Tag Archives: Eu

December 17, 2021 · 22:24

The media as enforcer

It is a thought, it is my thought and I wonder if there is enough that I am correct? You see, most people are crying foul, blaming rich people. Making noises on the need to tax the rich and the media is helping out. That is the operative part, the media is helping out. To show you just how far they go, let’s take a little trip.

Search by Google
When you search for ‘Charles P. Rettig’ you see two results. One by LGBTQ Nation, one by Mondaq. Consider the following parts
1. Charles P. Rettig is the Commissioner of the IRS.
2. Taxes are on the plate of responsibility of the IRS.
3. The media has nothing to report on the IRS? They are merely all flaming the tax the rich part?

Looking at the media
The BBC gives us another flame article on how ‘How billionaires pay less tax than you’, yet no one is looking at the simple fact that people like Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and other billionaires are doing what they are allowed to do, and it is not “special strategies to avoid paying income tax, say experts”, it is “Merely paying what Tax laws and tax codes are telling people how much to pay”. A setting that comes from the office of Charles P. Rettig, the people who were there before him like John Koskinen, Daniel Werfel, Steven T. Miller, Douglas Shulman, Linda Stiff, and Mark Everson a collection of people that were there for almost 20 years when nothing was done to overhaul taxes, and the media is not reporting on it, is it not news or is it part of the filtered information that some people do not want you to have. Yes, I am focussing here on the US, yet the mess in the EU is not better, it is actually worse as they got well over 20 nations to do NOTHING!

I am not stating that Elon Bezos and Jeff Musk are innocent (or was that the other way round?), I am stating. I am saying that they use tax laws as they are ALLOWED to be used, in black letter setting (meaning: literal interpretation) all whilst the media is shouting about the spirit of the law, the spirit of the law is not in writing, in writing we find “A tax code is a federal government document, usually numbering thousands of pages, that details the rules individuals and businesses must follow in remitting a percentage of their incomes to the federal or state government”, yes, and then the politicians added tax codes, exclusions, tax write-offs and that results in people like the ones we see mentioned as well as the Koch Family ($113,000,000,000), the Walton family ($220,000,000,000) and the Mars family (not the planet) with $127,000,000,000 we do not see these names do we? Just like Charles P. Rettig we see very little on them, we see houses bought and sold and two weeks ago we see ‘Influential Koch network rocked by an alleged affair scandal, donor departures and a discrimination lawsuit’ and I only see the CNBC mention, the other papers seemingly left it alone, why is that?

So whilst we see all flames we do not see anyone (including media) invoking the need to overhaul tax laws, no one seems interested in the essential step that is required. 

More important, no one in media is taking that step either, why is that? You still think that they are free to speak their journalistic minds, or does the hierarchy of Shareholders, stake holders, advertisers starts making sense. To realise that you the reader are a mere 4th place in any media source, how does that feel?

It is not a setting where the rich pay less, it is a setting that non-overhauled tax laws benefits the rich more and this is not semantics, consider that CNBC gave you “So if you want to find a way to lower your taxes like the rich do, it could be a good idea to meet with a financial advisor or CPA”, for a really rich person a CPA ($119,000 annual) is nothing, and they KNOW what tax laws are there to aid and which ones are not. And it was simple, it has been for decades and no one seems to focus on that part, they merely advertise the scream ‘Tax the Rich’ which is funny, because it goes nowhere and gets people nothing and when you realise that the taxation laws were the problem for decades, when will you see that the politicians and their IRS commissioners were part of the problem and never any part of the solution the USA desperately needs. So whilst the news is all about ‘Biden signs legislation raising US debt limit, averts potential default’, now consider your own situation. How much upgrades can you get on your credit card until is gets blocked, banned and retracted? How many upgrades can you get until you show more income? That is the stage; that is also why tax laws need overhaul. It is not names like Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, it is the stage that the USA has according to some sources 614 billionaires. You still think that there is no gain in overhauling tax laws? Oh, and when we look at those with a value that tops $100,000,000 you get to a number of people that is slightly surpasses 5000. When you consider all this, do you think it makes sense that the media has zero interest in people like Charles P. Rettig? Consider that he should be in the targeting view of EVERY American media outlet, but he is not, why is that you think?

I am starting to believe that the media is nothing more than an enforcer that uses the old premise of panem et circenses, a stage introduced by the poet Juvenal. Decimus Junius Juvenalis (his original name) was around in the age of Nero and Galba and a whole lot of other emperors, including the year when they had 4 of them (it is a hazardous job). A stage we see now exploited by media, politicians and rich people. Making us all watch where they want us to look, not where we need to look and the US (EU too) is running out of time. When the US defaults, what do you think will happen to the Yen and the Euro? So when you get angry at Jeff Bezos, wonder why the media is so focussed on giving him the limelight and they are actively avoiding the limelight on a whole group of 614 equally filthy rich as Jeff Ross (sorry the other comedian) Jeff Bezos and we do not see their names, not ANYWHERE, why is that? Consider that for a moment before you start shouting ‘Tax the rich’. Let’s be clear I have nothing against taxing rich people, but that is what tax laws are for, to tax all 5000 of them, not the three overly mentioned in media and there is the rub, that is where the media needs to ask people like Charles P. Rettig and the tax laws makers behind him very serious questions, but the media is not doing that. Why is that?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

December 7, 2021 · 17:29

Stating the obvious

It happens, we all do it and we do it for all kinds of reasons. We get into a place, or a state of mind and we state the obvious. There is no accusation, there is no giggle, it happens to us all (me too). So when he Dutch NOS stated ‘Education Council warns of inequality of opportunity through private tutoring’ (at https://nos.nl/l/2408491), I merely raised an eyebrow. You see that setting has been known since I was in school there well over a quarter of a century ago (around 1974). In those days it was merely to keep up with others, a stage I never actually faced. 

