The world will condone things that will radicalise you, and then the same world will condemn you for it. Screw that BS. Where I come from they say don't get angry with or condemn what is in the cup whilst absolving the person who poured it.
I heard... for China, Islam is a 'mental illness' that needs to be 'cured'. So, they have mass re-education camps where these Muslims (activists I suppose) are being held, and the camps are being run like “wartime concentration camps.”
The detainees I heard are being forced to attend political re-education lessons and sing political songs or even forced to denounce Islam and swear loyalty to the Chinese Communist Party, in addition to being forced to eat pork and drink alcohol and other acts forbidden by their religion.
Very legitimate for the whole world to raise concern about such unapologetic oppression but no, because the rights of Muslims aren't as pressing to them as the rights of non-human animals, as climate change, LGBT, feminism, or their profitable relations with China, especially Muslim nations who are almost all recipients of Chinese loans. But Allah is sufficient for the believer.
Monday 17 December 2018
Saturday 15 December 2018
Appropriation Bill 2019
Granted, a budget is a management tool. Yes, our budget should represent national values and aspirations. Yes, good grief! The figures I see being shared on here are massive by any measurement, but that's about it, the figures! Until you know the justifications, the fiscal rules, spending warrants and other conditions precedent to convince the National Assembly to accept the bill, dismissing everything as outrageous is only making the tool an obstacle.
See, where resources are very limited, there will always be competing interests and priorities, like what's good for the builder, the environmental activist may not be okay with, just to give an instance, and lest a fallacy of relative privation tug of war, a NATIONAL budget will hardly be left to a referendum, even though it would've been politically correct to give folks that much illusion of a voice in their fiscal affairs.
So, for my part, unless I see an explicit argument as to the follies warranting all the fuss, or suggestions of better national results for less than the amounts requested, all opposition to the bill (not the Supplementary Appropriation Bill) is debatable. But that's just me trying to offer a voice of reason.
My friend had a problem with the new presidential advisory positions, but seemed okay when I said 'c'mon dude, even Harvard graduated presidents keep advisers' - some official and others on unofficial capacities, but as many as the subject matters that the president could use advice on, especially where the president feels left on his own and that's neither confirming nor denying that ours is, lest I be too much an empath.
Others are kinda nervous about the expectations at the Quadrangle: the salary increase. But quite frankly, if it's not okay to love a job that cannot even pay one-eighth of your bills, not okay to call yourself a worker that still envies his jobless friends, not okay to see your family fall apart because half of your life is dedicated to some compassion-deficient employment that gives an offering plate for a salary, and if it's not okay to invent travels or take bribes at it, then my friend, a raise is in order, particularly for retirees and those at the lower salary band. One needs not much empathy to see that.
Yes, for those who are long-term-oriented, the trend isn't sustainable and I agree, especially for families like typical Gambia’s that are so extended that even the extension of the extended family becomes family; these increases will only mean more dependency on the sole earners and supporters of such families.
But that's why we need new jobs for those who are still unemployed – y'know, distribute the availability of means of securing the necessities of life by de-concentrating earning abilities. Otherwise, the percentage raise for FY2019 regardless, relational burden will cause these civil servants to come next year and ask for more.
I’m of the belief that when more than one person in every household is gainfully engaged, and all willing to feed the kitty, the burden on individual income will lessen and that’ll encourage personal savings - a move from not affording to save to not affording to not save.
I heard the minister say the downside of the raise is putting a brake on all but essential civil service recruitments. Well, can the government provide work for everybody anyway? That’s not even possible.
The government’s job is to employ essential people who will help create the conditions for employment creation, restrict expenses to socially useful causes and essential national conveniences (yes, even when there is the budget to do otherwise), provide water, electricity, dependable communication, and facilities that’ll attract investment. But most of all, allow entrepreneurs to freely explore, innovate and profit. Yeah, we gotta allow them to PROFIT, because if they don’t profit, they wouldn’t employ and I hope that's the thinking.
See, where resources are very limited, there will always be competing interests and priorities, like what's good for the builder, the environmental activist may not be okay with, just to give an instance, and lest a fallacy of relative privation tug of war, a NATIONAL budget will hardly be left to a referendum, even though it would've been politically correct to give folks that much illusion of a voice in their fiscal affairs.
So, for my part, unless I see an explicit argument as to the follies warranting all the fuss, or suggestions of better national results for less than the amounts requested, all opposition to the bill (not the Supplementary Appropriation Bill) is debatable. But that's just me trying to offer a voice of reason.
My friend had a problem with the new presidential advisory positions, but seemed okay when I said 'c'mon dude, even Harvard graduated presidents keep advisers' - some official and others on unofficial capacities, but as many as the subject matters that the president could use advice on, especially where the president feels left on his own and that's neither confirming nor denying that ours is, lest I be too much an empath.
Others are kinda nervous about the expectations at the Quadrangle: the salary increase. But quite frankly, if it's not okay to love a job that cannot even pay one-eighth of your bills, not okay to call yourself a worker that still envies his jobless friends, not okay to see your family fall apart because half of your life is dedicated to some compassion-deficient employment that gives an offering plate for a salary, and if it's not okay to invent travels or take bribes at it, then my friend, a raise is in order, particularly for retirees and those at the lower salary band. One needs not much empathy to see that.
