CBeebies advertising next program

CBeebies have started to advertise their next program upon nearing the end of a program. I am not too sure on the merit of this from the perspective of a parent. I cannot write from experience but wouldn't children be more inclined to stay and watch the television? If there are clear breaks between programs, children will not be as influenced.

Children knifed to death

News these days feature a lot of incidents of children getting stabbed to death by other children. It is important to ask why some children can so easily stab someone let alone kill someone. One thing that springs to mind is the low moral values. I cannot think that children who carry knives have no intention of killing someone. They just don't seem to care enough about life.

Why have the moral values of some children disappeared? I am tempted to say that the violent video games, films and music are the problem. They do not influence everyone but I think certain children are easily influenced. It would be nice if game manufacturers could produce an entertaining game that can educate good moral values. The market for such games is wide open compared to the violent games. More points for players who show a good moral character.

There is perhaps hope for this because I read the other day that hip hop or rap music is not as popular as before. My explanation for this is to do with the children who have parents that grew up on such music. Since children like to rebel against their parents, these children cannot easily rebel with rap music They are perhaps ready to rebel by becoming morally good.

Welfare system that favours single parent families

Contrast the following two scenarios.

1. Single parent with 2 children under the age of 11, works 16 hours a week on the minimum wage, receives 487 pounds (with the aid of tax credits).
2. 2 parent family with 2 children under the age of 11, must work in total 116 hours a week on the minimum wage to receive the same amount of pay.

This clearly shows that remaining single is better than getting married if you are trying to make ends meet.

It would be interesting to know if there are any other equally ludicrous welfare systems around the world?

Guerrilla marketing ethics?

The idea of marketing is to make your product or service well known. The marketing can be negative but it can command a lot of publicity. Is it worth it? I don't believe that the following advertisers had any intention of negativity. Surely the best thing would be to have a positive marketing campaign that reaches out to as many as the negative?

Take for instance, Sony Ericsson who wanted to get the public to try out some functions of the mobile phone. They got people to look like tourists who wanted their picture taken with the phone and attractive women who sat in bars to start a conversation about their purchase. Once the people found out that they were not genuine, the campaign became negative. The moral seems to be, if you are advertising, make sure you are upfront about it. Especially when you are, in effect, invading their space.

IBM decided to chalk symbols on the streets of San Francisco. Some technologically minded people liked it but others thought it as graffiti. Although the chalk was biodegradable, it took weeks for the stuff to be removed. The moral is to try and be in the good books of everyone.

Some offensive images can arouse suspicion. For instance, Cartoon Network decided to place these images. Some residents in Boston thought they were bombs. I remember the news showing the city grid-locked. The moral is to be aware of the past incidents that could have changed people's sentiments.

Smells and sounds are a relatively new medium to be exploited. They have been used to try and gain a bigger impact but the more unusual and unknown it is, the more people would be scared. Paramount Pictures teamed up with the Los Angeles Times to trigger the theme music of Mission Impossible whenever a newspaper was baught at a newspaper rack. People had thought it to be a bomb. Sending smells through an underground system to advertise a drink did not go down too well because it could be thought of as poisonous gas. Besides, forcing someone to smell something is not a good idea. The moral again is to consider the sentiments shaped by recent events. And don't force something upon the unsuspecting public.

Examples from BusinessWeek: http://images.businessweek.com/ss/07/02/0209_guerrilla/index_01.htm

Petition: Dog DNA database

On the 10 Downing Street website for petitions, I have found someone who has started a petition. Follow the link below if you would like to sign up to the petition.

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/K9DNADatabase/

The website states that you must be a British citizen or resident to sign the petition.

DNA analysis to identify dog owners who leave a mess

The idea of creating a database of dog DNA to clean the public areas does not seem to be new. A Freakonomics article in the New York Times (another link), a remarkable 12 year old girl's proposal, and Vienna and Dresden have proposed the same idea.

The idea is pretty simple. Firstly make sure that every dog is licensed. During this licensing process, the DNA can be collected through the saliva of the dog (existing dog owners' dogs can be included perhaps the next time they go to a vet). The data can be stored in a database. Now if a dog owner decides to leave the mess behind, the dog dirt can be collected and DNA analysed. A suitable fine should be imposed and sent to the dog owner's address.

