The UN Represents The Governments Of The World. May A "Bell Of Atri" Represent The People Of The World? (Part 62)
"Govt defends FBR purge amid concerns" - The Express Tribune (May 3, 2024)
To summarize: Pakistan Federal Minister Of Law & Justice Senator A.N. Tarar held a press conference to explain Islamabad's punitive measures against dozens of high-ranking Federal Board Of Revenue officials from both the Customs & Inland Revenue cadres. In an attempt to placate outraged officials (especially from the Customs Group), Minister Tarar explained that there should be no hard feelings, because the 25 (& counting) officials who are being sidelined or suspended, have not been branded as "corrupt", but were simply in the way of Prime Minister S. Sharif's vision of a solution to the economic crisis. However, the already-affected & the next-to-be-affected officials may take heart that, once PM Sharif removes them from the equation, PM Sharif will personally supervise all reforms, to ensure that said officials' sacrificed careers are not in vain. Minister Tarar also responded to objections over the legality of new amendments, e.g. Section 114B of the Income Tax Ordinance 2001, by observing that "amendments in the law were a good initiative" & people should now focus on doing whatever PM Sharif thinks will rapidly solve domestic economic problems.
"ADB delegation visits FBR" - Associated Press Of Pakistan (May 2, 2024)
To summarize: An Asian Development Bank (ADB) delegation visited the headquarters of the Federal Board Of Revenue in Islamabad, & met FBR officials who were working on the Domestic Resource Mobilization Program, to review the progress made so far on the DRM Program. The delegation declared themselves pleased with the FBR's progress.
Common misconception: An act that inflicts harm is magically rendered less damaging if it is "all in a good cause" or if it is "an honest mistake", as opposed to "an outright act of evil".
Is it fair to the professional background of Pakistan Law Minister A.N. Tarar - a lawyer by profession - to assume he truly believed his insipid attempt at an apology to sidelined &/or suspended FBR officials would work? How could an experienced old gentleman convince himself that the legal objections raised by said officials would be resolved, simply by telling them, "Just because we kicked you out on suspicion that you are either stupid or shady, does not by any stretch of imagination mean that we personally believe you are stupid or shady! Peace out, dudes & dudettes!". However, if Minister Tarar's professional expertise/experience is taken into account, his press conference takes on a new meaning: It could be interpreted as a strategy to seemingly respond amicably to Customs Group legal questions, without actually answering said questions. If this assessment of Minister Tarar's motives is accurate, his passive-agressive message - we are sorry for the inconvenience, but the show must go on - could be a way to make Customs Group questions appear unreasonable &/or a sign of guilt, thereby increasing the odds that FBR onlookers could feel motivated to accelerate compliance with the IMF objective of collecting its annual cut from the Pakistani exchequer.
Similarly, what did the Asian Development Bank hope to achieve by rushing to the FBR HQ at this juncture? The timing would be harebrained under normal circumstances (given that all FBR personnel are always extremely busy during the last 3 months of every Pakistani fiscal year, i.e. April, May & June); & given the ongoing crisis triggered by various (void ab initio) instructions by the IMF via the Prime Minister's Office to the FBR, it is downright birdbrained. No FBR official could possibly be focused on any matter other than the clear & present danger, not just to all FBR officers (senior or junior), but to the very existence of the Federal Board Of Revenue itself...despite just completing 100 successful years on April 1 2024. Perhaps, the Asian Development Bank wished to surreptitiously reduce the concealed indignation felt by the People Of Pakistan (& most of all, by harmed or at-risk FBR officers) over the illegally-draconian policies being enforced by the IMF (apparently in complicity with leading decision-makers from the Government Of Pakistan).
领英推荐
"The 2024 Grammy awards dazzle amidst declining viewership" - The Echo (February 22, 2024)
To summarize: The 66th Annual Grammy Awards was held on February 4 (2024) in Los Angeles. Despite featuring a line-up of established performers, e.g. Stevie Wonder, the ceremony failed to generate respectable viewership numbers. The highest viewership numbers in the last 15 years, were in 2012, after which Grammy Awards viewership has been on a steady downward trajectory. However, this situation is not unique to the Grammy Awards, considering that the Oscars & the Golden Globes award shows have also been declining in popularity since the last 15 years.
