General – Page 43 – More Zonkyness

Panic Petrol Buying Causes Injuries ?

Mar 312012

No of course it doesn’t.

Despite the claims of the media who like to imply that the government is to blame for the injury of someone who tried decanting petrol in her kitchen. However stupid the government advice was, they did not suggest people keep petrol in their kitchen in inappropriate containers. They explicitly mentioned “jerry cans” – being the generic name for appropriate petrol containers.

To steal a title from Pink Floyd, what is to blame here is a “momentary lapse of reason” by the woman herself. It is the kind of thing that can happen to anyone – not so much general stupidity, but a temporary ability to disregard the stupidity of some action. We all have been known to do it – you, me, and that daft bloke down the street.

Try to claim otherwise and I’ll laugh at you.

And sometimes that stupidity can have drastic consequences.

It is possible that the government’s rather stupid advise to top up cars and jerry cans has led to an increase in stupid and nasty accidents, but that is no reason to blame the government for accidents. If the government has to avoid issuing advice on matters involving dangerous substances because of the potential for accidents, we need an alternative “government” who will issue such advise.

Of course what the government is responsible for is issuing advise that encouraged panic buying. They obviously paid so little attention to the potential for panic buying that you have to suspect whether it was deliberate – did they want fuel shortages in the middle of the working week rather than during the Easter weekend ? Did they want people blaming the Unite union for causing woes?

Probably not. Even though the “scheme” backfired, the conspiracy theory would credit the government with too much in the way of brains to be possibly true. When issuing advice in such matters the government needs to :-

Get the timing right so that if there is panic buying, it occurs at the least damaging time. Easter (despite the pain of not being able to go away) is better than in the middle of the week.
Phrase advice so that panic buying is less likely.
Point out that diesel or petrol are dangerous substances where a “momentary lapse of reason” can have drastic consequences.

Roadworks – So Why Is It Happening ?

General No Responses »

Feb 112012

At the moment (and for quite a few weeks in the past), there has been a lot of activity in the road outside my flat – a major cross-roads is being dug up, fiddled with, and all neatened up again. Which has the usual bunch of irritations :-

Because the traffic lights are set so far back from the cross-roads, it makes crossing on foot even trickier than it usually is.
It always seems that they’re keen on working whenever I would prefer some peace and quiet – including on a couple of occasions working through the night.

But perhaps more frustrating than anything else, is just what the road-works are for. Why not stick up a little sign explaining what they are for ?

The “Strength” of Coffee Shop Coffee

General, Media No Responses »

Dec 032011

With news like this, my first reaction is: Where can I find a coffee shop that sells coffee that strong ?

It is rather extraordinary that you can find a coffee shop that sells a cup of coffee that is six times stronger than a “standard” cup of expresso. And even more extraordinary that nobody really knows how strong a cup of coffee they’re drinking is – even the proprietors of that shop selling the really strong coffee had no idea it was that strong!

It’s also clear from the interviews carried out by the BBC that people are under the impression that you can tell how strong the coffee is (in terms of caffeine content) by how strong it tastes. That turns out not to be the case – whilst at extremes, it is probably true that watery coffee (“American”) is likely to have less caffeine in, and thick, bitter, and flavourful coffee is likely to have more caffeine in, there are other variables at work too.

The news article concentrated on the potential danger to pregnant women which is your typical media sensationalism – whilst a few pregnant women might well be drinking more caffeine than is good for them (but just how many people have coffee shop coffee everyday?), it is also the case that others might want to know how strong the coffee is – on certain mornings, I’d be willing to go a whole lot further to get a coffee with 350mg of caffeine over a coffee with 50mg of caffeine.

So yes we want better labelling of coffee

Poppies, FIFA, Remembrance Day, and Remembrance Sunday

General, Politics No Responses »

Nov 122011

The people of the UK (and indeed other places) are garlanded with poppies in remembrance of the soldiers who have lost their lives in the wars of the past and present. It is easy to get distracted by the politicians, the large ceremonies, and get confused about the purpose of the poppy and Remembrance Day. It is not about the glorification of war, or a bone thrown by the establishment – it is very much a grass roots thing better shown by local ceremonies.

Those local ceremonies in villages up and down the land involve a few old veterans laying wreathes of poppies at local war memorials built to commemorate the fallen from the local community. A few local dignitaries get involved too, but the ceremonies have little to do with them – they would take place even without them.

One of my favourite war memorials illustrates the point. Close to where my parents live is a small memorial :-

4892

It isn’t a grand memorial – most villages have far more dramatic ones built in stone. But it was put up after World War I by the local community in remembrance not of the local people who had died but for the millions of men that the local community had seen march through the village on the way to the port of Southampton before departing for the front-line in France.

