In The Long Term

It is very difficult to work out what is going on really and where it is all going.  There are so many theories, expert opinions and philosophies getting in the way of the simple truth, whatever it is.

Sometimes you can get a case being made out which ought to be absurd, because it was intended to be.  This article from The Onion will annoy some people as well as amuse others.

Reading it, however, there were one or two times when I had the very uneasy feeling that there might, just might, be parts that were not entirely wrong.

Have You Seen A Doctor?

Today, Thursday 5 November, the Guardian has a cartoon about the NHS hours of work etc. and doctors in which Jeremy Hunt mentions Tuesdays.

The item below has been around for some time and might provide a solution.

Quote:

WORK CALENDAR

NEG FRI FRI FRI THU WED TUE 

8   7   6   5   4   3   2 

16  15  14  12  11  10   9 

23  22  21  20  19  18  17 

32  30  28  27  26  25  24 

39  38  37  36  35  34  33 

1. This is a special calendar for handling rush jobs. All rush jobs are needed yesterday. With this calendar, a job or project can be ordered on the 7th and delivered on the 3rd. 

2. Many companies set Friday deadlines, so there are three Fridays in every week. This is also beneficial for those persons who are paid on Fridays. 

3. There are eight new days added to each month, to allow for month-end panic jobs. 

4. There is no 1st of the month, thus avoiding late delivery of the previous month's last-minute panic jobs. 

5. Monday morning hangovers are abolished, along with non-productive Saturdays and Sundays. 

6. A new day—Negotiation Day—has been introduced keeping the other days free for uninterrupted panic.

Unquote.

It can only be a matter of time.

Making Space

The issues and problems arising from Frau Merkel's invitation to a few million from other places to join her in allowing Germany to be the socialist model for Europe and other places is arousing strong feelings.

There may be a way out for her which would fit in with her ideas about what a nation should be and for whom and for what Europe ought to be if her vision of Germany can prevail.

The answer could well be in the revival of this 1930 plan seen on the flashbak dot com web site.  All The Fourth Reich needs to do is borrow or create a lot of money, twist the arms of the neigbours and tell the UK it will increase GDP and the financial sector and bobs your uncle.

It would take a year or two, but the labour needed is already on its way along with those already arrived.

Imagine, you could ride a bike from Berlin to Barnsley without getting your feet wet.

Shall We Keep This?

When I read that the Victoria and Albert Museum, where I have spent many a happy hour, has politely rejected a collection of the personal belongings, clothing etc. of the late Margaret Thatcher, this comes under the category of interesting questions.

Where I wondered have Stanley Baldwin's carpet slippers got to?  It is rumoured that he wore them when making radio broadcasts to relax him and make him  sound friendlier.  Disraeli, it is said, liked to gargle, given the air pollution in London at the time, very sensible, but where is the glass?

In short just how much of a leading figure's possessions should be kept for posterity and which?  What we may think of as proper now may not be the items that the future would like to see.  With Mrs. Thatcher, it might be keep the hats but not the chewed pencils.  A later generation might not agree with our decision.

Also, the decisions about what to keep and not keep will often depend on our own prejudices.  The one thing I am absolutely certain about with Mrs. Thatcher is that she and I would never have liked each other at a personal level.

My memory is scarred with dealing with bossy female shop assistants during the time of rationing and severe shortages.  She always reminded me of the old bat at the grocers who had her favourites and did not like awkward questions.  I suspect my sense of humour would not have amused her.  This has nothing to do about whether she was a good, bad, indifferent, useful or what Prime Minister.

So I would throw away the handbags and the hats.  The question, however, it is how much heritage we want to keep and related to whom?  As a Life Member of the National Trust, this is a question I know is causing a bitter debate about what buildings, artefacts, culture and arts and memorabilia should be kept; because we cannot keep, archive or maintain it all, a great deal has to go.

The Trust does have a real problem. Decades ago and not long after its foundation the attrition of the landed classes meant many fine houses etc. were being lost and both the belongings and the memory of the relevant families lost as well to history.

So it found itself being involved and later identified with this rather than with the wider perspective of history which some intended.  In recent decades when our masters have decided that the tourist trade should be a major part of the economy this was an excuse, but in reality there are only going to be a limited number of major attractions to deal with that trade.

