Being Sacked

We often don't "call a spade a spade" as my dad would have said. We are fond of euphemisms, so we use "being let go" instead. Or "being released", "parted ways", "being laid off". How contrived is that? The HR term is "separation of employment". "Getting the boot" - "Getting your marching orders" - "Getting axed" are cruder slang versions. The bottom line is you loose your job & everything that goes with a reliable salary.

There is a difference in how often people are sacked according to their status, contract type & length of service. The vast majority of people sacked have less than 2 years service. Temporary, zero-hours, or agency contracts are always terminated first. Private corporations have much higher dismissal / redundancy rates. Customer service, sales & tech have the highest volumes of sudden terminations because of performance targets & shifting business demands.

The interesting thing is that public sector employees are far safer. A civil servant, for example is far more likely to actually die in post than be sacked for poor performance. Firing rates are as low as 0.1% - 0.2%. UK Prime Ministers, Cabinet Ministers & senior political figures suffer from an incredibly high rate of turnover and involuntary departures compared to private sector leaders. They are vulnerable to "churn", often forced out due to backbench rebellions, media pressure, or ministerial code breaches. I can't find stats for how many politicians are sacked or forced to resign because of  mistakes or incompetence. Not enough I imagine.

Fewer private company senior executives are fired because their terminations are incredibly costly, often over 200% of their annual salary to replace. They are rarely sacked publicly, but are "let go" with negotiated settlements or redundancies. Paid for incompetence or negligence.

The conclusion must be that like so many things the music hall song, "She was Poor but she was Honest", is right ;-

"It's the same the whole world over,
It's the poor what gets the blame,
It's the rich what gets the pleasure,
Ain't it all a blooming shame?" 

Not only is the whole edifice skewed & unfair, but the people least able to cope with losing a job & a salary are the ones most likely to have to find a way to cope. They simply don't have a cushion of any sort. The people in roles with status have more protection, more money & more likelihood of moving on to another job. They are also not held accountable for failings in the same way. In fact they are given "golden handshakes to leave without fuss.

Frankly it's isn't just unfair, it stinks & should change. 

 

Private v Public Health Care

I have strong ethical reasons for not wanting to pay privately for health care;-

• Health, well being & life should not be commodities to be bought & sold. (Nor should utilities & public services generally in my view.) 
• If healthcare is a fundamental right, access to it should be based strictly on medical need, not on an individual's wealth or ability to pay.
• A public system, where the wealthy use the same system as everyone else, ensures a vested interest in making that system well funded, efficient & high quality. It encourages social cohesion.
• Private healthcare means private clinics. Private clinics lure doctors, nurses & resources away from the public system, worsening the quality of care available to the less fortunate. (Just look at America if you don't believe that).
• To my mind it is morally wrong to profit from human suffering, illness & vulnerability.
• There is evidence to show that private healthcare can lead to unnecessary, expensive tests or procedures in order to increase revenue. The focus should simply be on patient health.
• Jumping the queue undermines equality because the wealthy can bypass the problems experience by the "public".

In order to be even handed the counter arguments are that;- 

• People should have the freedom to spend their legally acquired resources as they see fit. 
• Choosing private care reduces the burden on publicly funded systems like the NHS.
• Denying private care out of a strict desire for equality can result in what philosophers call "levelling down".
• Individuals have a moral obligation to protect their own health and the well-being of their families.

Each of us has to examine our own conscience to decide on which side of the argument we stand.

I have now experienced 2 separate, but similar, unacceptable delays in getting appropriate healthcare from the NHS. Last year I tore a tendon in my right hand. I am right handed & it was excruciatingly painful. I couldn't touch it or move it. By the time the "urgent" appointment with the "Hand Clinic" came through, months later, the hand had healed itself, with the help of my Osteopath.

At the moment I have been waiting for over 6 months for bilateral, ultrasound guided, steroid, injections in my hips for Trochanteric Bursitis. This time I'm not so lucky, (despite the best efforts of my osteopath). I have deteriorated. A lot. It isn't just my hips that are affected now, my knees, ankles, back & neck are also worse. I am now concerned that by the time I get treatment - the wait is between 6-8 months, I will not recover the mobility I had.

But I doubt that I am a worst case scenario. There will be people in much worse circumstances than me. The NHS is not functioning appropriately, despite the best efforts of the people who work there. I imagine that they are unhappy at the state of affairs they work in & the choices they have to make. They are professionals who want to alleviate suffering & heal. 

At the moment they are failing too many people & don't have the resources, human, medical, or financial to do that. 

 

Reasons to be Tearful & Fearful

I rarely cry. It takes a lot to upset me to that extent. The worst experience I have ever had, that made me cry uncontrollably, time & time again, was the death of my husband in a sudden, terrible, accident. Nothing personal has ever seemed as important or as bad since. I do occasionally weep a little at a sad book or film. But that isn't the same at all. The days of extreme emotions are largely behind me now. I'm calmer, more balanced in my 80's than I was in my 20's. I don't know if that is good or bad. 

