₦airaland Forum

The issue is not whether his policy is good or not. Personally I am pro-consolidation myself, I think it makes sense.

But whenever you implement a policy, you should try to do so in the least disruptive way possible. Try to bring in those who will be affected by your changes, get them to buy in or at least put up less resistance.

Amosun seems to be an insensitive man that does things without thinking about the consequences or impact on others.

This makes bringing about postive change more difficult than it has to be.

For example, whether he likes it or not, whether true or not, his actions make him appear that he is more interested in destroying OGDs legacy rather than establishing his own.

This pains my heart a lot. I think Ogun State has arguably the highest potential in Nigeria. But I am not convinced that Amosun is the man who will enable Ogun to achieve this.

violent:
Nothing so far points to the remote possibilities that this could even be achieved.  Thoughts are random events but unlike the most events that you may normally assign probability distributions, the human brain is too complex to predict an outcome.

True, but that nothing today suggests that this is possible doesn't mean that 5 or 10 years from now that the situation will be the same.

None of us understands how the brain works. . . maybe it more simple than it seems. Maybe there is a trick for copying brains, who knows?

t

The comments here. . . i dunno whether to laugh or cry

lmaooo

^-- Why wouldn't capping the cost at +20 or +25% whatever the average price is in say the US+Canada+EU work?

Even at that upper limit, most Nigerians (at least the ones with sense in their heads) would be happy to pay that price, so long as the electricity is reliable.

[quote author=Kilode?! link=topic=883510.msg10308534#msg10308534 date=1330617437]Thanks!

So what is R2 and R3? I was not able to find the definition on the site.[/quote]R1, R2, etc are residential units broken down by consumption. You can find the those levels here:

[url=https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:41CskbCTmasJ:www.nercng.org/index.php%3Foption%3Dcom_docman%26task%3Ddoc_download%26gid%3D249%26Itemid%3D56+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESj_o1ed6C4PtW1uJ-3RDVdp_4bRum248u22ttMEhAYVkVhonKfY8khKZ5VqhUK3SwUoSghb2LMprVrJzst7exAbow85c5rgSZ8xV9DNTfhTDK8WKTgwPYBTnqMSJ1FRSJTE8Fjz&sig=AHIEtbTos_uVizJIDP14ERpulesLJGHYvw]google docs link[/url]

So from that document, it appears they fixed prices for R2 designated residences at  about N10/Kwh or 6 cents/kwh

R3 = N27.00 or  17Cents/kwh

No, for the 2011 year (beginning July), R3=N11/kwh. So about 7 cents.

I guess we'll need to get the estimated cost of producing 1/kwh in an economy like ours to really see what price or cost burden both sides can carry?

It varies and depends on the source. But you can find online average price it is being sold for say in the US, on a montly basis (and possible even weekly?)

The department of energy publishes this information. . . it varies a lot from state to state. But typical prices here are probably 11-12 cents or so per kwh.

seems you've studied this a lot Ekt_bear  what do you think?

I've looked at it quite a bit, since I was curious to know why electricity is not functional in Nigeria.

Like I said earlier, the states/distributors need to be able to sell electricity at fair market prices, not at a loss.

[quote author=Kilode?! link=topic=883510.msg10306478#msg10306478 date=1330601915]I copied this from Governments published Roadmap. Except they've instituted new prices. No point arguing.

They admitted that their current price regime is nonsense and unworkable.

Ekt_bear, Gbawe, PointB, do you guys know what the new tariffs are? Please post if you know. They said 1st quater 2011, this is 1st Q 2012. Any info on the new prices.[/quote]Kilode they actually have this information on their site. Take a look here:

http://www.nercng.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=29&Itemid=56

. . . . .


If you don't already fvcking know this, why are you commenting on this thread and opening your fat mouth?

Seriously, like I said. Shut the fvck up if you don't know anything about this topic.

Or if you are curious in learning WHY electricity doesn't work in this country, then that is a different matter, and I or someone else will educate you.

PointB:
States having the go ahead to generate power was the crux of the matter, now that that has been resolved, the greed for excessive profit seems now the stumbling block. In any case, electricity tariff is being reviewed almost quarterly, that should suffice. Power generation and distribution is a gold mine, it is not a money losing operations. In any case, let see how states government respond to this.

WTF?!?!

Are you fvcking high? Gold mine?

Is it a gold mine to sell something for 5 cents when it costs you 10 or 15 to make?

Stop posting if you don't understand the issues!

