₦airaland Forum

billante: What nonsense is this man talking about....you just like talking long sermon just to drive in your bitterness.

If i want to travel down to anambra where am from and the only part of not smooth road i will encounter is the 48 km berger-sagamu part of a total of about 500km of express-way i will go through before i reach my destination, a huge improvement from 3-4 yrs ago, why wont i defend a visible improvement when i see one!

Gej is not a saint neither is he a failure.....he has his weak and strong areas.....you lumping him as a total failure is what i wont take cause that is a biased judgement

^^^^
You should be happy that as you put it, I am "talking long sermon to drive in my bitterness". As we speak, there are far too many people in this country who do their talking with bullets. Don't swell their ranks.

According to you, "GEJ is not a saint, neither is he a failure". Which then begs the question: what is he?

I am throwing the same questions to you that I threw to the philistine called nameo or whatever he is called: what is Nigeria's road network today? What was it in 1999? What was it when GEJ assumed office? In other words, what work has actually been done and at what cost? Bring your facts into the market square and we will take it from there.

nameo: SHARRAP there, guy. You talk too much.

Let me just remind you that you did not 'innovate' this kind of SHOUTING and cursing over matters like this. A lot more people have opened threads, and cursed at GEJ for one bad road or the other in the pasts, some of which are/have been fixed.

Many threads were opened whilst the Benin-Ore Road was still in a terrible state (but today, most of that road, which had been abandoned for decades, have been fixed); threads were opened as recently as middle of last year about the terrible state of the Abuja-Lokoja way, with all kinds of unprintable curses hurled at GEJ, even when that road had not only been abandoned for years by previous Admins but had not been dualised since it was built over 40 yrs ago (today, and in a sort of 'miracle', MOST of that road has not only been reconstructed but also DUALISED within a year whilst the Dualisation is even now been extended to the Benin end of the Road); threads were created and people poured curses over what was the Onitsha-Owerri Road (today, it is one of the smoothest roads in Nigeria); threads were opened about the 3rd Mainland Bridge by some Nigerians who somehow knew that the Bridge was vibrating and about to collapse, of course GEj was abused (today, the joints on that bridge have been replaced in less than 5 months and some other repairs made); people opened threads on the State of the Kano-Maiduguri Expressway which was not Dualised (today, the Dualization of that road began by Yar'adua is going to completion); threads were opened about the TERRIBLE state of the PH-Enugu Expressed way as early as mid-last year (toady, the road has been Rehabilitated and is now largely motorable, pending the FULL RECONSTRUCTION of the road that should start this year); threads were opened and insults hurled at GEJ, including one as recent as January this year, over the state of the Apapa-Oshodi Road (today, the reconstruction and Extension of that road by Julius Berger and Co, is nearing completion); etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.

This Lagos-Ibadan Road WOULD BE RECONSTRUCTED within the next 2 years. Most Definitely. You can take that to the Bank. The Ministry of Works has already declared it, along with the 2nd Niger Bridge, as Priority Projects of the FG this fiscal year. Moreover, GEJ clears the MESS that other Admins have pooed for decades. That is his job, and he is good at it.

I hope though that, as I told one other poster here, when this road is finally done, you chaps would not forget to write that GEJ had done a road that have been abandoned since the 1970s by other Govts, just as he has mostly done with some key roads as were enumerated above.

GOOD DAY.

^^^^I am not surprised at your response. A quick glance at your posts reveals exactly what you are all about. Empty threats from a coarse, depraved mind.

Some of you make me smile with your very amateurish attempts to turn every issue into a referendum about GEJ. His performance (or lack thereof) is a big part of the issue but it is still only a part of a much larger question.

If you go through my posts on this matter, you will see that I have situated the current administration's failures within a much wider circle of abject failure of the PDP at the federal level. The current administration is failing. Like the UMYA administration before it failed. And the OBJ administration before that which failed miserably too.

You come on these boards and peddle lies in the hope that you can suck people into a pointless slanging match over GEJ. Well, let me tell you: it won't work. At least not with me, for the simple reason that I know (as you do too) that the real issue is the abysmally poor performance of the ruling party at the federal level (after years and years of empty promises). Your worst nightmare is a situation where Nigerians will actually realize and understand the awful truth: the PDP has received billions of dollars over a 14 year period and pissed it all away. The PDP has not been able to hold the military to account for the theft and grand larceny that took place under the military regimes of the 1980s and 1990s. It has also not been able to build roads for Nigerians after 14 years at the helm of power. How can a party and the governments it produces be so useless?


You have given some flimsy details of road repairs on a few federal roads as if we haven't heard this before. Tell me sir, what is the length of Nigeria's road network that is motorable today and which meets global standards? What was it before OBJ came into power? What was it before UMYA and GEJ came into power? Give us the specific details or forever remain damned.

billante: I hope your family also hold you responsible and accountable if you fail to provide all their needs??

Hope you won't blame bad economy if that is d case!

I don't criticize just because its d govt, I don't also use past experience to judge!

The ministry of works has a nice blueprint for nigeria roads and its working judiciously on it......take ur time and go through their website and see what am talking about!

I hav always said it, d only area GEJ is not doing enough is corruption....every other area he is working to d best of his ability

^^^^Indeed.

Some of you think you are dealing with children. There are some dead giveaways in your post which instantly reveal who you are. We all know those who use words and phrases like "working judiciously". Or that other perennial favourite of Nigerian government scribes: "massive reconstruction and rehabilitation".

While you spend an eternity going through blueprints and websites, some of us demand results. Roads are not built in cyberspace.

The way you glibly dismiss and explain away the current PDP administration's failure (like all the other PDP administrations before it) to decisively tackle corruption speaks volumes. Is it that you cannot (or you choose not to) see the link between a thoroughly compromised executive arm of government and our dilapidated infrastructure? Do you have any idea of the real cost of corruption to an economy? Do you?

We have been here before. Some perceptive Nigerians were not taken in by the charade that brought in and sustained the venal, inept OBJ administration and the equally inept government which succeeded it. Most Nigerians however, chose to vote with every thing except their heads and their brains. In 2 years time we shall see whether Nigerians are truly their own worst enemies.

In the meantime, mr billante sir, keep defending the indefensible. But remember: what goes round comes round.

rusher14: I often feel disappointed in the people that make up the entity called Nigeria. Yet, every now and then i come across a few people like you and i know that all hope isn't lost.

Nevertheless, one should note that your kind are not only in the minority but infinitesimal.

Regardless, keep doing your thing and preach to those you can, I'll do mine as well.

Changing the psyche of a people is never easy but that's why a visionary is needed at the top. Hoping his/her intelligence, vision, honesty and deliberate action can cascade down the chain.

We are yet to witness a leader of this kind in Nigeria, but from soil can earthen pots be made.

Education is key, not in terms of a portfolio of degrees but in being able to reason, rationalize and act.

This is one thing that many Nigerians lack, and it's not natural intelligence but purpose-built intelligence which becomes a culture.

This culture would encompass dignity in labour, honesty, morality, as well as a purpose-driven lifestyle and not the money-driven culture which is us today. The canopy covered by this culture is endless but i know a few might see my point.

Let us work towards educating ourselves and those around us as this would surely induce that element of change and a new paradigm from which sound decision making would be made.

^^^^Thank you for the kind words sir.

I have had a long association with the Lagos-Ibadan expressway - for about 3 decades. I have seen awful things on that road. The waste of human lives and property on that road (and other Nigerian roads) is something we will all be held accountable for someday; either for our complicity or our cold indifference.

A close relative of mine narrowly escaped being shot by armed robbers about 4 weeks ago on that highway. I drove on that road today. I am a stakeholder of sorts and that road (just like all other Nigerian roads) matters to me. The billantes of this world (see his post above) and their despicably low expectations will do their best to lower the bar to the subterranean level they inhabit but some of us know and demand better. And we shall not be silenced.

We will continue to fight to hold public officers accountable. By any means necessary.

Pukkah: That road is the busiest interstate highway in the South West. It also links Lagos, the nation's commercial capital, to the North, South East and South South.

It goes directly to Ibadan, the largest city in this part, from where you can connect other parts of the South West.

The alternatives to this road are too narrow, too bad or too unsafe.

Yet, this road has been abandoned since the 70s when it was constructed and in spite of greater use brought about by the explosion in population.

The road has consumed so many lives and maimed many individuals. Armed robbers operate at will. Beggars transact their business! And hawkers make brisk sales at the bad spots! Tanker/trucks accidents occur daily wasting cargoes, fuel, and human lives.

The neglect has not been by only the Jonathan government but by all the governments before it. This is why many people have become used to the notion that 'our government is useless and irresponsible' and have stopped making noise.

The people get by with prayers and with the hope that one day, the 'useless government' will remember the road.

^^^^
I came into Lagos today from Ibadan through the expressway.

Despite what some people on here would have us believe, the road is still in BAD shape. I have written several posts on NL about this expressway - I am thoroughly weary of writing. I have made it a point of duty to remind people I meet that the ruling party at the federal level has been in charge since 1999, and yet federal highways are still a disgraceful eyesore. Whether Nigerians will take these reminders and do something useful with them is another matter altogether.

A so-called federal highway where the 30m? setback rule is observed in the breach? A few years ago, I was driving from Ibadan to Lagos when I ran into the ever present gridlock at the old Ogere toll point - gridlock caused by the menace of tanker & trailer drivers who chose to park their vehicles right on the expressway. I drove to the FRSC outpost at the toll point to find out why tanker/trailer drivers would decide to park their vehicles on the expressway and waste everyone else's time, with the police, FRSC, Customs etc. doing absolutely nothing about it. By the time the FRSC official on duty had finished explaining the reasons why those trailers were left there, I left his office even angrier than I was before I had gone in.

As at today, those trailers/tankers have moved away from the road itself and are less of a nuisance. The question I have is this: why were Nigerians held to ransom all these years? And who is going to pay for all that lost time? Let's not even get started on the many prayer houses that dot the Lagos outskirts of the expressway. I'm sure everyone reading this is familiar with the completely needless traffic jams that occur whenever some religious event is being held at any or all of these prayer houses. Do we ever think of the real cost of the time lost to all this nonsense? What kind of people are so indifferent when it comes to appreciating the importance of time?


Until we Nigerians decide that we want to live (and not just exist) and until we begin to elect leaders who reflect this conscious, reasoned choice, we will continue to suffer. As I have said time without number on these boards: life is about choices or actions and the inevitable consequences of these choices or actions. Nigerians have de-linked the quality of their miserable lives from their voting choices and they are paying the price for this decision. Salvation can only come when Nigerians themselves (and no one else) decide (of their own free will) to restore the link.

A man can choose his sin. But he cannot choose its consequences.

PapaBrowne: The problem with you guys is you fail to ask Buhari what he has done in his own private capacity to better the lot of people in his neighbourhood. There are many derelict schools all over Katsina state. Why can't Buhari show some example and use his influence to get some of those schools renovated. Why are there no pictures of Buhari in an orphanage helping out poor people. Why arent there any indigent students on a Buhari Scholarship. Why is it only elections that Buhari talks about. Buhari followers should understand Karma. The man can never be president in a democratic setting for the simple fact that he truncated our new born democracy in 1983.
Why hasnt Buhari been able to get the only CPC state in the country to fight the corruption he says the FG should fight. Or are state governors exempt from fighting corruption?

^^^^

I concede that you may have a point here. I have said here before that if mr. buhari is involved in some worthy social cause he needs to let the public know. This is no time for reticence.

With that out of the way, I find it sad that you can take a single state run by the CPC to task on corruption while you remain silent on the PDP - a party in charge of over two thirds of the states in the federation and a majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. Nigerians know the party that is rotten and corrupt right down to its core. Do you?

PapaBrowne: A sudden lowering of inflation rates is a very bad sign and a signal of a contracting economy. Inflation occurs for many reasons one of which is increased earnings. If people suddenly begin to earn less money, their spending begins to go down and in turn, deflation occurs. The deflation you reffered to was surely a signalling of how bad things were getting at the time which is the exact reason Babangida's takeover was followed by a resounding jubilation accross the country.

^^^^
Your preceding posts on citizen responsibility were very profound - which makes this one all the more shameful. Your quest to demonize mr. buhari and his party has watered down some very hard truths you stated earlier and led you to some strange theories and even stranger conclusions on basic macroeconomic management. What a waste.

nap2: When researching historical events, you need to read different sides of the story from different (even opposing) sources, so that you can get a balanced view and come to your own conclusions about what happened.

Remember that the British were accused of being complicit in Dimka's coup. On the day of the coup (while the coup was in progress) Dimka went to the British High Commission. Also remember that some of Murtala's policies were against British interests.

^^^^
Accused by who?

(Although I do agree that there are several sides to a story and its prudent to get as much info as possible from all sides.)

You have spoken well. But will your target audience listen?

When finally located at mid-day friday, yusufu seemed resigned to whatever might happen to him, refusing a high commission offer to move him out of his house to a safe location "where he might be able to regroup his colleagues."

As for the behaviour of the other three, lequesne says he has been reliably informed that they "ran home" and changed into civilian clothes as soon as they heard the dimka broadcast. Garba was not heard from for the rest of the day.

Obasanjo made no appearance until mid-afternoon and chances for the counter-coup appeared good.

As for danjuma, he went to the bonny camp on victoria island around midday to rally loyalist military forces but was so unnerved and out-of-control that his principal staff officer col. Isama, had to take charge.


^^^^



"If God wanted us to be brave, why did He give us legs?" - Marvin Kitman

debosky: 15 pages and no one has done so - except shymexx with his 'increase tax' idea, which doesn't sound credible.

I have heard other arguments though - such as using the increasing North Sea revenues at the time to create new industries to replace those that were being lost, instead of using those revenues to reduce taxes. How exactly this would have worked and what these 'new' industries are is unclear to me.

^^^^

I would have proposed a progressive tax regime (sweetened by a guaranteed tax rebate in subsequent years for business owners and the wealthy who decided to sit the pain out rather than flee to offshore tax havens i.e. if you don't believe in britain enough to keep your money in her and endure temporarily higher taxes, then go! But you won't be able to come back in easily when things get better ). I would definitely not propose a poll tax like mrs thatcher did in the latter part of her reign though.


I would have sold the mines to the workers themselves. It would be up to them to make them profitable or accept the reality that lower wages would be necessary to remain competitive.

^^^^
I expect to be raked over the coals for what I'm sure some other posters would call full blown insanity but this is a marketplace of ideas, no matter how crazy they may sound. Your responses are all welcome.

Katsumoto: The same leftwing lazy rhetoric.

I asked you before and I will ask you again. What policies would you have implemented in 1979 considering the following

1. A decline in the UK mining industry

2. High inflation

3. High debt (the labour government had borrowed from the IMF)

4. High taxes from Labour (98% marginal rate)


The problem with people like you is that you expect the government to do everything for you.

Thatcher dealt with a devastating economic conditions with skill and wisdom.

She understood that the mining industry was dying and reformed trade unions so much that the unions could not hold the country hostage. Did the unions not bring down the Labour government of Callaghan in 1979?

Many home owners in the UK owe owning their homes to Thatcher. What was the rate of home ownership before Thatcher? Wasn't it only rich people who owned their homes? With Thatcher, individuals could also own shares. 11 MILLION people bought shares after privatization. That is still the level of share ownership in the UK today. The only people that didn't benefit were those who expected the government to do everything for them. Many clever people became millionaires in the 80S BECAUSE she reformed the markets.

^^^^
I took a different view from Mr Katsumoto earlier because of the double standards of prominent 1st world neoclassical economists & politicians on one key issue. That particular issue (public bailouts of private enterprise) aside, I agree broadly with SOME of his ideas. More to the point, I think his challenge to Mrs. Thatcher's opponents on this thread IS an appropriate (though tough) one. Indeed, what would any of us here (if we were in Thatcher's shoes) have done differently (with the added benefit of 20/20 hindsight vision?)

Surely we can rise to the challenge!!

Katsumoto: The advocates of free market economics don't run governments; politicians do. And politicians (not 3rd world politicians) will take into consideration the desires of their constituents, financial backers, their own personal glory/legacy. This is why different economists speak for and against the same policies.

^^^^
There are many politicians who are also advocates of free market economics. You make it sound as if they are mutually exclusive. I'm not too clear on what your last sentence means though.

Katsumoto: But most governments provide some form of subsidy or the other. India provides various cash subsidies to its citizens, The EU provides subsidy to European farmers through the Common Agricultural Policy; Nigeria provides a direct cash subsidy through the pump price. China provides export subsidies to its manufacturing industry through currency manipulation. The industries that receive subsidy are dependent on individual government preferences.

^^^^^
But the received wisdom is that subsidies (some types at least) are bad - they distort the price system and lead to resource misallocation. Of course, the all important question is: who is doing the lecturing and who is being lectured? As you pointed out earlier in one of your posts, - the swiss, chinese, germans or any other solvent economy can simply ignore any criticism about their subsidy regimes (in a way that chronic debtors and aid dependent entities like Nigeria (before debt relief at least) cannot). But the point still remains: the advocates of free market economics cannot have two sets of rules (one for rich 1st worlders and another for poor 3rd worlders) or a "do as I say but not as I do" mentality.

You can't have it both ways.

Katsumoto: Governments will look at the the impact of failure of an industry on the economy in deciding whether to save it or not. There is no nation that has a completely free market; government will always interfere as it sees fit depending on the ideology of the government in power. Providing a lifeline to a temporarily bankrupt industry is not the same as a permanently bankrupt industry.

Both the finance/banking and auto industries have returned to profitability in the US and are providing returns to the tax payer. Allowing the financial industry to collapse would have been catastrophic for the US.

If you are insinuating that there are other reasons for saving certain industries, then you are probably right. But if you don't accept terms when they are put to you, then you may be allowed to fail. Lehman Brothers was allowed to fail as a lesson. After that, others fell into line.

^^^^
If indeed governments reserve the right to intervene in the economy when they deem it fit to do so then why do the Hugo Chavezes and Evo Moraleses of this world attract such strong condemnation from right of centre interests in the 1st world? After all, going by that logic there is no objective standard of the 'rightness' or 'wrongness' of government intervention. The question then becomes a subjective one of the degree of intervention and how it is interpreted by any observer. And that sir, is relative. There are no absolutes.

I raised the questions I did earlier because high finance has traditionally received preferential treatment despite overwhelming evidence of very poor risk management - behaviour that ordinarily should be punished by the market. In strongly free market 1st world economies, poor decision making by market players attracts retribution. The judgement of the market is swift and brutal. The question is: why is high finance an exception? Is it because the political cost (of letting big banks fail) will be too high? Could it be because financialization has created market players that are so powerful that they are in essence parallel or alternate governments? Could it be because regulators have been compromised and are no longer impartial arbiters?

It seems that when the chips are down, hard-nosed pragmatism takes over. The US and its allies have long advocated a strict application (through both soft and hard means) of neoclassical economics across the globe. But the rules change when american jobs are at stake. Suddenly it becomes ok to erect protectionist barriers and to pay subsidies to ensure the survival of american farmers. Suddenly it becomes ok to keep large british & american investment banks afloat with taxpayers funds, despite the indefensible moral hazard involved. Why?

Neoclassicists have to make up their minds. There should be a strict application of the rules across the board or their orthodoxy will lose all credibility.

Katsumoto: Obama saved the autombile industry in the US even though Republicans such as Romney wanted it to fail. The true test in saving an industry lies primarily in whether that industry will accept change. If someone else is doing the same thing you are doing at a cheaper price and doing it more efficiently, then you can't be saved. It is simple economics. It is for the same reason that China is losing to other Asian nations like Vietnam and cambodia.

The US auto industry was saved because the unions realised that it better it save it for some or lose it for everyone. Generous pension plans were slashed, labour rates went down, and jobs for life were abolished. If the unions didn't accept what was put in front of them, GM and Chrysler would have been out of business. Today, the US car manufacturers are back in the game.

^^^^I'm not sure I agree with your argument that the true test in saving an industry lies in its willingness to accept change. The question is: should the government in a so-called free market economy be "saving" any industry at all? What criteria is used to decide which industry is worth saving and when?

I also see that you concentrated on the US auto industry but said nothing about financial services. That industry (financial services) in my view is where the really hard questions should be asked. I'm sure you remember the case of the hedge fund (Long Term Capital Management) which the Clinton administration bailed out - this was long before the days of sub-prime mortages and Goldman Sachs etc. Why should a bank be saved because it is deemed "to big to fail"? Should size alone be the only criteria? Or are there more sinister reasons for this moral hazard that has come to define financial services in most so-called free market economies?