I do hope that the health of our children can be protected with this simple idea. No more risk of blindness. The initial cost may be high but it will be a fraction of the cost of setting up the equivalent for us humans.

Dog muck on my daughter

I have just come back from the park with my daughter who had stepped on some dog muck and picked it up. She was crying during the way back because she thought she did something wrong. I had to explain to her that it was not her fault. It was a particular dog owner's fault.

I am usually very careful but this time, some children playing football had hid the thing under some leaves. They were old enough to know better that hiding it would not have prevented them from getting dirty themselves if they had stepped on it. Anyway, they did not mean anything bad and it is beside the point.

There may be a solution to this. I will write shortly.

Scam: Tickets to see The Queen

Scammers (or con artists) appear to be using The Queen as bait. They are dressed in The Queen's guard uniform to make the scam authentic. The incident I have been told occurred on a tourist bus. At the traffic lights, there is a knock on the bus door. They enter and mention a chance of a lifetime to meet The Queen. This is particularly effective because there are many people to sell the tickets to and they can be hidden from sight until a target bus appears. They can also sell the tickets and make a quick getaway.

Scamming is an evil practice as it is but to defame someone else makes the matter even more disgusting. I must contact The Queen and the police.

This was obvious to me because I am familiar with many scams. Since someone has asked for my opinion on this, I am inclined to believe that some people will fall prey to these con artists.

The convincing trick they have used is to operate near where the public see the genuine Queen's guards. In the example that I have heard, the bus was waiting to get into Whitehall from either Whitehall Place or Horse Guards Avenue. Since the genuine guards are in sight, they try to make you think that they are coming towards the bus from that vicinity. So that they don't appear too conspicuous, they did not wear the tall bushy hat. They had the red jacket which from certain angles could look like an ordinary jacket but from the front, it should convince the vulnerable public.

A solution could be to inform the tour leader of such a scam so that the next time they get on the bus, the tourists could be advised to take pictures of the Queen's guard. The photos can be past onto the police.

Wheelie bin thefts

Wheelie bins are rubbish bins on wheels. Designed for their manoeuvrability, the UK government distributed them to most households. Theft of these things have risen due to the cut backs on the frequency of rubbish collections from once a week to once every two weeks. Why are they stolen? The neighbours have decided to steal them so that they can store more rubbish.

It is a small wonder how the thieves can neglect to put themselves in the shoes of their neighbours?

Wasting food on the Apprentice (BBC)

Last night, the BBC showed an episode of the Apprentice where the teams were challenged to sell British food in France. One team in particular did so poorly that on top of making a loss, they were unable to shift a lot of the food. At the port, they were seen to discard the food in a bin. Did the BBC need to show this? Do they think it is acceptable to waste food? I fail to see these actions as entertainment. Why show something so morally wrong?

If the BBC wanted to show a better moral standard, they should have arranged the losing contestants to store the food at their living quarters. Since there are many more weeks to go, they should be able to finish off the food during this time. Provided they are not eliminated so quickly.

I am surprised that Sir Alan Sugar did not make a big issue out of it. Even from a business perspective, throwing away your merchandise is appalling.

Incentive for pupils to take science and maths

We are seeing a decline in pupils taking science and maths. The government is reviewing an incentive scheme that pays the pupils who decide to take science and maths. Is this the right thing to do? I don't think so. I can fully imagine the government using this scheme because they have introduced a similar scheme to reward pupils who decide to stay on at school rather than leave early. Why rely on money? Science and maths are very important subjects which should already be an incentive for children to take. The government must look at why the subjects are unpopular and try to fix the imbalance by tweaking things accordingly. A common reason is that other subjects are easier. So two immediate options. Either make science and maths easier or make the other subjects harder. Another option will be to reward pupils with more points for taking science and maths (the points should closely follow the hardness of the subject).

Another problem is that science and maths are taught without any applications. Surely we can design these subjects so that pupils can see the relevance to society. Even better, introduce maths and science more to the other subjects to reflect how they cover different subjects. This should be done at an early stage so that the teachers can cope.

1 in 58 police patrolling the streets

I read today in the Sunday Telegraph that only one in 58 police are patrolling the streets at any given time. This is based on the result that each police person spends about 14% of their duty time patrolling the streets. There are about 150,000 police and around 2500 are patrolling the street.

