Posts by Bart Janssen
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Where are the foreigners?!, in reply to Simon Grigg,
I also rate Mekong Neua
Some nights yes I agree. But other nights I've had bland cardboard pretending to be food. To me that says they have one very good chef and when he/she has a night off the customers suffer.
As for Little India I can't agree. You must have got lucky because the only food I've had from there has been barely up to supermarket standard.
-
Hard News: About Occupy Wall Street, in reply to Andrew C,
Greenspan himself now says he got it badly wrong. So it’s not entirely silly.
Yes but Greenspan is a political appointment. Had he known that he should have acted differently it is questionable as to whether he would have been allowed to act differently.
-
Hard News: About Occupy Wall Street, in reply to Sacha,
Carbon taxes and ETS are one example.
Yes and their response is to buy politicians that will change that law and where that isn't possible challenge every detail legally or simply ignore the law and dare the govt to do anything.
Yes I think a demonstrably untrustworthy group should not be trusted. But I think the way to change that is to replace them with trustworthy people who have been taught what (long term) ethics really are and get tested before they are allowed to be in positions of responsibility.
-
Hard News: About Occupy Wall Street, in reply to Lucy Stewart,
Either that or we must figure out a way of teaching management to behave differently.
To do that you'd need a way to make the consequences for management relative to the long-term, rather than the short-term, results of a company, because you're right - it's really hard to lay the finger on individuals for doing what made most sense for them (and their companies) *at the time*, but overall and over time was disastrous. And that's hard to regulate. Making corporations (and boards) liable for their failings in more serious ways than relatively small fines would be an excellent start.
I don't think there is a way to make "consequences of actions" drive managers into good behaviour. It just encourages them to find lawyers to create loopholes.
If solutions are to be found for the failures in the existing system they will have to be short and long term. I agree that short term it will have to be governments taking intelligent regulatory measures, but they will be evaded.
Long term I think the only way to change the system is to either change the role of managers, from controlling to support, or to change the way managers think, by education. I personally think getting managers to step down from the controlling roles is unlikely but changing the way they are taught so that they become less selfish and short term in their thinking is possible. Essentially I'm suggesting making ethics a compulsory part of the MBA, not compliance with legal ethics but real human ethics.
Of course you'd then have to license them. Wouldn't that be fun, require people to pass a test in order to control businesses that are important (say if you have more than 50 staff dependent on your decisions). I know some that would pass with flying colours and some that wouldn't even understand the questions.
-
Hard News: About Occupy Wall Street, in reply to hamishm,
he blames Greenspan for it all
Which of course is silly as well.
-
Hard News: Where are the foreigners?!, in reply to Lucy Stewart,
It inspired terror in you?
:P
Given that my English haz fail
-
Hard News: About Occupy Wall Street, in reply to Lucy Stewart,
"Hang the bankers" isn't a useful response, but it's still absolutely true that the banking and financial systems screwed up bigtime, that most of it was predictable, and that some people actively profited off it. Conspirators they may not have been, but they're not exactly scapegoats, either.
The problem, as I see it, is that the people running those businesses are rewarded for very specific behaviours. Sometimes those behaviours are required by law eg shareholder will sue and win if the managers don't maximise profit.
But fundamentally some of those behaviours actually damage the long term viability of the business and ultimately the economy. So you have a situation where very smart management teams know full well that what they are doing will screw things up horribly long term, but they still do them because the short term benefits are too great.
A similar problem exists when businesses are encouraged to view the world as someone else's problem and only focus on their own narrow gains. Again sometimes that narrow focus is demanded by Boards of Directors and shareholders. But the cost is actions that harm the majority while still benefiting the individual business.
I don't think we should scrap capitalism but I do think we need to identify where it becomes so extreme that it does more harm than good and at that point I think regulation by governments is the only option. That becomes very hard when businesses essentially pay for politicians election campaigns.
Either that or we must figure out a way of teaching management to behave differently.
-
Hard News: Where are the foreigners?!, in reply to Jackie Clark,
I would always head to Tasca
Been there twice and not managed to find what they are really good at on the menu. I've from several people they love it but I've only had average food. Service is fine. So what do you recommend Jackie?
-
Hard News: Where are the foreigners?!, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
aweful
Bah I hate that word I always get it wrong :). Awful, bad, terrible even, condescending, oblivious, ignorant of their own menu. The best staff make you feel like you are in their own home and most welcome to be there.
-
Hard News: Where are the foreigners?!, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
Soul on the Viaduct might be a tad chi-chi for my taste, but the times I’ve been there it is obvious Judith Tabron puts a lot of effort into getting the front of house staff right.
We had lunch there once and the fish was overcooked, we had had only one mouthful and the waitress noticed that we didn't have the look of pleasure that is usually associated with their fish and immediately came to insist that it go back and be replaced. Note this wasn't the formula "how is everything?" this was a waitress who was actively watching her tables to make sure the customers were enjoying their meals. That is great service. Oh and the fish when it was replaced was great. There is a reason that Soul has been so successful for so long.