Katsumoto: If the govt didn't bail out the banks, it would have lost in the following ways

1. Hundreds of thousands of jobs would have lost
2. Many more would have gone on the dole. Do you think everyone who worked in a bank was a dealer/broker/executive? Do you think everyone in a bank earns huge bonus
3. Banking would have collapsed and a service would have gone.
4. It would have been more difficult to build the banking industry
5. Government spending would have increased and its revenue from taxes would have reduced

The banks that were taken over became government assets. Or do you think the government just gave them free money. In the US, bailed out banks have returned to profitability. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are profitable today. Buffett's holding in Goldman Sachs as enriched him further. In every crises, there is always opportunity. While some are seizing these opportunities, others are complaining even when they don't understand the basic details.

^^^^
Great thread. Very interesting exchange between the pro and anti thatcher groups.

I have a few questions for you mr katsumoto: what makes financial services and the banking sector so special? Which other sectors are bailed out by the government when they run into trouble? The same argument you put up above (your five reasons for a bailout) for banks could apply to any other sector. So why doesn't the government bailout the steel industry, shipbuilding, car manufacturing, etc. when they "need help"?

cap28: I dont get where you are coming from - why was it necessary for her to have closed down the mines?

why was it necessary for her to have spear headed the deindustrialisation of the british economy - which led to major outsourcing of british manufacturing jobs to the far east and mass unemployment in this country?

she is the architect of the problems we are having today in this country - she started the deregulation of the financial industry which is what enabled the bankers to run wild and which culminated in the recent 2008 financial collapse - i mean everything this woman touched turned to ashes - even the right to buy housing programme was unsustainable because not long after interest rates went through the roof and many people who purchased council homes under this scheme could no longer afford their mortgages.

It is painful for me (as someone somewhat sympathetic to left of centre views) to admit it but the mines were unsustainable. They were unprofitable and thatcher didn't want taxpayers to keep carrying the burden. (Good old self preservation may have had a lot to do with it too. She clearly didn't want striking miners to destroy her government they way they destroyed Heath's.) Where she failed miserably was in creating new jobs for the thousands thrown out of work. Where were they supposed to go?


I agree with some of your points on financial deregulation though.

cap28: I think the evidence is all around you to see.

^^^^^

She wasn't all bad.

Some say if she hadn't grabbed the UK by the scruff of its neck, the streets would still be full of garbage and the labour/trade unions would have become completely invincible by now. The story is that Britain was a whisker away from a military takover in the 1970s (as improbable as this sounds) with the way things were then.

Her views on the apartheid regime in SA tell us all we need to know about how she saw Africans in general. Nobody is under any illusions there. She WAS a racist. But I think she was a far better economic manager and a more rounded leader than Ronald Reagan - now that was a man promoted far above his station and hyped well above his rather mediocre achievements.

Thatcher...a highly controversial figure.

Only time will tell whether her promotion of financialization (and the associated decline in manufacturing) was the right way to go for the UK.

naptu2: I think he's referring to 1990 (the first gulf war).

^^^^
She was no longer in office when the war started. Although it seems she contributed to the war effort before her resignation.

al-qaeda:
i wont say good riddance but certainly dont give a dried crap over her death afterall she and george bush the monkey started a war in iraq that has so far killed over a million so she just another dead person to me. she an rot in hell.

^^^^



I think you have mixed up Mrs Thatcher with someone else. . .

Ngwakwe: If I may recall, Pardon was part of the plea bargain agreed on the indictment of Salisu Buhari.

He is an impersonator, that aside, if a person have the courage and capability to handle and coordinate the proceedings of NASS in a flawless Leadership, what then is the value of worthless paper called certificate most traders possess and cannot defend them.

Abeg, free the man.

Nigerians have sold their souls for paper qualification and not intellectual acumen coupled with technical know-how.

In our company in Port Harcourt, no one ever discusses the academic qualification of these Lebanese and Scottish workers that I always call redundant waste.

^^^^

Strange, rambling piece. But then, what should we expect from a man who offers unsolicited advice to public officials (on other threads) on how to game the system?

anonimi: This is definitely a bad move by Jonathan and his handlers although I imagine that he, personally may not be aware of ALL the names of board members of ALL government parastatals who are normally nominated from their home state.
But it has now become his list.

