Category Archives: cool

Catfish Quote

They used to take cod from Alaska all the way to China. They’d keep them in vats in the ship. By the time the codfish reached China, the flesh was mush and tasteless. So this guy came up with the idea that if you put these cods in these big vats, put some catfish in with them and the catfish will keep the cod agile. And there are those people who are catfish in life. And they keep you on your toes. They keep you guessing, they keep you thinking, they keep you fresh. And I thank go for the catfish because we would be droll, boring and dull if we didn’t have somebody nipping at our fin.

Vince Pierce – Catfish (The Movie)

 

catfish_quote_wp_ss_20140725_0003

John Perry Barlow: Which side of history do you want to be on?

“The main thing here is for people to recognize that what we’re doing is creating the foundations of the future in a very fundamental way.

I mean we’re building the future that we all might want or all might not want, depending on our current vested interests.

I think it takes a really crummy ancestor to want to maintain his current business model at the expense of his descendant’s ability to understand the world around them.

And if you really want to figure out which side you’re on, ask yourself what’s going to make you a better ancestor?

John Perry Barlow
Co-founder, Electronic Frontier Foundation

Interviewed in the feature documentary “Downloaded” aired on SBS.

Helsinki making car ownership pointless in 10 years

An interesting, challenging idea… why not!

http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/jul/10/helsinki-shared-public-transport-plan-car-ownership-pointless?CMP=twt_gu

Helsinki’s ambitious plan to make car ownership pointless in 10 years

Finland’s capital hopes a ‘mobility on demand’ system that integrates all forms of shared and public transport in a single payment network could essentially render private cars obsolete

Helsinki, Finland.
Urban mobility, rethought … Helsinki, Finland. Photograph: Hemis/Alamy

The Finnish capital has announced plans to transform its existing public transport network into a comprehensive, point-to-point “mobility on demand” system by 2025 – one that, in theory, would be so good nobody would have any reason to own a car.

Helsinki aims to transcend conventional public transport by allowing people to purchase mobility in real time, straight from their smartphones. The hope is to furnish riders with an array of options so cheap, flexible and well-coordinated that it becomes competitive with private car ownership not merely on cost, but on convenience and ease of use.

Subscribers would specify an origin and a destination, and perhaps a few preferences. The app would then function as both journey planner and universal payment platform, knitting everything from driverless cars and nimble little buses to shared bikes and ferries into a single, supple mesh of mobility. Imagine the popular transit planner Citymapper fused to a cycle hire service and a taxi app such as Hailo or Uber, with only one payment required, and the whole thing run as a public utility, and you begin to understand the scale of ambition here.

That the city is serious about making good on these intentions is bolstered by the Helsinki Regional Transport Authority’s rollout last year of a strikingly innovative minibus service called Kutsuplus. Kutsuplus lets riders specify their own desired pick-up points and destinations via smartphone; these requests are aggregated, and the app calculates an optimal route that most closely satisfies all of them.

All of this seems cannily calculated to serve the mobility needs of a generation that is comprehensively networked, acutely aware of motoring’s ecological footprint, and – if opinion surveys are to be trusted – not particularly interested in the joys of private car ownership to begin with. Kutsuplus comes very close to delivering the best of both worlds: the convenient point-to-point freedom that a car affords, yet without the onerous environmental and financial costs of ownership (or even a Zipcar membership).

But the fine details of service design for such schemes as Helsinki is proposing matter disproportionately, particularly regarding price. As things stand, Kutsuplus costs more than a conventional journey by bus, but less than a taxi fare over the same distance – and Goldilocks-style, that feels just about right. Providers of public transit, though, have an inherent obligation to serve the entire citizenry, not merely the segment who can afford a smartphone and are comfortable with its use. (In fairness, in Finland this really does mean just about everyone, but the point stands.) It matters, then, whether Helsinki – and the graduate engineering student the municipality has apparently commissioned to help it design its platform – is proposing a truly collective next-generation transit system for the entire public, or just a high-spec service for the highest-margin customers.

