4 Sept 2012
Phil hogan,
Minister of Environment.
Dear Phil,
I am writing to you about a property tax. I am a homeowner in Dublin.
Firstly, I support the intoduction of a property tax. Without rehearsing commonplace observations -a property tax will broaden and stabilise the tax base, without milking already overburdened revenue streams such as VAT and income.
Secondly, I am in favour of the tax being levied in relation to the value of the home. It amazes me how much controversy this has caused -often from people who normally advocate a wealth tax. But to me, it is obvious, that the value of the home, rather than the size, location or whatever else, should be the key determinant of the tax rate. Taxing people with less valuable assets, simply because they occupy more space is not only silly, it is regressive to those living in poorer areas -be they rural or urban. I would particularly like you to identify the property tax as a wealth tax, as I am truly fed up of hearing people talking out of both sides of their mouth on this wealth tax issue.
Thirdly, though I believe the value should determine the rate of tax -I also firmly believe, it must be the value of the site that must be taxed -not the value of the building. If we start taxing people for the value of their buildings/homes, there is an incentive to leave empty buildings derelict. Much like the old "window tax", I feel that a tax on the value of the building will simply lead to people adapting their homes to be squalid and unattractive, delaying upgrades and redevelopment. Much better to tax the value of the site, which ultimately is the value of the locality, rather than the building. Leaving people with the full benefit of any improvements they make by spending money on construction/renovation. Also, Multi-Unit Developments will need some sort of special method of collection in a site valuation tax -possibly via the OMCs.
Fourthly, I am quite opposed to linking these rates to local authority budgets. Local authorities in ireland are extremely efficient at wasting money and should not be given an independent income stream. That's one man's opinion, but it is sincerely held.
Fifthly, I think that non-payment of the property tax (and indeed the household charge) should simply be assigned as a burden on the property with penalties accumulating each year. That sidesteps the issue of having paid revenue staff collecting the money from a hostile public -and what is more, people would hurry to pay it if they felt it was linked to their ownership of the property.
Sixthly, i don't think there should be any exceptions to the property tax. Even if the homeowner is mortgaged, or on a low income, the fact that they own a high value asset should be indication enough of their ability to pay. Income tax reliefs should be for people on low incomes, mortgage interest relief is targeted at those with mortgages -I therefore see no reason to relieve such people from a property tax which is based on the value of the assets they own, quite seperate from their income or debts (and I say this as a low income, mortgaged man). However, i do think that the lowest band of housing should be either exempt or very lightly taxed. People owning homes in low value areas, should not have to pay a substantial tax for the pleasure.
Finally, i think you should move early to announce a target rate of taxation levied from property. If we have 4 months of speculation about how much individual householders might pay, then the psycho brigade in the Sindo will work themselves and everyone else up into a tizzy. I think it would be better for you, and everyone else if you made clear now that there will be x number of tax bands, with a range of rates from Y to Z euros per 1000 euros of site value. Once people feel there is an upper limit to what they may end up paying, they won't be as animated over the whole thing.
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Sunday, August 19, 2012
Julian Assange's dissembling
A quick summary: Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks is persona non grata in the United States. Over a year ago, his organisation received a large quantity of confidential CIA documents which expressed US opinions about various countries around the world. This was intensely embarassing for the US as some of those opinions were quite frank. Also, many claim it undermined the safety of individuals by revealing confidential conversations with the US or else simply by giving away tactical or strategic information to the US' enemies. Wikileaks rejects this, by saying it screens the leaks it releases to evaluate the safety to individuals resulting from publication. Assange is wanted in Sweden (who have issued a EAW) for trial on allegations of sexual assault. He has fought his extradition from Britain to Sweden on various grounds (all of them, it must be said were bogus), but now claims that his human rights are endangered, because Sweden might re-extradite him to the United States where he could face the death penalty. He has taken refuge in the embassy of Ecuador, and the Ecuadorean president has granted him asylum in Ecuador. The embassy is currently surrounded by police.
