Monday, December 15, 2008

Cheating

Ok.  This is a topic which has no standard definition, again.  My friends and I stayed up one morning, arguing and discussing till 6am, till the sun came up and still, no solution.

So it figures, it's one of those things again.  Grey, not black and white.  Very grey indeed.  So I was in a chat forum and someone said it best.  31 yr old female:

"see, this whole cheating thing has many shades of grey.  I suggest asking your SO if she considers it cheating.  And by the same coin - would u consider her cheating if she danced around naked and a man gave her a "facial".  I know what the answer would be for my marriage - you need to find out what the answer is for your relationship."

So, the conclusion is...It is cheating if it's considered cheating by your other half and yourself.  Now, let's hope you and your other half have somewhat of a common standard of cheating.  

Intent and context came into parts of the forum too.  Quite good.  This guy discussed it like a lawyer's point of view.

Intent = you wanted to cheat (e.g. you wanted to kiss the other person but someone barged into the room).  Did u or did u not cheat?

Context = u did kiss another person....but were playing a role in a film.  Did u or did u not cheat?

Standard of cheating varies differently for different people and cultures too.  Example, in Arab culture, it's common for men to have many wives.  Hmmm.....



Monday, December 1, 2008

What Makes A Marriage

- Belief & Faith that it will work (BOTH sides must believe tat), regardless of ANY shit that comes along.  

- Real maturity 
Having a belief is not enough.  Guy, 48, happily married on forum said:

"I think most people believe it enough to get married....

The problem in most cases is they don't know themselves well enough to get married, so they marry based on how they feel rather than what they know about themselves and each other...

I believe marriages work best when BOTH adults are considerate of each other when making ANY decision affecting the relationship...that means money, friends, family, jobs, leisure, vacation, holidays, travel and have the good sense to COMMUNICATE!!

......a simple phone call to say I'm stuck at work or in traffic does wonders for your SO (who's probably just worrying if you're ok....)"


Thursday, November 27, 2008

Financial Crisis Part II: Should derivatives be marked to market?

So this is a continuation from the other post "Financial Crisis 2008".

What I don't get is "mark-to-market". Is it the accounting standard for derivatives? Can u valuate it by another way? I dunno, I just think it's dodgy. Mark to market is damn dangerous. I mean, value is all perception rite? All's good when the markets are well-oiled - enough buyers and sellers....valuations are reasonable. Actually, I hv to correct that. Valuations are too high in the recent 1 - 2 years.

My question is: when the mkt is irrational, how can valuation be rational? But right now, everyone's doing just that! Markin prices to irrationality and panic, not value.

Scenario
Okay, to put it in layman's term. You have a business selling tables. Note that it's NOT perishable. Last year, you sold tables at $50 a piece, with the cost price at $20. But suddenly, no one can give me a price on my tables. Because the wood that goes to making the table, is in some kind of a mess (housing issue). There's some problems with the farmers and some weird-ass insects ate the wood. BUT, it's a solvable problem. Some scientists are working on insecticides that will kill the
insects. But because I need to sell tables to survive, I started panicking because no one wants to buy my tables. So, I valuate my tables at zero. Like...HUH!?!?

So back to reality, people still need houses. Life still goes on. Prices will drop back down to a level where people will start buying again and then, the derivative instruments will hv something to price on, right? But nooooo, the banks MUST...MUST price their derivative to something. Even if it's zero. Those derivatives are not expired biscuits rite? As long as housing is a necessity, at some point, value will reach a point where there will be demand.

So to summarize, I do not agree that derivatives should be marked to market. Meanwhile, solve the cashflow problem first - govt should pump in money to bail out some of the very institutions that make the world go round (bring back the demand for housing)...and solve the money supply/economic policies later.

Wednesday, May 21, 2008

Why Barbaric Stratocracy/Top-Down Dictatorship Does Not Work

I was talking to a friend, let's call him G. We've basically identified some stratocratic societies/countries. Countries like North Korea, Myanmar, Pakistan, Libya , Sudan, etc. Our opinion is that they are using their people as ransom to the international community for foreign aids and in turn use those money collected to enhance their arsenal of weapons and military might to further control the people. Now, we are praying that Thailand will not follow the slippery slope towards this type of rule.