It remains to be seen, too, whether the scheme can work effectively not merely for relatively compact central Helsinki, but in the lower-density municipalities of Espoo and Vantaa as well. Nevertheless, with the capital region’s arterials and ring roads as choked as they are, it feels imperative to explore anything that has a realistic prospect of reducing the number of cars, while providing something like the same level of service.

To be sure, Helsinki is not proposing to go entirely car-free. (Many people in Finland have a summer cottage in the countryside, and rely on a car to get to it.) But it’s clear that urban mobility badly needs to be rethought for an age of commuters every bit as networked as the vehicles and infrastructures on which they rely, but who retain expectations of personal mobility entrained by a century of private car ownership. Helsinki’s initiative suggests that at least one city understands how it might do so.

Thanks CT.

This is bang on. Good to see some good people agreeing. I don’t feel nearly as mad.

http://www.afr.com/Page/Uuid/1fec72e4-07d2-11e4-a983-9084720e3436

ROSS GARNAUT AND PETER DAWKINS

Melbourne forum aims for politics-free economic thought

Melbourne forum aims for politics-free economic thought

The discussion of necessary reforms is dominated by special pleading by vested interests. Photo: Gabriele Charotte

ROSS GARNAUT AND PETER DAWKINS

Australia needs rigorous, independent economic policy debate and analysis to inform economic policy. The Melbourne Economic Forum seeks to contribute to meeting that need by bringing to account the considerable analytic capacity in economics based in the city.

A joint endeavour of the University of Melbourne and Victoria University, this new forum will bring together 40 leading economists, from or with institutional connections to Melbourne to discuss the great economic policy issues confronting Australia and the world.

The forum is independent of vested interests and partisan political connections. It will not support the position of any political party or campaign of any group. It will focus on analysis of policy in the public interest. Almost any policy proposal has implications for the distribution of incomes and wealth and income amongst Australians. Our objective will be to make these implications explicit and to point out their implications for wider conceptions of the public interest.

It would be surprising if high quality analysis of policy choice for Australia does not, from time to time, earn the criticism of participants from all corners of the political contest and from many groups with vested interests in particular uses of public resources and government power. The test of the forum’s value will be its success in illuminating the consequences of policy choice and not its immediate and direct influence on government decisions.

Through the final four decades of last century, dispassionate economic analysis and debate played a major role in illuminating government decisions on economic policy. Rational economic analysis became more important in underpinning serious discussion of policy choice. It emerged from interaction of economists in some of the universities with the predecessor to the Productivity Commission, the national media and later the public service and some parts of the political community. This interaction gradually built support for an open, competitive economy. The ideas preceded their influence, but eventually were of large importance in guiding the reform era under the Hawke, Keating and Howard governments. The resulting reform era laid the foundations for 23 years of economic growth without recession.

CHANGE IS A NECESSITY

 

Business organisations and the trade union movement joined the consensus and joined the discussion in constructive ways. The Business Council of Australia was formed to develop policy positions that were in the national economic interest, though not necessarily in the commercial interests of every one of its members.

Both rational economic analysis in the public interest and Australia’s high standard of living have been weakened by developments in the early twenty first century and are now under threat.

As mineral prices fall, productivity growth languishes and our population ages, Australia needs a new program of economic reform. Yet the discussion of necessary reforms is dominated by special pleading by vested interests.

Of course there is room for disagreement about the size of the challenge Australia faces if it is to maintain high levels of employment and prosperity. And different policy prescriptions will have different consequences for the distribution of the burden of adjustment to a more sombre economic outlook. A lazy policy response would shift the burden onto the shoulders of those Australians who lose their jobs or cannot find one.

Yet a budget that is viewed by the community as unfair is inimical to the task of building a consensus for reform.

