I’m sick of the negative media. For months I’ve been convinced that if, instead of going for sensational headlines of doom, the press were just a little more optimistic – balanced even – then the financial markets would probably sort themselves out. Even though that’s probably a bit too optimistic, having spoken to a wide range of business analysts in the last few months on the subject, I’m firmly convinced that even if reporting good news wouldn’t help, reporting all this exaggerated bad news is certainly making things worse.

Sadly, it’s not just the news-hounds who hate people having a good attitude. Baroness Shriti Vadera has been publicly shamed today for daring to voice optimism in this current economic climate. According to the Tories (who I supposedly support), saying “I am seeing a few green shoots” demonstrates how out of touch and insensitive she is…

The trouble is, no-one wants to admit the question that this was in response to. According to Sky News, the question asked was when would we be seeing green shoots – so the words themselves were put in her mouth by the reporter. No-one seems to want to discuss that…

Not only that, but it’s true. As I was driving home today, Radio 2 was talking about the thousands of new jobs – a little research finds that both Tesco and Sainbury’s are looking to expand into new stores, creating over 10,000 new jobs between them. That’s surely a green shoot?

The best comment about it I’ve heard was that Norman Lamont said this “at the height of the last depression”. So… that’d be just as it was turning around then?

Remember this from a few days ago?  Well, now Sam and Mary’s brother Steve has decided to weigh in with his opinion… BBC NEWS | World | Middle East | Rockets hit Israel from Lebanon.

Does anyone honestly believe this is anything other than “Ooh, here’s an excuse to blow shit up!”

Does this scene seem familiar to anyone?

“Ow – she hit me!”
“Yeah, well he hit me first!”
“Only because she bit me before that!”
“Well he shouldn’t have taken my ‘My Little Pony’ – I told him I’d bite if he didn’t give it back”
“But she took my Action Man and made him ride around on her gay pink pony”

“ENOUGH – BOTH OF YOU!  I don’t care who did what to who – you’re both behaving like 3 year olds.  Grow up, the pair of you.  Sam, give Mary back her pony – and the head – and Mary, you give Sam back his toy soldier – wipe the lipstick off it first.  Right, you’re both grounded until you kiss and make up.”

Let’s face it, the root of most conflicts between small children are often so far lost in the mists of yesterday, that no-one can ever figure out who’s to blame, and the only solution is to apply parental authority and reset things to a ground state.  Fortunately, in this case, reparations could easily be made (or at least, once the super glue was found), and peace can resume almost immediately.

The current Middle-Eastern crisis is another fight of a similar sort.  I’ve had this explained to me twice in the last week, and though this may be a classic example of the Grey Fallacy (or better yet, here), I’ve come to the conclusion that the truth is so clouded in propaganda, perceptions and outright lies that it will never be found.  What we really need is for some benevolent, all-mighty force to sit both sides down on the naughty step and sort things out in a fair and equitable manner.

In this case though, we can’t give Sam back his soldier and Mary her pony – this is more like the fight between Sam and Mary that happens 13 years later, when Sam comes back from his first year at Uni to find Mary now has his old bedroom.  Or maybe more like The One Where No One’s Ready – Joey takes Chandler’s seat, so he retaliates by sitting on Joey’s lap, so Joey steals the cushions, then Chandler steals Joey’s underwear, then Joey wears all of Chandler’s clothes.

Unfortunately, there’s no-one who can take the roll of a stern parent and take control of this situation.  The UN is too fragmented, and as a result, weak.  The US – though powerful enough – is too mistrusted.  Russia… well, let’s just say maybe not.

Maybe we need the Australians to declare themselves a superpower.  I can just hear them shouting across the ocean now (like an angry neighbour)…  “If you guys don’t shut up and sort it out right now, I’m going to nuke the blazes out of the lot of you.  I’m trying to enjoy the rugby here!”

The only final solution, of course, is to bring out more Hydrogen Fuel Cell cars.  When no-one needs oil any more, the Middle East will become just another patch of dessert; lacking international attention, the governments on all sides will have to sort it out themselves.  Or, of course, Marmite.

Expatriates (see, I do know the right spelling) are people temporarily or permanently residing in a country and culture other than that of the person’s upbringing or legal residence. The word comes from the Latin ex (out of) and patria (country, motherland).

Now, there are many reasons to leave your home country.  War, famine, oppression, love – these are all good and valid reasons to move away from something that perhaps you have no control over (or in the case of love, a valid reason to move to a new country).  However, in recent times, the tendancy has been for the British to move away, not for legal or ethical reasons, but to enjoy better weather and lower cost of living.

I have no problem with people moving to a new country for any reason.  What gets my goat though is people who expect to be able to have their cake and eat it too.  Today’s Jeremy Vine show on BBC Radio 2 included a wonderful call from a lady who had willingly chosen to leave old Blighty and move to the warmer climes of the South of France (or Spain – whatever), yet was immensely put out that this left her unable to benefit from the best savings deals at her particular English banking establishment.  For once Jeremy agreed with my views on the subject – and in not so many words told her to quit whining – there’s pros and cons to every decision to move, and oh dear, this was a con.

The other side of the coin of course is the asylum seekers and foreign immigrants who leave their home countries for slightly more pressing reasons – political oppression, famine, war, poverty etc. – and yet expect to be able to continue living by the laws of the country they left behind.  This is no more acceptable than Mrs Jones expecting all the benefits of English banking when in France, and should be seen as just as ridiculous.

For some reason though, the opposite has taken place.  Despite leaving their homelands for the freedom and equality of the British Empire (all 3 islands of it), Muslims moving to this country seem determined to maintain the laws – that would be lack of freedoms – from their homelands.  In fact, Sharia law has now been adopted by the UK.

You know what – I have a theory: This isn’t immigration or asylum seeking – it’s just a very slow invasion!

Okay – that’s a bit extreme… but what else do you call it when a large number of people move into a country and start changing the laws and culture to suit themselves?