^^^^The part in bold lettering is true. But you are damn right that the list is now his, regardless of its origins. The difference between capable leaders and mediocre ones is that capable leaders make sure that public officials face the consequences of their actions, especially if those actions bring the government into any kind of disrepute. Good leaders fight to make the system work properly and they leave no one in any doubt about which side of the moral divide they stand on.

Once people know what a man stands for, they adjust their behaviour to reflect their perception. When a man is known to have a moral compass that points true north, those working with him (be they party officials, civil servants or whoever) WILL keep the beastly side of their nature in check. Why will they do this? They will do this because they know there will be serious consequences for any misdemeanour. In a defective system such as ours in which the president wields disproportionately large power, people will take advantage of any moral ambivalence they percieve in the man at the top. It is the way of the world.

I can imagine that the administration's defenders will soon be here to make excuses on its behalf - statements along the lines of "GEJ didn't know the names or history of all the nominees on the list", "the problem is his advisers" etc. The real problem is that the GEJ administration ran out of excuses a long time ago. If the excuse is that GEJ didn't know the history of the nominees, then how useful is that large army of bureaucrats and special assistants he employs? What exactly are they getting paid for? Isn't there a vetting process for appointees that will prevent further erosion of whatever moral capital the GEJ administration has left? How hard can it be to send a one page document with a paragraph or two about the nominees to GEJ to look through? What are the so-called security reports about then? In summary, how are GEJ's staff being held accountable?

Nigerians are tired of the ineptitude. GEJ presided over an embarrassment of a national awards ceremony in which there were not enough medals to go round. The GEJ administration supervised a national awards ceremony in which at least one Nigerian was awarded a national honour lower than one she had received over 10 years earlier. Let's not even start on the clemency/state pardon of last month. We could go on and on.

Of course, the other side of the coin is that GEJ is very much aware (indeed, how could he not be?) of Mr. Salisu Buhari's antecedents but he decided to approve the appointment anyway. Which is another way of saying 'You can all go to hell with your morality and what you think. I really do not give a damn. I've got political debts to pay and alliances to forge'.

Whichever scenario the truth is, I have said and will always say: Nigerians MUST go through all of this in order for them to understand that THEY are the architects of their destiny. Nigerians are finding out the hard way that choices (and the action or inaction that flows from those choices) HAVE CONSEQUENCES. Whatever the choices nigerians choose to make - be it apathy, nonchalance or wilful ignorance (about life and death matters such as the democratic process, elections, voting rights, the rule of law, partisan politics, the social contract etc) - those choices HAVE VERY REAL CONSEQUENCES.

It is an immutable law that cannot be changed or overridden.

Pukkah: As for those who say Nigeria can leapfrog into knowledge-based services, I ask : which knowledge? Is it banking, consulting or engineering?

Britain and the US - two countries that are supposed to be the most developed in the knowledge-based services - are unlikely to meet their balance of payments needs in the long run through the exports of these services. If they can't, it's unlikely that any developing country can.

In the US, supposedly another model post-industrial economy, the trade surplus in knowledge-based services is less than 1% of GDP. That of Britain is less than 4% of GDP.

Papabrowne and Rossike, you may continue to delude yourselves but stop deceiving gullible minds.

^^^^

Well said.

Gbawe: The truth is that GEJ and OBJ are both gradualist mediocrities and opportunists who would not meritoriously have gotten as far as they did in Nations where, naturally, standards are set high. Both OBJ and GEJ, above everything else, are destructively corrupt as well.

Everything is then compounded by how Nigerians lack the political sophistication to make leaders do what should be done. Praising mediocrity, for one reason or another, is now enshrined in the mentality of Nigerians. I personally don't care for any list of achievements related to OBJ or GEJ because the major problems that must be tackled robustly and effectively, to turn Nigeria around drastically, are always ignored by 'defenders of the realm' like GEJ, Yar Adua and OBJ. One after the other, same story of ignoring our most devastating challenges.

