A Small New Friend
I have been delighted to learn, at first by text message at 5.30 a.m. a fortnight or so ago, and more recently by snail-mail, of the arrival in Zittau, Germany, of a tiny new member of the family of my friends Kornelia (Konnie) and Andreas Kulke. He is Tom Friedrich Kulke and was born on 1st September weighing, so I have been told, 3720 grammes. That is nearly three and three quarters kilos and must be round about 8 lbs. A pretty good weight, I would say.
In the picture he has closed his eyes and appears to be counting his fingers. They are all there…..all ten of them! He looks very pleased with himself, and he has reason to be, because he has been born into one of the nicest families I know. My daughter-in-law, who is not given to fulsome flattery, said of his Mum, ‘I can’t imagine her ever raising her voice in anger’. His Dad, Grandma and Auntie Ingrid, my good friend for many years now, are equally warm, generous and loving.
Below is big sister Maja, taken just a year ago on her second birthday. She is holding a greetings card from Pete, Arlene and myself and is probably thinking; ‘I can’t read German yet….and they send me a card in English!’
She tells me (through her Mum as an interpreter) that he can’t play with her yet, but he can sit on her lap. I realize that I missed a lot by not having a big sister.
The Death of a Thousand Cuts
With an election in the no-longer-distant future it is a little disquieting to find that ‘cuts’; cuts in public services, cuts in state benefits, cuts in pensions, cuts in health and education budgets, feature prominently in the pre-election speeches of leading politicians. The only cut of which we can feel there is little possibility is a cut in taxation.
It would be nice to be able to say that they aren’t necessary, but they are. The financial crisis resulted in the government having to plough millions of pounds of borrowed money into coffers that had been emptied by the folly and greed of their custodians. It has to be paid back. That, I think, is common ground. The question is, how is that burden of debt to be shared?
I would like to see, though I think it improbable that I will, the burden spread fairly across every stratum of society. Cutting the services that spell the difference between civilisation and barbarism disproportionately penalises the less well off. Cutting the national health, the education and the social services budgets doesn’t bother the wealthy in the least. They can buy their health care and the best education for their children, and they certainly never need to avail themselves of any of the social services.
They do, of course, have rather more to be stolen or vandalised than the rest of us so I don’t imagine they would be in favour of any proposed economies or down-sizing of the police force.
One substantial cut that could and should be made is disposing of, or at least declining to renew, our Trident nuclear deterrent. The ownership of nuclear weapons hasn’t yet succeeded in deterring anyone who was actually attacking us. It didn’t prevent our Turkish NATO allies from invading the Commonwealth island of Cyprus. It didn’t deter the Argentinians from invading the Falklands. It didn’t deter the Iraqis from invading Kuwait. It certainly didn’t deter the IRA or El Quaida, nor does it in any way deter the Taliban! If some other country, Iran or North Korea perhaps, should threaten ‘the west’ with nuclear weapons I am sure that there will be enough in other hands to provide Mutually Assured Destruction (M.A.D), which is really all that these weapons can offer. The Prime Minister is now talking about dispensing with one of our four Trident submarines. Well, I suppose that a quarter of a loaf is better than no bread……..but it’s not all that much better!
No politician has so far mentioned the dreaded word ‘taxation’ yet surely taxation will have to be increased. To make sure that its burden is evenly shared, our rulers should concentrate on income tax. I pay what is for me a substantial sum in income tax every year. I don’t enjoy doing so but I count myself lucky. The incomes of many thousands are too low to be eligible for tax. I wouldn’t want to have to live on such an income.
In considering income tax rises the Government should also raise the upper rates so that the seriously wealthy have to pay as large a proportion of their income as the rest of us. At the same time they should close securely those loopholes in the law by which clever lawyers and accountants can arrange for their wealthy masters to avoid (not, of course, evade – that is illegal!) payment of the taxes for which the rest of us are liable.
By its very nature it is only those who can afford to pay income tax have to do so. The same cannot be said about indirect taxation, now loved by both the main political parties but called ‘stealth taxes’ by the opposition.
I deeply resent when paying for a repair or improvement to my home, to have to pay a substantial sum of VAT for the privilege of having it done. I resent having a sum added to my insurance premiums (like a compulsory tip for bad service!) to pay the relatively new insurance tax. I heard it said during the Thatcher years that the great thing about indirect taxes was that they offered ‘freedom of choice’. If you didn’t buy the object or service you didn’t have to pay it.
The householder faced with water pouring through a hole in his roof doesn’t have a great deal of choice about getting it repaired. Neither does the motorist, or the cyclist, who relies on his machine to get to work, have much choice about taking it to the garage or work shop when something goes wrong.
I have heard many explanations of the cause of today’s economic situation. One thing is certain; it wasn’t caused by the indolence or cupidity of the poor. Yet I suspect that it will be the poor who will have to suffer most before the situation improves. Last week, in my references to songs popular with the troops in World War II, I didn’t mention ‘She was poor, but she was honest, Victim of a rich man’s whim,’ a long and lugubrious Victorian ballad of which few of us knew all the verses. We all knew the last one though, and sang it with gusto;
It’s the rich wot gets the pleasure,
It’s the poor wot gets the blame.