It isn't by force to comment on everything.

PointB:
State having the ability or not to fix their price is not the issue here

Err. Let me not call you a bad name.

Use the brain that God gave you and figure out why the above sentence is not correct.

devilish creature

PointB:
That said, I wonder what excuse state governors and opposition parties will now use as excuse for their inability to deliver stable power to their constituency.

Let there be light!

Please read and comprehend before posting. This is not the solution. . . unless states have the ability to set their own prices, then the FG has effectively just shifted its own money-losing operation onto someone else (the states.)

There is still more regulatory work that needs to be done.

Hell.

Just ask for the ability to charge up to 15% more per kWh than is charged say in the US.

That way nobody can say you are trying to gouge anyone or arbitrarily inflate prices outside of what the "true" cost should be.

And even paying 15% more for electricity in Nigeria, you'd then have a massive, massive advantage price-wise when it comes to any sort of light manufacturing.

Textile plants, shoe-making shops, food processing, then eventually move up the value chain from that.

Massive job creation and the creation of a true middle class. All of this possible if electricity is solved.

Electricity is too important. Even if the states must sell at a loss, they must find a way to make it happen.

If this requires adding "installation surcharges", "annual electricity fees", etc, whatever tax they can make up to at least make it revenue neutral, they must do it.

Electricity is the gateway from our current status as impoverished third-world country to something more. . .

Still, the governors must collectively come together and demand the ability for their states to set their fees independently.

Let states be able to set their own prices for electricity.

Or if they must sell at a loss, allow them much broader powers over taxation.

Well, the latter should be done regardless

from other thread:

[quote author=ekt_bear link=topic=818599.msg10305534#msg10305534 date=1330594103]"The NCP said  the state would receive compensation within the ambit of the extant tariff methodology. “Excess capital costs, if any, will be borne by the state government. Any investment by the state will not attract any interest payments by the distribution companies,” NCP said."


The same "extant tarriff methodology" that causes electricity to be sold for less than it costs to produce?

So in essence, state distribution companies are required by law to lose money?

A step in the right direction, but not quite enough.[/quote]

"The NCP said the state would receive compensation within the ambit of the extant tariff methodology. “Excess capital costs, if any, will be borne by the state government. Any investment by the state will not attract any interest payments by the distribution companies,” NCP said."


The same "extant tarriff methodology" that causes electricity to be sold for less than it costs to produce?

So in essence, state distribution companies are required by law to lose money?

A step in the right direction, but not quite enough.

breezy047:
Itskov envisages surgically 'transplanting' a human consciousness into a robot body within 10 years.He hopes to then 'upload' minds without surgery, leaving human bodies as empty husks as their owners 'live on' inside robots.

I thought about this a couple of months ago.

Suppose it were possible for someone "download" your brain to some digital medium. Then 1000 years after your body is died, technology exists to take this digital copy and "recreate" someone who has the exact same memories, mannerisms, etc as you.

Would this be immortality?

Would it be satisfying?

Somehow it seems unsatisfying, right? It wouldn't really be you who was being resurrected. You'd have been dead for 1000 years. So this copy of you, though exactly the same isn't quite you.

But. . . at the same time, what difference does it make? For all you know, when you go to sleep at night, some powerful aliens make a copy of you, take your existing body/consciousness and destroy it. Maybe every day you wake up in the morning, it is a new replica of yourself, not the "true" you.

Yet there is absolutely no way to tell the difference.

he is a bull in a china shop.

dunno what is wrong with the guy

omo alaro:
Ibori is not smart. Why must he leave nigeria. Worst case scenario: he would have been paraded on NTA by EFCC, 10 SANs would have stood for him and argue that his offence is bailable, the judge would have agreed, give him bail with the condition that he must drop his travel documents. 2 months after, the SANs would have gone back to court to argue for the release of his travel documents on medical ground. the judge would have agreed. If vested interest insist on punishing him for any misdemeanor, he would have ended up being jailed for six months to be spent in sheraton or nicon noga. Case closed.
Is it not in nigeria that a robber governor went to court and obtain an injunction that no agency of government must touch him or ask him any silly question?
Afterall, in nigeria, government officials are not corrupt, it is corruption that is official.

hehehe

THE conference room resembles an old “Star Trek” set, with swivel chairs, laptops on desks and headsets that switch between Kinyarwanda and other tongues. Paul Kagame, Rwanda’s president, sits in the captain’s chair. His technocratic ministers sit nearby. When the talk turns to business, Mr Kagame becomes animated. It is his passion—he says he reads business case studies in bed. He wants to turn Rwanda into the Singapore of central Africa. He is nothing if not ambitious.