"Sony Music Group reportedly buys half of Michael Jackson's catalogue for $600 million" - Euronews (February 12, 2024)
To summarize: After months-long negotiations, Sony Music Group has reportedly finally agreed to John Branca's pleas to buy 50% of Michael Jackson's Mijac Music for US$600 million. Sony acknowledged that its late former business partner, Michael Jackson, was a savvy businessman with a gift for creating & recognizing lucrative businesses, such as his acquisition of ATV Music Publishing in 1985.
According to all Economics textbooks, there are 2 main types of professional assessment: "Normative" & "Positive". Normative assessments are value judgments, i.e. the identification of economic policies that focus on the concept of "fairness" or "morality". Positive assessments are factual statements, i.e. the confirmation of facts, independent of whether said facts promote "fairness" or "morality".
For instance, take the phenomenon of declining viewership numbers for the Grammy Awards. The media argues that the problem is an overall decline in American interest shown for showbiz sector award shows as a whole, citing the Oscar Awards & the Golden Globes as evidence. This is a normative assessment, i.e. an opinion based on the proponent's personal belief that Grammy organizers are doing everything right. The facts - if viewed in their entirety - convey a different interpretation: Oscar Awards popularity went through the roof in 1998, when "The Titanic" made a splash among American viewers, thus generating a viewership of more than 57 million; but the Oscars had actually always been popular, until the arrival of WHO-stipulated COVID-19 lockdowns & social distancing procedures, that decimated the popularity (i.e. the profitability) of a number of international events, including the Tokyo Olympics. The Grammy Awards on the other hand, scored their highest numbers of all time in 1984, when an impressive 51.67 million Americans tuned in to watch Michael Jackson win an amazing 8 Grammy Awards for his work on megahit album "Thriller"; however, the Grammy judges' horrifyingly-petty act of ignoring Michael's outstanding contributions to the music industry in 1988, heralded the beginning of the end for the Grammy Awards; organizers made an attempt to repair their damaged fortunes with an invitation to Michael in 2006, but when they turned down his condition to attend only if he chose his plus one himself (instead of adhering to past practice of leaving the choice to Grammy organizers', e.g. Brooke Shields), he refused point-blank...& that was the dissolution of the last hope for recovery for the Grammy Awards.
In the same way, on what grounds (except incompetence or corruption) did Ziffren Brittenham LLP open negotiations for the sale of a stake in Mijac Music to Sony? This is the same Sony with whom Michael fought a bitter battle over Sony's insistence that Michael agree to a promotional tour for his album "Invincible", while Michael argued that he hadn't toured for "Thriller" but banked (correctly) on the quality of its songs; as the conflict raged on, it became increasingly clear that Sony's actual aim was to bully Michael into cutting Sony in on his Mijac Music catalog (which, they had expected to snap up in the Sony/ATV merger, but Michael had refused); when Michael continued to stand his ground & refuse to share Mijac Music with Sony, Sony was so enraged that it literally sabotaged the marketing of Invincible, as a result of which, the American market response to Invincible was lukewarm (while Invincible was a smash hit in the rest of the world). What can anyone expect from a company that blithely cut its own profits from Invincible for the sake of its tantrums over Michael's refusal to accept unreasonable demands? In view of the evidence that indicates Sony's historic inability to truly understand the importance of prioritizing commercial success over personal vitriol, what is Ziffren Brittenham senior partner John Branca's motive to try to sell a stake in Mijac Music to Sony - does he fear getting ousted from his illegally-acquired executor position & is trying to implement a "scorched earth" strategy, or is he strengthening his friendship with Sony (in honor of his partner-in-crime, Tommy Mottola, who conspired with Branca to launder money using Michael's name & resources, which is what got Branca fired by Michael the second time in 2003)?
"Philosophy is to be studied, not for the sake of any definite answers to its questions, since no definite answers can, as a rule, be known to be true, but rather for the sake of the questions themselves; because these questions enlarge our conception of what is possible, enrich our intellectual imagination & diminish the dogmatic assurance which closes the mind against speculation; but above all because, through the greatness of the universe which philosophy contemplates, the mind is also rendered great, & becomes capable of that union with the universe which constitutes its highest good." - Bertrand Russell