Chinese presence in Papua New Guinea has more questions than answers

While I wouldn't go any further than merely acknowledge Chinese presence in Papua New Guinea and what China tries to do for Papua New Guinea, I still have some unanswered questions:

What does Papua New Guinea government need to know about China? What do you and I need to know about Chinese companies, businesses, be their customers, vendors, or partners, employees, etc...? Who are the Chinese? What is their world view? What do they see as the proper process for making decisions? What are the goals of China's approach toward the Pacific and Papua New Guinea in general?

In other words, the Papua New Guinea government, her citizens, and the landowners alike need to know the Chinese business practices before we establish any dialogue. Evidently, the Papua New Guinea government is indoctrinated by the Chinese 'yen' as this is taking precedent over our interests and that of our poor landowners'.

I wonder whether or not the Papua New Guinea government has answers to some of these questions to inform our local landowners where some of these projects are located. If the Papua New Guinea government does not have answers to some of these questions, our landowners are in the dark. Therefore, their resources are in the hands of the Papua New Guinea government and the Chinese companies.

I want to reiterate on an earlier post I made on Kange Nga Kona that, Papua New Guinea mining laws needed to be rectified to suit the landowners and not the third parties so that our landowners need something to fall back when the Papua New Guinea government and foreign companies exploit and keep them low and dry.

As a Papua New Guinean, I will always support a good government that has the interest of it's people ahead of other things and a foreign company who has the landowners' interest before their business interests. I want to see landowners benefit immensely from what is theirs on their own land but not the contrary.

Chinese presence in Papua New Guinea has more questions than answers

While I wouldn't go any further than merely acknowledge Chinese presence in Papua New Guinea and what China tries to do for Papua New Guinea, I still have some unanswered questions:

What does Papua New Guinea government need to know about China? What do you and I need to know about Chinese companies, businesses, be their customers, vendors, or partners, employees, etc...? Who are the Chinese? What is their world view? What do they see as the proper process for making decisions? What are the goals of China's approach toward the Pacific and Papua New Guinea in general?

In other words, the Papua New Guinea government, her citizens, and the landowners alike need to know the Chinese business practices before we establish any dialogue. Evidently, the Papua New Guinea government is indoctrinated by the Chinese 'yen' as this is taking precedent over our interests and that of our poor landowners'.

I wonder whether or not the Papua New Guinea government has answers to some of these questions to inform our local landowners where some of these projects are located. If the Papua New Guinea government does not have answers to some of these questions, our landowners are in the dark. Therefore, their resources are in the hands of the Papua New Guinea government and the Chinese companies.

I want to reiterate on an earlier post I made on Kange Nga Kona that, Papua New Guinea mining laws needed to be rectified to suit the landowners and not the third parties so that our landowners need something to fall back when the Papua New Guinea government and foreign companies exploit and keep them low and dry.

As a Papua New Guinean, I will always support a good government that has the interest of it's people ahead of other things and a foreign company who has the landowners' interest before their business interests. I want to see landowners benefit immensely from what is theirs on their own land but not the contrary.

Chinese presence in Papua New Guinea has more questions than answers

While I wouldn't go any further than merely acknowledge Chinese presence in Papua New Guinea and what China tries to do for Papua New Guinea, I still have some unanswered questions:

What does Papua New Guinea government need to know about China? What do you and I need to know about Chinese companies, businesses, be their customers, vendors, or partners, employees, etc...? Who are the Chinese? What is their world view? What do they see as the proper process for making decisions? What are the goals of China's approach toward the Pacific and Papua New Guinea in general?

In other words, the Papua New Guinea government, her citizens, and the landowners alike need to know the Chinese business practices before we establish any dialogue. Evidently, the Papua New Guinea government is indoctrinated by the Chinese 'yen' as this is taking precedent over our interests and that of our poor landowners'.

I wonder whether or not the Papua New Guinea government has answers to some of these questions to inform our local landowners where some of these projects are located. If the Papua New Guinea government does not have answers to some of these questions, our landowners are in the dark. Therefore, their resources are in the hands of the Papua New Guinea government and the Chinese companies.

I want to reiterate on an earlier post I made on Kange Nga Kona that, Papua New Guinea mining laws needed to be rectified to suit the landowners and not the third parties so that our landowners need something to fall back when the Papua New Guinea government and foreign companies exploit and keep them low and dry.

As a Papua New Guinean, I will always support a good government that has the interest of it's people ahead of other things and a foreign company who has the landowners' interest before their business interests. I want to see landowners benefit immensely from what is theirs on their own land but not the contrary.