However, after further discussion and wild brainstorming, is it possible that Darwinism is at work here? Ok, here's my theory. Darwinism is basically like the strongest survive right. I think, these countries, left to their own devices, will just die off anyway. Examples: they kill each other or when the shit hits the fan, AKA cyclone, aid workers actually have to bribe the policeman to give aid to the people. Such behaviour like refusing to help each other in times of need, just reeks of Darwinism don't you think?

True, there are other issues like "Power can corrupt", as stated by G. But I still think it's part of Darwinism, haha. Because, I think power can corrupt, if u allow it to. Actually, it's like anything in life and I will touch on it in another post - "Abuse or Use". Hell, even something simple like water, can abuse u if u drink too much!! It can even be used as a torture instrument as demonstrated in WWII, when the Japanese were in Singapore.

Anyway, digressed a little and back to Darwinism. So if I'm Burmese, what would I do? I would run for my life! I've met a friend, who is Chinese/Cambodian by descent and her parents escaped to France during the Pol Pot regime. She's born and bred in France so I consider her French. When her parents visited her in Singapore and she took them to the night safari, they were afraid of the leafy forest part because they still had memories of back then, of escaping. I look at her life today (good job, good life) and I think, something must be right about escaping!
So again, I see Darwinism. People just run away!

I'm sorry, but barbaric stratocracy/top-down dictatorship just does not work. I emphasize barbaric because in some very civilized societies, if it's not barbaric, stratocracy might still work with appeasement of the masses via camouflaged goodies.

All in all, I'm sorry but barbarism (if there's such a word) CANNOT communicate with evolved reasoning and communication (erm, diplomatic talks). It's like talking to caveman with good English or Chinese or whatever!?

I think, the people from these nations have tried. Aung San Suu Kyi from Myanmar - she was voted into power but who the hell cares? You hold a gun, you win!

So really, still think Darwinism at play....and worse still, if such a country is holding onto a leveraged product such as oil, you'll be invaded, on top of Darwinism at play!?

My heart goes out to the innocent people of these countries.

Marriage

These days, I'm thinking alot about marriage. I'm single now, as I'm typing this. I have been in long term relationships, flings, what have you. But now, I just can't go back to how I used to view marriage. I believe it's a permanent change in view.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not sad nor happy. I'm just curious, as usual. What is marriage really? It's really a piece of legal paper. In the old days, I believe it's a tool to help the rich get richer. E.g. my daughter marry your son, so our assets grow and stay within the "family". So in an official sense, it's more for asset and human protection (kids).

And suddenly, in the Shakespeare era or something, this boy-girl relationship became romantised. And you know how the media can play on your mind. Gosh, it started even in the Shakespearean era! (think poems, love stories and what not). As time progressed, the romantisizing of a boy-girl relationship becomes a social norm (Valentine's Day, fairy tales and happily-ever-after, etc). Anything outside this social norm is deem incorrect (not true).

As I discovered more about life through experiences and people I've met, I've realized that, as with everything in life, alot of it is bullshit. E.g. when your broker recommends you a stock, it might not be a right call. Or when my mother told us that she made up some part of a bear story that she told us, becos she forgot parts of it!!

Marriage = love is NOT true.  Marriage is social engineering/a mindset and faith in a belief system.


Let me explain.

Any relationship in life is fluid. It's complex and it changes. It can be nurtured, it can be destroyed. People themselves can change. No relationship in life has a social expectation to be officiated except marriage! Really! Example - have you ever seen a "best friend" certification? Maybe, the only other thing is a an employment contract in a company. So the certification/role is "employee".  Of which, you can quit quite easily.

But as I mentioned earlier, human relationships are fluid and complex. People change, come and go, etc.  So in a natural sense, marriage is not supposed to naturally work on its own.  But don't under-estimate the power of social conditioning.  The human mind can tune itself to expectations (social and individual).  Example, if u believe marriage is a good thing, u will want it to work.  If you think it's forever (in a human lifespan), then chances are that, it will (provided your spouse thinks the same way).  For some people, they view marriage lightly; so the chances of it working, will be lower.  If a society promotes bigamy, then bigamy will become a social norm.  So, it will be normal to marry 2, 3 spouses.

