So what does $700bn get you? Simple it bails the people at the top of the money food chain out, and gets the ordinary man into more debt.

The more and more you look at the so called finicial crisis (greed karma) the more and more you see people feathering there own nests, the greed that got so many banks into this problem, is still there and apparently more prolific than ever. Not content with making a mess of their own systems of finance they want the common man to pay for their mistakes, and bail them out - yet again.

$700bn sounds alot of money but really it barley scratches the surface of the problem, and if anything will compound the current problem for a great deal longer. I hate to be a synic but those companies who stand to benefit the most from the latest bail-out plan, are also the most connected and often friends of the politicians and the lobbyists that make the legislature that ultimately gives them an open check to right down the worst debt on the books to the US tax payer.

It also sets a very unhealthy president for countries outside the US, the banks seem very comfortable with the idea of the governments buying the bad debt off their books, so much so it may be expected should there be another downturn in the markets the UK tax payer would have to foot the bill for a similar rescue plan.

Its uterly ridiculous to think that anybody thinks that a government buying almost $1,000,000,000,000 worth of debt is in any way a good idea. It gives the banks free reign to muck the system up again, bad debt is a way of keeping all the banks in check. The bad debt forces the banks to take fewer big risks, as they have to maintain at least a value of equal capital to the debt to stay afloat. Yet the US government is going to take all this debt and effective make it dissappear (at least for the banks) No investment is a bad investment anymore

Never before have we been in such a situation and never before have we come up with such ridiculuos and frankly childish solutions to the problems. Rather than spend money buying, spend money creating regulatory procedures and bodies to uphold them which aren't in the pocket of any other organisations. That would be money well spent, and would ensure economic success many years down the line. 

You Learn from your mistakes, not cover them up with more money. 

Lloyds TSB HBOS

Today also saw the greed in the UK banking sector, not content with owning practically all the mortgage market the new LLoyds HBOS bank decided, it might cut most of the jobs in London instead opting to go with the Edinburgh HBOS HQ. My question is why would you move from one of the financial capitals of the world? and secondly why on earth would you be looking at cutting so many jobs. Surely the staffing costs have to been factored into the deal, apparently not - when things are rushed it helps nobody in the end. 

They are still looking to turn a quick buck.

"We're doomed Captain, doomed" Private James Frazer (Dads Army)

We don't have to look far back to see what the olympics cost, and what happens to the sites when things aren't thought through properly. Athens 2004 cost ~$15 billion, yet the majority of the remaining venues are derelict 4 years on, and most importantly the Greek People will be paying for them for years to come. The only real positives to come out of the games were the new Metro and Airport.

China spent a massive $41 Billion, on there games and by all accounts it worked. They are number one, and they produced the best Olympic spectacle so far. There was much talk by the BBC commentators during the Opening Ceremony that London is going to have to top China, the obvious thing is its going to cost the UK tax payer over $40 billion to do it, its an insane amount of money for 16 days of sport. The total cost of the London 2012 games is going to be in excess of $17 billion, inflation could add up to $10 billion, the majority of which we are paying for, to put the figure into perspective the total Sponsorship Funding only adds up to GBP £650 million and so far only £400 million of that is secured. [Source: Telegraph] On top of that long time sponsor Kodak aren't even bothering to renew there Olympic Commitment, along with Lenovo and Canadas' Manulife, whether or not this is any indicator is up for debate.

Tokyo is one of the nations that could take the 2016 olympics but there isn't that much support for it:

The Games cost too much money, and they destroy the environment - Assemblywoman Yoshiko Fukushi

We will be the only nation to host the Modern Olympiad 3 times, it is important to look at when we last hosted the olympics 1908 and 1948. Some would argue these were both times, when the olympics were actually about sport and not one upping the last host nation. If the London 2012 can one up China then I would be very surprised, but one thing we have in abundance is ingenuity and a willingness to make it work. London 2012 will be a success if we get back to basics, and bring it back to the fantastic athletes that compete and not the fireworks and showmanship even though that is rather clever.