As such when we are given “Access to quality education now depends too much on the wallet of parents. Therefore, the role of the growing number of commercial tutoring, exam training and homework guidance providers in primary and secondary education needs to be carefully considered.” I think it was not stating the obvious, I started to think that the game of education in the Netherlands has changed and not for the better. I personally believe that it is not about “Access to quality education now depends too much on the wallet of parents”, I believe that there is a larger chance that overall education is slipping and the standard foundation of education will not allow the average student to push ahead to higher education. The reader gets the blah-blah “Government and school boards are not sufficiently aware of the risks that this development entails. The Education Council advises schools to think more carefully about ‘what is necessary’ for education and ‘what is nice’ to do with it. Everything that is needed should be freely accessible to everyone.” I believe that this is a shot across the bough. Those in eduction have been ignoring a setting that had been around for decades and now the government remains inactive on the premise the stage is shifting, the people without funds become those without a future. A stage that Dutch Entrepreneur and writer Luc Sala had been warning the people about since the late 80’s, it will become a setting of ‘those who have and those who have not’ and I am still around to see his wisdom come to fruition. The larger problem is that the EU is close to bankrupt. 

We see “European Union Total Debt accounted for 732.5 % of the country’s GDP in 2019”, a debt that increased with 7%, amounting to well over € 10,000,000,000,000. As such nations all over the EU are cutting corners and schooling is one of the earliest (and for some easiest) cuts. In the article we see with “The Education Council advises schools to think more carefully about ‘what is necessary’ for education and ‘what is nice’ to do”, yet the arts tend to be ‘nice to do’ and the business people do not realise that art and considering the artful is an essential element in what drives innovation. Looking at spreadsheets does not make you innovative, seeing how something could also apply, that does the trick and I have over a dozen of IP setting proving that (presently alas not cashable). But it is not about the cash, it is about the ability to get there. I have no idea how Sony makes their TV’s, but I found a way around it and come up with the concept of a printable solution for entertainment, education, information and military applications. No essential or necessary part of the education got me there, it was the ‘nice to do’ part that got me across the finish line, it also gave me a way to optionally meltdown the Iranian reactors (which will be more essential soon enough). 

The setting that Dutch entrepreneur Luc Sala presented decades ago is now tapping on the doors of Dutch schools and this scares a few people, as well it should. It is not merely about the stage of those who have and those who have not. It will be the stage of lasses that will be pushed upon everyone and there are more than a few people walking beyond their station (relying on the BS principle) where that is a concern, not merely those who follow guidelines. It will impact who gets to be on those guidelines and with schools failing all kinds of needs that setting will increase all over the EU, not merely the Dutch. The French, Italians and Spanish will see similar changes soon enough. It becomes a larger setting when it is NOT reported on there. Schools with all their ‘allegiances’ to international schools and their stage for international students will impact soon thereafter and that is when the budgets fall over. Because governments all over the EU will cut corners more and more and education will take a dive giving the US and Asia, especially private schools, a much larger advantage in the coming two decades. So whilst plenty of people in the US, Asia and Middle East are looking towards the boundaries of 6G in 2026, some people in the EU (in the Netherlands too) will then wonder what 6G is. Those who have and those who have not will polarise at that point and that setting is optionally less than half a decade away.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , ,

December 3, 2021 · 22:03

It is difficult

One one hand, thee was a reason to be joyful. There was another article by Stephanie Kirchgaessner, so let the bashing begin. On the other hand, this is actually a good article. It is also an important article. And there is a stage where we need to consider what is and what could be. The article ‘Rights groups urge EU to ban NSO over clients’ use of Pegasus spyware’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/law/2021/dec/03/rights-groups-urge-eu-to-ban-nso-over-clients-use-of-pegasus-spyware). This is interesting in two ways. We see no such ban on Remington, Fabrique national, Glock and a few other firms. And I would like to add that the NSA has done worse, much worse, so why is it now onto the NSO because their clients are skating on the edge of what some people might seem as ‘unacceptable’?

We see “Letter signed by 86 organisations asks for sanctions against Israeli firm, alleging governments used its software to abuse rights”, we see it, but do we realise what is going on? We are holding the publisher of a law book accountable for criminals using those books to stay out of prison. And it is not mere criminals using the books, it is governments using the books. 

This is a slippery slope and as Stephanie Kirchgaessner illuminates this, we are left with questions. I personally want to see a list of these 86 organisations. I am not saying that the Guardian is lying, I am stating that the NSO and us have a right to see these accusers. Yes, we see Access Now, Amnesty International and the Digital Rights Foundation. But where are the others? We also see “the EU’s sanctions regime gave it the power to target entities that were responsible for “violations or abuses that are of serious concern as regards to the objectives of the common foreign and security policy, including violations or abuses of freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, or of freedom of opinion and expression””, it is here that the problem starts. We see “freedom of opinion and expression”, but who allows for that? Who allows for ‘peaceful assembly’? Consider the US and their ‘Black Lives Matter’ setting. We see “Some states have recently increased the severity of criminal penalties for protesters along political lines”, so where is your freedom of expression and opinion now? 

There is an issue, there is and in this Stephanie is right, but is there any kind of stage where the NSO can be held responsible for the actions of their clients? What do you think will happen when the NSO sells what they have to China and/or Russia? Do you think these 86 organisations will have anything to say then? 

And there is a larger stage, the stage everyone is silent about, the stage we all know but no one is willing to look there. We are so willing to blame the NSO group, but no one is wondering why Apple and Google didn’t have better protection? We can understand that there are always, but they do not seem to work and for some reason, Apple and Google have a massive problem. So when we consider Forbes ‘Apple Starts Sending NSO Hack Warnings To iPhone Users’, why was this not done earlier, and more important why was the problem not fixed 5 years ago? Apple is playing the cautious game, leaving the NSO group out of the debate with “State-sponsored attackers are very well-funded and sophisticated, and their attacks evolve over time. Detecting such attacks relies on threat intelligence signals that are often imperfect and incomplete. It’s possible that some Apple threat notifications may be false alarms, or that some attacks are not detected. We are unable to provide information about what causes us to issue threat notifications, as that may help state-sponsored attackers adapt their behaviour to evade detection in the future.” So why are new phones not more secure? Why are cyber locks a problem? Because Apple (Google too) caters to people who need automation to get better and more revenue and that crosses with the needs of some players who need access. 