So what makes a marriage work? Or not work? I have seen successful and unsuccesful marriages and after much analysis, I have come to a conclusion. Most of the same rules apply as to why you and your best friends, are best friends. Effort, patience, acceptance of each other as a package (faults and all) and tenacity to see the relationship through bad times.   But a marriage is more difficult, because of these additional requirements (vs friends):

- same time (both like each other at the same time and want to be married)
- same things (kids, geographical location, etc)
- same moralistic belief system (honesty, trust, view on monogamy, bigamy, etc)


You don't know if this relationship with your spouse will work; whether you or he/she will change, or be around, etc. Life itself is transient.  So really, this spousal relationship will only last like what?  5 years, 20 years, 40 years?  You do realize that you WILL lose this person at some point.  So take it easy and enjoy the ride.  Hopefully, it's fun.

I think more people should be educated in this aspect. This is definitely more realistic than Cinderella glass slippers, Prince Charming and other nonsense. These stories are nice, I enjoyed it but like a nice song or a religion, not all applies to me! I think all governments should make it compulsory for couples to attend pre-marriage counselling before they get married.

I think people should marry one of their best friends. Love...no, but someone you have a really soft spot for and erm, enjoy additional benefits. Haha.

Financial Crisis 2008

Ok, as I sit here on a Monday nite, Oct 2008, I'm typing and listening to Bloomberg television. This is my take on the cause of this crisis:


Factor 1: Ideologies
Let's backtrack a little to when and how it all started.  We had it coming for a long time to be honest.  Alan Greenspan, the ex-Federal Reserve Chairman has a very laissere-fare style of management.  U.S-style free market capitalism.  AKA, markets will correct itself.  He was very revered.  Low interest rate environment, easy credit for like wat? 10 years or something.  Erm, obviously, people will happily spend rite?  So they did.  I mean, they went on a shopping spree I tell ya!  And when Daddy doesn't tell u to stop, why should u right?  

I'm sorry, but everything on earth is man-made.  That includes the entire capital market systems and ideologies.  So there are no absolutes on earth.  Everything is flawed.  But that's ok.  Life goes on.  It always has.  Just be careful who you "worship".


Factor 2: Easy credit
This is a continuation of U.S.-style free market capitalism.  Fact is, markets DO need to be regulated.   Easy and I would even say, fraudulent credit was rampant.  I mean, not earning money and still obtaining housing loans (sub-prime)?  Come on!  Erm, how are u going to pay your loans if u're not earning money?


Factor 3: The invention of sophisticated financial instruments; and all parties related to it

Loans (imagine, tat housing loan tat u took that you couldn't afford....haha...pun intended) all embedded into structured products - e.g. mini bonds, big bonds, what have you.  And resold back to retail investors like u and I!  Wow.  So actually, u did swallow back some of the risks u put out there!  Talk about what goes around, comes around.  Just pity those honest folks who pay their mortgage on time and bought some of those tiny little dirty bonds.  Damn!

Like melamine-laced milk products, these dirty loans (those who couldn't pay back the loan) were all embedded into financial products and distributed all throughout the world.  Dirty loans in an OTC market couldn't even be priced becos everyone was staying away from them with a 10-foot pole.  Even if they were clean.  Confidence crisis here, people!  It's no longer about truth, it's about perception.

When the party is going, the going parties.  And everyone jumps on the bandwagon.  Including rating agencies who, oops, just shortly awhile ago, rated that instrument AAA?  And it crashed? The experts that u trusted are well, just human. And faltered they did!  After a bailout, what do they do?  Have a massive party, tat's what!  Capital A in the insurance line, tat's wat it is.  I wonder if they did enjoy the party.


Factor 4: Our connected world
I blame the internet and the airplanes.  Since when did the world become so inter-connected? Never.  Past crisis have always been contained within continents and countries.  Now, the speed and interconnectivity just spreads the good and bad stuff around faster.  Can't have one without the other.


Factor 5: The reliance on loans
Also, the financial world lends money to the normal world, ALOT more than in the past.  When the financial world stops lending, the normal world, having been so reliant on it, just feels more vulnerable.  Like damn, how come I can't borrow $100million to buy that new machinery to expand my business?  I used to be able to do that pretty easily!


Factor 6: Fear
So like a half of a couple who has been cheated on, it doesn't matter if the other party swears to God that he/she does not cheat.  You won't believe him/her, for now.  So investors are just withdrawing their money, banks are withholding credit.  Out of fear.  


