Friday, 4 March 2011

The 2011 UK Census Boycott

Coming up at the end of the month is one of the most historically important part of information gathering, the UK Census, and I'm appealing for a Boycott.

How ever much I enjoy history, and the things that have been learnt from the use of Census, I believe in this day and age where we live in a society where the government cares little about individuals, that we would be subjected to fill in a form containing personal information.

In a society where its easy to find personal information about people, target them with advertising, or sell their details to another company, in a time where we can be conned into buying something without realising or been pressured into it, that we feel its needed to give away even more information?

How are we sleeping safely a night knowing people can find out anything they want from us with a simple click of a button or passing of money?

Can we really justify this information sharing, especially after the few incidents where 25,000 citizens private and personal information were just 'lost' by incompetent people, in just one example of the data loss. This may only be a fraction of the population, but if just £15 can be made from each of those 25,000 peoples information (from just that instance) that's £375,000 of profit, just selling on the information, the buyer maybe a debt firm, credit company or a company offering a specific service targeted at you from what data they receive. If you end up buying into it it might be a deal that makes them a couple of thousand pounds long term, obviously not everyone will be in the same boat or take up their offer, that's why information can be sold so cheaply. (The £15 is a estimate, it could be extremely lower)

But back to the main point, there's a company called Lockheed Martin who specialise in creating Trident nuclear missiles, cluster bombs and F-16 fighter jets, this American company has paid a £150 million bid (other companies bid to buy) contract to run the census on behalf of the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

Now... at what point does a company who states (In the Guardian Article) that;

"No personal census data will be handled or seen by any American-owned company. No Lockheed Martin employees will see or handle any personal census data. The public can be reassured that their personal details from the census will be kept confidential and will remain so for 100 years,"

Then why do companies bid for the Census...? If there's no profit in the use of the data, I don't see the significance, it's beyond me, I've checked the internet, not much luck in finding why. I've asked this question on Yahoo Answers and hopefully will get an informative answer.

So as of now, all I can assume is the information somewhere will be compromised, in this day and age it makes just as much sense to count Facebook accounts. Big Brother keeps getting bigger and bigger.

So I ask you to defend your privacy, you don't owe the government anything, because we are in enough debt as it is, we are fighting for our voice, which is ignored far too often, we need to get louder and pro-active!

I would consider filling in the Census if it had an important effect on decisions in our society, (Not to say the decisions made with it aren't important... schools, hospital funding etc) like if it had a question, 'We're we right to invade Iraq?' 'Should defending our country involve INVADING another?' and so on, things that will give the true opinion of the people a chance, because we don't have enough of a say on what's going on.

If David Cameron decides to send us to Libya and fuck us/it up for the civilians and get our troops killed then i'm going to flip my lid at his atrocities.

So, lets boycott the Census and tell the government what we really think, Surely the act of refusing to fill out the census is important information gathering...

[Edit] The contract is £450million of potential profit (The Budget), however I read that it will cost £438 million although the gaurdian says 'administration costs have spiralled to an estimated £480m' I just don't see the room for profit.

The Guardian link to the Boycott -
The Guardian link to the government costs -

Wednesday, 2 March 2011

Boycott War shooters

The problem with War shooters is they're played by kids, i'm not saying all kids are impressionable, but after watching Jurassic park, if your kid isnt thinking how great it would be to be a dinosaur or live with them they you have a wrong child.

Call of Duty is a dead game now, but people will continue to buy them, I imagine to majority of people getting the game are younger than 18, apparently on Xbox360 its usually always kids you're playing against. Call of Duty has become a franchise, you know they're just cashing in on dead weight when they release one a year, i mean look at Tony Hawks, they've pushed one out about every year for the past 10 years, and despite the last 3 attempts to change the game somewhat, its now a sunken ship.

The problem is are parents really going to just suck up and buy this game for their kids, there's nothing good about a child playing a shooter that with each release gets even more realistic and violent. One thing thats important about parenting, is when your child is in their Teens, they aren't supposed to like you, the logic;

If they dont like you, you're doing something right, if they like you, you're doing something wrong.

Translation: Dont like you = no call of duty, like you = call of duty.

I dont believe computer games are the cause of violence in the world, but it develops in in young minds and makes shooting people in the head an achievement. Theres nothing good about war, its not clean, its very dirty and people die, all in the sake of government's advancements over territory and resource.

I was in the Army at one point, i left because i didnt want to get shot, the iraq invasion had recently started and i wanted no part of it, if id've stayed in, i would've done 4 tours of Iraq and probably be on my fourth tour of Afghanistan by now. I don't have a problem with the army and defending our country, i just don't like the idea that defending our country means invading another, theres no logic to this, its basically kill a threat before they threaten us.

Boycott anything that promotes war in the middle east and 3rd world nations.

Tuesday, 1 March 2011

Women victimised on Car insurance rise.

Probably one of the most irritating pieces of news for a few days, this logic of how car insurance can't be biased towards gender, even though we know a 17-22 year old man is more likely to kill someone through reckless and careless drunk driving, or just showing off to his mates in a punto with a new air filter, going 55mph in a 30mph zone, like a village, outside a school.

Bad drivers are bad drivers, and in the sake of argument, bad drivers aren't judged by their gender, as anyone can be a bad driver, thats why buses' and other public transport were invented, but you can't help but think that the more likely logic is the person who is going to cause the most accidents through dangerous driving is a male.

So now women are going to be forced to pay more, because they wont lower the cost when they know they can just equal it to the male rates, and get a profit on what they're already earning, or maybe they'll split the difference?

Sheilas wheels might be useless now... although if you only cater for women insurance surely this will bypass the legislation as you wont have to change any prices, as you only cater for one gender? So we will probably see more male and female specific car insurance caterers.

Whilst we are on the subject of sexism I still don't understand why women still get paid less in the same job position as a man, its ridiculous because for a start its the same job, and i know one thing for a fact, that women get better grades because they work harder, so maybe its because the 'corporation' feel that women still wearing skirts don't have what it takes to make deals like a man because he wears trousers, well one thing i know is women wear trousers in business nowadays so I dont see why they are still been treated as a minority in the workplace...

and on ANOTHER note, i don't get how a logic of equal oppourunities, is hiring a coloured person to do a job, if the incentive is 'to hire a coloured person' to not seem racist, this is been RACIST as you're making a decision based on skin colour, and also singleing out non coloured or other colour-specific people.

Anyway I hope thats just an interesting opinion, and yes I know it has a bit of contradiction in it because not all male's drive like dickheads but its in our nature to thrash an engine.

Humourous View:,-blindfolded-monkey%27s-201103013586/

Official BBC View: