The BBC will print a lie and then remove posts and even ban posters for daring to counter blatent lies.

The BBC america site will ban people on hearsay and innuendo for life without any appeal or reasoned debate discussion or even listening to the person banned. Just as americans did in gitmo. russians in the gulag (though thank god being banned from the BBC is not really a big deal) it is a strange stance for the BBC to take.

And the bit at the bottom of the page about being sure you have your facts right.
That doesn’t apply to the BBC america blog apparently.They have allowed libellous comments about michelle Obama getting given money for nothing when she took paid possitions.
A reliculas farce of moderation there has led to near a on revolt.

But that is history, we seek the future.

Some management principles:
You get 2 out of 3, cheap, pretty and fast (a pretty girl who’s fast don’t come cheap). We can’t afford expensive now, so it’s a trade-off between pretty and fast. We don’t have time to waste, so forget pretty. Which means we must be prepared to get brutal. An odd suggestion in an ethics debate, but someone has to fly the kite.

A first step: get the courts working on time. They must cut their coats according to their cloth, and clear the backlog by the end of the year: that means no more Term Calendars, no more deferments, each case can have so much time and no longer (depending on the load to clear and the 220 days available, working all weekends and onwards), divided 40% on each side and 20% for judgement. These Bleak House proceedings must stop, innocent men lie in prison on remand while judges take their ease. Any judge who fails, even once, demote him to a Peter Principal level he can handle. Away with the 195 9-5 working days they allow themselves, when in a crisis a manager signs up to work the hours necessary and it’s a crisis there now. If they don’t like it, either ship out or staff up, without increasing the spend: make the buildings work for a living, 24/24 365.25/365.25. Yes to night courts to clear the remand cases – who wouldn’t want to do all possible to regain his freedom, over 50% of relmand prisoners are innocent? – yes to stringent curfews while awaiting prison, yes to amplified punishments for non-cooperation, ie just as sentences can be cut for good behaviour, so they can be increased for bad behaviour. That means defaulting on a suspended or probationary sentence must receive more than the balance not served, Rahere suggests restarting from zero with the period on conditional liberty added to the top. That means a rapist on bail gets double the sentence if he offends while on bail, in the least of matters.
I said it would be brutal and brutal it will have to be if we ever hope to come out of this.

The reason for this is that we need a hammer to deal with companies. There is a case for a National ID system, and it’s this: every man should be able to check the honesty of the people he’s dealing with. A man has a right to a presumption of innocence ONLY WHEN HE IS INNOCENT, let’s see the criminal and civil records up front. A Director of a Company which goes bust is responsible for the fact, it should be visible his Record (and to stop Directors jumping ship, that should also apply to all Directors who resigned up to five years earlier). Whether a ticket for speeding or RBS, a trail of scam companies or nothing at all, it should be seen.

Then, and only then, can we turn to the legislature, for we need a tool to hold them accountable with.

It can never be pinned down and never should be, Humans have the unique? capability to positively engage with ethics which is why a jury of 12 people drawn from diverse walks of life (no matter how complex a case) is the only way to maintain justice in society in my view.

That principle has been eroded away by an increasingly complicated legal language leading to claims that many cases are ‘too complicfated’ for trial by jury. most isssues are actually pretty simply at their core, they are only made complicated because it is in someones interests to do so.

We are hard wired for greed and it requires constant vigilance to keep it in balance, even the quakers were done in by a hady mix of chocolate and cash it seems.

I cam see the temptation there i have to admit.

Jericoa

Hasn’t anyone told you? There is only one real god. Money.

Yes. “Ethics” does allow more scope for discussion.

#speaking the truth, even when it is difficult

This the difficult one!

I’ve resigned two jobs ‘cos I knew speaking the truth would have me fired. When the boss asks, and you know him well enough to know better than answer truthfully, you can either squirm, dodge the issue, go for it, or leave without the screaming match.

I think one is missing at least for us Brits. We do not accept compliments with grace!

I’ve yet to meet a business man who lived up to these ideals. Do you know any?

Maybe I want a simple life. One that many people can understand. Morals – much simpler.

Maybe I can begin to understand Honesty and Truth. Maybe other people can understand as well.

Below an excerpt from an article on the Quakers. How do you feel reading this.

# speaking the truth, even when it is difficult

# paying people fair wages for their work

# giving one’s employer the right amount of labour for one’s pay

# saying difficult things with grace and tact

# receiving difficult sayings gracefully

# guarding one’s reputation for honesty, fairness, and fidelity

# taking responsibility for one’s actions and their results

# fulfilling one’s commitments

# taking care of items entrusted to one

# being open to the ideas of others but not being too easily swayed by them

# confronting lapses in integrity in oneself and in others

# giving credit to others for their contributions

# assessing people and situations fairly and accurately

# avoiding spending beyond one’s means through the use of credit

Could it also be argued that politician should not be ‘paid’ and have their expenses reimbused only, how realistically could this be enforced? They can make donations to political parties capped and transparent why not politician salaries/expenses.

The point that needs addressing also is dual interest. All interests should be declared and published, especially directorships look at all the saga with the Lords.

As the backlash of all the greed and actions over the last few months expands, there may be an initial need/requirement for better morals, at least for a bit before we fall back in our old way (I fear)

As long as some bank remain in the control of the State, (and other large organisations, civil service etc) then it could be written into the control of the board, eg specific targets that are measured, expecting commitment from the board member, say paying/releasing bonuses after 5 year or something like this