Factor 7: Unwinding of excesses
In a nutshell, I just think this whole crisis is a massive unwinding of excesses.  I'm not evil, but I think this crisis could be a good thing.  Since when did organic growth (cash business) go out of vogue, or even contraction? Let's take a step back and chill a little, shall we?  Let's smell the roses for awhile.  Not what an investor would like to hear, but maybe, let's just be comfortable with NOT expanding for awhile, shall we?  










Victor Bout - Morally Confused or On The Fence?

Small time criminals don't interest me. But big-time ones do. I will cover Hitler later when I have the time, haha.

I first read about Victor Bout in the local newspaper. I read with interest, amusement, and then laughter! Either this guy is clueless, doesn't give a shit, or just morally confused or in my terms, morally on the fence.

Source: http://www.ruudleeuw.com/vbout00.htm

Victor Bout's File
Victor Bout is a former KGB major and arms merchant, the most notorious in the Post Cold War era and he plays a critical role in areas where the weapons trade has been embargoed by the United Nations. Mr. Bout (pronounced "Butt" in Russian) combines his legal airline activities with illegal ones. His fleet of aircraft has been based in Central African countries, South Africa and U.A.E. of Sharjah. He also operated out of Ostend, Belgium and he seems to have had connections with Mexair in Geneva (1989-1994).While I thought nothing of it I photographed some of his aircraft at Sharjah in 1999, but later I stumbled on his story while I tried to identify some of his aircraft (couldn't, they were carrying illegal registrations). I became fascinated by his exploits and while he is being searched by media and governmental agencies, he seems to hide in the shadows and run his businesses.In 2002 he changed the name of his company again, from Air Cess to Air Bas, while previous also having operated as Centrafricain Airlines and Air Pass.While Air Bas (registered in Equatorial Guinea, under cover company CET Aviation) was still current in 2004 (though no aircraft carried these titles), his company (allegedly) British Gulf International Airlines (registered in Sao Tome and a subsidiary, under the same name, in Kyrgyzstan) was reported to have landed contracts from the US (which in turn put Western Allies under pressure to get Mr Bout off the blacklists). Victor Bout gave an interview to Peter Landesman, which was published (in German) in the Süddeutsche Zeitung (no.43 24Oct03); below is a link to the article in English (but requires registering with the NY Times). Before this interview the only publicly available photo of him was secretly taken by a Belgian journalist in March 2001 on an airstrip in Congo. And his only statements had been brief denials of his role in arms trafficking. He walked out of a CNN interview in March 2002.

Okay, apart from being really obnoxious (besides walking out on CNN, this fellow commented that Nicholas Cage did a bad job at impersonating him in a film based on him!), this character is really quite fascinating. He supplied arms to a African leader, then later, supplied arms to the opposing party. He then helped the African leader escape and dropped aid for the people. Something to that effect. No comments. You judge.

Anyway, this fox was finally caught in Bangkok on 6 Mar 2008. Usually working annoymously behind runners, he was lured by a potential big deal that ended up being a set-up. I believe U.S. undercover agents finally did him in during a sting operation.

In any case, this guy's made history and got many book deals. Not sure whether he'll have the freedom to enjoy any of the financial freedom and fame it brings.








Method Behind Every Madness

I always try to figure out people's reasons behind their actions. From serial killers to crazy bosses, to why couples break up. To date, I've found that there's always a reason. Always.


The most interesting one to date, is the serial killer. Apparently, this fellow was interviewed on TV. And he himself said that it's better that he's kept in jail!? He understands it's a medical condition that he's suffering from. He started killing in his teens and couldn't stop?! Gosh, talk about an addiction!


Well, let science explain. This group of scientists did this experiment and showed a series of pictures to normal folks and then, to the killer. There were pictures of babies, cars, playground, normal pictures. Then they were showed gruesome pictures. Pictures of slaughtered human bodies, etc. Their reaction was recorded.


Apparently, the killer's reaction to ALL pictures were the same! He has no reaction to good things, bad things. And needs ALOT more to get "high". I believe it's called testosterene. It can be found in males and females and alot more in males (that explains why fights are mostly started by guys).