The reason for this is blamed on the amount of paper work that they have to do which appears to have steadily increased by the government. This is just difficult to fathom. Surely the police in other countries spend much less time on paper work and spend a greater amount of time outside patrolling the streets?

I have mentioned about reintroducing smaller mini police stations around the country. Considering the area of UK to be 245,000 sq km and having three in the mini police station, we can have 50,000 covering just under 5 sq km each. This is of course a trivial calculation but on the surface, it looks feasible. I have assumed a uniform density of these mini police stations so a more appropriate spread of them will make the idea even more attractive.

Dog poo on my shoe

Dog owners, please can you pick up your dog's poo. Today, I spent some time cleaning off the mess off my shoe. Although this is a nuisance, I am much more concerned about my daughter falling ill. I have heard that some dog poos contain worms that can cause blindness (if say a toddler rubs their eye with a dirtied hand). I am sure the dog owners that leave the poo on purpose do not understand the severe consequences. I do believe that if the dog owners are told of the dangers of dog poo, they will all clean it up. Should there be signs erected in the park that succinctly explains the consequences?

I would like to know why they do not clean it up in the first place. Are they too lazy? Do they think that the rain will miraculously wash it away so that their efforts will be pointless? If they have a garden, do they leave the poo lying about without cleaning it up? I cannot believe all the owners that do not bother cleaning up the mess in public places will act in the same way at home. So why the difference? Do they think that a public area is not their responsibility? Any way you look at it, they lack moral values.

There is such a thing called the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005. So it is against the law to leave the mess behind.

Dog owner takes another dog owner's dog

I have written negatively about some dog owners in my previous posts. I just wanted to say that I am not biased. I was in the park with my daughter and we were playing in a pretty packed playground. A dog owner was playing with a child and the dog was waiting outside. I was busy with my daughter but I noticed that another dog owner was concerned about this dog all alone and decided to take it with her. She had apparently called for the rightful dog owner but without a response. I alerted the incident to the rightful dog owner who had been engrossed in a game with the child. She managed to get her dog back just in time.

Youth, 16, knifed to death as gang chants 'kill him, kill him'

The article with the above title caught my eye today in the Daily Telegraph. The gang included boys and girls but the police have arrested 7 males - four 13-year-olds, two 15-year-olds and a 21-year-old. Murders of youths are fairly common these days but this story stands out because so many people were indirectly (or you may really say directly) involved. Did they really want him killed or the chant was just to scare him? It appears that they had hammers, bats and knives to go through with the killing pretty easily. Perhaps they were used to scare him?

If they all valued life, the death would have been avoided. I feel that children these days do not value life as much. They seem to treat it as one of those things. Killing someone is no big deal. I can only imagine that, to develop such an attitude, they are surrounded by events that trivialise killing. The TV, music, films and computer games have all trivialised killing and are still doing so. Surely it is time to reverse this trend and put more emphasis on how valuable life is. We cannot just rely on education to instill such a view. We need the cooperation of the media as well.

This is all linked to our moral values declining. Although killing is one of the worst outcomes, there are other less extreme cases of the moral decline. For instance, my front tooth is dead because someone at my secondary school punched me in the face. He distracted me by saying the teacher was looking at us in the class room. I turned to see but the teacher was looking at something else and as I turned back, I was hit (very naive of me I know). This is clearly a difference in moral values. I was aware that punching someone in the face can be dangerous. You can severely disfigure someone and you can even kill someone. I have never punched someone else in the face. This puncher obviously did not have the proper moral values. He did not show any regret or anything after the event. This happened just because I pushed him when he said some insulting words to me.

How did the puncher have such moral values? I have blamed the media above but on second thoughts, I have been acquainted with such material from a very young age (since maybe seven). It must be the way my parents brought me up. I think nurture has a lot to do with it but nature also. Some people are more violent than other people and if they want to have better moral values, they need to be taught more than others.

Although I have said that the media has not affected me, I still think that some people will be affected. Is it difficult to have scenes in movies where a fight is about to erupt but they come to their senses by thinking of the consequences? Why can't games promote how to prevent fighting (you can do this by awarding more points to the player for doing so)? Why does music need to glorify violence?