In all this, the simplest solution was that no one gets access to your mobile, and it is not a new concept. The Blackberry started that idea and was quickly pushed out of the market (they were not the cheapest either). I saw this come up a few times when I was considering the evolution of a console (name xxxxxxxx redacted) , but the premise is larger and it is all linked to the simple setting that Facebook opened a door and EVERYONE wants to get through. In this case the NSO group saw that as a great idea to collect information and they are not alone, let that be clear, they might be the most visible player, but they are not the only player, but the article does not give that part, do they? You see there were a few nations on the list (that everyone ignores) and they are not NSO group clients, but they have certain abilities, so they are a client of someone and these 86 organisations are about to give that one player (with no scruples) the entire market.

Did you consider that?

Moreover, the accusations from some against the NSO group are still absent of evidence. Several newspapers gave light that the list of 10,000 was bogus and it was from 2017. In addition, I found the financial link missing, 10,000 hacks implied that the NSO group had received in excess of $600,000,000 and they have not. Some give us specifically worded accusations. Like the Citizens Lab giving us that 36 phones might (emphasis on might) have been transgressed upon, 36 out of 76, and we seemingly delete the word ‘might’ with our minds, but I did not. I am not opposing the Citizens Lab, but 36 might out of a debatable list of 10,000 is a long stretch and so far none of the media have given us any clear evidence, but these 86 organisations see there limelight moment, so they are all crying foul (or is that fowl). 

I for one want to see the media become responsible and hand over a dashboard of alleged victims. 10,000 numbers, that would be a massive list, but a dashboard stating how many are government, how many are journalists (which was in one article no more than 180, I think) making that a mere 1.8%. How many infections per nation? The list goes on and the media over all these months presented ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. But now we see “Letter signed by 86 organisations asks for sanctions against Israeli firm”, all whilst no clear evidence has been presented EVER. This is ab out something else and it has nothing to do with the NSO group, it has everything to do with a group of journalists who have become obsolete and as we see event after even (like that running Joke called the ICIJ), how much evidence have we see on their so called 11.9 million leaked documents with 2.9 terabytes of data, and zero (none) dashboard giving a summary, even with all that time and 600 journalists no one had time to give us a run down, that is how pathetic the media has become. Oh and they promised not to investigate the source, interesting is it not?

All flaming for digital revenue and presenting close to nothing, flames and way too little  substance. So when we ask these media players for clarity, their most likely answer will be ‘It is difficult’

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

December 2, 2021 · 04:43

The shoddy essay

I actively dislike certain people, especially as they use their position to merely lash out at others. This is seen (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/01/saudi-arabia-yemen-un-human-rights-investigation-incentives-and-therats) when we see Stephanie Kirchgaessner have another go at Saudi Arabia. I honestly think that is all she does. So here is my take. The article ‘Saudis used ‘incentives and threats’ to shut down UN investigation in Yemen’ Of course my first reaction was ‘What UN investigation in Yemen?’ And the article starts off with “Political officials and diplomatic and activist sources describe stealth campaign”. I go into the article and I am treated to “according to sources with close knowledge of the matter”, “Riyadh is alleged to have warned Indonesia”, and lets not forget ““You could see the whole thing shift, and that was a shock,” said one person familiar with the matter”, so what people were familiar to the matter? What actually happened? It is a fair question, especially when we are given “The resolution was defeated by a simple majority of 21-18, with seven countries abstaining”, it is in this case that I am apparently a much better investigator. So, lets take a look.

First lets look at some headlines ‘UN calls on Yemen’s Houthis to release detained staff’, ‘UN: Houthi rebels impeding aid flow in Yemen’, ‘Yemen: Houthi Terrorism Designation Threatens Aid’, and these are just three headlines from dozens in the last two years. In this, the UN and other parties (like essay writers) have been really active in silencing any actions that included Houthi and Iranian forces in Yemen. The article has two mentions on Houthi, one in a photo and none (read: Zero) mentions of Iran. We see one mention of all in “committed by all sides”. The article is that one sided and that much of a hack job. The situation in Yemen is large, much larger then this essay writer makes it out to be. 

I am not making some claim that Saudi Arabia is innocent, but I can tell you it is definitely not that guilty either. Houthi and Iranian forces have at least part of that blame (well over 50%) and we seem to forget that all this started by Houthi forces, The Saudi coalition was asked to come and no one seems to notice that. So whilst the Guardian hides behind “the Saudis appear to have influenced officials”, I merely wonder if there isn’t a much larger picture. We see mention by John Fisher giving us “It was a very tight vote. We understand that Saudi Arabia and their coalition allies and Yemen were working at a high level for some time to persuade states in capitals through a mixture of threats and incentives, to back their bids to terminate the mandate of this international monitoring mechanism”, here we see the stage, but we ignore the lighting. In addition to that stage, what evidence is there for “through a mixture of threats and incentive”, you see Iran and  Houthi Yemen do not want any monitoring for a few reasons, and they are non-mentioned parties, why is that? Shovelling BS all on one pile is nice at times and we love to see all that BS piled up at Strasbourg, but that will not happen either will it? 