Add to that what one generation likes to do and see and what following ones want can be very different, a lot of the Trust's places could begin to rarely see many visitors at all.  To add to this in terms of what might chosen to keep from the recent past and present be of little interest in the future.

For the moment our recent prosperity has allowed us to avoid many of these decisions but this is not going to last.  There are too many stresses now in our system and too many demands made and obligations buildings up for resources of all kinds to keep compromising and making promises that will not be kept.

Which is why the V&A cannot take on this latest offer.  Once it may have been one they could not refuse.  Is it now one they ought to or have to?

The Spectre At The Feast

James Bond, Deputy Assistant Manager of Big Bang Investment, the Limited Liability Company subsidiary of the Information Sources Agency of the External Department of the British Government; that  is 50/50 owned with private capital, and to which functional data gathering is outsourced on a contract basis, is finding it difficult to accept the new meaning of the word "contract".

He gathered this when he found a message from Virginia, the Executive Director of the Agency asking him for an actual person to person meeting instead of an encrypted Skype.  At first he assumed happily that this was a chance to make a big impression, one way or another.  But then the suggestion that his legal adviser should be there made him wonder.

They were sat there in the large space in the Penthouse with the many screens and it was not looking good.  Virginia had her little friends with her as he liked to say.  Only they were neither little nor friendly.  Worse was when he was handed an actual document that all had before them.

He was out, busted, broke, unloved, unwanted and it was all over.  But why?  He made the mistake of asking the question.  Yes he had not been sticking strictly to the online code of operations.  He tried to claim his human rights and privacy even although his legal man was telling him to shut up, because it proved he was in the wrong.

But it wasn't really these breaches it was what they told his bosses.  His gambling pattern told them he was an innumerate liability in a place where the numbers were all. He had tried every dating agency and the like without once make a successful contact.  Worse, far worse were the nocturnal visits to web sites about church architecture, heritage steam railways, medieval genealogy and home brewing.  He was a man of the past.

His shoulders slumped and his face ashen he made for the door.  But another man was entering.  It was his replacement who they welcomed with beaming smiles and a politeness they had never given him.  He was clearly a man James Bond could never be or match.  As he went through the door he heard his first words.

"The names Crouchback, Guy Crouchback, Halberdier and Man At Arms. I'm from Duchy Originals." 

Going Down

We know we live in a changing world but many of our leaders and those running our economies insist that if we just get a few things fixed we will be on the way up again to a prosperous future and all will be well.  The question is what if it won't?

This bleak view of the future by Paul Craig Roberts of the Institute for Political Economy, hat tip Automatic Earth of 31st October, sets out his view of the nature of the recent real economic decline of the USA and what might be to come.

Much of the illusion of prosperity in a number of countries is owed to the media and those areas where money and wealth does flow round.  One example is the celebrity culture in the Western world which is given so much space and attention.

The other is accepting inflation as a norm.  Many see themselves as wealthy if their property has risen in price.  Perhaps in some cases, but when if selling one they have to buy another and take on more debt to do so to have living space, the bargain may not be a good one and could go bad.

One intricate area is the relative values of currencies and the policies related to them.  At the moment the financial  massaging of the markets may suggest wealth but if something does go wrong then the values might change and the inflation become super charged or even deflation setting in.

Much of the article could be taken to apply to the UK and there are problems enough in the making or already made that could mean our own parallel decline.

Once it happens there may be no way back this time.

Trick Or Treat?

When I asked the question "How should I dress up to spread fear, terror and horror among the neighbours on Halloween?"  The answer was to do nothing, just stay as I am.

The first time I came across the Halloween thing was in the film "Meet Me In St Louis", a 1944 musical set in St. Louis, USA, at the time of the 1904 World Exhibition there, see Wikipedia.  It struck me as daft then and my opinion has not altered.

I know now that there has been a long tradition of days or nights of misrule in many countries it is just that this one is the product of several borrowings taken over by commercial and media marketing men.

The cartoon above has nothing to do with this but it seemed to make sense in terms of the title to this item.