Whilst a cursory check of the history of Remembrance Day would seem to indicate that it was all a government thing, a deeper look indicates that whilst the establishment was involved, some of the initiatives were started by what were effectively ordinary people, and it was supported by the public at large.

FIFA

As anyone who has been watching the news the last week knows, FIFA initially prohibited the England and Wales football teams from wearing the poppy during this weekend’s international fixtures but later backtracked from this under pressure from a variety of sources.

FIFAs initial ban on the poppy looks like gross foolishness, and indeed to a certain extent it is. But any organisation like FIFA is likely to be conservative and slow-moving in relation to making decisions about their rules, and you do have to wonder why the people wanting to start wearing poppies on their team strips during a football game left it until the last minute to query whether wearing poppies was ok.

FIFAs rules on emblems of a political or religious nature are probably quite sensible, and whilst the poppy is neither it would be sensible to allow for plenty of time to persuade FIFA that it should be allowed. A year would not be an unreasonable amount of time. Yet the England and Wales football teams only recently decided that they wanted to wear poppies on the field – this is a new thing and not something traditional.

You do have to think that FIFA has been treated a little unkindly over the last week.

Remembrance Day And Remembrance Sunday

It is strange how things change over time. When Remembrance Day was new, it was the main day for remembrance although not a public holiday. When I was growing up, the closest Sunday to Remembrance Day was called Remembrance Sunday and that was the main day for remembrance with Remembrance Day itself being a much quieter affair.

Today, the pendulum seems to be swinging back in favour of Remembrance Day rather than Remembrance Sunday. Of course the Sunday events are still far bigger, but Remembrance Day seems to be getting more and more attention every year. It is time to consider making Remembrance Day a public holiday so we can remember the dead on the real anniversary.

Greedy Pigs In The Boardroom

General, Politics No Responses »

Oct 292011

Yesterday we learned that UK company directors managed to screw the public, the shareholders, and the people working in the companies they direct by getting awarded pay rises amounting to 50%. Chief executives (who do a little bit more work) managed to grow their pay by 43%.

Of course the unions were up in arms, but this is bad enough that even the Tories are a little uncomfortable with the repugnant greed, and David Cameron has called for “transparency” in the boardroom. Whatever that means – after all we know that these guys are greedy pigs, what do they need to be more transparent about?

The likelihood of any company board paying the least bit of attention to a polite request to act with restraint is about the same as the chance of a snowball in hell lasting more than a minute. After all these people are quite happy to be known as greedy pigs … they have spent years and sometimes decades working themselves into a position where they can make themselves repeatedly sick eating from the trough of the economy.

The CBI on the other hand has trotted out the tired old excuse of having to pay salaries sufficient to attract the best in the world.

Which is true to a certain extent (although I doubt that every company director – many of whom do not work full time – deserves quite as much as they get), but is not quite the whole story.

Every year it seems that the top-level executives see at least double-digit income growth, whilst people who actually do real work see far less than that. Over time it leads to an increasing gap between the income of the richest and the rest of us. This is normally phrased as a gap between rich and poor, but that is just as wrong as ridiculously high salaries. It isn’t a gap between rich and poor, but a gap between the richest 1% and the rest of us.

Conventionally we accept these sort of things because superior company directors are supposed to ensure that companies become healthier and more profitable, causing the economy as a whole to become healthier with more resources to spread around. In other words the rich get richer, and so do the rest of us. But this doesn’t seem to be the case.

Sometimes we forget what an economy is for. It isn’t to make the rich richer, but to ensure that all the population get a share of the wealth so they have enough to eat, a place to live in, etc. If there are people who do not have enough to eat, have trouble affording energy bills to heat their homes, have inadequate homes, or lots of other “issues”, then the economy isn’t working properly.

I do not know of an easy fix for this, but we do need to start looking into fixing things so that we all benefit from the wealth created by the economy. And in such a way that the wealth isn’t frittered away. It doesn’t mean total equality – those who contribute more should get more out of the system, but we have a broken system at the moment that doesn’t actually reward those who contribute more properly – it only rewards the wealth creators.

Now genuine wealth creators do deserve to be rewarded more than those who do not contribute so much. But they should not be rewarded excessively when everyone else is suffering (to a greater or lesser extent).

One thing that might help is a way of taxing bonuses and golden parachutes in a way that takes away money from those who just manage to get good contracts, but leaves more money with those who really increase wealth. If for example, we start with a base rate of 50% tax on all bonuses and golden parachutes greater than the average yearly salary. That percentage goes up to penalise those who have not increased profits and have lost jobs, over the last 10 years, and the percentage goes down to those who have created jobs and increased profits over the last 10 years.

Oh! And one last thing. Not all rich people are greedy pigs. On a day when Jimmy Saville has died, it is well to remember that he gave away 9/10ths of his pretty large income.

Older Entries Newer Entries