"English language has 'borrowed' words for centuries. But is it now lending more than it's taking, asks Philip Durkin, deputy chief editor of the Oxford English Dictionary. "
Knowledge of what is being borrowed, and from where, provides an invaluable insight into the international relations of the English language. Today English borrows words from other languages with a truly global reach.
Guatemala City, Nov 1 (EFE).- The Guatemalan government acknowledged Friday that 88 children under the age of 5 have died in this Central American country so far this year from severe malnutrition, a scourge that affects 49 percent of minors here.
"With Europe sputtering and China costly, the 'stars are aligning' for Mexico as broad changes in the global economy create new dynamics of migration." (Not migration FROM Mexico, let's talk about migration TO Mexico: "For Migrants, New Land of Opportunity...
Food independence refers to an individual or communities right to produce and distribute food without government intervention or control. Also inherent to the food independence movement is a desire to remove the power of food productionfrom vast international corporations and place it back in the hands of ordinary people. Food independence can be realised as an individual as a family unit or as a community, the ideal of self-sufficient living and independence from centralised bureaucracies is fast growing in popularity.
Thinkers from around the world believe that achieving food independence is not only necessary to improve the quality of our food but to ensure the protection of human health from industry practices. The numerous health concerns cited by experts who support food independence include the use of genetic modification, the saturation of produce with chemical insecticide and fertilisers, the overly early harvest of produce leading to diminished biochemical value and the constant choice of profit over nutrition. It is a well known fact that the agri-businesses of today are producing substandard food using a production process which is highly damaging not only to human health but to the environment as a whole.
In addition to the health concerns there are numerous social and moral issues surrounding food supply. A pertinent example is the over reliance upon imports from countries where labour standards and environmental protections are virtually non-existent. Even if the international scope of the moral issues inherent to the topic of food supply are not enough to inspire action, the complete dependence which the domestic population has on such a small and powerful group of corporations is a cause for concern. It is well-known that supermarkets can run dry within 24 hours of any major disaster. Not only this but governments around the world have a record of complicity in aiding the proliferation of bad food practices, this is especially evident in the rise of genetically modified organisms despite a plethora of evidence that GMO’s cause cancer and sterility.
It takes a great deal of organisation and planning
Becoming food independent is not something that should be approached lightly, it requires a great deal of patience and organisation normally achieved within a highly motivated group dynamic. In the long term however the benefits are huge, if food independence keeps growing in the manner that is presently we will witness profound changes in social dynamics and in our attitudes to consumption. Successful examples can be found from across the globe, in England the town of Todmorden is four years into its quest for self-sufficiency and easily on track for its target date of 2018.
It Really Is Happening
The idea has spread like wildfire as a perfect storm of political, health, ecological and economic issues is causing a new Renaissance in food values. Communities want fresh organic produce with minimised social and environmental impact.
There are already thousands of food independent families, communities and townships within the United States and hundreds of towns, in reference to the declaration of Independence, issue declarations of food independence every year. It remains an issue where people of any political persuasion can find common ground. Whether domestic self-determination is your goal or the environmental aspect of global food production worries you, folk of all political creeds will find working together to maintain their own basic needs is a great way to create a better community and a better world.
This shows how human dietary choice could impact the environment because the abusal of land for mass producing food is quickly reducing its effectivness, slowly destroying all our useful land and food producing.
"The popularity of Quinoa has grown exponentially among the health-conscious food consumers in the developed economies of the world. Quinoa (pronounced KEEN-wah) is rich in protein and is a better grain for those seeking to lose weight. Quinoa has historically be rather limited but this diffusion is restructuring the geographic patterns of many places."
Watch a video that explains Ukraine's crisis in two minutes or read this quick article that covers the same material.
Ukrainians have been protesting since Nov. 21, when President Viktor Yanukovych rejected a deal for closer integration with the European Union, instead drawing the country closer to Russia. They are still in the streets in huge numbers and have seized regional government buildings in several parts of the country. In Kiev, the capital, clashes between protesters and security forces have become violent, killing several people. On Tuesday, the prime minister resigned. No one is quite sure what will happen next.
ANKARA (Reuters) - The number of Syrian refugees in Turkey has exceeded 600,000 and more than 400,000 of them are living outside refugee camps, the Turkish disaster management agency said on Monday.We...
Comes after Cameron indicated the Tories are ready to quit the European Court of Human RightsHome Secretary will also cut the number of grounds of appeal for migrants Home Office officials expect the crackdown will halve the 68,000 cases lodged against the Government every yearIn shiny patent brogues May vowed to kick out illegal immigrants
Britain's immigration system is like a 'never-ending game of snakes and ladders', Theresa May claimed today as she vowed to end the culture of endless appeals.
The Home Secretary used a speech at the Tory party conference to announce that foreign criminals, terrorists and illegal immigrants will be kicked out of Britain before they get the chance to claim their human rights are being breached.
She also promised to slash the number of grounds on which migrants can lodge an appeal from the current 17 to just four after the fiasco of the deportation of Abu Qatada, who finally returned home to Jordan earlier this year after a 12-year legal battle.
