It takes an evolved individual to recognise that the only response that will solve this economic crisis is to give money away. The reasoning is simple; if you do not reinvest into the roots of society then its flower will surely whither.
There are any number of phrases and sayings that reinforce this, but a purely economic reasoning that underpins this is; if less money comes down from the top of the wealth pyramid than goes up, then there is going to be a ‘cash flow” problem.
The people at the bottom can’t create wealth or employment unless they are given something to work with, and if the governments print money it disappears in overhead, loan repayments and spiralling inflation, filtering upwards into the ‘safe’ commodity markets. Nature hates imbalance in all things and will always seek to achieve an equilibrium, the greater the imbalance, the bigger the impetus is to push back, which is why nonprofit organisations are the fastest growing sector in business today.
There is recognition here that there is significant pressure on decision makers in the private sector to provide substantial returns for their investors and this necessarily leads to questionable decisions being made. Banks who repackage high risk loans, energy companies who falsify oil reserves or cut corners with safety, food and drink manufacturers who bulk with addictive and harmful chemicals, you name it. The irony is that this does not necessarily represent greed as many of the share holders are pension funds trying to provide security for the old at the cost of a future for the young.
Nonprofits are free of these pressures, because of donations and accounting rules all transactions are transparent. Salaries are open to scrutiny and bonuses non excitant. Other businesses find that they prefer to deal with the nonprofit organisation as there are no hidden agendas a trust reputation relationship is easier to establish; equally there may even be the possibility of positive PR!
The lesson of the Chinese monkey trap is clear; the monkey is trapped by his desire to acquire the fruit and his inability to let go of it when it is in his grasp. It takes a lot of courage to trust and let go, by some it is called “a leap of faith”.
“Be the change you want to see“
– Mohandas Mahatma Ghandi
March 9, 2012 | Categories: charity, communication, current affairs, economy, environment, financial, legal, lifestyle, nature, news, non profit, Politics, religion, Social Issues, social media, Uncategorized | Tags: charity, crisis, economy, giving, politics | Leave a comment
Growing up in Cornwall, we were taught be our elders “Be more aware, I should not have to ask”.
This is a fundamental principle that my organisation is promoting. We believe people are more likely to engage in the process when they are actively engaged in helping in something that ‘speaks’ to them on a personal level.
If we are to escape to fate of global economic collapse then people of every social strata need to accept that they have to help in the task of nurturing the roots of society: “If the roots remain untreated then the flower will surely whither”.
Either the problems that beset our world are everybody’s responsibility or it is nobody’s responsibility. It is now no longer sufficient to say that something is “Somebody else’s problem”, because very quickly it becomes nobody’s problem at all..
Perhaps it is now time for every individual to ask, “How can I make a difference?”, instead of taking the opposite view that “One person can’t make a difference”.
After all, how many people would it actually take to improve this world or even a small part of it?
There is an old challenge that springs to mind “Is there such a thing as a selfless act?”, perhaps the best way to find out is by trying to perform one.
A worthy challenge for anyone, anywhere and at any time.
William Hague (Britain’s Foreign Secretary), would have been better advised to do some fact and logic checking before speaking out.
If history shows us anything it is that governments exert control over people by limiting the communication of information.
The principle of ‘divide’ and conquer definitely applies to any government that feels the need to ‘control’ their people.
Traditionally this is achieved by the careful control of the flow and visibility of information, and also by limiting access to means and methods of communication.
This has been especially true in times of hardship or mass discontent, after all if a populace are unable to communicate they are unable to organize.
Social Media is changing that, and rather than being a revolution what we are seeing is a social “evolution”. Governments are finding it harder to sow the seeds of distrust by spreading fear and exploiting it,. because “The Truth is out There”, on the internet; in words, pictures and HD video.
Where were those weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? President Bush senior is on the record as having said that America would never be held to ransom over the price of oil again whilst he was head of the CIA in the 70’s, did he really believe that none would make the connection?
It is said that there is no profit in war, however is that the truly the case? In the recent conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq vast sums of money have been generated for US arms manufacturers, private security firms, communication specialists and construction contractors all paid for by the oil revenues of those countries and the goodwill of US citizens. Has anyone stopped to count the human cost?
Now that people are self organizing and information concerning activities in these countries are becoming more transparent, the appetite for heavy handed policing of the world is diminishing, or is it? The US has declined to become involved in the problems in Syria and Libya, quite rightly, as these are problems that the Muslim world can resolve themselves. We can act as referees and cry ‘foul’ when human rights are abused; refuse to sell arms and ammunition and perhaps that should be the full extent of our involvement.
But the rumour mills are starting again, this time concerning Iran; are we truly expected to believe that Iran are more of a threat than Syria, Cuba or North Korea? Is this not the same Iran that has not threatened any of their neighbours since the Shah was overthrown? The only war that they have been engaged in was defending a border from an expansive Saddam Hussein who after eight years of war decided Kuwait was an easier target.
What if Iran are just concerned about how it will generate electricity after the oil they are being force to sell runs out? Given that there is also a limited amount of Nuclear fuel in the world, and that it is ‘burnt’ in a reactor, stockpiling makes no sense. Would you stockpile deisel when the tractors in the fields have empty tanks?
Have we yet reached the point where we are a shining example to follow? Learning is a two way street, the financial market in Iran has been completely immune to the recent global economic crisis, I wonder why?