Robert Peston caused the recession

I saw Robert Peston quoting a member of the public, saying "...why should bankers get paid so much money when I haven't had a pay rise for a long time, things are getting more expensive and I'm in lots of debt. They don't deserve it..."

Well I tell you something...they do! There is a growing sense of socialism and the feeling of "it's not fair" brewing at the moment. This is following a few decades of centre-right policy and society aligning with an overall desire to work for, and take personal responsibility for, our own wealth. But things are tough now - we are in the midst of an era of austerity, unemployment is at a new peak and the press love sending shock waves of fear through our communities...

The tragic thing is that this new found sense of socialism reminds me of the way children at school expect their teacher to support them wholeheartedly when things are bad...but when things are good, the student will turn on the teacher. In other words, it seems to me that society is saying "woe is me, the world is unfair, someone help me and lets punish those in a better position"...simply because things are difficult. And Robert Peston is loving it... The fact of the matter is that the people that complain do not have the intelligence or strength of character to succeed in the banking world. It is tough. Bankers in the top positions have made many personal sacrifices that many people would not be prepared to make. Fine, we can challenge their judgement when it comes to gambling our country into a financial mess and question their personal values when it comes to friends and family. But we all must take responsibility for our own decisions and follow our innate drive. Therefore, to non-bankers who believe Robert Peston is speaking on their behalf, I say...you could have applied to Goldmann Sachs or Barclays but you chose not to. Get over it. And even if you did work for one of the banks, you would probably not have survived. It's not in your nature to succeed in the banking environment. It is not safe, cosy, warm and friendly. Bankers put up with this because there is a large financial reward. It suits only a small minority of people.

Things are tough but don't try to blame others without taking a look at yourself first. And more importantly, don't listen to Robert Peston or any of his sensationalist bollocks. He has been the worst thing for this country for over 3 years and is milking the system and other peoples' misery. He is no different to Bob Diamond or Steven Hester if you actually think about it. Cut throat, highly successful, unpleasant.

Watch 'Invictus' streaming

This is a great movie. The story of South Africa winning the rugby world cup in 1995. It is about exceeding our own expectations of ourselves. Inspiring.

Click on the picture below, the movie pops up as a new page, click play, enjoy...

Earl Spencer speech in memory of Princess Diana 1997

If you can get past the first 90 seconds of Elton John (sorry Elton), you will see one of the most tragic and stirring speeches from recent history. The profundity of the situation, from Earl Spencer’s perspective, is so clear. The societal significance of Princess Diana’s death is secondary to the death of his sister and he opens himself up. It is rare that such honesty is seen on such a public stage.

Neil Pasricha: The 3 A's of awesome

Neil's life went bad. But he got on with it and made a conscious effort to find the good things in life rather than dwell on the bad (why oh why don't more people do this rather than loaf around in self centred, self inflicted, self perpetuating misery). This is Neil's story and his insights. It's touching, simple and so damn obvious! Many people go through ordeals like this but he deals with the matter so personally and delicately (and even thanks his parents). It is from the heart. He got his platform at TED because he helped change the world. Respect. Thanks for having a bad spell :-)

Blink: Malcolm Gladwell talks

Malcolm Gladwell talks about hig book 'Blink'. Published in 2005, the book describes the main subject of "thin-slicing": our ability to gauge what is really important from a very narrow period of experience. In other words, this is an idea that spontaneous decisions are often as good as—or even better than—carefully planned and considered ones. Gladwell draws on examples from science, advertising, sales, medicine, and popular music to reinforce his ideas. Gladwell also uses many examples of regular people's experiences with "thin-slicing."





Gladwell explains how an expert's ability to "thin slice" can be corrupted by their likes and dislikes, prejudices and stereotypes (even unconscious ones), and how they can be overloaded by too much information. Two particular forms of unconscious bias Gladwell discusses are Implicit Association Tests and psychological priming. Gladwell also us about our instinctive ability to mind read, which is how we can get to know what emotions a person is feeling just by looking at his or her face.

We do that by "thin-slicing," using limited information to come to our conclusion. In what Gladwell contends is an age of information overload, he finds that experts often make better decisions with snap judgments than they do with volumes of analysis.

Gladwell gives a wide range of examples of thin-slicing in contexts such as gambling, speed dating, tennis, military war games, the movies, malpractice suits, popular music, and predicting divorce.

Gladwell also mentions that sometimes having too much information can interfere with the accuracy of a judgment, or a doctor's diagnosis. This is commonly called "Analysis paralysis." The challenge is to sift through and focus on only the most critical information to make a decision. The other information may be irrelevant and confusing to the decision maker. Collecting more and more information, in most cases, just reinforces our judgment but does not help to make it more accurate. The collection of information is commonly interpreted as confirming a person's initial belief or bias. Gladwell explains that better judgments can be executed from simplicity and frugality of information, rather than the more common belief that greater information about a patient is proportional to an improved diagnosis. If the big picture is clear enough to decide, then decide from the big picture without using a magnifying glass.

The book argues that intuitive judgment is developed by experience, training, and knowledge. For example, Gladwell claims that prejudice can operate at an intuitive unconscious level, even in individuals whose conscious attitudes are not prejudiced. An example is in the halo effect, where a person having a salient positive quality is thought to be superior in other, unrelated respects. Gladwell uses the 1999 killing of Amadou Diallo, where four New York policemen shot an innocent man on his doorstep 41 times, as another example of how rapid, intuitive judgment can have disastrous effects.