The Melbourne Economic Forum will contribute to these debates, starting with a session on the economic outlook for Australia and the impacts of alternative policy responses. In September we will take on the international policy challenges most pertinent to the G20 meeting in Australia later in the year.

In November, we will venture into the hazardous territory of tax system reform and federal-state financial relations.

Bi-monthly forums in 2015 will tackle issues such as infrastructure, investment, foreign investment and trade policy.

Reviving the tradition of rigorous, independent policy thinking is not a hankering for the past but an essential precondition for a new wave of economic reform to secure employment growth and rising prosperity for all Australians in a far more challenging global economic environment.

Professor Ross Garnaut is professor of economics at the University of Melbourne. Professor Peter Dawkins is vice-chancellor at Victoria University. For more details on the Melbourne Economic Forum see melbourneeconomicforum.com.au.

The Australian Financial Review

The Vitality Institute: Investing In Prevention – A National Imperetive

Vitality absolutely smash it across the board…

  • Investment
  • Leadership
  • Market Creation
  • Developing Health Metrics
  • Everything…!

Must get on to these guys…..

PDF: Vitality_Recommendations2014_Report

PDF: InvestingInPrevention_Slides

Presentation: https://goto.webcasts.com/viewer/event.jsp?ei=1034543 (email: blackfriar@gmail.com)

 

From Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapsen/2014/06/18/how-corporate-america-could-save-300-billion-by-measuring-health-like-financial-performance/

Bruce Japsen, Contributor

I write about health care and policies from the president’s hometown

How Corporate America Could Save $300 Billion By Measuring Health Like Financial Performance

The U.S. could save more than $300 billion annually if employers adopted strategies that promoted health, prevention of chronic disease and measured progress of “working-age” individuals like they did their financial performance, according to a new report.

The analysis, developed by some well-known public health advocates brought together and funded by The Vitality Institute, said employers could save $217 billion to $303 billion annually, or 5 to 7 percent of total U.S. annual health spending by 2023, by adopting strategies to help Americans head off “non-communicable” diseases like cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular and respiratory issues as well as mental health.

To improve, the report’s authors say companies should be reporting health metrics like BMI and other employee health statuses just like they regularly report earnings and how an increasing number of companies report sustainability. Corporations should be required to integrate health metrics into their annual reporting by 2025, the Vitality Institute said. A link to the entire report and its recommendations is here. 

“Companies should consider the health of their employees as one of their greatest assets,” said Derek Yach, executive director of the Vitality Institute, a New York-based organization funded by South Africa’s largest health insurance company, Discovery Limited.

Those involved in the report say its recommendations come at a time the Affordable Care Act and employers emphasize wellness as a way to improve quality and reduce costs.

“Healthy workers are more productive, resulting in improved financial performance,” Yach said. “We’re calling on corporations to take accountability and start reporting health metrics in their financial and sustainability reports.  We believe this will positively impact the health of both employees and the corporate bottom line.”

The Institute brought together a commission linked here that includes some executives from the health care industry and others who work in academia and business. Commissioners came from Microsoft (MSFT);  the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation; drug and medical device giant Johnson & Johnson (JNJ); health insurer Humana (HUM); and the U.S. Department of Health and Humana Services.

The Vitality Institute said up to 80 percent of non-communicable diseases can be prevented through existing “evidence-based methods” and its report encourages the nation’s policymakers and legislative leaders to increase federal spending on prevention science at least 10 percent by 2017.

“Preventable chronic diseases such as lung cancer, diabetes and heart disease are forcing large numbers of people to exit the workforce prematurely due to their own poor health or to care for sick relatives,” said William Rosenzweig, chair of the Vitality Institute Commission and an executive at Physic Ventures, which invests in health and sustainability projects. “Yet private employers spend less than two percent of their total health budgets on prevention.  This trend will stifle America’s economic growth for decades to come unless health is embraced as a core value in society.”