Now, frankly, I think his case is all a load of rubbish. The idea that Sweden might ignore his human rights and extradite him anywhere under threat of the death penalty is absurd. It is not possible for any European country to extradite anyone without assurance that the death penalty is off-limits. Such agreements have never been broken. Indeed, even if Assange was to fly directly to the United States tomorrow, it is unlikely he could be tried for any custodial offence of which I am aware. He is after all a journalist, he did not leak any information, he merely published it. I find it hard to imagine any situation where the US legal system would be able to severely punish him. Indeed, there is more chance of him being prosecuted in the effected European countries (such as Ireland) than of being imprisoned in the US where freedom of speech has a high legal significance.
The real story here is not the phantom threat of his being extradited to the US, but rather the serious allegations he faces in Sweden. His supporters seem willing to dismiss these accusations as merely a plot to discredit him in his role as head of Wikileaks and/or extradite him to the US. However, I am not. Sweden is a stable democracy with an excellent record of policing and impartial justice. It is very difficult for me to ignore their suspicions of Assange, and even more difficult for me to suppose that they would somehow be complicit in a miscarriage of justice to exact revenge for the humiliation of another country (or even their own). Indeed, as a member of the EU, and the area of Freedom, Security and Justice, it is assumed in the UK that a fair trial is guaranteed in the other members of the area (such as Sweden) and that he will not be extradite anywhere at risk of the death penalty.
His extradition to Sweden is just and correct, his human rights are not realistically endangered, his bid for asylum is bogus and the actions of the Ecuadorean President bizare.
Now, frankly, I think his case is all a load of rubbish. The idea that Sweden might ignore his human rights and extradite him anywhere under threat of the death penalty is absurd. It is not possible for any European country to extradite anyone without assurance that the death penalty is off-limits. Such agreements have never been broken. Indeed, even if Assange was to fly directly to the United States tomorrow, it is unlikely he could be tried for any custodial offence of which I am aware. He is after all a journalist, he did not leak any information, he merely published it. I find it hard to imagine any situation where the US legal system would be able to severely punish him. Indeed, there is more chance of him being prosecuted in the effected European countries (such as Ireland) than of being imprisoned in the US where freedom of speech has a high legal significance.
The real story here is not the phantom threat of his being extradited to the US, but rather the serious allegations he faces in Sweden. His supporters seem willing to dismiss these accusations as merely a plot to discredit him in his role as head of Wikileaks and/or extradite him to the US. However, I am not. Sweden is a stable democracy with an excellent record of policing and impartial justice. It is very difficult for me to ignore their suspicions of Assange, and even more difficult for me to suppose that they would somehow be complicit in a miscarriage of justice to exact revenge for the humiliation of another country (or even their own). Indeed, as a member of the EU, and the area of Freedom, Security and Justice, it is assumed in the UK that a fair trial is guaranteed in the other members of the area (such as Sweden) and that he will not be extradite anywhere at risk of the death penalty.
His extradition to Sweden is just and correct, his human rights are not realistically endangered, his bid for asylum is bogus and the actions of the Ecuadorean President bizare.
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Letter to the Minister for Foreign Affairs & Trade
Dear Minister,
I would like to bring your attention to the issuing of passports.
I have just renewed my passport. My old passport had 6 months left to run, but I wanted to get the task out of the way.
My new passport arrived this morning, but I see that the life of the passport is 10 years from now. The time remaining to my old passport was not added to the lifespan of this new passport.
Although it is only a small issue, nonetheless I'd like to see the rules changed in this regard. I have a passport from another jurisdiction, and when I renew there, they give me a new passport for 10 years, plus the remaining time on my old passport. This appears only fair as the period of passport coverage should not have to be paid for twice. That effectively penalises people for renewing their passport early/on time.
I see from the rules that a passport can only be issued for a maximum of 10 years, but I would urge that the rules be udpdated to allow for the preservation of time that customers paid for on their previous passport. It will mean less expense, more utility for the customer and less administration for the passport office.
I would like to bring your attention to the issuing of passports.
I have just renewed my passport. My old passport had 6 months left to run, but I wanted to get the task out of the way.