Adrenaline junkies need more to get high and that explains why some people are just more apt for certain jobs & passions. E.g. people who love rollercoasters, financial traders, stuntmen, etc.


So are you an adrenaline junkie? If you are, you should identify what jobs and hobbies suit you. Beware, such people get bored easily and if their adrenaline is not channelled rightly, they could get themselves into unnecessary trouble.

Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Destiny or Choice

I asked this very smart boy once. On his opinion on destiny VS choice. His take is you can't fight destiny (the bigger scheme of things), but the choices you make along the way can change and vary. But at the end of the day, u're back to what you're destined to do.

2nd boy answers. Something along this line but not really. His comment was "If it's never meant to be yours, it will never be". Meaning, even if you get it, but you will lose it later. So really, it's still back to destiny at the end of the day.


Let's look at some true stories.


Wife Vs Ex-Girlfriend
I hear of this lady (let's call her Kate) who recently went for this gathering and she couldn't stop crying and wanted to kill herself. She has a daughter and her husband's left her. For his ex-girlfriend. Whom he knew, longer than his wife, Kate. Kate went through thick and thin with him (including bankruptcy) and he left, after he recovered. Into the arms of his ex-girlfriend. Hmmmm. I'm thinking, is this really true love at play (ex girlfriend) or he's just an irresponsible bastard? Or is it that he was never meant to be Kate's in the first place? I think the only tangible good outcome is the daughter (who loves Kate so much). Destiny or choice?


Children From Products of Broken Marriages
I read 4 stories of children as products of broken marriages. Back to back stories. All sad sob stories. Except one girl stood out. She caught my eye. She still believes in the sanctity of marriage and wants a happy marriage and kids. I remembered she said she made a conscious choice - to be happy or dwell in the past. She chose to move on. I underline - chose.


I know this guy who heads a department in a company. He comes from a broken marriage. I remembered getting a glimpse of his tattoos and he mentioned he wanted to turn gay at one point in time. It's just so mind-boggling that now, he is happily married with a boy, so good at his job and happy. I think he is...he's smiling most times.

Another 2 friends too, made it in life, despite a very hard past. One even, at 11 years old, had to stand in front of his Dad with a tennis racquet to stop him from beating up his mum! He too, wants to get married, loves kids and want to have them one day. He's quite negative sometimes, but I think he's doing good.

But another one just couldn't overcome his fear and, as far as I'm concerned, still has a terrible phobia of marriage & kids. I think alot comes from acute phobia and negativity from his mother.


Another one is "in between" I think. He is a good boy and I hope he figures out what's best for him.


So, 2 sides of a coin, true life testimonials. Destiny or choice? You decide.

Complaints of Corruption Amid Prayers for Myanmar's Cyclone Dead

I'm sorry, I'm usually not tat vocal but this govt is totally and utterly disgusting!!!! And Myanmar says constitution approved by 92.4%? Reeks of rigging or the poor pple had a gun pointed at their head when they went to "vote"!

"The United States on Tuesday questioned the relevance of a scheduled fundraising conference for cyclone-battered Myanmar, saying it was more important for military rulers in the Southeast Asian state to provide swift increased access to disaster-hit areas."..........I totally agree!!

Just be careful where your donation is going if u're planning to....



Complaints of corruption amid prayers for Myanmar's cyclone deadPosted: 20 May 2008 1127 hrs

Source: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/348865/1/.html

Photos
3 of 3
> ">A young survivor of the Cyclone Nargis stands by a makeshift house in Bogalay