All She Had

23rd Sunday after Pentecost

She put in everything she had, all she had to live on - Mark 12:44

Imagine putting everything you own in an offering plate! For many of us, the offering plate would have to be fairly substantial: large enough to hold homes, stocks, investments, electronic devices, furniture, cars, boats, all kinds of other "toys." Others of us might not need such a large plate, but still we would likely have something to give: perhaps a home, perhaps a car, perhaps food off a shelf, perhaps some treasured possession.

Jesus watched acts of stewardship - he watched as a whole crowd put "money into the treasury" (Mark 12:41). He watched as one rich person after another placed their gifts into the plate, as it were. These were no small amounts of money! Still, Jesus was not impressed with their giving. It was the impoverished widow who drew his attention.

The widow gave a pittance - not enough to bolster the temple budget by any stretch of the imagination. She gave only "two copper coins" worth a penny; hardly enough either to feed a hungry person or provide for temple worship needs.

But Jesus praised her, not the wealthy givers. "Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the treasury. For all of them have contributed out of their abundance; but she ... put in everything she had" (Mark 12:43-44).

Some have asked if the widow was responsible, in giving her gift. Without any money left for her own needs, she was entirely dependent on others. But that, perhaps, is the point. Her heart was large - large enough to trust God with all she was, all she had.

Her act of faith challenges future believers: do our gifts reflect our total dependence on God? Do we give gifts of whatever size because it is the right, perfunctory thing to do? Or are our gifts about utter trust in God's desire to provide for us?

All She Had

23rd Sunday after Pentecost

She put in everything she had, all she had to live on - Mark 12:44

Imagine putting everything you own in an offering plate! For many of us, the offering plate would have to be fairly substantial: large enough to hold homes, stocks, investments, electronic devices, furniture, cars, boats, all kinds of other "toys." Others of us might not need such a large plate, but still we would likely have something to give: perhaps a home, perhaps a car, perhaps food off a shelf, perhaps some treasured possession.

Jesus watched acts of stewardship - he watched as a whole crowd put "money into the treasury" (Mark 12:41). He watched as one rich person after another placed their gifts into the plate, as it were. These were no small amounts of money! Still, Jesus was not impressed with their giving. It was the impoverished widow who drew his attention.

The widow gave a pittance - not enough to bolster the temple budget by any stretch of the imagination. She gave only "two copper coins" worth a penny; hardly enough either to feed a hungry person or provide for temple worship needs.

But Jesus praised her, not the wealthy givers. "Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the treasury. For all of them have contributed out of their abundance; but she ... put in everything she had" (Mark 12:43-44).

Some have asked if the widow was responsible, in giving her gift. Without any money left for her own needs, she was entirely dependent on others. But that, perhaps, is the point. Her heart was large - large enough to trust God with all she was, all she had.

Her act of faith challenges future believers: do our gifts reflect our total dependence on God? Do we give gifts of whatever size because it is the right, perfunctory thing to do? Or are our gifts about utter trust in God's desire to provide for us?

All She Had

23rd Sunday after Pentecost

She put in everything she had, all she had to live on - Mark 12:44

Imagine putting everything you own in an offering plate! For many of us, the offering plate would have to be fairly substantial: large enough to hold homes, stocks, investments, electronic devices, furniture, cars, boats, all kinds of other "toys." Others of us might not need such a large plate, but still we would likely have something to give: perhaps a home, perhaps a car, perhaps food off a shelf, perhaps some treasured possession.

Jesus watched acts of stewardship - he watched as a whole crowd put "money into the treasury" (Mark 12:41). He watched as one rich person after another placed their gifts into the plate, as it were. These were no small amounts of money! Still, Jesus was not impressed with their giving. It was the impoverished widow who drew his attention.

The widow gave a pittance - not enough to bolster the temple budget by any stretch of the imagination. She gave only "two copper coins" worth a penny; hardly enough either to feed a hungry person or provide for temple worship needs.

But Jesus praised her, not the wealthy givers. "Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the treasury. For all of them have contributed out of their abundance; but she ... put in everything she had" (Mark 12:43-44).

Some have asked if the widow was responsible, in giving her gift. Without any money left for her own needs, she was entirely dependent on others. But that, perhaps, is the point. Her heart was large - large enough to trust God with all she was, all she had.

Her act of faith challenges future believers: do our gifts reflect our total dependence on God? Do we give gifts of whatever size because it is the right, perfunctory thing to do? Or are our gifts about utter trust in God's desire to provide for us?