You think that this I the end, but it is time to add flavour to it all,  because in all fairness, Stephanie Kirchgaessner is not in this alone, the stakes against Saudi Arabia are much larger. That is seen when we add the Conversation (at https://theconversation.com/jobs-are-no-excuse-canada-must-stop-arming-saudi-arabia-171792) where we see “Jobs are no excuse — Canada must stop arming Saudi Arabia”, and I would state ‘Yes, handing more revenue to China is the way to go!’ I would love to get a larger billion dollar stake holding a 3.75% bonus setting. Even as we are given “The bulk of Canadian arms exports to the Saudis are light armoured vehicles, known as LAVs”, We see the attack using ‘Human Rights’ all whilst Saudi Arabia is under actual attack, Houthi (apparently Iranian operated drones) are attacking civil targets in South Saudi Arabia, so whilst we are given “Canada has twice been named by the United Nations Group of Eminent Experts on Yemen as one of several world powers helping to perpetuate the conflict by continuing to supply weapons to Saudi Arabia”, and we are not given the clear involvement of Iranian and Houthi settings, it is all a one sided attack and it matters, these people attack one sided for a larger need, an ego driven need and the media is helping them do this. But feel free to state I am wrong, and I am happy to be wrong, especially if $12,000,000,000 going to China might fetch me a nice 450 million dollars (I can dream, can’t I?). when the numbers are this high 3.75% makes a very nice number. And the world is making this happen, so when we see project after project fail in Europe and the US because the moral high ground came at a price, consider the names of people who made that happen. Hunger on the moral high ground is not rare, it usually is linked to all kinds of revenue that they never got. This is not a perfect world, I never claimed it to be, but a commerce world needs to sell all kinds of stuff, also stuff that seems to be wrong, there is no denying that. And when it comes to that side, these two articles leave Houthi and Iranian actions in the dark. You should wonder why that is, because a nation does not spend 12 billion in any one sided event. If it was truly one sided one billion would have been more than enough. Did you consider that?

The US and the EU have at presently dropped 48 billion in revenue, revenue that they desperately needed and now that von der Leyen revealed the ‘300 billion euro answer to China’s Belt and Road’, how will that be paid for? Not from the revenue that Saudi Arabia required to defend its borders. That revenue will support China’s Belt and Road projects, a nice pickle they got themselves in and no one is wondering how this farce can go on, because soon there will be no money left, the overdrawn credit cards from the US, the EU, France, Germany and the UK makes any economic action close to impossible. And soon (in about 3-5 weeks) when the US has another debt ceiling, consider all the things that the US could have done to stop the new stress settings; the EU and the UK as well, now that these funds are going to China, the stage changed, the electricity bill can no longer be paid and there is no fighting ring, there is no event to watch, it is just a dark room in a dark location and that I the setting we all had to avoid. But rejoice, you then know one element that Yemeni people face, they have no electricity either, the Houthi forces made sure of that. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

December 1, 2021 · 13:07

Ego versus tax dollars

Yes, that is the setting. It is not a new setting, we have seen it before and it comes with a surprise, just like the Ferrero kinder surprise.

It is a chocolate egg, but in the middle there is a toy, a surprise. And ego versus tax dollars also have a surprise for the people. Yet in this case it is a little less nice, in this case the people, the tax payers pay either way and optionally they get to pay both ends of the equation. This is seen in BBC article ‘Multi-billion EU bid to challenge Chinese influence’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-59473071). Here we are given “It’s regarded as part of the West’s efforts to counter Chinese influence in Africa and elsewhere. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen will present the “Global Gateway” initiative on Wednesday. The EU is looking at how it can leverage billions of euros, drawn from member states, financial institutions and the private sector”, now consider the setting:

  • member states
  • financial institutions
  • the private sector

And here is the rub, here we see how the tax payer gets that bill twice. Or a speculated once for the duration of twice the timeline. The member states sounds nice, yet the credit cards of France, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Italy are severely overdrawn. So who will pay? Poland? Austria? Hungary? Estonia? Gimme a break please.

Then we get the second setting the ‘financial institutions’. Yet they will BORROW you the money for an interesting percentage, which means that a load with up to 15% interest is still payable by the tax payers. 

The private sector? Who has that kind of cash? I reckon that Webuild SpA (formerly Salini Impregilo SpA) will take the job, as long as they get the job with a few long term tax benefits, optionally at cost + 3% + tax benefits. And who do you think pays for it in the end? Yup you got it, the poor poor taxpayer (you). 

As such when I see “It has been criticised as a means of providing “predatory loans” in what is labelled “debt-trap diplomacy”” I am not opposing this (as I never looked at that data), yet the wording is almost exactly like the big tomato of MI6 (you say potato, I say tomato). Isn’t that a nice coincidence. Almost orchestrated. Now, I accept that it might be true, but in that same way Iran has been doing all over the Middle East and the same parties were eager to avoid shining the limelight there, and now that Huawei has a much stronger case (made in Saudi Arabia) and their 5G is 700% faster then anything the US has. The link here us that both Huawei and Saudi Arabia have a larger case for Egypt and that matters. With Neom city smack in the middle, they are likely have an operating 5G network long before the US figures out that marketed speed is not the same as real speed, but they will and they will see the cost involved. In that same light the BS approach to the arms deals with Saudi Arabia, China has a larger stage now, a stage that will cost the US well over 9 billion with a nominal maximum of $23,000,000,000 over the next 5 years, revenue handed to China and we see European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen getting ready for a presentation that is as I personally see a joke the EU cannot afford. Not with the US handing business over to China as they did over the last 12 months alone. 