Q: "What is the problem?"
A: "I don't really know, but we can solve it if we buy a new X "

Here in lies the problem, there a number of companies that get this crap answer. There is very rarely a person in the company who will take responsibility and make sure their current system works properly before trying new things or upgrading, at the end of the day new hardware is meant to be better right?. Small to medium businesses have less of a problem with this because the amount spent on IT directly effects there bottom line, and don't have deep pockets for IT to begin with.

The problem becomes even more pronounced when you get to a school or college. There are obvious complexities with these system your dealing with a couple of hundred computers and about 10 times as many users, but when anything goes wrong more money 'must' be spent to solve the problem. Inevitably the systems breakdown within a couple of weeks or even days, because the real problem wasn't tackled or even attempted to find a fix.

For the average user this is a minor or major frustration depending on which way you spin it, but for anybody interested or working in tech like me, its like having burnt sticks buried into the back of my eyes. It can't be too difficult to get it set up right in the first place, I like buying new tech as much as the next man (probably even more) but you have to realise somewhere along the line what you are proposing is costing someone a shed load of money and that money could be used better elsewhere, especially in schools.

--Rant Over--

"Unfortunately, many schools have turned a blind eye to piracy," Berman said. "I don't doubt that there are legitimate issues that universities must grapple with, including privacy and cost concerns. However, when a university such as Purdue tells the AP that it rarely even notifies students accused by the RIAA because it is too much trouble to track down alleged offenders—such inaction is unacceptable."Congressman Hollywood: Universities a wretched hive of scum and villainy

This is what happens when a person in power, brains' get turned to jelly and is spat out by the cat. It never occurs to these people funding researching and going around screaming disaster and catastrophe from the hill tops, to actually look what is right in front of them.

The Music/Movie Industries is Inherently, poor at adapting
So what exactly does this mean well its quite simple. When Napster came along the Music industry looked at it and said "We still good it will all blow over in a couple of months" Then a couple of months later they had a problem. The same goes for the Movie industry. They are arrogant enough to dimiss a technology that will quite clearly effect them in the money making department and try to place the sole blame on the cosumer. The consumers pay them money in the first Place

Solve not Sue
Anyone with a slight business interlect and brain cell(s) would look at the current situation within the Music/Movie industry and start working on solutions, put the money were it is well spent. The industry will never change the habits of the youth of today, they have spent to long in the courts increasing the resentment for that. They need to start working to give the consumer product they want in the form they want, this by no means free.

The idea that forcing your consumers to do something because the man companies say it should be is completly stupid and cause more illegal downloading, just so you as a consumer feel happy your pissing the said companies off. Everybody knows that downloading music and not paying for it is wrong, but when the labels offer no better alternatives, what else are your options.

The Other Options
iTunes Store, has a big market share and a big catalog of major labels and indie music, look deeply at the  Store and you see just what a miracle it is, its there, and in the same moment why it doesn't give what a p2p client gives. The simple matter of choice is what it now starts to boil down to, what could be classed as the catalyst to this whole thing in the first place.

People want choice they want to choose how they consume media and where, iTunes limits you to the iPod and your PC/Mac, there is a simple solution get rid of DRM and completely and open the whole thing up, and I would never illegally download again.

However, there is one place that iTunes excells at apart from providing a seamless UI experience. Our friend the Longtail, p2p only really is a good distribution system for popular tracks, when you get to less popular tracks you quickly find nobody sharing things.

To cut a long story short we need a solution, that the consumer is happy with and we need it fast else we could see everybody going down to court.

"You cannot be everything to everybody"

As much as Tesco is excelling at what it does it is diversifying too much, look at Apple mid 90s. As much as Human Nature says do everything, you should really stick to what your good at before branching out. Tesco has only one asset if it all goes wrong, they have the money so they will have likely lost very little money on it.