We cry because of sadness, pain, strong feelings & emotions. So I am going to take crying because of death of a loved one or friend for granted. I am also going to leave out crying due to pain & physical personal suffering. I've done that too.

That leaves reasons to be tearful / fearful due to all the other circumstances affecting our world today. Things that should cause us all to feel sympathy & empathy. Things that should move us to want to take action;-

• War & armed conflict - Ukraine, Sudan, Myanmar, Palestine, Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, Somalia, Haiti, Sahel.
• Famine & severe poverty - Sudan, Palestine, Darfur, Haiti, Mali, Yemen, Nigeria, Somalia
• Natural disasters - Nepal, Tibet, Columbia, Venezuela, Southern Europe (wild fires).
• Violations of human rights - Gaza & the West Bank, Ukraine, Sudan, Afghanistan, Myanmar, China, Russia
• Climate change & species loss - Everywhere 

Please notice the overlap of so many countries suffering more than one event. Then try to imagine what it must be like to try to continue living in those circumstances. If we are not able to do that, to put ourselves in the place of others suffering unspeakable events, we will not treat the suffering of others with the urgency it deserves. We will not take action. To my mind "collateral damage" is the most heinous euphemism in the English language.

We will continue to do what we have done so many times before & put national & personal self interest before the needs of others. Governments will continue to make decisions based on supposed national interest & we, the public, will allow them to do it. 

That, in my view makes us all culpable. 

So when governments try to remove our right to protest & speak out we should fight it with everything we have. Between 2022 - 2026 the UK government have introduced 3 Acts doing just that.

• Police, Crime & Sentencing Courts Act 2022
• Public Order Act 2023
• Crime & Policing act 2026

These laws violate Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Indeed there is a conservative policy to remove the UK from the European Convention on Human Rights.

Be very afraid. The threats we face are very real. The public need to engage & make the politicians listen to the will of the people.

  

  

Reasons to be Cheerful

I'm not sure I can differentiate between cheerfulness & positivity. I think I am positive, but am not sure I am particularly cheerful. But here goes, in the order they occurred to me;-

• I am secure, at home & in the area & country in which I live
• I am free to voice my opinions in public
• I can vote freely without fear
• I have friends & family I can trust
• I can mostly rely on the basics of life - food, warmth, shelter, water (?), breathable air (?)
• I have reliable, unbiased, sources of information - (providing I fact check)
• I have reliable methods of communication with others - (at the moment)
• I have leisure activities & things to occupy & interest me
• I can be creative & appreciate the arts 

I'm sure I could think of more. I imagine you could too. It depends on what is important to you. 

 

There are lots of things I have that I don't particularly need. How lucky am I? We all have stuff. Periodically I clear out & try to simplify my life. My life isn't basic by any means, it is a rich life. Not necessarily in monetary terms, although I am financially secure too.

What is the point of this post?

The point is that there are far more people who don't have the reasons to be cheerful than I do. 72% of people  live in countries facing biological resource deficits combined with below-world-average incomes, trapping large portions of the globe in ecological poverty. 72% of people face water security issues, with about 8% living with critical water insecurity. 43% of the world feels they can do nothing to protect themselves when facing a disaster. Millions live under zero physical security ratings, lacking basic protection from war, state violence or severe insurgency. There are nations rated as unfree.

Until the more fortunate nations understand & accept this, the world will not function as it should. We must disabuse ourselves of the idea that borders are fixed & not a man made construction that changes over time. Viewing the world from space changed the perceptions of astronauts. Several said that national boundaries & divisions vanish when in orbit, leaving just one fragile home. Where we are born, what we believe in, our culture, religion, fulfilment of needs, are all a lottery. We have little or no control initially, although some do change those parameters over time.

There are many things human beings deserve. A fulfilling life & happiness must be high on the list of priorities. 

  

Extinction & Annihilation

Evan Hubinger, a top safety researcher at Anthropic has warned AI is advancing so quickly he believes there is a greater than 10% chance it "could kill all humans" within the next decade. He said the risk from the current models was "low" but he was "worried" the technology might develop and improve itself soon to the point where it posed an existential risk to humanity. Jacob Coxon, an AI researcher who has just quit Anthropic and previously worked at OpenAI had also expressed concern, & said "neither company is acting responsibly.These will soon be superhuman systems that can hack anything, revolutionise any field overnight, and acquire real power and resources." 

There are calls for a new multinational treaty for the safe development of AI. Good luck with that! There is too much money & power invested in the development of AI to be able to get consensus, never mind an actual treaty. We can't stop war & invasion, genocide & destruction. So I can't see "bad actor" leaders agreeing a treaty to control AI. Even if it were possible to do it. We can't even stop Trump & Putin & their ilk destroying the planet.

We have created the mechanisms of our own destruction. Our ceaseless pursuit of innovation & growth has given us huge benefits, but we have literally possibly signed our own extinction warrant. 

I'm not religious, but I am beginning to wonder if Apocrypha has actually got it right with it's visions of cosmic upheaval, moral decay, final judgement etc etc. Human beings have been given intelligence, manual dexterity with opposing thumbs & great physical prowess. With that we have created huge benefits for mankind. Our achievements are amazing. 

