United Nations – Another Scam

For the tsunami relief, it appears that the UN is taking an overhead 300% higher than charities in the private sector. They also don’t want to be too forthcoming on how they money is being spent. For more details please see the following link. (Please note: this is not an endorsement of the Heritage Foundation.)

Korean Farmers, Hong Kong Stock Brokers

It appears that smaller Hong Kong stock brokers are now complaining that they are not getting the kind of 20 month bonuses they were getting before the abolition of the minimum commissions they were guaranteed under the old commission system. Today fees are as low as 0.15% of the trade and smaller brokers are getting a half month commission at the end of the year. Most big arbitrage deals are being done through larger brokerage houses, so they are getting the bigger year end bonuses.

Of course, a person can buy HSBC shares in the US with a commission of $US20 through ETrade, although there might be other taxes to consider (e.g. the US has a capital gains tax and taxes dividents)

The old commission system in Hong Kong (where small brokers paid out 20 month bonuses at year end) unfairly protected smaller brokers by FORCING the buyers to accept a minimum commission or go overseas to buy shares in foreign countries. Kind of like rice buyers in Korea being forced to buy rice from inefficient Korean farmers.

NBC News Takes Worst Reporting Award

From the Notable Quotables Award for worst reporting comes this first place winner from Brian Williams NBC NEWS ANCHOR. [Personally I would hand him a traitor award instead.] Notice how he is putting the first American presidents on the same level as the current Iranian president. This is the kind of moral relativism that should be condemned in the strongest terms possible. As long as people like Mr. Williams anchor nightly news bulletins, America is going to have a much more difficult task defeating radical Islamic based terror – especially if those news anchors are making excuses for the president of Iran. Anyway the text from Notable Quotables:

Slam Uncle Sam Award

Andrea Mitchell: "It is an iconic picture: American hostages, hands bound and blindfolded, being paraded outside the U.S. embassy in Tehran by their captors. But has one of those student radicals now become Iran’s newly elected President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?…Tonight, U.S. intelligence officials say that they will continue to study this, but may never have definitive proof of what the role was of Iran’s new president, Brian." Brian Williams: "Andrea, what would it all matter if proven true? Someone brought up today the first several U.S. Presidents were certainly revolutionaries and might have been called terrorists at the time by the British Crown, after all." Mitchell: "Indeed, Brian." — NBC Nightly News, June 30. [91 points]

Ratzinger’s New World Order

If anyone is any doubt that religion does not try to influence governments and politics in a broad, grand scale, hopefully this post will help. Last year John Paul II called for a new world order in his New Year’s message and it appears that the new pope, Mr. Ratzinger is calling for his version of a new world order in his 2005 Xmas message.

At the end of of 2004, John Paul II is quoted as saying he wants …:

"an order that is able to give adequate solutions to today’s problems based on the dignity of the human being, on an integral development of society, on solidarity among nations rich and poor, on the sharing of resources and the extraordinary results of scientific and technical progress."

Except for the points I have put in bold type, we already have such a system – it is called capitalism and it is not just an adequate system, it is the only efficient and moral system that allows men to lead a dignified life, based on the moral premise that their life is the proper standard of moral value. (However even here, the former pope uses a bad choice of words, for example, I think sovereignty would be a better word than dignity.)

The idea of solidarity for the sake of solidarity is a terrible idea though. It is a sick person indeed who wishes to have solidarity to with regimes like North Korea, Iran or the former Taliban in Afghanistan. The former pope also contradicts the idea of adequate solutions when he calls for the sharing of resources – He appears vague in this call, but it sounds like socialism to me.

The new pope, Mr. Ratzinger was equally vague in his call for a new world order. He is reported as saying:

"The life-giving power of his light is an incentive for building a new world order based on just ethical and economic relationships," the Holy Father added. [Holy Father Indeed!]

However Ratzinger is 1000 times worse than John Paul II and given the chance would take us back to the dark ages. To get a full idea of what Ratzinger would think is a new world order, one would have to read St. Augustine (Ratzinger’s favourite philosopher). To get a full idea of what that would be like, just think about what happened during the dark ages, when the Popes had their new world order – it was a time of religious persecution where life was nasty, brutish, lonely and short.

Economically, our world is doing pretty well right now, at least in the West. (Radical Islam is still the biggest threat and that needs to be eliminated). In general, calls for more religion, any religion will harm our prosperity. This includes calls from Ratzinger’s Catholics or George Bush’s evangelical appointees.

We need more capitalism and no religion.

Update:

According to the SCMP, Ratzinger is quoted as saying:

"The modern age is often seen as an awakening of reason from its slumbers, humanity’s enlightenment after an age of darkness," the leader of the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics said. "Yet without the light of Christ, the light of reason is not sufficient to enlighten humanity and the world."

They also say:

Since his election in April, the Pope has repeatedly reminded Catholics not to give in to an "ethical relativism" where circumstances can be used to justify actions that should be considered wrong in all cases.

Let’s take the first bit first – reason as the age of awakening from an era of slumbers. Let’s not forget that age was not age of slumber but rather of irrational persecution fueled by religious persecution of anyone who chose not to believe the church’s fairy tales. Unbelievers were tortured and justice was dispensed according to such ideas as "trial by fire". That is what he calls the "light of Christ" helped perpetuate. Indeed by calling it the "light of Christ" he is really trying to cloak an incredible evil. Reason, through science, production and capitalism have provided many, many modern achievements that the "light of Christ" would have denied. (Even today Mormons refuse blood transfusions.)