Related News

Myanmar begins three days of mourning

Myanmar agrees to aid effort led by ASEAN

UN humanitarian chief awaits visa for Myanmar mission

Myanmar says constitution approved by 92.4%
Special Report

Picture Gallery on Cyclone Nargis
YANGON - Rajagopal, one of many volunteers in Myanmar bringing food to cyclone victims, said he was shocked by the desperation of the survivors in the Irrawaddy delta, where he saw corpses still hanging in trees. But even more appalling, he said, was that local officials demanded that he and his friends pay cash bribes to win permission to bring food into the devastated southern region. "The survivors are in a dire situation," he said, "and we had to pay bribes to get aid goods into the area." "It is terrible what this government is doing," Rajagopal added, as he offered prayers at Yangon's Shwedagon Pagoda for the 133,000 dead or missing.
Fast Facts He was among about 10,000 Buddhists at the pagoda Monday to observe a normally joyous holiday commemorating the birth, enlightenment and passing of Buddha. This year, the mood at the pagoda was grim, with residents in Yangon still coming to grips with the tragedy that has left 2.4 million people in desperate need of help, more than two weeks after the storm. The government has declared three days of official mourning, a rare public acknowledgement of the grief hanging over the nation. "People are sad. Look at their faces. They are all worried about what's in store in the future," Rajagopal said. He lost a niece when the storm pounded Yangon, knocking over a tree that killed the girl inside her home. But he said the suffering in the city paled in comparison to the grisly scenes that still fill the Irrawaddy delta. "I returned from there three days ago. I saw bodies up on the tree branches," he said. "We have to help them. This government is not helping," he added. Myanmar's military government agreed Monday to allow its neighbours in Southeast Asia to coordinate an international relief effort, but so far shows no sign of relenting in its refusal to allow in foreign aid workers needed to oversee the disaster response. Many private donors from Yangon and other cities have taken matters into their own hands, delivering food and clothing to victims in the delta, where roadblocks dot the highways in a bid to keep out foreigners. Other devotees at Shwedagon had stories like Rajagopal's, telling of corrupt local officials trying to profit off the tragedy. "My friend wanted to give rice to victims in the delta. But the authorities manning the roadblocks demanded money before allowing him to deliver the food," said Zin Khin, a 25-year-old volunteer at the pagoda. "Myanmar people are angry with the regime's attitude. But there is nothing much we can do," he said. "We can't take to the streets. They are afraid. This government has killed people before to stay in power. They will not hesitate to kill to remain in power," he said. Last September, Buddhist monks led marches of more than 100,000 people through the streets of Yangon. It was the biggest protest against military rule in nearly two decades, and the military was unyielding in its reaction. Security forces shot and beat protesters in the streets, including revered Buddhist monks. After the crackdown, many monks fled the city. Shwedagon, the country's holiest shrine, was surrounded with barbed wire and closed to the public for days. Many devotees are still reluctant to return to the pagoda. Zin Khin said only half the normal number of people turned up for the holiday this year. They slowly circled the golden spires, splashing water at statues of Buddha and at the banyan trees that shade them. Laying flowers, bananas and coconuts as offering to the temple, they recited mantras that also carried prayers for the dead. "I hope those who died will be reborn with lots of happiness and wealth," Zin Khin said. "For the survivors, I hope aid comes to them quickly." - AFP/ir

North Face Founder Saves, Fights Nature as Chile Volcano Erupts

Question. If u were Douglas Tompkins, would u :


1) Not know the future - build the Pumalin Park
2) Know the future - build the Pumalin Park
3) Not know the future - Not build the Pumalin Park
4) Know the future - Not build the Pumalin Park


Pick one. Your choice can define how you live your life.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

North Face Founder Saves, Fights Nature as Chile Volcano Erupts
By Joshua Goodman

