ‘Foreigners now banned from buying homes in Canada’ and when home pressures are as high as in Canada, that makes sense. But there is more. You see Canada states “As of 1 January, the ban prohibits people who are not Canadian citizens or permanent residents from buying residential properties” so we can state that the term ‘foreigner’ is applied loosely. Then there is the list of people with critique and issues. But consider, why would you want to buy a residence when you are not a citizen or a permanent resident? Consider that and then consider how the London Real estate atmosphere is spiced and spiked due to hedge funds and wealthy investors? Canada had to do something and they chose this. And it is not a new thing. New Zealand did something similar in 2018. We also get “federal housing minister Ahmed Hussen said the ban is meant to discourage buyers from looking at homes as commodities instead of a place to live and grow a family” and here I personally believe that Ahmed Hussen is correct. What is interesting that the BBC did not give us any results from the 2018 act by New Zealand. Did it reduce pressures? Any answer would have been nice and also illustrative, but they did not, why not?
I personally believe that Canada made the right step, whilst too many governments are catering to investors and speculators, there is a larger need to stop all this. And Canada made its move. Also the Canadian governments made a mention in December “the Canadian government announced some exemptions to the regulation, including for international students who have been in the country for at least five years, refugee claimants and people with temporary work permits”, as such we see that the heart of the Canadian government is in the right place. Will this be enough to reduce pressures? I cannot tel, I do not know enough about the housing market and specifically the Canadian housing market. Yet, overall when we consider the mess London and several other places are in, the move makes sense. If there is one loser, then that would be the players who invested in building ‘The One’ on Bloor street West in Toronto. That building screams investors and they cannot get a place as far as I can tell, but I reckon that the government will find a loophole for that as that place has nothing below a million and it caters to a different group.
I wonder if the results will be made public enough at the end of 2023 to see the impact. It might be a report that places like New York, London, Amsterdam and Paris are waiting for. In a time when the cost of living is going nuts, reducing housing stress makes perfect sense to me.
Lawrence van Rijn - Law Lord to be 