I suppose it is to do with the children being rebellious and so naturally gravitate towards material that show the most rebelliousness. I don't know if we can control this rebellious streak but instilling the proper moral values will nevertheless be invaluable.

Politician waste light

The media has recently remarked on how Government buildings are lit up over night. This is not because there are people working late. Are they trying to scare off a potential burglar? All this during the time when they are asking the public to be more energy efficient. How can we entrust the country in the hands of such morally inconsistent politicians?

Woman with a dog destroys toddler's ball

I have no prejudice towards people with dogs in general but here is another incident I encountered involving a dog owner. As the toddler was playing with his ball, a dog grabbed it and destroyed it. The owner just apologised and walked off. The mother had to say to her son, say bye bye to the ball. How can someone just destroy someone else's property and walk away like this? Is it not common courtesy to at least offer compensation?

I was also involved in a similar incident when I was around maybe 15. I was playing tennis when a youthful looking dog bounded into the court and grabbed one of the new balls (which I rarely bought but I digress). After it had deposited enough saliva and exercised its jaws enough by gnawing, the ball was ready to be placed in the bin. The owner who was much older than us just said an empty apology and walked off? I was quite taken aback by this nonchalant behaviour but I managed to draw his attention to the fact that a tennis ball in the UK is very expensive and asked for some money to contribute towards it. He just made another excuse and walked off.

Dangerous man with a dog and a stick

As I was playing with my daughter in the playground, a man jogging along with his dog hurled a heavy stick into the playground which was intended for the dog to chase. It narrowly missed a girl standing by and another girl in the swing. Even if he had managed to avoid the playground, there were children playing football nearby so there really was no place for such a dangerous implement to be thrown. The girl on the swing managed to throw it outside the enclosure where the dog was waiting eagerly. The man just said something like good throw and carried on jogging. I don't think he actually felt sorry at all. He must have felt that as it did not hit anyone, it was ok. Surely he could have at least set a good example to the children and said sorry.

I remember a similar incident vividly to this day that I regret very much (maybe I was 14). I was playing golf in the park where there was no one in sight except some people playing in the tennis courts. I had some idea of how far I could hit the golf ball but never in my wildest dreams did I expect the ball to reach the tennis courts. Luckily, it had hit the fence and trickled into the tennis court. I rushed over to the tennis court and apologised profusely. I was prepared to be scolded severely but the father was very magnanimous. I was in a state of shock for quite some time afterwards. How could this man calmly jog away from the above scene? I struggle to understand.

Marketing Inequalities

To expand readership, newspapers like to offer things like DVDs and books for free. At least this is the case in the UK. I wonder what it's like abroad? You would think that everyone would be treated equally if you buy their newspaper but sometimes this is not the case.

The Daily Telegraph and the Sunday Telegraph have recently offered a collection of National Geographic DVDs and Jane Austen novels.

4 DVDs came inside the weekend papers probably because they use plastic bags to keep everything together. In order to get the rest for free, you have to buy the Daily Telegraph at a stationery shop called WH Smiths. The only other way of getting them is to buy the newspaper elsewhere and request them to be posted to you (you must pay the postage). I think this is unfair on the customer as well as the other retailers.

Similarly, you can get the Jane Austen novels for free if you buy the newspapers at Costa Coffee shops. Any other way, it is not free.

Is this a good marketing tactic? To me, you should create a reputation that all customers will be treated equally.

Surprisingly, there are many other things that harbour inequalities. For instance, food. In one supermarket, they may offer buy one get one free but in another, you will only get one. Customers are quite accustomed to different prices in different places for the same good. Surely the more unified the prices are, the more faith the customer will have provided everything else remains constant?

Brushing teeth 3 times a day

My primary and secondary schools did not encourage us to brush our teeth after lunch. Would it not be better if the children are encouraged to do so with the cooperation of the schools?

No smoking sign for playground

I wrote the following to my local council.

Health Issue. In my local playground, there are adults (and teenagers) that smoke in the enclosure. Can we at least have a NO SMOKING sign for the playground enclosure? You would think that this is common sense but some people just don't know. It would be nice to have a no smoking policy for the whole park.