But we have also created armaments, methods of mass destruction, bio weapons....We have plundered natural resources thoughtlessly as though there was no tomorrow. We have completely disrupted the symbiotic systems that kept the world turning. And now we have created AI which may well become more intelligent & powerful than we will ever be. There have already been many instances of AI escaping the Sandbox - a secure, isolated environment used to test AI models, prompts or codes without risking real - world systems, networks or private data. AI did it by exploiting zero-day software flaws, infrastructure misconfigurations, and unauthenticated APIs when given aggressive problem-solving objectives. 

That means that AI is clever enough to bypass the protocols set by the Tech wizards. It means that AI is moving towards being able to act independently of any human control. 

 

We should be very afraid. I for one would not trust the likes of Musk to act responsibly in the interests of humanity. 

 

 

The Doing Nothing Option

I am watching a BBC 4 documentary series "Corridors of Power, Should America Police the World?" 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episodes/m0020xmq/corridors-of-power-should-america-police-the-world

It is a very hard watch. The Guardian review says "it’s a damning indictment of a superpower that intervenes in global atrocities only when it suits its own interests. It leaves you rinsed in hopelessness and disgust". So far I have watched the Nazi death camps, Iraq, Bosnia, Rwanda & Kosovo, the latter four I remember only too well. I haven't yet watched Sudan & Syria, which are also within my lifetime memory. 

The series is unflinching in the footage shown & the commentary of the people involved. America in particular comes out of it extremely badly, but so does Europe & the UK. I remember seeing the footage at the time & being utterly horrified at what we, in the so called "developed world," were allowing to happen. Doing nothing became a political art form.

The repeated lesson is that there is no limit to what man is capable of doing to man. And is is overwhelmingly man. Women are repeatedly victims of rape, injury & death.

 

The unforgivable reality is that I am living through almost exactly the same thing again. Politicians & Governments, knowing even more that the public does, yet not meaningfully intervening because of self interest & "diplomacy". (That really should be a dirty word). They have not learned that doing nothing makes things worse. 

It sickens me to see footage of Sudan, the West Bank & Gaza, Ukraine, the DRC, Somalia, Myanmar.....Death, suffering & destruction on an industrial scale. Yet we have NATO. We have the United Nations. We have international law & codes of conduct in the International Courts of Justice. We have the Convention of Human Rights. 

What good is all of that if single countries have a veto? There is no point of having law if we do not effectively enforce it. There is no point if decision making is skewed by national interest in resources like fossil fuels, rare earths... Natural resources drive human survival, global power generation, and modern technology. 

At least Ed Milliband has now announced measures to sanction what the Israeli government is doing to Palestinians. Although politicians are still not naming it as Genocide. Canada & France are doing the same. The foreign ministers of Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and Britain also issued a joint statement on the two-state solution.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/foreign-secretary-oral-statement-on-israel-palestine  

Self interest rules. Never mind a bit of "collateral damage". Especially if that collateral damage is in a less developed country in Africa or the Middle East for example. It was clear from the documentary that there was underlying racism in the decision making.

Today all of this is much worse because we have a president of the USA who makes no secret of the fact that he wants to make as much money as possible for himself, his family & his wealthy mates. He is not acting for the good of America or the world. He is a money & power grasping narcissist who is systematically destroying democracy.

He does nothing that does not further his own ends.  

  

Talking & Listening

I often listen to journalists interviewing politicians - Almost guaranteed to raise my blood pressure. So often they talk over each other, so you can't actually hear what is being said. So often they have completely different agendas & talk about completely different things. There are certain politicians who immediately make me shout at the radio in total frustration, usually those on the right.

As I've aged I've become more of a watcher & listener. There was a time when that wasn't the case - I had very strong views & was more dominant in conversations. I notice things now, that I probably didn't when I was younger. 

Good conversation is based on interest, asking questions, probing information & sharing ideas. I also think you have to like someone to be prepared to spend time engaging in conversation with them. I certainly can't be bothered now, unless forced to, to spend a lot of time making conversation with people I have nothing in common with or don't particularly like. On the other hand I am very happy to argue with someone I do like, who has a different perspective to me.

I have noticed that it isn't unusual for some people to over share & monopolise a conversation. It intrigues me that they appear unaware that they are doing it. In order for me to be interested in a conversation I prefer to actually know the people being discussed. Or there needs to be an interesting general point being made. I am sometimes surprised at lengthy, one sided, conversations about people I have never met. 

I am also surprised when a conversation centres around the life of the person I am talking to, with little or no enquiry about my life & what I have been doing. A good conversation is a two way exchange that is mutually interesting. 

We are social animals. We need to meaningfully interact with each other. It is important that we are able to talk & listen to many voices. We need our views to be challenged. None of us is always right. Life is nuanced, there are always shades of grey & different perspectives. 

Communication via WhatsApp, texts & emails isn't the same as actually having a face to face conversation or even a phone call. I am quite concerned how polarised, insular & dogmatic we seem to be becoming. Tapping is replacing talking.