Now with regard to ethical relativism. I agree that we should not be blinded by relativism in ethics. If one holds that man’s life is the proper standard of moral value, then there can be no room for any kind of religious mysticism in a man’s realm of ethics. They would be guilty of just the kind of ethical relativism that Ratzinger seems to condemn. In this sense men should not use religion in ethics, they should not to give in to not consider an "ethical relativism" [such as religion]where circumstances can be used to justify actions that should be considered wrong in all cases.

MERRY Xmas

This is to wish an officially secular and MERRY MERRY Xmas to all readers of this blog. May you have a wonderful time and a prosperous new year.

Organs for Sale Part 2

I want to pick up on a post by Flagrant Harbour regarding the resale of human organs. I did a post on the general sale of organs before but it bears repeating in light of what Flagrant says. in his post Flagrant writes:

I knew and whose bar I used to occasionally drink at has turned out to be a very low human being who would stoop to selling organs from the conveniently timed executions of people set to die at the hands of one of the world’s most untrustworthy justice systems.

Whoever this Jonathan Hakim is, he should be vilified.

It would be nice to find out that I had this all wrong.

I want to make it clear I generally disagree with a government executing a prisoner and then harvesting his organs without consent – particularly in a country where the justice system is still in need of justice. However what about in other circumstances when ordinary people who die? Should they be allowed to exercise their right to sell their organs so that their relatives can benefit from the proceeds? Should more people be able to exercise their right to buy organs so they can have a better and longer life? David Holcberg did an excellent article discussing these issues. It can be accessed here. It makes a compelling argument for ending the ban on the sale of human organs.

A Step Back

Just when you thought the WTO had taken a small step forward this happens. According to the SCMP:

The United States will impose preliminary anti-dumping duties on diamond saw blades from China and South Korea. China is also facing several anti-dumping investigations by the European Union on tungsten electrodes, plastic bags and shoes

Catholic Inversion of Justice

According to the SCMP Catholic Bishop Joseph Zen has judged the Korean rioters innocent even before a trial. It appears he has also saved his critisisms for the police, not the rioters. From my own experience newspapers have a tendency to misquote, I am putting this quote in from Zen, but leave it open to clarification by him or his spokesmen. From the SCMP Zen is quoted about the rioters:

"They are children of the Catholic family, I hope their appearance in court today will run smoothly, because they have not committed any offence," the bishop said yesterday, after visiting three Koreans and a Japanese suspect held at Wong Tai Sin Police Station

Zen is also apparently offering accomodation:

Mr Clancey said Bishop Joseph Zen Ze-kiun would provide accommodation and surety to 12 detainees, though not a Taiwanese student and a mainland designer.

He also clarified previous critisisms of the police. Again the SCMP says:

But he clarified an earlier remark about police treatment of the protesters.

"The press may have mistaken my meaning as criticising frontline officers. I was not, I appreciated them very much and expressed my sympathy to them. It is the high-ranking ones who are confused and irresponsible. I repeat, they are very irresponsible and incompetent."

It appears that Mr. Zen is critisizing the good and rewarding and making excuses for the bad.

Mr. Zen, the police including the high-ranking officers all acted responsibly. They handled a difficult situation well. Your remarks and actions are an inversion of the idea of justice.

Next Big Issues For Hong Kong

After the WTO meeting, I have been asked by some people what I will be working on next. I see the next three big issues as being:

Ending the cosy relationship between certain businesses and the government. This does not mean bringing in anti-trust law, but rather ending preferential treatment for businesses in certain sectors. For example, the government suspended land auctions in order to support the market, or the government is maybe looking at keeping the duopoloy in the electricity sector.

Related to the first, the next issue is getting the government out of the property sector altogether and selling its entire land bank. Most people in Hong Kong live in shoe boxes and if the government sold all its land holdings, there is potential for more people to own their own place or live in bigger flats.

Again related to the frist, the next big issue is ending the Mandatory Provident Fund and instead making it voluntary.

Other issues include reducing expenditure instead of bringing in a sales tax, allowing for more development of the harbour and going after environmentalists.

Debating Republicans On True Meaning Of Xmas

I had a 5 minute debate with Mark Simon of Republicans Abroad today on RTHK Backchat. Unfortunately many Republicans in the US that are now strongly influenced by religion. The three points that I picked up on in the debate were:

1. Contrary to what Mark Simon might say, America is not one nation under god. God does not exist, so it is impossible to a nation under something that does not exist

2. Christmas was originally celebrated by ancient Roman pagans including those who worshipped Saturn. Tomorrow (December 23 is celebrated as the Winter Solstice by the Chinese) In the third and fourth centuries AD, the pagans worshipped the sun god and this is when the Xtians stepped in to steal Xmas. Some even put the date of Jesus’ birthday in September.

3. Christmas is a time to remember friends and family, i.e. those people that bring meaning and joy to one’s own life. Presents (large or small) and cards help re-enforce relationships with such people. A rational person doesn’t wish Merry Xmas to someone they don’t value. At the same time, Xmas is also about justice. Santa Claus makes a list of good and bad children. He checks it twice – it is about justice – rewarding the good and punishing the bad. Every kid knows that.

I won’t go into all of Mark Simon’s replies, but from what I could make out, he was saying that America is a nation under god because the majority believes that to be true. Of course one could say that the Earth is flat because the majority say so. This is a blatant appeal to the authority of the mob, when reason clearly shows the opposite.

The lesson is that Republicans are not good defenders of capitalism. Capitalism is a system that rests on the morality of rational self-interest. Christianity is a system that rests on a system of irrational self-sacrifice. They put faith before reason and hold up Christ as a person who gave up his life for complete strangers.

Capitalism helps one uphold the ethical principle that a person’s individual life is the proper standard of moral value. It is completely different to Christianity. Thus Christian Republicans are caught in a basic contradiction of moral values.