My new passport arrived this morning, but I see that the life of the passport is 10 years from now. The time remaining to my old passport was not added to the lifespan of this new passport.
Although it is only a small issue, nonetheless I'd like to see the rules changed in this regard. I have a passport from another jurisdiction, and when I renew there, they give me a new passport for 10 years, plus the remaining time on my old passport. This appears only fair as the period of passport coverage should not have to be paid for twice. That effectively penalises people for renewing their passport early/on time.
I see from the rules that a passport can only be issued for a maximum of 10 years, but I would urge that the rules be udpdated to allow for the preservation of time that customers paid for on their previous passport. It will mean less expense, more utility for the customer and less administration for the passport office.
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Household V Business debt -revisited with new numbers
http://www.centralbank.ie/polstats/stats/cmab/Documents/ie_table_a.6_loans_to_irish_residents_-_outstanding_amounts_(incl._securitised_loans).xls
As observed previously, the reduction in private debt in ireland is outpacing the accumulation of public debt. We as a country are more than breaking even and are in fact mending our position (financially at least, the economy is still dire).
However, this reduction in private debt is almost all occuring in the business sector, and households are not achieving any serious improvement in their debt positions.
Between Jan 2009 (the peak of debt) and today (may 2012), households have reduced their debts from 184 billion to 159 billion (14%). Whereas (non-financial) businesses have reduced their debts from 166 billion to 87 billion (48%).
Obviously, a certain amount of this debt reduction in both the household and the business sector is occuring through writedowns, bankruptcies, defaults etc.. I do not have figures to quantify this though.
Nevertheless, the picture is stark. Business has reduced debts dramatically, and they are now roughly half what they were, in just 3 years of austerity. It seems unbelievable to me that this could have been achieved by writedowns alone (indeed the amount of debt reduction is even larger than the total loan loss provisioning of the Irish banks), and a substantial part of it must have come from profits being diverted to paying off debt.
It seems obvious that businesses have access to a significant income stream, that serious profits are being made (despite the continual pleading), and that our tax system (geared towards taxing households rather than business) is increasingly unfit for purpose. It made sense previously, but our low corporation tax is obviously an imbalancing force, which is allowing business to make supernormal profits while households seem to have hardly anything surplus at all with which to mend their positions.
This policy must change. We are in a crisis, we can no longer afford to maintain policies that surrender business tax revenues, placing all the strain on the rest of society. Businesses are increasingly debt free and should not be spared the tax burden that debt choked households bear.
As observed previously, the reduction in private debt in ireland is outpacing the accumulation of public debt. We as a country are more than breaking even and are in fact mending our position (financially at least, the economy is still dire).
However, this reduction in private debt is almost all occuring in the business sector, and households are not achieving any serious improvement in their debt positions.
Between Jan 2009 (the peak of debt) and today (may 2012), households have reduced their debts from 184 billion to 159 billion (14%). Whereas (non-financial) businesses have reduced their debts from 166 billion to 87 billion (48%).
Obviously, a certain amount of this debt reduction in both the household and the business sector is occuring through writedowns, bankruptcies, defaults etc.. I do not have figures to quantify this though.
Nevertheless, the picture is stark. Business has reduced debts dramatically, and they are now roughly half what they were, in just 3 years of austerity. It seems unbelievable to me that this could have been achieved by writedowns alone (indeed the amount of debt reduction is even larger than the total loan loss provisioning of the Irish banks), and a substantial part of it must have come from profits being diverted to paying off debt.
It seems obvious that businesses have access to a significant income stream, that serious profits are being made (despite the continual pleading), and that our tax system (geared towards taxing households rather than business) is increasingly unfit for purpose. It made sense previously, but our low corporation tax is obviously an imbalancing force, which is allowing business to make supernormal profits while households seem to have hardly anything surplus at all with which to mend their positions.
This policy must change. We are in a crisis, we can no longer afford to maintain policies that surrender business tax revenues, placing all the strain on the rest of society. Businesses are increasingly debt free and should not be spared the tax burden that debt choked households bear.