Yes, for those who are long-term-oriented, the trend isn't sustainable and I agree, especially for families like typical Gambia’s that are so extended that even the extension of the extended family becomes family; these increases will only mean more dependency on the sole earners and supporters of such families.
But that's why we need new jobs for those who are still unemployed – y'know, distribute the availability of means of securing the necessities of life by de-concentrating earning abilities. Otherwise, the percentage raise for FY2019 regardless, relational burden will cause these civil servants to come next year and ask for more.
I’m of the belief that when more than one person in every household is gainfully engaged, and all willing to feed the kitty, the burden on individual income will lessen and that’ll encourage personal savings - a move from not affording to save to not affording to not save.
I heard the minister say the downside of the raise is putting a brake on all but essential civil service recruitments. Well, can the government provide work for everybody anyway? That’s not even possible.
The government’s job is to employ essential people who will help create the conditions for employment creation, restrict expenses to socially useful causes and essential national conveniences (yes, even when there is the budget to do otherwise), provide water, electricity, dependable communication, and facilities that’ll attract investment. But most of all, allow entrepreneurs to freely explore, innovate and profit. Yeah, we gotta allow them to PROFIT, because if they don’t profit, they wouldn’t employ and I hope that's the thinking.
The SAP
The official story that the Supplementary Appropriation Bill's been rejected is good news for democracy and system change, or at least an indicator of the latter. But that's the part that'd cause one to seek enlightenment, like: now, what?
What if the SAP request was just a front to retroactively normalise our fiscal data... you know, one seeking to fix an already incurred over-spend (D1.2b), because no contingency or advance warrant exist to allow the Ministry of Finance to be creative with?
What happens if, by their oversight role, Parliament is provided an appropriation account, or a variance report for 2018, showing huge excesses presented as can't-wait obligations? What's the penalty for exceeding expenditure limitation set by the legislature?
I heard the Appropriation Bill 2019 is also marked for rejection tomorrow? What's the legislative stopgap measure thereof... because furloughing the civil service or causing a shutdown of national operations pending a redo wouldn't be so cool?
What if the SAP request was just a front to retroactively normalise our fiscal data... you know, one seeking to fix an already incurred over-spend (D1.2b), because no contingency or advance warrant exist to allow the Ministry of Finance to be creative with?
What happens if, by their oversight role, Parliament is provided an appropriation account, or a variance report for 2018, showing huge excesses presented as can't-wait obligations? What's the penalty for exceeding expenditure limitation set by the legislature?
I heard the Appropriation Bill 2019 is also marked for rejection tomorrow? What's the legislative stopgap measure thereof... because furloughing the civil service or causing a shutdown of national operations pending a redo wouldn't be so cool?
Political Epicaricacy
The way I see some of us rejoice at the wedge that the BYM is (seemingly) becoming between the UDP and the presidency, as if: 'Yay!!! We can't wait for the fall out!' Is the pits of political epicaricacy. Really so low!
Perhaps it's the price to pay for being the most influential political party, but seriously??? Sometimes, in my head, I'm like: 'hey, to you be your party, and to them their party!' Particularly lately that the suggestion making the rounds on here, by folks who aren't even UDP, is Darboe to retire from party leadership... as if that's not entirely his party's call?
And seeing how the man's given his life to the party and to politics, the admirable strategist he's at it, at this point that his is all about loyalty and commitment to party objective, that shouldn't even be a motion... that's like asking him to retire to 'no life to retire to.'
But that's us (the average Gambian) for you. When we support you, you become a holy object. We can find you holding a gas canister and a box of matches, smelling like a chimney, near the fire, and still try to find someone to blame the blaze on.
But oh, boy! Should we like someone above you... even holding a fire extinguisher makes you the perp. We'd adduce that you're just tryna put out what you started. Our sense of affection pays zero attention to even the natural imperfections of the people we glorify, and I don't know if that's a good thing.
Perhaps it's the price to pay for being the most influential political party, but seriously??? Sometimes, in my head, I'm like: 'hey, to you be your party, and to them their party!' Particularly lately that the suggestion making the rounds on here, by folks who aren't even UDP, is Darboe to retire from party leadership... as if that's not entirely his party's call?
And seeing how the man's given his life to the party and to politics, the admirable strategist he's at it, at this point that his is all about loyalty and commitment to party objective, that shouldn't even be a motion... that's like asking him to retire to 'no life to retire to.'
But that's us (the average Gambian) for you. When we support you, you become a holy object. We can find you holding a gas canister and a box of matches, smelling like a chimney, near the fire, and still try to find someone to blame the blaze on.
But oh, boy! Should we like someone above you... even holding a fire extinguisher makes you the perp. We'd adduce that you're just tryna put out what you started. Our sense of affection pays zero attention to even the natural imperfections of the people we glorify, and I don't know if that's a good thing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)