So you will not solve the great challenge of the present and future about the solution competence in politics: with apparent solutions, accountant tricks, polishing of statistics, tinkering with symptoms is just zero. Who really wants to improve, you must eliminate the real causes of the problems. What can you see everything, if you look through the straw on the serene sky: a blue stain, white or grey and much in between. And it does not matter, whether it is spring, summer, autumn or winter. And so it goes also when you look with the straw in our world: cheer them every hour and are worried at the same time, our future, economic and other prophets, and with them the media.
Today’s good, tomorrow bad, in the morning, at midday, rising, falling, evening sideways blah, until the ink runs out the pot. If it was less by 90 percent, it would be too much still to 90 percent. At least for those who on the sophisticated thoughts come contemporaries, on meaningful, sustainable information Value to set. History teaches, if the harvest is good, then you must start with the seed. It just changes when change behaviour, procedures or new possibilities open up by new inventions.
And that takes time usually. Often, this is also a matter of decades, for example, the corporate culture in a company to change. With apparent solutions, accountant tricks, polishing of statistics, tinkering with symptoms is just zero. Who really wants to improve, you must eliminate the real causes of the problems. Once, it was somewhere between Europe and Asia on the plane, I got an older Chinese in the conversation. We talked about wealth and poverty as the wise man was serious and said you have to ask five times why, to reach the true cause – and, you have dry to create the swamp of often wrongly acquired privileges – even if the privilege Knights defend the marshes with claw with their lobbyists.” In other words: It would be the advisable sometimes Straw to put aside and look to focus on the essential: what are the overall objectives and the really important questions? A non-bureaucratic management without a useless diversification and without duplication or the genuflection before nursemaid and beneficiaries? Effectively eliminate poverty or that make rich richer? Prevent the extinction of the fish in the sea or allow overfishing? People who can live in 200 years on this planet or the overexploitation of nature continue? Tolerate solidarity with billions or the excess of the cheaters? Stop the cruelty or not jeopardise the income of animal tormentors? And, it retains the usual ritual of the problem solution? After years tug of war by mostly uninvolved with the lobbyists, there is a hard-won compromise proposal: a little less cruelty, so that the animal torturer must not suffer too much. Robert Lackner