SPQR -Sono pazzi questi Romani
I have in recent months attended 2 meetings of the We are Church movement. On both occasions, the meeting was very slow to warm up, but when it did, it was very exciting.
As said in a previous post, this group, and others like it in other countries, is a group of committed catholics who are questioning aspects of the catechism that seem to conflict with the central christian message. In particular they have identified 5 areas where most catholics would agree the (man-made and antiquated) catechism is wrong and contradicts the christian message.
I have been particularly impressed with one woman who said on the first occasion I was there: " the only thing I can control is myself". Last night she said, "We can't change them (the catholic hierarchy), but we can refuse to be changed by them". This woman is a great inspiration to me, a true revolutionary, using nothing but self-determination to fight the vast Roman church. The humility and confidence of a seemingly frail lady is truly awesome.
I am a little pessimistic that change will come about, but at least I want to be on the right side of the debate. I intend to go back again.
The group is holding a pentecost celebration in the Davenport hotel this Sunday at 3pm.
As said in a previous post, this group, and others like it in other countries, is a group of committed catholics who are questioning aspects of the catechism that seem to conflict with the central christian message. In particular they have identified 5 areas where most catholics would agree the (man-made and antiquated) catechism is wrong and contradicts the christian message.
I have been particularly impressed with one woman who said on the first occasion I was there: " the only thing I can control is myself". Last night she said, "We can't change them (the catholic hierarchy), but we can refuse to be changed by them". This woman is a great inspiration to me, a true revolutionary, using nothing but self-determination to fight the vast Roman church. The humility and confidence of a seemingly frail lady is truly awesome.
I am a little pessimistic that change will come about, but at least I want to be on the right side of the debate. I intend to go back again.
The group is holding a pentecost celebration in the Davenport hotel this Sunday at 3pm.
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Grid West consultation 17/5/2012
Grid West consultation 17/5/2012 -http://www.eirgridprojects.com/media/6424%20Study%20Area%20Rationale%20010512.pdf
Dear sirs/madams,
Before making my observations, I would like to express my great excitement at the proposal to develop a high quality grid infrastructure in the NorthWest. This area, for historic reasons, has been one of the poorer areas of the country, with consequently less facilities than the rest of the country. It is a constant struggle to attract industry to the West, and a stable, high capacity electricity supply is one of the most important factors for the future catch up of the region with the rest of the country. I am delighted that you are beginning this process, and I hope that it progresses quickly.
1. I would like to advocate that the connections built, be of a high capacity. The approval of power lines has become controversial in recent years, and I fear that if an inadequate grid is installed in this process, it will be even more difficult to expand it later, than it would be right now. Therefore, I would urge that the connections to Flagford and Cashla, should be of an ambitious capacity, to allow for future industrial growth, without necessitating a return to the planning process.
2. I would like to advocate that both connections be advanced simultaneously, or if this is not possible, that detailed planning and permission be sought for both. Even if there is only money for one line, I would like to see the other well planned, and disputes with local landowners ironed out in advance –so that when money does become available, the second line can proceed smoothly and quickly.
3. If only one line can progress at first, I would advocate Flagford –Bellacorick. The Cashla route already has a direct connection to bellacorick –albeit small- and building this connector will only increase capacity. Whereas, the flagford route, is not replacing a direct connection, and will therefore, not only increase capacity, but improve the robustness of the system too. Flagford seems the most beneficial of the two routes –though, obviously, both should be built.
4. I am a little sceptical of the future of massive windfarms. I suspect we are experiencing something of a bubble in this area at present. Large scale wind is only one of numerous renewable energies that will be available in future, and it is not at all clear that it will be the cheapest/most successful. I believe that the grid should be designed with the possibility of distributed generation from small scale wind/pv/hydro outfits in mind. We need a grid, capable of absorbing such distributed power sources if and when they become available. I do not have the technical expertise to comment on what would be necessary for large scale distributed generation, but I believe it is crucial we prepare for it as it is likely to become a major power source. In particular, I would like to point out, that distributed generation has a great advantage in terms of access to capital; far in excess of large scale projects. The technology already exists and simply needs to come down in price for a massive increase in this form of power being made available to the grid. We must prepare today for this.