So when we consider “Mrs von der Leyen said in her State of the Union speech in September: “We want investments in quality infrastructure, connecting goods, people and services around the world.”” We need to see the word ‘investments’, which is nice, but does that not imply that you have the funds? If not (which is the case) it ends up being a mere ego loan and that is not what is supposed to happen. I am not against it, as long as CORPORATIONS are properly taxed and that has been a horse no show for over two decades. I wonder what happens if Huawei and not Amazon decided to buy my 5G (and a few other matters). We then get a setting that shows that the European ego race was over before it even began, it was over when the ego driven tailored to stop the innovations because it did not give them a nice percentage, that is the larger stage we need to see and that is merely one of 4 elements stopping this ego driven presentation that is coming in hours. So even as we are given “Wednesday’s 14-page document isn’t likely to explicitly pitch itself as a rival to China’s strategy.” A setting that gives us the not explicit, it is relying on implied settings, a stage that can be revamped any given stage and there is the second rub, if you cannot go out and say what you mean, you can never mean what you say. That has been a truth for a lot longer than we had the internet. The EU relying on nudge-nudge-wink-wink settings (sorry Monty Python). When was the last time time you saw that going well? And now it involves multi billion euro plans that they cannot even afford. So in the end you the tax payer (if you are in the EU) get to pay that bill too. So hows that going against the rising prices of energy, Gas and petrol? Oh and how about the food prices, inflation of food which was 0.1% in April 2021, which is 2.3% in October 2021. Which is nothing to what I saw at the supermarket. I saw minced meat go up almost 20% in the last few months. So enjoy that extra tax bill with all the expenses you have in Europe. You elected what is there, so you get what is coming. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

November 28, 2021 · 21:34

For those still in denial

Yes it happens, it even happens to me, but not in this case, not today. There was a discussion going on and a person (not this one) had a view, I do not agree with that view, but it is a view that the person was entitled to have. It did not match mine but that is not the case.

The image was a third person, a so called marketing person gave their view, which you see in the image. There is in denial, there is stupid and there is being stupid as well as being in denial. And the views matter. So here goes and this is information that is out in the open. 

‘97% Of People Entering Hospitals For COVID-19 Are Unvaccinated’ (source: NPR), then we get “Of the total admitted to hospital, 153 (3.3%) were confirmed as fully vaccinated, while 844 (18.1%) were partially vaccinated and the rest (3657) were unvaccinated, or their vaccination status was unable to be established.” This implies that 78.6% of all hospital admissions for Covid are unvaccinated, in NSW Australia. We see similar stages all over the world. The Dutch RIVM reports that 70% of ALL intensive care admissions are unvaccinated. And this amounts to 241 people in the month of October 2021. We see that these settings in Australia, the US, the Netherlands, and the UK are not alone. We see similar settings in Germany, Italy and Belgium. Belgium is a matter of debate. We see sources (Xinhua) giving us that 98% of covid cases in hospitals in Belgium is unvaccinated. Yet that too is debatable, I find that number to be weirdly high compared to other European nations. I can understand that there will be reporting issues, connected health issues, as such a 75%-89% makes sense, yet to see a 98% number is just too weirdly high. 

I try to see all the numbers and that revealed an interesting flaw in the media as well. As they are all about flaming and emotional wear and tear. There is a flaw in the metrics. Even per nation there is not any clear numbering and percentage standard in use. I found the RIVM (Netherlands) to be the clearest and even then it was not always easy to find (but it was there). The setting in the EU is one of massive failure and in light of the fact that this has been going on for well over a year makes the failure even worse. Yet in all this the setting of someone claiming to be in marketing and giving us “The unvaxed in hospitals are few and far between”, all whilst I see dozens of media outlets, several data outlets giving us a very different story. There are times when it is ok to be in denial, yet when there are over 261 million sick people and we have 5,215,057 cadavers, to be in denial is silly, stupid and it has far reaching issues. Although there is a case for that too. The Texas Tribune gives the people ‘Unvaccinated Texans make up vast majority of COVID-19 cases and deaths this year, new state data shows’, so we can postulate that they have a solution for the unemployment numbers of Texas. It is a drastic solution, but it will work, it always does. So feel free to listen to marketeers who give you “The unvaxed in hospitals are few and far between”, because Texas allegedly has 50,000 cemeteries, there will be one who has a place for you too and at that moment someone else can take over your job. Nearly all problems solved. 

Happy days!

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

November 24, 2021 · 18:54

When anger takes over

On November 19th I wrote ‘Uranium, Iranas, Iran it again’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/11/19/uranium-iranas-iran-it-again/). In that article I wrote “the absence of strong language and the absence of clear shot time lines, I feel that my point will be made and I only need to see one of the three to be proven correct. This has been going on for 7 years, enough is enough I say”, that was a week ago. Now we get to see:

Reuters, 10 hours ago ‘IAEA’s Grossi says in Iran that he wants to deepen cooperation’, and this gives us “detailing its conflicts with Iran, from rough treatment of its inspectors to re-installing cameras it deems “essential” for the revival of the nuclear deal”, as well as “The agency is seeking to continue and deepen the dialogue with the government of Iran…We agreed to continue our joint work on transparency and this will continue”, in this, as I personally see it, we see Director General Rafael Grossi of the IAEA playing some ego game, pretending to be a diplomat, all whilst the clear setting is that the other party (Iran) is playing its own game which includes stalling as the essential part of their strategy. They are playing for time.

Arab News, 8 hours ago ‘Iran taking ‘arbitrary measures’ against IAEA inspectors, says Saudi representative’ where we are treated to “Iran is taking “arbitrary measures” against International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors, Saudi Arabia’s governor at the UN watchdog said Tuesday”, as well as “Iran’s nuclear policy revolved around “blackmailing the world through its nuclear program”

In the mean time, Iran is stopping the IAEA to assess just how much they have enriched, the bully tactics, the delays, and it never stops, it has never stopped. As far as I can tell, Director General Rafael Grossi of the IAEA is on a fools errant and he, and his American ‘friends’ are willing to sacrifice both Saudi Arabia and Israel in the process and that is a side we should be unwilling to accept, if this goes through, the Mediterranean would be in danger in several ways and none of them will look good on France, Spain and Italy. Egypt will take the brunt of that danger as well. All settings that could have been avoided by hitting Iran where it hurts, where it really really hurts. And in this, the bankrupt nations are unwilling to act, too much ego and too little common sense and lets face it, the EU needs the Suez Canal, America has alternatives, And when it does come down we all get to pay the price. In the US Gasoline is set (today) to $3.395 per gallon. When this go south that price will be a loverly memory, it will drive prices up by 100%-350%, there is no clear predictions here, Yet the setting will become that any household will have options to select heating, a car or food and they can only select one, some will be able to afford two, so how does that grab you?