Comparisons, for me, are a waste of time because it cannot be argued that the index that matters most differed significantly under OBJ or GEJ. I.e significantly notable improvement in the life of the average Nigerian. In fact, I would posit that most of the small progress made in the past 13 years have been largely incidental and evolutionary in context and not the result of deliberately inspired leadership. People talk about GSM in relation to OBJ. For f*ck sake, it was evolutionarily bound to happen considering I had been using a mobile phone for around two years in Ghana, and much longer in the UK, before Nigeria got the technology !!! Is any one, not given to the worship of mediocrity, to praise OBJ for technology the entire world already had as standard?

No President, since 1999, has made significant progress in relations to the fundamental problems troubling Nigeria. To that end, they are all failures to me. Granted it can be argued the degree to which they have failed/are failing.

^^^^

Well said.

Itoroetti :
Mumu at its highest point.see what sentiment has done to u. A pity for u.so obj 8year reign without power was an achievement after embezzling chunk amount of money on d said project?what did he do to our rail sector?what happen to the lagos- ore express way that has killed many?which agriculture sector did he reformed apart from his ota farm?why are u people so biase that u can't read in between lines?

^^^^

Sir,

You wouldn't understand the sarcasm in Pukkah's post even if it came up to you and asked to have your babies.

If you can't figure out that pukkah considers GEJ and OBJ to be two sides of the same bad coin of failure, then I'm afraid your paymasters need to ask you for a refund.


(Unless of course, your post was cleverly disguised sarcasm too, which would really put me in a bind. But I know that isn't the case here. )

Afam4eva: Who created the said thread? Is it " Membership List 2013"?

Mods,

Still no update on this thread?

Afam4eva: Who created the said thread? Is it " Membership List 2013"?

I think it is. I'm not sure.

OAM4J: Any thread that does not comply with the rules can be removed, but I think the thread you are complaining about was not removed but moved to General section since it has nothing to do with Politics.

I guess you are referring to this thread: https://www.nairaland.com/1236031/truth--here

^^^Thanks. But the thread you highlighted above is not the one I am referring to. The one I am referring to just vanished into thin air - some posters in the thread you highlighted above actually mentioned this too. Could you investigate and revert? And for the future, when a thread is removed or moved, are the mods duty bound to explain what is being done and why before posters begin to complain?

plaetton: I dont know why everyone is obsessed with amount of physical damage on the Honda.
When it comes to vehicle safety, physical damage is not directly proportional to passenger injuries or fatality.

Infact, looking at the pictures, and assuming that both collided with the same momentum, the honda car, in this instance would have been safer for the driver and passengers.

How?
Physics.
Modern cars are built with numerous crumple zones in the fronts and rears. The crumple zones are designed to crumple and absorb the force of an impact, thereby dissipating and spreading the residual force throughout the vehicle chasis.
By absorbing much of the force and crumpling, less of the force of impact is passed through the drive and passengers.


In the case of the the mercedes Benz car, the crumple zones did not fold, so the force of impact would have had more of an effect on the passengers because the crumple zones did not absorb any of the force.

So looking at the pictures,The Honda car would been a safer vehicle for the passengers.

Up Honda!

^^^^Thank you!

You took the words right out of my fingers.

I do not necessarily agree with your "Up Honda", "The Honda car would have been a safer car for passengers" viewpoint (After all, it was a Mercedes Benz engineer who invented the passenger safety cell + crumple zones in the 1950s . MBenz has a long and proud history of active and passive safety systems which continues to this day. I would like to think that even though as you said, 'crumple zones exist in order to crumple and absorb impact', they must STILL retain a measure of strength and rigidity up to a pre-determined point. It is only when this point is breached that the safety cell suffers visible damage and the crumple zones visibly 'crumple'. I guess the safety cell of the MBenz being discussed on this thread had not yet reached that pre-determined break point, and that's why it still looks intact. But I digress).

Your key point about energy absorption is noted though. That's why some cars are almost intact after an accident and yet there are no survivors. And some other cars are written off in an accident and yet the passengers walk out of the wreckage on their own two feet with little or no harm done to them. I think Saab made this a big selling point in its adverts in the 1990s.

On a lighter note, where are nairaland's resident tribalists? We all know who they are. How come they have nothing to say on this thread? Is it because the thread has tough equations, mathematical symbols and greek letters? Somebody answer me!