Just got sent a list of Bush quotes, and was pondering how Bush often sounds like some bloggers – you know what he’s saying, but because he’s on the national scene the smallest mistake is magnified.
Then I though, wouldn’t it be fascinating if Bush started a blog.
Then I realised what sort of comments you’d get on such a blog. You’d need a whole army of moderators.
Which is lucky, because there’s a lot of unemployed people at the moment. Well, seems that Bush can fix problems even when he’s not president.
That man is a genisus.
Two thoughts collided in my head in the last 10 min before I conceived this post on Thursday.
One, was the thought that if you irrigated the Sahara eventually the climate of the are would change sufficient to self-sustain without pumping in more wanter. This would also help a lot in the whole “food-growing area” thing.
Second is that such a scheme would require a lot of water from the sea. Now you could use a nuclear reactor or three to get the power (I also hear it’s quite sunny around those parts), but this would take a lot of water out of the sea.
Then it struck me – isn’t sea level supposed to be rising anyway? Bingo, two birds with one stone!
Is it just me, or are there a whole lot of people arrested for a robbery that involved 3 people? I wonder if those charges are actually going to stick.
A though does occur that I don’t recall much money being put into law and order in the recent budget. Of all the things Auckland needs, lower crime would be fantastic. It’s a blight on society and a very real drain on the economy.
Second, it was interesting to see part of a debate on law and order on TV3. It was a little refreshing to see someone point out that prison does not work, that rehabilitation doesn’t work until the person is actually wanting to change.
It’s a nonsense to suggest that prison doesn’t reduce crime. There are people in our society who have no intention of ever doing anything with their lives other than taking from others, usually causing many times more damage than the value of good stolen.
I had a colleague who’s house was broken into by a person who had tens if not hundreds of convictions for burglary. Frankly, why did they bother letting him out? His few months on the outside caused many thousands of dollars to be lost in goods, productive time, police time and court time.
What I’d like to see is a policy made that people can be classified as “career criminals” – usually triggered by a large number of convictions. After this, those persons are detained “at her majesty’s pleasure” for a long period of time, possibly never released until old age. With the criminals who commit 80% of the crime permanently in jail, the police can spend more time looking for the other 20%.
Third, on Police 10/7 last night, they showed retailers selling spray cans to youngsters who were clearly taggers.
There’s a very easy way to fix that – send the kid in, and when he comes out point him in the direction of the managers car. End of problem!
Warning: the following is a ramble, and not a particularly entertaining one. But you may be interested in the ending. Maybe.
You have been warned.