5. Finally, I would like to point out that a new broadband connection is to land in Belmullet soon. There is scope for data centres and other connection heavy enterprises to develop in Mayo on foot of this. These centres are often very energy intensive, and the sooner this grid is developed, the sooner we can set to work attracting such high end, high profit businesses to the region. I urge that the project proceed quickly.
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
My guide to happy trails
Years ago, a good friend of mine was embarking on a big backpacking trip. He asked if I had any tips for him. Initially I couldn't think of anything, but later I wrote him an email, and once I got started I realised there are dozens of well-known maxims that are bandied about by backpackers. Here is the list I sent him, no doubt there are many more that could be added to this:
My guide to happy trails
-avoid salad (it's usually been washed in dirty water)
-don't set off with a full pack (you'll acquire some things along the way -either souvenirs or specialised clothes)
-don't trust a stranger who speaks perfect english, especially if they are trying to take you to somewhere i.e. a 2nd location, not of your choosing
-use small bags inside your backpack to divide up the various groups of things in your pack
-time spent regularly organising your pack is never wasted time (you may have to leave in a hurry; especially if it's a lawless place)
-if you're carrying dollars, try to carry small denominations. Poor people rarely have change for a 50.
-if you get into trouble, don't panic, most likely they only want your cash
-smile
-never steal from backpackers or locals, they will probably detect the crime and retribution can be brutal
-remember, tourists naturally attract some of the worst people (conmen, thieves etc.). If you have a bad experience, don't damn everyone because of it, just make sure you find some genuine people.
-avoid arriving into a new town late in the day, and especially if it will be after dark. It's harder to get accommodation and with your pack you are a target for crime.
-Dehydration is the backpackers worst enemy. Between diaorrhea, unreliable water supplies and sweating, you will be constantly under threat of dehydration. This can cause sunburn, constipation, dizzyness and a host of nasties. It's the most common pitfall.
-Guidebooks can be a lifeline when you're stuck for accommodation/food etc., however, some people cling to them so closely that they rarely do anything that's not in the guide. Don't be afraid to go pot luck and find something of your own.
-Don't fall out with your companions (sometimes easier said than done). Cabin fever, heat and exhaustion can make anyone testy.
-If you do get sick, be careful about using anti-diaorrhoea pills. Too much and you can be corked up for a week. Moderate diaorrhoea is harmless enough, constipation can slow you to a crawl. Long bus journeys don't help either.
-If you're using a map in a dodgy neighbourhood, you can step into a doorway or some other relatively concealed spot. Standing in the middle of the street looking at a map is like lighting up 'lost and helpless' in neon lights on your head. Same goes for money.
-taximen are necessary, but don't let them take you somewhere you hadn't heard of before you got into the cab; it's probably their brother's shop where you'll have to buy all sorts of rubbish to get out again. Or it could be somewhere worse.
-Don't buy cheap stuff in your first week, unless you're prepared to carry it for the rest of the trip or else are posting it home.
-No matter where you are, there is always transport nearby, you just have to find it.
-If you get off a bus/train and are besieged with drivers offering to take you somewhere, you're in trouble. They probably have an ulterior motive for driving you. They definitely want to overcharge you. This is an impossible situation; if you work out how to deal with it tell me.
-Some of the best food you can eat is in places filled with locals. It's best if you can watch them fry it. You might get sick, but Western style food outside of the West is often improperly cooked rubbish. Locals can generally cook local dishes well.
-wash your hands before you eat. You are in contact with a lot of things your body has never seen before.
-fruit that you peel is generally safe (bananas, oranges)
-you are not alone. Thousands of backpackers have gone before you. They will swap information about places, pitfalls, travel arrangements, they are your best source of information. They are sometimes interesting too (varies).
-local alcohol is fun, but don't expect to taste anything tomorrow
-Some towns have only one method of transport out of them. They are generally small and nice, but consider if they are unsafe before you put yourself in a cul de sac. Also, make sure you won't have to wait 2 days to catch the next buffalo out of town.