And it is not the setting you might like, but it becomes the one you deserve. You deserve it because when it was time to act, you all preferred to wait it out. I had no issues to design a way to turn their reactor into a meltdown machine, it would end their needs right quick. Will it work? I honestly do not know, if it works great, if it goes boom perhaps even better. But the time of inactions against Iran is over. I (and many like me) are done with that trail to nowhere.

The fact that ego driven people are willing to let two sovereign nations face the consequence of the ego of some politicians is not that funny, not that hilarious and the delay trail has too many bad settings, too many dangers and optionally too many victims. It is not a setting of numbers, with Saudi Arabia and Israel representing 45 million, versus Iran 84 million, I say let Iran fry. It is a choice they made. And in light of the setting that people will not be hit, the idea of a meltdown at Bouchehr is not optimal as it is too close to the Sea of Dammam (what Iran calls the Persian Gulf), yet the benefit is that their gulf side land will become unavailable for decades. I still have to consider what I could do to both Natanz and Fordow, never considered crashing an enrichment site. Do I want to? Hell, no. I never wanted to get involved, but the inactions of the IAEA, its flaccid approach to Iran gave me no option. Israel faced a few extinction events, they have faced their ordeal, Saudi Arabia is crucial to stability in the middle East and to be honest, no one needs Iran. Not anymore. We can just do fine without them. 

I admit, in me anger is taking over, but I have decent ground after watching this shot show go down. Too many players are hoping for their slice of pie and they are willing to sacrifice two nations to get their cake. It is a price I am not willing to face, in this sacrificing one nation means a 50% reduction in damage. When numbers can be used to make a case the individual person always loses out, there has never been a case where that was not happening. If you wonder about that, consider all the articles I wrote where 147 facilities were responsible for 50% of all the damage (pollution), and still the media ignores it. Not my view, the view of the European Environmental Agency given to all a year ago, so why is that?

These matters are intertwined, they all use the same ego driven groups of people. You still think that inaction gets it done?

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

November 5, 2021 · 03:41

As Credit Cards run dry

That was pretty much the first thing that went through my mind as Reuters gave me ‘UK could speed up criminal sanctions for big tech, minister says’ an hour ago. The article (at https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-could-speed-up-criminal-sanctions-big-tech-minister-says-2021-11-04/) gives us the first dangerous setting ““It will not be two years, we are looking at truncating that to a shorter time frame,” she told lawmakers. “I’m looking at three to six months for criminal liability”” in the first I have all kinds of emotional outbursts as to the uselessness of certain political players. Then there are a few more chapters, yet it is not yet the moment for that (it will come soon enough). When we see “Powers to make executives liable have been proposed as a “last resort” to be introduced at least two years after the rules have been set, the government has said”, we see the first part that it is a timeline change of almost 75%, then there is the statement ‘as a “last resort”’ and I personally believe that none of it will hold up to scrutiny. There is of course the ‘old’ setting of “In general, Facebook may not be held liable for slanderous or defamatory posts due to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Section 230 protects internet service providers, like Facebook, from liability for content posted to their platform by third-party users” Yet it also means that a demand could be made to hold Journalists up to those same standards, and that is where the shoe stops fitting and the dance ends real quick.

Consider Stephanie Kirchgaessner, someone at the Guardian. On July 19th 2021 she gives us “A phone infected with NSO malware, as Kanimba’s has been, not only gives users of the spyware access to phone calls and messages, but it can also turn a mobile phone into a portable tracking and listening device. In the period before she was alerted to her phone being hacked, Kanimba said she had contacts with the US special presidential envoy for hostage affairs, British MPs, and the UK high commission office in Rwanda – all of which could have been monitored”

We now see:
A. ‘A phone infected with NSO malware, as Kanimba’s has been’
So where is that evidence? As such the guardian could be just as liable and hiding behind ‘big tech’ optionally constitutes a case for discrimination and the Guardian is also on Facebook, Twitter and so on, so what gives there?
B. When was the phone infected? Can the moment of infection be proven?

The Daily Mail reported on October 25th 2021 “The alarm was raised after an online harms issue known only to a few people at the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport was raised by a senior executive at Facebook in a recent meeting” So we see “I’m looking at three to six months for criminal liability”, basically Facebook would be prosecuted for events that the employees of that government leak on Facebook? How insane is that train? Who would be the conductor of that crazy brain train and with that in sight, when we consider that some of these messages come from all over the globe. And in plenty of those cases the so called trolls are to blame for some messages. When we consider that the track record in the US, UK, EU and larger commonwealth fails to deal with trolls, can we demand more from Facebook? Consider that the Council on Foreign Relations reported on June 7th 2021 “Chinese trolls are beginning to pose serious threats to economic security, political stability, and personal safety worldwide”. So how long until not so intelligent politicians see a larger string of attacks and fine Facebook whilst the business shifts to China where the US, UK and EU have no say in the matter? How stupid does one need to get to consider their stretched credit cards to get fines whilst losing billions in taxable revenue and optionally global revenue? When it all shifts to China (as well as the Russian equivalent) people like Britain’s Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries were too close to clueless to understand the digital media? Yes, we get it, Zuckerberg created a Behemoth, one a lot larger then even he thought was possible, but the rest had no idea whatsoever (I used to work for a few of them). So in all this we see lofty words like ‘criminal liability’, yet that same government (as the BBC reported) gives its population just 1.6% of rape allegations in England and Wales result in someone being charged, something the government has said it is “deeply ashamed” about. Charged, not convicted, that is a mere 80%, leaving 98% of the assailants free to do it again. That government who failed its population for well over three decades thinks it can judge “big tech firms already had the capability to make their platforms safer”, how is that insight gotten? Because as I see it in too many places the people have no clue on digital media issues, especially in social media. 