Safety Issue. In the same playground, there are children that play with balls (I mean the heavy footballs) inside the enclosure. They also use part of the enclosure as the goal and kick the heavy balls towards the playground. I have felt very unsafe for fear of my daughter (21months) and any other child getting hit. My daughter narrowly avoided getting hit by a heavy ball. An accident is waiting to happen. I think at least a sign prohibiting playing with heavy balls is needed.

Violence on TV programs for toddlers

I cannot help wondering whether the "violence" depicted on channels like CBeebies (BBC) is having a bad influence on toddlers? Violence is an extreme word but I feel the following content could be misconstrued by the toddlers:

• generally unpleasant behaviour in Higgledy House.
• Mud fight in Bob the Builder.
  

You may disagree with my view but I have evidence of such behaviour in the playground. My daughter has been pushed and hit by other toddlers just for being there. I cannot understand how toddlers can develop these tendencies. I am sure that there are cases due to the innate disposition of the child but surely the TV can be blamed for the quantity of violence in the playground?

Commission based salaries connected with poor moral values

I have written about a parking attendant with poor moral values because his salary is commission based. Check out the poor morals of a parking attendant and the local council.

I have come across a related article in the Sunday Mirror:

11 February 2007

THE BULLY BAILIFFS

EXPOSED: CRUEL TRICKS OF THE DEBT-CHASERS .. here's one trying to get cash from a sick woman.. just as two paramedics arrive to treat her SUNDAY Mirror INVESTIGATES

By Nick Owens

This is another example of poor moral values because the salaries are commission based. Just because the Government has outsourced these jobs, they think that they have nothing to do with this. Well, it is the Government's job to prevent these problems from happening. Looking at the basic salary of the bailiffs at 9000 pounds and the 20% commission on every debt, they are virtually encouraged to get the money even if they have to be morally deplorable.

If nothing is done about this, the situation is only going to get worse.

Football and morals

Football (soccer) is a very successful sport when you consider the amount of money it generates. But does it set a morally good example? I don't think so. I think it is one of the worst sports for setting a good moral example.

Take for example the diving. Players these days just collapse without any collisions. At the moment, players have a mentality that if they can get an advantage by foul play they should do it. If they are not noticed the better. Surely this kind of skewed moral has transcended into daily life by influencing children. If they can get away with it, they should do it without thinking of the moral consequences. If the football stars can get away with it, it must be ok.

Turning this tide by just talking to the players is probably impossible. Why not include video replays? Replay it on the big screen and if it is diving, it will be entertaining for the spectators, embarrassing for the player and there is proof. In no time, the players will stop diving.

Some police stations are closed

Some police stations are not open 24 hours a day. I am losing a lot of confidence in the policing in the UK. There is also the problem of not tackling what the police call minor crime. But the minor crime like robbery, burglary and violence are what the general public want tackled. They should be punished severely once caught rather than let off lightly (it appears unlikely because of the lack of space in prisons).

I like the idea of having mini police stations (they used to be called police boxes but I mean something bigger) all around the local communities which are open 24 hours. The police will be much more familiar to the community and they should be able to get to the crime scene quicker. This is what it is like in Japan. I think this is a vital way to create safer communities. At the moment, I feel the police and the community are too distant.

There does seem to be steps being made towards such an idea. I take my daughter out at night to get her to sleep. I bumped into two policemen walking along my street. I have lived here for more than 20 years and this is the first time I have seen any policemen walking along my street. I quickly searched online and I found a mobile phone number to get in touch with them. But Japan I feel is one step ahead because the mini police stations or Kouban (housing maybe 3), are interacting more with the community.

You may question if such a scheme is feasible? I think it is possible if the police are spread out more than now.

Another point is whether the police have enough time to patrol the community when they appear to be lumbered with a lot of paper work? I am in favour of police having less paper work and instead patrolling more of the streets.

Prisoner who attempted suicide is paid compensation

A prisoner has been awarded 575,000 pounds compensation because the prison wardens managed to prevent the attempted suicide. Is this morally right? I do not want to get into the debate about euthanasia. Even if you believe in euthanasia, I still think it is wrong to try and kill yourself when there is a chance that someone could rescue you.

Besides, why should any amount of money be paid for this incident? Currently, the UK law is against suicide or assisted suicide. So the law appears to be supporting th actions of the wardens. This case is currently under investigation.