-take a walk in the countryside at least once
-if a place smells like shit, it probably is. It may have an open sewer nearby, you're better off avoiding it if possible. Definitely don't eat there.
-a fan in a bedroom is a simple way to keep away flies (but it can dehydrate you). Opinions differ on air conditioning, although I believe it just prevents you acclimatising.
-incence, tiger balm and other smellies are one of the easiest ways to keep away flies.
-dogs are not the same when you are abroad. they are treated differently by society and they act differently in response.
-a small padlock can be handy in some hostels where you have a locker.
-hiking boots are really heavy. Unless you're going to use them a lot -don't bring them. A pair of light shoes and a pair of sandals is my favoured combination.
-books are heavy too. There will be opportunities to swap books with other people as you go, but be prepared to end up reading slushy romance novels about alien zombies.
-If you have a guide book for one country, you may be able to swap for one about the next country with someone going the opposite direction at the border.
-The most important word in any language is 'pardon'. Even if you can't say thank you to someone who helps you, it's more important to be able to apologise to someone you rub up the wrong way.
-Check ahead to see if there are any festivals or events happening close to your route.
-blogging or regular group emails are a simple way to tell your story to everyone as you go along. It's not for everyone, but it can save you having to recount your story a hundred times when you return.
-Take pictures for your friends to see.
-if you suspect are in trouble you will always have the option of leaving town. Never forget this, as it's often the best and simplest solution to a problem and in a panic you may overlook it.
-swimming is lovely but dangerous. Leaches, water-borne diseases, currents, concealed rocks. Of course you will go swimming, hopefully a lot, but be aware that you are responsible for your own safety, especially in big rivers with fast currents. Some people think that somehow water is less dangerous because they are abroad. I myself have had several near ones by thinking that because a sign or a passing local says it's safe to swim that that means it is totally safe. Water is never totally safe.
-If some backpacker acts as if they know it all, they know nothing (that goes double for me)
You'll probably break almost every one of these rules -and be right to do it in the circumstances. You've got to have a good time in spite of all these cautions.
Talk to fellow travellers. Backpackers are often (not always) very gentle souls with modest personalities and an openness to new things. Some of them have travelled extensively. They are typically good advisers with local knowledge. They have often learnt things the hard way, so talking with them means you can learn things the easy way. They will know the problems you will face much better than anyone writing in abstract can.
Happy Trails
My guide to happy trails
-avoid salad (it's usually been washed in dirty water)
-don't set off with a full pack (you'll acquire some things along the way -either souvenirs or specialised clothes)
-don't trust a stranger who speaks perfect english, especially if they are trying to take you to somewhere i.e. a 2nd location, not of your choosing
-use small bags inside your backpack to divide up the various groups of things in your pack
-time spent regularly organising your pack is never wasted time (you may have to leave in a hurry; especially if it's a lawless place)
-if you're carrying dollars, try to carry small denominations. Poor people rarely have change for a 50.
-if you get into trouble, don't panic, most likely they only want your cash
-smile
-never steal from backpackers or locals, they will probably detect the crime and retribution can be brutal
-remember, tourists naturally attract some of the worst people (conmen, thieves etc.). If you have a bad experience, don't damn everyone because of it, just make sure you find some genuine people.
-avoid arriving into a new town late in the day, and especially if it will be after dark. It's harder to get accommodation and with your pack you are a target for crime.
-Dehydration is the backpackers worst enemy. Between diaorrhea, unreliable water supplies and sweating, you will be constantly under threat of dehydration. This can cause sunburn, constipation, dizzyness and a host of nasties. It's the most common pitfall.
-Guidebooks can be a lifeline when you're stuck for accommodation/food etc., however, some people cling to them so closely that they rarely do anything that's not in the guide. Don't be afraid to go pot luck and find something of your own.
-Don't fall out with your companions (sometimes easier said than done). Cabin fever, heat and exhaustion can make anyone testy.
-If you do get sick, be careful about using anti-diaorrhoea pills. Too much and you can be corked up for a week. Moderate diaorrhoea is harmless enough, constipation can slow you to a crawl. Long bus journeys don't help either.