I believe that this is another ‘tax the wealthy’ stage, this time it is on what I regard as ‘false grounds’. And in that light, lets take a gander into another stage (adjusted stage in this case) of ‘flawed reasoning’

6 Most Common Causes of Wrongful Convictions

Eyewitness misinterpretation.
The stage where the observer does not comprehend all the elements of a digital track and uses his or her status as expert witness, or witness to the event all whilst the stage cannot be seen as a lot of the variables involved are not visible to that witness.

Misinterpretation.
Misinterpretation is set to what is seen, the data behind it and the stage on why and who placed it. In many cases (especially with flamers and trolls) several of these elements are faked and wrong values are captured mainly because flamers and trolls know what to change. This is similar to all the scam calls showing a UK/US number whilst the scammer is in India. YouTube is filled with those examples.

Incorrect forensics.
Is slightly the wrong term, it is incomplete forensics, because governments listened to self righteous pinko’s who demanded privacy and as such digital platforms cannot capture what needed to be captured to do more, so first (overly graphically stated) the government cuts off the hands of the media giant and then tells the media giant to pick up the right ‘pick-a-stick’, how lame is that part of the equation?

False confessions.
There is the cry-baby (hoping to get freebee’s), the trolls and flamers and those with a natural aversion to one side (abortion, politics, vegans), take a subject and there will always be a crying opponent and they are willing to embellish their side and optionally lie on what they feel, all sides that goes straight into social media and often several times over.

Official misconduct.
Basically is is seen on both sides and always will be, I used the government staff leaking lists, but the opposite side is also there (like Amazon staff greasing personal (family) needs. Several options and these things happen and time is the only way to get there, yet the issues mentioned earlier drains close to all resources.

Use of informants.
That is the larger problem, who is a real informant, and who is there to play some political game? The data will not reveal either but it also constitute a wrongful case.  A seemingly small but growing issue on a stage where size is the least visible element of all.

Inadequate defense.
The largest problem issue. It overlaps with technical abilities, privacy abilities and false confessions, they all impact the defence that is offered and as such is the easiest overrun in court or in a hearing. This also is a stage with documentation and as we see with some players at the ICIJ (Pandora papers) as well as the NSO group. There is no adequate defence as the presented attacks are too often absent of evidence, yet still there is a conviction against the players and the media became part of that problem. A stage where defense was not possible because some players were allegedly tainting the field. 

Six elements and they are out in the open, so when we see “Britain’s Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries, who was appointed to the job in September, said she wanted the powers brought forward” I personally wonder whether she is clueless on what is involved, or is this a mere ruse to get fines so the governmental Credit Card is not cut into pieces by too many banks? And if the UK is in that stage, how deep is the EU and the US at present?

Before we leap to rush to the small minded people, lets make sure that they do not end up driving business to players like WeChat. A site that will not adhere to anything that is seemingly non-Chinese.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

October 25, 2021 · 10:09

Call for change!

Yes, this is a call for change. A call to take care of some loud mouthed and despicable individuals. I will allow them to be what they are, but they will face the consequences of their choices, as we all need to do at times. 

The first port of call
The first port is that anti-vaxxers and those not vaccinated with a good provable reason will have to pay UPFRONT for any hospital admittance for COVID. So there are no stories about “Anti-vaxxer Kristen Lowery”, or those radio hosts and stories on how sorry they were lying in a comfortable hospital bed. They can tough it out at home and optionally die there. We see and avoid the utterly exhausted nursing staff having to deal with idiots and I for one have had enough. As we see media sources give us that 90% of all COVID hospital admissions are non vaccinated ones, I say stop now!

More important, the fact that the media is not making sure the people realise that certain choices are a stage of utter disbelieve. In data we call a 90% stage EVIDENCE! When the stage of vaccinated versus non-vaccinated is that much off, it should serve as evidence that vaccination is the only way. So when I get to see the WA Today giving us “Mr McGowan’s personal mobile number was plastered across anti-vaccination and “freedom” social media pages and WhatsApp groups on Wednesday night, with constant threats to himself and his family bombarding his phone to the point where he was forced to turn it off” the time has clearly come to stop being nice and do what is essential. Now there is a case that people can decide what THEY want to do, but if we see a person deliberately endangering themselves and optionally intentionally endanger the lives of others, we need to see this as a sign that they need to fess up their coins to pay for the damage they instil ion self and others. So they get to pay upfront for their hospital needs. As I see it, it would relieve pressure on all healthcare workers. And this should be applied all over the Commonwealth, optionally the US and EU could decide to do the same.

In this there will be an upside for the US. Most of these weird anti-vaxxer people are Trump supporters, so as they all die, the US sees a second benefit, Ronald McDonald Trump will no longer have the votes he needs to enter office again. His voters will be spread all over the 144,000 cemeteries, or spread over rose bushes, and I am Republican in nature, so this is not some democrat feud. 

So the call for change is given, I hope that this sentiment will make it all over the Commonwealth, the US and the EU. And in this my anger does not subside. You see people are allowed to be as stupid as they can be, but when we get a video of some anti-vaxxer tosser shouting at an exhausted nurse with a bullhorn, things have gone way too far and now we will give them a sample of consequence. So call your MP, call your Congressman, your Senator. Write them a letter of demanded change and make it clear, if people want to be anti-vaxxer, that is allowed, but on their OWN dime and this might lower the hospital pressures as well, so there are more benefits. Let these people pay, literally let them pay for their own stupidity.

This has gone on for way too long!

1 Comment

Filed under Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

October 10, 2021 · 19:46

Choices that some make

We all have this. We make choices and that is not against anyone (or anything for that matter). So I was a bit on the fence when I saw ‘Frances Haugen takes on Facebook: the making of a modern US hero’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/10/frances-haugen-takes-on-facebook-the-making-of-a-modern-us-hero). First off, let’s start by saying I have nothing against Frances Haugen or her point of view. I do find the setting ‘the making of a modern US hero’ debatable. I feel certain that it was not her setting to become a hero or to see heroism. It is the paint stage that the massively less than credible media is taking. If big tech was not under attack the media would most likely have been more moderate in their colours of painting brushes. 