How can people have faith in the judicial system when this sort of thing happens? If only the law was more straightforward.

Lack of space in prisons

Lack of space in prisons. I don't mean that the cells are tiny (prisons in the UK are probably luxury compared to prisons abroad). I mean the number of cells are inadequate to house the burgeoning number of prisoners. The problem must be pressing because they are thinking of placing murderers and paedophiles in prisons where there is less security. I find this a problem
because there are already problems in selecting prisoners for early release under parole since many are re-offending. The people that make these decisions could decide who should be sent to the less secure prisons.

Besides, there should not be a lack of space in prisons. The knock on effects are fewer convictions. The police have to be more lenient because they will know that the judges will be more lenient. Someone has to be more lenient because it appears that we do not have enough space to house every offender even if the police can catch them all. Is this not a grim reality? I fear that this is sending a message to offenders and any would-be offenders that there is a higher chance of them escaping a jail sentence because the judicial system and the police will be more lenient towards them. This is one reason why people feel less safe on the street and in their homes.

Take the following example. I was reading a group discussion online about someone who was hit by a car which had jumped a red light. The car returned and rather than enquiring whether the person was ok, three men came out (one with a baseball bat) demanding money for the repair. The man escaped but not without getting smashed over the head with the baseball bat. This is already shocking to me because I cannot understand how someone could have such skewed moral values? What makes it worse is that according to the lawyers in the group, getting a conviction is difficult. Furthermore, even with a conviction, they will most likely be release with a caution. With such injustice, how can people have faith in the law apart from the criminals? What is even worse, the lawyers call this a minor offence.

Inequality in education with voucher scheme for bright pupils

The government is kick starting a scheme where the top 10 percent of pupils get some extra lessons. Why is it that the brightest pupils get such treatment. Do you not want to send a message that everyone has an equal chance? I feel that a kid that has a willingness to learn is more important than being bright. So take for example a kid that has just missed the mark and is in the 11 percent. How do you deny this person if there is genuine enthusiasm? Why does the government waste money on silly schemes like this. Squandering public money. They should be focusing on how learning is fun for everyone.

Labour and morals

The news papers mention about Mr Blair's holiday destinations and the celebrities that he mingles with. I find these issues much more acceptable than the fact that he can even go on holiday when there are his troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. If I was in his shoes, I would carry on doing what is required of a prime minister since I could not enjoy a holiday. Besides, although he has failed to live up to his expectations, the least he can do is to show some effort. I don't know how he can sleep confortably on holiday let alone a normal working day night. The impression he is sending to me is "I like being famous and being able to hang out with other famous people. I wish I can be in this position until I die. That would be a tough record to break for any Heads of state. The least I can do is to stay until I am forced out." His excuse for going on holiday is because of his children. This is not a good reason to go on holiday under the circumstances.

There are other people in the Labour party and who were in the Labour party who lack moral values. Peter Mandelson has been in and out of the Labour party twice for dubious behaviour. Is this morally good? I don't think so. Goodness knows how such a person can be chosen to be the UK's European Commissioner. David Blunkett has had a long affair with a married woman. This morally wrong reason alone did not seem enough for his departure. The reason for his first departure was to do with providing privileges to a nanny. Then he was able to come back. Then he resigned over more controversy. John Prescott has had numerous controversies and yet he has managed to remain the deputy prime minister. The bottom line is, if politicians do not do something that will affect their job directly, they can even be morally wrong. Again if politicians set this kind of example, what signals are they sending out to the children?

When people at such powerful positions can exercise poor moral values, you can imagine how an ordinary person may also fail to do so. We should expect politicians to set a good example.

I do hope the next Government has a better moral standard and above all can set a good example to everyone.

Benefit fraud

Why should there be more benefits paid to single parents? Well, the trivial answer is that fewer funds coming in so they need more support. But what about from the perspective of a couple looking after their children? Why should they be paid less? I cannot imagine couples splitting up to get more benefits but there are couples who claim that they are single parents and claiming more. My objection is the lack of support from the government for being together as a family. I don't think you need any hard facts to justify that being together is more beneficial to society than being single. Bringing up children is difficult even when there are both parents. It is much tougher on your own so you will have much less opportunities to instil values. Also if you are feeling under pressure, the children will find the environment uncomfortable. The government should support families at least equally. The problem is, the bigger the family becomes, the more they can survive off the benefits without working. You don't need to be a genius to realise that this is detrimental to the stability of society.

