There can be no doubt: world wide, the US is one of the most beautiful and interesting countries and this in many of the meanings by which such qualities can be considered and appreciated. I always maintained this claim without any reservations on the basis of my personal experiences in that country, even though when I first arrived there I had my share of prejudice.

Without any doubt as well, the country also has negatives, some of which are very significant. But which country is free of them?

Indeed the worst feature of the US is that it considers it should enjoy global pre-eminence as a matter of right. If there is the beginning of any fear that it might lose this, everything is to be allowed in the effort that must be mounted not to let that happen. The approach is one that has always been assumed as being their prerogative by hegemonic empires, from Rome to the British Empire.

I have referred to this as being a negative feature of the US. Perhaps it would be more correct to say that the manner by which initiatives are organised and run to disallow all competition from outsiders cannot be blamed on the American people as a whole but rather on their power elites.

***

FURTHER CONSIDERATION?

Perhaps it is indeed the case that the new regulations covering the licensing of contractors in the construction industry need deeper study. Not in order to halt what has been achieved up to now. To the contrary, that should continue to be implemented. The aim would be to strenghten and clarify the new regulations as soon as possible.

One must really wonder whether the big problems facing the sector are uniquely linked to the level of proficiency possessed by those who take up a project. True, this problem does exist. However other problems arise because of how works contracts are assigned or how construction firms set about implementing projects, which then impacts greatly on the framing and running of work schedules.

Neither is it just the operators who alone carry the reponsibility for what goes wrong. There surely is that of the professionals who design, verify and certify as the work of construction proceeds.

If I understand correctly, the regulations that are being introduced do not involve at all such aspects.

***

DISTRIBUTION VS SUPPLY

This month’s crisis in the provision of electricity to households and business concerns again turned the searchlight of public opinion on the dilmma that for decades needed to be resolved by the enterprises that supply energy and other utilities (plus services related to public communications by phones, electronic and related devices as well as in transport).

When deciding on investment, what should they emphasize? The introduction of more facilities to produce the service or of new installations that deliver (distribute) the service?

Generally speaking, the preference went largely towards new production facilities. I understand the claim that this happened because such decisions were politically more sexy. But the choice was also dictated by the fear that really and truly we could end up with a total disaster... because supply would have failed to keep up with demand.

If I am judging the situation correctly, it was in water services that the best balanced choices were made. In other sectors the situation remains unclear.