Why I don't value value.

There are many words in the English language that are confusing and in my opinion, 'value' is a prime example.  Here are some definitions of value as a noun:

1. Importance, worth, usefulness.

1.1 Material or monetary worth.

1.2 The worth compared to the price paid, e.g. 'good value'.

2. Principles or standards of behaviour.

Value and worth, particularly monetary worth, are, in my opinion, disconnected and often contradictory.  This is particularly relevant in the context of 'adding value'.  Let's take the example of a construction project.  A builder buys a dilapidated property for £100,000.  He spends a further £100,000 renovating it and then sells it for £300,000.  So he has 'added value' to the tune of £300,000 - £200,000 = £100,000.  The monetary value of the property has increased by £100,000.  But I don't see that as an increase in value, I just view it as a price someone is prepared to pay, which provides the builder with £100,000 profit.

The builder's profit, which he might call 'added value', of £100,000, equates to $166,000.  Why have I done that conversion?  Because 80% of humanity lives on less than $10 a day.  So if it took the builder, say, six months to complete his project, he will have earned (if that's the right word!) almost $1,000 per day, 100 times more than the highest paid in 80% of the world's population.  So what 'value' is the builder's 'added value' to society.  I would suggest very little because it will probably be ploughed back into more construction projects, with similar out-turns, which only privileged members of society can afford to purchase, certainly not 80% of the global population.

It might appear that I am just knocking the capitalist economy, which for centuries has widened the gap between the haves and have-nots and continues to do so.  But other forms of economic management, like that employed by the former Soviet Union, have also failed miserably.  No I am not knocking economic management systems per se, I am merely pissed off with the flowery rhetoric.  In the example of the building project, for 'added value' read 'excessive profit'.  The commercial businesses that might advertise their capabilities as providing 'value propositions' should really be described as offering products and services at 'rip off prices'.

So there we have it.  I've had my say.  I certainly do not value value!

Depression

The death of Robin Williams on 11 August 2014, shocked the world.  He was an extremely talented actor who was known to have suffered from depression for some years.  At 63 years of age, he decided to take his own life by hanging himself - his personal suffering had come to an end.  But what is depression?  We've all heard people say, or indeed have said it ourselves, "I'm depressed" when what is really meant is "I am fed up because I have had a row/failed an exam/lost my job/etc".  The ups and downs of life are common and natural.  That's not depression.  True depression results in a low mood and other symptoms, day after day, week after week, month after month.

I don't think I have ever suffered from depression, but I do know someone who did and also committed suicide at the age of 63 - my brother Gordon.  He didn't hang himself but instead jumped off Beachy Head, a chalk headland in Southern England.  No one witnessed the event and his body, washed up on the beach, was not discovered for some time and could only be identified from his dental records.

I remember it well and I am ashamed to say that my immediate reaction was anger.  How could he be so selfish and leave behind him so many loved ones, including his wife, a son and a daughter?  It was many years after the event, when in my own mind I started piecing together snippets of information from family and my own recollection of my brother's behaviour during the latter years of his life, that I realised he was probably suffering from depression.  Did that make me feel guilty?  No, not really.  It's easy to think I could have done this, I could have done that,....  I have learnt that an individual life is a complex part of an even more complex organic system and cause-and-effect analyses of human behaviour rarely expose the roots of systemic problems.

So there we have it, two men with very different backgrounds and lifestyles who in the end suffered from depression and the only way each could find to solve his problems, was to end his life.  I now believe I am beginning to understand depression, an understanding that was totally lacking when my brother died.  I think the illness is extremely well defined by the words of the American psychologist, Rollo May:

"Depression is the inability to construct a future."

RIP Gordon and Robin.

Three reasons why this post won't go viral.

Most bloggers wish for the lucky break, the day the latest post goes viral.  Maybe 100,000 views, perhaps a million, or with a world population of over 7 billion, maybe 10 million views are not unreasonable.  So why won't this post go viral?  Well here are three good reasons.

Reason 1: The Title

Readers apparently like precise conclusions, so 'Three reasons why....' Is a good start, but the title is negative.  It explains why something won't happen and readers want positive titles.  'Three reasons why your career aspirations will be achievable' is far more inviting, particularly for young, ambitious high-flyers, and there are millions of those Tweeting, LinkedIn-ing and Facebook-ing everyday!  The title has to be an attention grabber.  It must feed egos and a few #hashtags might give an appearance of appealing to a wider audience - wrongly in my opinion.  The title also needs to have some uniqueness. There have been lots of posts and tweets on the atrocities in Gaza over the past few weeks and if you add the number of views of all such posts, it would be a huge figure.  However, the views per post would be considerably smaller, because the topic Gaza is not unique.  But imagine the following I might get if I described my recent visit to the moon (I wish!), how I had encountered living creatures and my findings had been independently verified.  Oh and by the way, I had posted videos on YouTube of my experiences of meeting the little green men and women.  That would certainly be unique!