May 19 (Bloomberg) -- North Face Inc. founder Douglas Tompkins and his wife Kristine have spent $50 million to save Chile's rain forest. Now nature is rebelling: A volcano that has erupted for the first time in 9,000 years is ravaging the reserve they have built.
The Chaiten volcano sits on the southern edge of Pumalin Park, a 300,000-hectare (740,000-acre) site created by the Tompkinses to preserve a swath of Patagonia. Ash and rivers swollen by volcanic mud have damaged land, trees and trails on a third of the park and threaten to obliterate 17 years of work, Kristine Tompkins said.
``It's a mess, a serious mess,'' she said in a May 13 phone interview from Pumalin's administration center at Puerto Varas, about 160 kilometers (100 miles) from the volcano. ``If it gets worse, it could hammer in a big way the infrastructure we've built, and wipe out forests that'll take thousands of years to return.''
The eruption, which started May 2, has spewed windblown ash east across the Andes as far as Buenos Aires, almost 1,500 kilometers away, and forced the evacuation of more than 4,000 people living within a 30-kilometer radius of the mountain. A 3,000-year-old hardwood forest of evergreen Alerce trees has been spared so far.
About 90 percent of the now-evacuated town of Chaiten is flooded, Chile's national emergency office said on May 15. Residents probably won't be able to return for at least three months, Chilean Defense Minister Jose Goni said the same day.
Patagonia Visit
Douglas Tompkins was traveling and unavailable for comment, Pumalin spokeswoman Carolina Morgado said. In an interview with Bloomberg News last year, Tompkins, now 65, recounted the steps that led him to Chile
He said he first visited Patagonia, a vast expanse of mountains, rivers and grasslands at the southern tip of South America, in the 1960s. A climbing buddy with him on that trip later started Patagonia Inc., the outdoor-apparel company where his present wife once served as chief executive officer.
Tompkins himself went on to found and sell outdoor-gear maker North Face in the 1960s. In 1968, he started fashion company Esprit Holdings Ltd. with his first wife. He gave up his Esprit holdings for $200 million in 1989.
Two years later, he sold his Ferrari and Amish-quilt collection and moved to an isolated cabin in Chile to work fulltime on conservation. He married Kristine, a long-time friend, in 1993. They say they have spent $200 million to acquire and preserve 810,000 hectares of land in Chile and neighboring Argentina.
People, Livestock
Pumalin, which spans the country from Argentina on the east to the Pacific Ocean on the west, is the showcase of their holdings. Its self-guided trails, rustically luxurious cabins and elegant visitors' center draw 7,000 visitors a year. In 2005, the Chilean government granted the park the status of a nature sanctuary.
Since the eruption, the Tompkinses have relocated 75 people who live and work in the reserve. Kristine Tompkins said flyovers showed that flooded, debris-filled rivers threatened to wipe out livestock on several farms that they own contiguous to the park, which is owned by a foundation established by the couple.
``We're anticipating major damage,'' Kristine Tompkins, 57, said in the May 13 interview. ``What's shocking is that this thing is still blowing as hard as it was the first day and we don't know what will happen next.''
The eruption is refocusing attention on the Tompkins holdings and stirring up old controversies.
Local Concern
Douglas Tompkins, who says he is a proponent of so-called Deep Ecology, a philosophy that blames technology from laptop computers to nuclear power plants for damaging the environment, has upset local officials and business people by refusing to allow logging, hydroelectric dams and a proposed roadway through his reserve.
President Michelle Bachelet's government announced May 8 it would ban all land purchases in the area hit by the volcano, after local officials said they were concerned that Tompkins would try to take advantage of the eruption to buy out farmers whose livelihood could be wiped out.
The possibility that Tompkins would seek to enlarge his holdings was ``an important factor in the decision'' to seek a ban, Claudio Alvarado, the opposition Congressional deputy for the area, said in an interview. The aim is to ``avoid speculation and people taking advantage of the situation,'' he said.
Carlos Ignacio Kuschel, a senator from the region, said the measure wouldn't be an effective deterrent.
``Tompkins has never paid attention to these things, he just buys,'' Kuschel said in an interview. ``He's capricious and the older he gets, the more difficult he becomes.''
Kristine Tompkins said she and her husband have no plans to buy more land because of the eruption.
``We're so used to this kind of thing,'' she said. ``At first we joked that if this volcano exploded it would end up being our fault.''
To contact the reporter on this story: Joshua Goodman in Rio de Janeiro at Jgoodman19@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: May 19, 2008 00:00 EDT

If abortion is right "because a foetus is not self-aware", it must also be everyone's right to kill unconscious people

This was a question posted in Facebook. It is morally controversial, so yes, apparently, it's garnered lotsa different opinions.


I think it's grey because there's different definitions of life. Some opinions in Facebook have stated that 6 months is a cut-off period for a definition of a life. One argued about "seperateness" - foetus is in your body, vs a stranger lying somewhere in a hospital bed. I just have 2 questions:


- Does tat mean that if u cheat on your partner and it's guaranteed that he/she does not find out (unconscious)....that this gives u a reason to cheat?

- Also, 2 people sleeping (unconscious). One is a friend, one is not. Is it ok to kill the stranger? They don't know any better right? This second scenario is to test the "seperateness theory.



I think this question is good because it creates a moral fence and I think, yes, u hv to choose which camp u're in. Granted there are grey areas like if the foetus is seriously deformed, pdt of rape, etc. In grey cases, a moral consensus from parties involved is needed i guess.