On the economics, about micro-, macro- and the economics of ideas.
Beware there be Bears!
London Zoo’s Bears are at Whipsnade, which is closer to me than Marwell, and I am not sure Marwell have them! …
London Zoo’s Bears are at Whipsnade, which is closer to me than Marwell, and I am not sure Marwell have them! …
Is it just me, or are Google’s ads becoming even more intrusive. How does that work, why am I getting shit loads of ads from Wix, udemey, Monday project management, Arsenal sponsored trading software and for phone games! Why are they interrupting stuff made by other people when I have paid for half the infrastructure? Is there another podcast, vlogging plaform?
Oi Google, you can loose eyeballs by posting too much ad-shite! …
Today is a great day; in the USA, works written/created in 1922 become available under the public domain as the 1970’s extension laws durations expire. This is recorded by Ars Technica, in an article entitled, Mickey Mouse and Batman will soon be public domain—here’s what that means. This headline is misleading since these properties won’t become PD until the 2030s. Don’t quite get the maths myself since the international treaties talk of 70 year durations and this looks like 95 years but we do know that this was an exercise in corrupt lobbying power but it would seem that “I’ve got you Babe”, written by the Congressional sponsor of the second extension law, yup, they did it twice, expires in 2060; don’t think I’ll be around to enjoy it for free. What a greedy twat!
Torrentfreak, always worth a read, highlights a debate in Canada where they propose to lengthen copyright duration to the Berne treaty maximum. Bryan Adams, for those of us who remember him argues that long copyright duration benefits intermediaries and distributors, not creators. TF notes that the Canadian law proposes that the creator’s estate can revoke a copyright grant at 25 years after the death of the author and suggests that this should be at 25 years after the initial grant. Sadly unlikely to happen. Very similar to my proposal to Top of the Manifestos at #lab13. …
So much Brexit/Lexit shite in my time line and I have to cook a Xmas lunch and begin my submission to #LewishamDemocracy review. But I have to react …
Someone has circulated the Sqwawkbox Lexit piece on a forum/group that I read, and I feel I need to say:
I have always argued that once those who want to leave have negotiated their best deal, we should ask if that is what is wanted. I am told that it has to be a referendum, I’d take a vote in Parliament because we have already had a General Election since the referendum.
ooOOOoo …
While writing and thinking about Labour Party governance, I asked myself the question how does one measure democraciness? My reading for that article pointed me at two data sets that allow one to answer this question for Nation States. These are the Polity IV index and the Economist Information Unit’s Democracy Index. The key white paper for Polity IV is, CONCEPTUALIZING AND MEASURING DEMOCRACY Evaluating Alternative Indices, by MUNCK & VERKUILEN, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 2002 and the Economist defines its methodology in this paper, The Economist Intelligence Unit’s index of democracy by Laza Kekic dated 2007 which lists their 60 attributes of democracy.
I have decided to examine the Economist’s methodology to see if it can be used to help understand the democraciness of non-Nation State entities. However, I went through the questions and scored the UK according to my own judgements. The rest of this article looks at the Economist’s methodology and my findings about the UK’s democracy. … …
I have over the last 24 hours installed the “Advanced Random Post” plugin and created a “Random” page which lists 7 old articles,with a short excerpt. I did this for me because I now have 14 years of content on this blog, and some of it is worth revisiting, either to show how clever I was, or how wrong I was. You can laugh, I can learn! …
The British Constitution is very simple to understand. Parliament, which means the House of Commons can do what it wants and cannot bind itself or its successors. Unless you can seize control of the Agenda, it seems. …
While writing up the last article, I also looked at “Labour’s Brexit trilemma: in search of the least bad outcome” on the Open Democracy web site. It refers to Rodrik’s trilemma., which was designed to examine the Bretton Woods currency regulations and the international trade regime it spawned. I have marked up the first of these article with what I think are the interesting bits on diigo which can be viewed here. The OD article adopts the trilemma and sees a Lexit option as maximising (national) democracy and national control of economic policy and poses it against a “remain and reform” position which it argues maximises economic integration.
My biggest problem with the trilemma, which was designed to describe the Bretton Woods global currency regime is that it seems to believe that the UK’s democracy is superior to that of the EU. Within the EU, British Citizens are protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights and EU’s Court, which as I an others have mentioned is chock full of the children of the opponents of fascism and Stalinism. It is also a republican construct without a House of Lords, without First Past the Post and without a hereditary Head of State. The people elect the European Parliament, the biggest party in the Parliament nominates the President of the Commission, the members of the Council and Commission are nominated by member state governments and the latter are confirmed and can be removed by the Parliament.
The Open Democracy article, also asks some tough questions of the Lexiters, not the least important being what makes you think that a more independent UK can manage Capital and the economy more effectively; it is clear that the Bexiters in the Tory Party don’t believe this. It also points the impossibility of being independent; the WTO places constraints on Trade Policy and if we want to sign a Trade Agreement with the EU, most of their same red lines will exist. …