Reason 2: My Following

I'm not Richard Branson, Warren Buffett or Bill Gates.  I have a lot in common with them, including two arms, two legs and a brain.  I shit and fart like the rest of them, but the physical similarities are all we have in common.  They are very well known, whereas Alan Hayman, by comparison, has a much smaller following.  Success breeds success, so more people following Richard Branson encourages even more people to follow Richard Branson........and so on.  A large following will, in my opinion, instill even more confidence in the person being followed and therefore, possibly enhance my final reason for viral posts.........

Reason 3: The Content

If you look at TV ratings for various programmes, then in the UK, for example, a 'soap' like Coronation Street might have an audience of around 10 million, whereas a current affairs debate, like Question Time, will struggle to be viewed by more than 2 million.  An easy-viewing, fictional story like Coronation Street is far more popular than an intellectual debate on real events.  Content is a very important factor in the popularity of TV/radio programmes, books, newspapers and blog posts.  Take a look at Amazon.  A popular novel for a Kindle might be priced at £3, whereas a technical book could be as much as £50.  Why?  Because the novel will sell millions and even at a very low margin, will generate good profit.  The technical book with its less popular appeal, will have sales in maybe the low thousands and thus is priced much higher to generate an adequate return for the author, publisher and distributors (including Amazon!).  The content of my blog posts maybe a bit dry for many readers but hopefully stimulating and insightful for others.

So there you have it, three very good reasons why my blog posts are unlikely to go viral - Title, Following and Content.  Am I intending to do anything about this?  In a word -NO!  I aim to satisfy and achieve quality readership rather than quantity of readers.  Yes you, dear reader, are Quality with a capital Q.  I am extremely grateful for your following - Thank You!

The evil spreads like cancer.

Much of the news at the moment is understandably focussed on the slaughter in Gaza.  There have been plenty of analyses of the situation but all the rhetoric doesn't stop the carnage.  It is, in my opinion, symptomatic of an evil streak within the human race that, despite our obvious intelligence, seems to spread like the most deadly cancer within societies.  It is 'legitimised' by vast expenditure and allocation of resources on war machines around the world, usually in the name of 'defence'!  Expenditure on defence increases year-on-year.  Why?  Because one nation will always want to make sure it's defence capability is greater than its enemy's offensive capability.  Of course, the enemy will want to ensure its offensive (which now becomes defensive) capability is greater than its enemy's defensive (which now becomes offensive) capability.  This is what is commonly known as an arms race.

Let's return to Gaza.  A very simplistic analysis of the tragedy is that Hamas is firing rockets at Israel, so Israel is defending itself by bombing the hell out of Gaza.  That, in my opinion , is a very simple summary of the symptom, not the underlying problem.  To try to understand and articulate the latter would require research that would probably take me at least another twenty blog posts.  So I won't try. That said, no matter how tense and for whatever reason that region of the world is, the slightest tension tends to result in resorting to force with highly sophisticated weaponry.  The decision to take military action might only involve a handful of politicians on each side who, by the way, are unlikely to be personally and directly involved in the military action.  You won't see Benjamin Netanyahu or Khaled Meshaal fighting on the streets of Gaza City.   Maybe if that was a requirement, both participants in this dreadful war would feel differently towards achieving a negotiated, lasting settlement.

In my view, the real impediment to peace and catalyst for future military confrontation, is the availability of deadly military capability, which is used as the option of first resort.  I have explained the arms race, which is an example of a vicious circle.  Maybe world governments need to put more effort into converting the viscous circle to a virtuous circle.  If nation A reduces its military capability, then its enemy, nation B, should logically do likewise.  This should lead to nation A continuing its arms reduction........and so it goes on........vicious becomes virtuous.  An unachievable utopia you might think but I'm more optimistic.  The decision for conflict is made by a very small minority of the population.  But those affected by the military actions, defenceless civilians, are a large majority of the population and, for example, in Gaza City the entire community lives in fear and trepidation.

So let the majority have it's say.  Let's stop this foolishness and stem the spread of evil.  A lasting settlement will only, in my opinion, be achievable with progressive and rapid arms reduction, which requires demonstrable action by those nations that are funding the arms race.  War does not determine who is right - only who is left (Bertrand Russell).