-If you're using a map in a dodgy neighbourhood, you can step into a doorway or some other relatively concealed spot. Standing in the middle of the street looking at a map is like lighting up 'lost and helpless' in neon lights on your head. Same goes for money.
-taximen are necessary, but don't let them take you somewhere you hadn't heard of before you got into the cab; it's probably their brother's shop where you'll have to buy all sorts of rubbish to get out again. Or it could be somewhere worse.
-Don't buy cheap stuff in your first week, unless you're prepared to carry it for the rest of the trip or else are posting it home.
-No matter where you are, there is always transport nearby, you just have to find it.
-If you get off a bus/train and are besieged with drivers offering to take you somewhere, you're in trouble. They probably have an ulterior motive for driving you. They definitely want to overcharge you. This is an impossible situation; if you work out how to deal with it tell me.
-Some of the best food you can eat is in places filled with locals. It's best if you can watch them fry it. You might get sick, but Western style food outside of the West is often improperly cooked rubbish. Locals can generally cook local dishes well.
-wash your hands before you eat. You are in contact with a lot of things your body has never seen before.
-fruit that you peel is generally safe (bananas, oranges)
-you are not alone. Thousands of backpackers have gone before you. They will swap information about places, pitfalls, travel arrangements, they are your best source of information. They are sometimes interesting too (varies).
-local alcohol is fun, but don't expect to taste anything tomorrow
-Some towns have only one method of transport out of them. They are generally small and nice, but consider if they are unsafe before you put yourself in a cul de sac. Also, make sure you won't have to wait 2 days to catch the next buffalo out of town.
-take a walk in the countryside at least once
-if a place smells like shit, it probably is. It may have an open sewer nearby, you're better off avoiding it if possible. Definitely don't eat there.
-a fan in a bedroom is a simple way to keep away flies (but it can dehydrate you). Opinions differ on air conditioning, although I believe it just prevents you acclimatising.
-incence, tiger balm and other smellies are one of the easiest ways to keep away flies.
-dogs are not the same when you are abroad. they are treated differently by society and they act differently in response.
-a small padlock can be handy in some hostels where you have a locker.
-hiking boots are really heavy. Unless you're going to use them a lot -don't bring them. A pair of light shoes and a pair of sandals is my favoured combination.
-books are heavy too. There will be opportunities to swap books with other people as you go, but be prepared to end up reading slushy romance novels about alien zombies.
-If you have a guide book for one country, you may be able to swap for one about the next country with someone going the opposite direction at the border.
-The most important word in any language is 'pardon'. Even if you can't say thank you to someone who helps you, it's more important to be able to apologise to someone you rub up the wrong way.
-Check ahead to see if there are any festivals or events happening close to your route.
-blogging or regular group emails are a simple way to tell your story to everyone as you go along. It's not for everyone, but it can save you having to recount your story a hundred times when you return.
-Take pictures for your friends to see.
-if you suspect are in trouble you will always have the option of leaving town. Never forget this, as it's often the best and simplest solution to a problem and in a panic you may overlook it.
-swimming is lovely but dangerous. Leaches, water-borne diseases, currents, concealed rocks. Of course you will go swimming, hopefully a lot, but be aware that you are responsible for your own safety, especially in big rivers with fast currents. Some people think that somehow water is less dangerous because they are abroad. I myself have had several near ones by thinking that because a sign or a passing local says it's safe to swim that that means it is totally safe. Water is never totally safe.
-If some backpacker acts as if they know it all, they know nothing (that goes double for me)
You'll probably break almost every one of these rules -and be right to do it in the circumstances. You've got to have a good time in spite of all these cautions.
Talk to fellow travellers. Backpackers are often (not always) very gentle souls with modest personalities and an openness to new things. Some of them have travelled extensively. They are typically good advisers with local knowledge. They have often learnt things the hard way, so talking with them means you can learn things the easy way. They will know the problems you will face much better than anyone writing in abstract can.
Happy Trails
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)