We get told “The 37-year-old logged out of Facebook’s company network for the last time in May and last week was being publicly lauded a “21st-century American hero” on Washington’s Capitol Hill” yet where was the media these last three years? Collecting Facebook advertising money I reckon. So when we are given “I believe Facebook’s products harm children, stoke division and weaken our democracy” I do not disagree, I have no data to disagree, but the media had that, they have had a clear picture for years, but for the media flaming creates emotion, it create click bitches and it generates digital advertisement income. But Facebook was an eager tool for a long time and you do not bite the hand that feeds you and the media has shown itself very protective of ANY hand that feeds them. If there is one part I disagree with (to some extent) then it is “She repeatedly referred to the company choosing growth and profit over safety and warned that Facebook and Instagram’s algorithms – which tailor the content that a user sees – were causing harm”, it is the “which tailor the content that a user sees – were causing harm” part I cannot completely agree with. I do believe that Frances Haugen is sincere in her approach, but ‘causing harm’ requires evidence, evidence that is a lot harder to obtain. Perhaps that was given, and I did not look at all the documents, but there is a stage, optionally two. The first is “choosing growth and profit over safety”, that seems clear, the entire emotional flames might be part of that, yet there is a stage of “choosing growth and profit over increased safety”, it seems like a small step, yet the stage is proving that it was all against “profit over decreased safety” that matters. We create safety, or we stop increased safety, none of that is on Facebook, only if a clear view of “profit over decreased safety” is shown Facebook will have a larger problem. You see, no matter how we point the fingers on ‘flaming’ in the end it is the view of the less than articulate person lacking a decent education and the US is so protective of its First Amendment, that nothing goes anywhere. The Media has been using that stick to slap donkeys, horses, dogs and people for decades. In this I have some issues with Democrat Senator Ed Markey (D-MA), when we are given   “Facebook is like big tobacco, enticing young kids with that first cigarette,” said Senator Markey at the hearing. “Congress will be taking action. We will not allow your company to harm our children and our families and our democracy, any longer.” I cannot completely disagree, yet in the 70’s and 80’s there was clear evidence on Big Tobacco, but the US government and corporations had no issues taxing and grabbing marketing dollars wherever they could. (Example at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Vg_QVAEJtg) If Facebook is just as bad, you should have had years of evidence and I believe you had it but these political big wigs were unwilling to act. A model based on selling advertisements that brought in billions, what was there not to love and for the most the media loved it too. So I am not arguing with the views that Frances Haugen is bringing, it is the views of those heralding her now. And too many of them should be seriously afraid. When hackers and others start looking into data and the timeline of decisions a few people in the Senate, Congress and a few other players will sweat drops of death. 

And my view? Well CNBC did that work with ‘Facebook spent more on lobbying than any other Big Tech company in 2020’ (at https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/22/facebook-spent-more-on-lobbying-than-any-other-big-tech-company-in-2020.html) at the beginning of the year. So when someone grabs an abacus and digs on where the $19 million plus went, some politicians might not like the answers the people are given, and that is the part that is out in the open, the setting of Stakeholders and media for Facebook might optionally double or triple that amount. It is the highest of all the FAANG group and almost twice as much as Microsoft, so what do you think will happen next? 

It took 20 years for big tobacco to get into real trouble, as such if there is a parallel there is every chance that something is done by 2040, as such Facebook has plenty of time. But in all this, there is a part missing, which is not on anyone (and not on CNBC either). The stage where the people get to know the names the lobbyists and how these politicians voted on Facebook and other first amendment issues. That is the part no one gets to see and I very much doubt that this will change any day soon.

And my point of view is seen with Christopher Wylie when we get “Wylie said he had relived his own experience as a whistleblower by watching Haugen. But he also found the flashbacks frustrating – because nothing has changed.” The Cambridge Analytica is out there and even as the New York Times gives us 2 days ago “We’re Smarter About Facebook Now”, I personally am considering that they are full of it. They needed to be smarter about it close to 2 years ago, so weren’t they? Isn’t that equally a decent question to ask? So as Wylie gives us “The fact that we are still having a conversation about what is happening, not what are we going to do about it, I find slightly exasperating,” shows us clearly the inaction of politics, of policies and the lack of actions by the law, global law no less. Fir we look at the US, but the laws and the actions by the EU and the Commonwealth is equally lacking, so why is that? It is due to the choices some make and the consequences we all have to face and in a stage where every coffer is empty and every nation has a credit card that has a maximised debt, acting against a company bringing in millions in taxable dollars is often not considered.

We all make choices, that is not a sin, but after the Catholics, a second deal where the choosing parties are giving sanctum to those endangering kids is debatable on several levels, that being said, those opposing Facebook will need to prove it and that is not an easy matter to do, because as I state, it is not about “choosing growth and profit over safety”, it will be about “profit versus decreased safety” and that is a very different data stage and the evidence will not be easy to obtain, mainly because the users are often the problem too. Facebook gives us “Facebook’s policy is to delete accounts if there is proof that the account holder is under 13 – they won’t be able to take action if they can’t be sure of the child’s age.” And they try to adhere to that, yet there have been plenty of indications that some were younger, but the stage of “if there is proof that the account holder is under 13”, as such the account stays in place. And when we see several sources give us (unverified for honesty) “A friend has a 9-year-old son and they have allowed him to create his own Facebook account” how can Facebook be blamed and that setting will taint the evidence as well, as such it will take a long time for actual action to start, it is not a setting that Frances Haugen might have seen coming, but in a land of laws, evidence is key (unless political issues take precedence). 

There is a lot more on the Facebook front and it will take months for it all to surface and when it does there is more than likely several months of contemplation and inaction, all because those who could act would not. Who is to blame there? I will let you work that one out.

Have a great day!

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,