Job seeker's allowance is a benefit paid to people who are looking for work and are currently unemployed. Do other countries have such a benefit? I am technically unemployed. Although I am not actually looking for a job because I am in the middle of setting up a business with a friend. However there is no income at all. I would be grateful for any assistance from the government and I suppose it would be easy for me to claim this benefit. But I am not and I have no intention of doing so. But there are plenty of others exploiting this benefit as well. Why not scrap this benefit? Benefits which can be easily exploited should be either scrapped and introduce something that cannot be exploited or try to prevent exploitation.

Entertaining teenagers

Some people have mentioned that if teenagers have adequate facilities to be entertained, they will not resort to crime. This is a superficial measure that does not tackle the main problem. The main problem is the lack of moral values and the lack of imagination. If they have the proper moral values, they will not resort to crime. If they have imagination, they will be able to entertain themselves. You don't need expensive facilities to entertain children. For example, you just need a field and a ball and they can play the well known games or they can create their own games.

Our society is geared towards materialism. Children born in a materialistic society will have their imagination, curiosity and creativity stunted. They are too busy wanting to acquire materials instead of trying to develop their inside skills. We need to encourage children to develop their inside skills rather than skills in how to acquire materials.

The current education model has also problems. A common reason given to children is go to school, do well and you should be able to find a good job which will allow you to acquire many materials you want. The government, schools and some parents believe that this is the principal reason to go to school. No wonder children feel a lot of pressure and lack entertainment value from schools.

Since children are grouped together, no matter how you put it, the environment is competitive. This also puts a lot of pressure. Although learning about competition and pressure is important, they should not be taught about this concerning their abilities.

Schools should be a place for children to be entertained. Learning must be shown to be fun. Why is it not fun? Several reasons.

• Motivating why they are learning something is lacking. Teachers must explain why things are important in relation to society and to their pupils.
• Quick learners get bored because of the slow pace.
• Slow learners get bored because they cannot keep up and so cannot understand.
  

For the last two points, the solutions has been to split the children into classes depending on their abilities. There is nothing worse that to be labeled at such an age. I do not think this is wise and should be avoided at all cost. So how can the children of the same year be taught together? Well, focus on the first point and only cover what everyone can do. For quick learners, they can collect as much learning material as they please maybe online or by post. As they go through the material, they can ask the teacher if they get stuck. They could be allocated time to ask. For slow learners, they can go at a pace that suits them. How can they be examined (compared)? They will be only examined on the learning material that they have requested. This way the competitive nature is hidden more than at present.

There is a problem in letting children do what they want to do. When there is lack of guidance, they can easily get lost. They may only want to do what they want to do.

Killing the homeless for entertainment

I read recently about a gangs of teenagers in America will kill the homeless for entertainment. I don't know the current situation in Japan but I know that similar events were common a while back. In the UK, we have seen the proliferation of happy slapping (attacking someone while the event is filmed). There are also plenty of unprovoked attacks which end in murder.

How can people be so lacking in moral values? Why are these people enjoying killing? I cannot begin to understand how their minds work. Can it be prevented? Well surely the number of these incidents will fall if people have the right moral values.

I do believe that we can never completely get rid of these incidents because it would be highly unlikely to be living in a world were everyone is born to do good. The probability of having a whole spectrum of people with varying goodness (including bad) is much more likely. So I suppose I believe that some people are born bad. Although I do believe that many of them can be nurtured in a way to be good. Education is the key.

Gang of teenagers

When I was in the playground with my daughter, a group of teenagers entered the enclosure. They were smoking and let in a dog (bull terrier). We quickly left the scene. There is a lack of moral values among these teenagers. Smoking is a bad influence on small children and a bull terrier can be very dangerous to people. Why did they not know this? Are they not properly educated? Where do they learn what is right from wrong? The parents should instill these values. Do the parents know what is right from wrong? Perhaps the parents of these teenagers do not know what is right from wrong?

How can we break out of this vicious cycle? Well, if the parents cannot be relied upon, the schools must teach what is right from wrong. Once the morals are instilled into every child, the job can be passed back to the parents.