Rwanda is best known for the genocide that claimed at least 500,000 lives in 1994. It has been peaceful since then, but lacks nearly all of Singapore’s advantages. Singapore has the world’s busiest port; Rwanda is landlocked. Singapore has one of the world’s best-educated populations; Rwanda’s middle class was butchered in 1994. Singapore is a gateway to China; Rwanda’s neighbours are “less than ideal”, as a recent report from the Legatum Institute, a British think-tank, put it. Uganda is corrupt; Burundi a basket-case; Congo worse.

Yet Rwanda has one huge advantage: the rule of law. No African country has done more to curb corruption. Ministers have been jailed for it. Transparency International, a watchdog, reckons Rwanda is less graft-ridden than Greece or Italy (though companies owned by the ruling party play an outsized role in the economy). “I have never paid a bribe and I don’t know anyone who has had to pay a bribe,” says Josh Ruxin, one of the owners of Heaven, a restaurant in Kigali, the capital.

The country is blessedly free of red tape, too. It ranks 45th in the World Bank’s index of the ease of doing business, above any African nation bar South Africa and Mauritius. Registering a firm takes three days and is dirt cheap. Property rights are strengthening, as well—the government is giving peasants formal title to their land.

The startling improvement in Rwanda’s business climate is largely thanks to Mr Kagame. Rwanda’s president is a controversial figure. A tough-as-Kevlar bush fighter, he stopped the genocide and chased the militias who carried it out into neighbouring Congo. His forces killed huge numbers of people. His enemies are terrified of him. The elections he holds are a sham.

On the plus side, he has overseen dramatic improvements of Rwanda’s institutions. He understands that his country may collapse again if it does not grow richer, and he is determined to make it easier for businesses to operate. The average income has more than doubled since 1994.

Investors are impressed. Visa, for example, is busy linking Rwandan shops and cash machines to its global network. It picked Rwanda out of dozens of countries as a test ground for bringing electronic payments to “frontier economies”. (It also woos gorilla-watching tourists.) Elizabeth Buse, Visa’s president for Asia, central Europe and Africa, says Rwanda is “a very easy place for a global firm to operate”.

Companies still face immense hurdles, however. Skilled labour is scarce. Only 5.7% of the domestic workforce have a tertiary qualification. An agri-businessman says that he can trust only one of his employees with complicated duties. “Most domestically educated Rwandans have never learned how to think independently and critically,” says the Legatum Institute. “Many Rwandan businesses do not even grasp the idea of bulk discounts, and tend to charge premia for larger orders.” Rwandans admit they are not good at wheeling and dealing. The countryside is largely empty of the small businesses like battery recharging, second-hand clothes and cafés which light up villages even in Congo.

The government has done some brave and sensible things to ease the skills shortage. It recruits Western-educated members of the diaspora. It has opened up the labour market to immigrants from Burundi, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. About 7,000 Kenyans in Rwanda have set up transport, farming and construction firms.

Taxes are another headache. Most Rwandans are too poor to pay anything, so the top 200 taxpayers shoulder 75% of the burden. VAT is payable on invoice, not on receipt of payment, which creates terrible cashflow problems for small firms. Enforcement is strict: paying a day late can mean the bill is doubled. The finance ministry is mulling a lower flat tax.

Domestic infrastructure is shoddy. The electricity supply is meagre and expensive. Outside Kigali, naked flames often provide the only artificial light. The government aims to increase power capacity tenfold by 2017. Transport is tough, too. Rwanda wants to be a regional trade hub, linking all the areas where Kinyarwanda is spoken (see map). But reaching a port is an ordeal. A government study found that it takes a lorry four days and $864 in bribes to make it from Mombasa to Kigali. It must stop at 36 roadblocks and ten weighbridges, many of them manned by thieves in uniform.

Still, the Legatum Institute argues that Rwanda shows that the rule of law can take root in Africa. Here’s hoping.

http://www.economist.com/node/21548263

bleh

rrhostomy:
Sincerely, maths na headache wey Oyinbo man carry put for our head.[b] Lookin for x y z dats not even lost. [/b]Dats y i love LAW.

Na wa o

So this is why fulanis like ndu_chucks believe in "one Naijeriya" at all costs?

Which one of those oil blocks does your family have an interest in, alhaji?