Home Office officials expect the crackdown to more than halve the astonishing 68,000 cases lodged against the Government every year.
‘I am clear that the law must be on the side of people who respect the law, not those who break it,’ Mrs May said.
Her move came as David Cameron gave the strongest signal yet that the Tories are ready to quit the meddling European Court of Human Rights.
The Prime Minister said he would do ‘whatever it takes’ to ensure Britain can throw out people who pose a threat to the country and have no right to be here.
The court’s interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights, which is enshrined in British law in the Human Rights Act, has been condemned by many Conservative MPs.
Asked if the party is considering complete withdrawal, the Prime Minister said: ‘It may be that that is where we end up.’
Justice Secretary Chris Grayling told the Conservative Party conference in Manchester today that the court has become a ‘big international frustration’.
A Tory government would ‘scrap Labour’s Human Rights Act and make sure that with legal rights go legal responsibilities’.
Ministers have tried for years to take a hard line against preachers of hate, foreign criminals and illegal immigrants.
But they can drag out the appeal process for years – usually by citing the Human Rights Act and the European Convention on Human Rights.
The ECHR has been invoked by scores of people fighting deportation from Britain. They argue its provisions mean they are entitled to various rights, including the right to a family life. As soon as an appeal is lodged, deportation proceedings are halted.
In a Daily Mail interview, Mrs May said public trust was being undermined – and tens of millions of pounds squandered – by migrants and their lawyers playing the system.
In future, officials will be told to throw people out of the country as soon as their case has been decided by the Government – a system which is already in place in France. They can still appeal, but only from their homeland.
The only exception would be in cases where there is a ‘risk of serious irreversible harm’, such as torture or execution.
Migrants who claim to have a right to a ‘family life’ under article 8 of the Human Rights – the biggest frustration to the public – can still be thrown out.
Tory backbenchers will hope the tough stance, which will be unveiled in Mrs May’s speech to the conference today, will help to win back voters who have defected to Ukip.
Mrs May said: ‘The Abu Qatada case proved that we need a dramatic change in our human rights law. We’re going to cut the number of appeal rights, extend cases where we deport first and hear the appeal later, and use primary legislation to make sure judges interpret the “right to a family life” properly.’
Mrs May also wants to end the farce of migrants being able to build up ‘rights’ to stay in Britain by stringing out an appeal for as long as possible. The longer a person can remain in the UK - even if they are facing removal - the easier it is to claim they have established a ‘family life’.
A new Immigration Bill will be introduced when Parliament returns. The 17 existing rights of appeal will be cut to just four. A right of appeal will only exist where the decision is complex and fact-specific.
The Tories say it will reduce the number of appeals by nearly 60 per cent, leading to an estimated net saving of £219million over ten years.
In her speech to the Tory party conference in Manchester today, Mrs May said: 'The Government will soon publish the Immigration Bill, which will make it easier to get rid of people with no right to be here.
'First, we are going to cut the number of appeal rights. At the moment the system is like a never-ending game of snakes and ladders with almost 70,000 appeals heard every year.
'The winners - foreign criminals and immigration lawyers, while the losers are the victims of these crimes and the public.
'So we're going to cut the number of appeal rights from 17 to four and in doing so cut the total number of appeals by more than half.
'Last year human rights were cited in almost 10,000 immigration appeal cases so the second thing we will do is extend the number of non-suspensive appeals.
'That means that where there is no risk of serious and irreversible harm we should deport foreign criminals first and hear their appeals later.'
Pranav Pradeep's insight:
We get a better idea of how some people with power react to immigration policies/ changes.
Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe everything will be fine. Maybe the “widening gap between rich and poor” is temporary. Maybe the steady growth in the proportion of jobs that are part-time and/or low-paid will soon reverse.
This has not been a great decade for the average American. The recession ended in 2009, but median household income remains 6.1% below what it was in December 2007…while the income of the top 10% rose. Meanwhile, productivity growth has been exceedingly sluggish on both sides of the Atlantic. The Economist explains, and theorizes:
"In the early 2000s, in both Britain and America growth and wages peeled apart. The economy kept growing, but median earners did not feel the benefit… in Britain a net 360,000 self-employed jobs have been created in the first four years of recovery… The self-employed work longer but their median hourly earnings are less than half those of employees."
Another theory is far more disconcerting: it’s the suggestion that “the economic progress of the past 250 years may have been a unique period in human history.” As New York Magazine puts it:
"At some point in the late sixties or early seventies, this great acceleration began to taper off … The rate at which life is improving here, on the frontier of human well-being, has slowed."
Which neatly echoes Peter Thiel’s essay “The End of the Future”:
"Technological progress has fallen short in many domains… While innovation in medicine and biotechnology has not stalled completely, here too signs of slowed progress and reduced expectations abound… By default, computers have become the single great hope for the technological future. The economic decoupling of computers from everything else leads to more questions than answers, and barely hints at the strange future where today’s trends simply continue."