It’s the same, the ‘ole world over,
Isn’t it a bloomin’ shame!
And so it still is!
The Cost of University Education
Did you hear the spokesmen for the CBI (Confederation of British Industry – the voice of the employers) giving us, on tv, their views on University Education? They are quite straight-forward……tuition fees should go up, student loans should be subject to interest, and there should be fewer and smaller financial grants for students.
It always gets under my skin when I hear the middle aged, be they politicians or captains of industry, urging that heavier financial burdens should be placed on students’ shoulders, or even that the existing ones should be maintained. Those who are themselves graduates, know perfectly well that when they were students there were no tuition fees and there were generous though means-tested maintenance grants for those who needed them.
‘Pull the ladder away Jack ….I’ve reached the top!’ seems to be their motto!
With an election in the no-longer-distant future it is a little disquieting to find that ‘cuts’; cuts in public services, cuts in state benefits, cuts in pensions, cuts in health and education budgets, feature prominently in the pre-election speeches of leading politicians. The only cut of which we can feel there is little possibility is a cut in taxation.
It would be nice to be able to say that they aren’t necessary, but they are. The financial crisis resulted in the government having to plough millions of pounds of borrowed money into coffers that had been emptied by the folly and greed of their custodians. It has to be paid back. That, I think, is common ground. The question is, how is that burden of debt to be shared?
I would like to see, though I think it improbable that I will, the burden spread fairly across every stratum of society. Cutting the services that spell the difference between civilisation and barbarism disproportionately penalises the less well off. Cutting the national health, the education and the social services budgets doesn’t bother the wealthy in the least. They can buy their health care and the best education for their children, and they certainly never need to avail themselves of any of the social services.
They do, of course, have rather more to be stolen or vandalised than the rest of us so I don’t imagine they would be in favour of any proposed economies or down-sizing of the police force.
One substantial cut that could and should be made is disposing of, or at least declining to renew, our Trident nuclear deterrent. The ownership of nuclear weapons hasn’t yet succeeded in deterring anyone who was actually attacking us. It didn’t prevent our Turkish NATO allies from invading the Commonwealth island of Cyprus. It didn’t deter the Argentinians from invading the Falklands. It didn’t deter the Iraqis from invading Kuwait. It certainly didn’t deter the IRA or El Quaida, nor does it in any way deter the Taliban! If some other country, Iran or North Korea perhaps, should threaten ‘the west’ with nuclear weapons I am sure that there will be enough in other hands to provide Mutually Assured Destruction (M.A.D), which is really all that these weapons can offer. The Prime Minister is now talking about dispensing with one of our four Trident submarines. Well, I suppose that a quarter of a loaf is better than no bread……..but it’s not all that much better!
No politician has so far mentioned the dreaded word ‘taxation’ yet surely taxation will have to be increased. To make sure that its burden is evenly shared, our rulers should concentrate on income tax. I pay what is for me a substantial sum in income tax every year. I don’t enjoy doing so but I count myself lucky. The incomes of many thousands are too low to be eligible for tax. I wouldn’t want to have to live on such an income.
In considering income tax rises the Government should also raise the upper rates so that the seriously wealthy have to pay as large a proportion of their income as the rest of us. At the same time they should close securely those loopholes in the law by which clever lawyers and accountants can arrange for their wealthy masters to avoid (not, of course, evade – that is illegal!) payment of the taxes for which the rest of us are liable.
By its very nature it is only those who can afford to pay income tax have to do so. The same cannot be said about indirect taxation, now loved by both the main political parties but called ‘stealth taxes’ by the opposition.
I deeply resent when paying for a repair or improvement to my home, to have to pay a substantial sum of VAT for the privilege of having it done. I resent having a sum added to my insurance premiums (like a compulsory tip for bad service!) to pay the relatively new insurance tax. I heard it said during the Thatcher years that the great thing about indirect taxes was that they offered ‘freedom of choice’. If you didn’t buy the object or service you didn’t have to pay it.
The householder faced with water pouring through a hole in his roof doesn’t have a great deal of choice about getting it repaired. Neither does the motorist, or the cyclist, who relies on his machine to get to work, have much choice about taking it to the garage or work shop when something goes wrong.
I have heard many explanations of the cause of today’s economic situation. One thing is certain; it wasn’t caused by the indolence or cupidity of the poor. Yet I suspect that it will be the poor who will have to suffer most before the situation improves. Last week, in my references to songs popular with the troops in World War II, I didn’t mention ‘She was poor, but she was honest, Victim of a rich man’s whim,’ a long and lugubrious Victorian ballad of which few of us knew all the verses. We all knew the last one though, and sang it with gusto;
It’s the rich wot gets the pleasure,
It’s the poor wot gets the blame.
It’s the same, the ‘ole world over,
Isn’t it a bloomin’ shame!
And so it still is!
The Cost of University Education
Did you hear the spokesmen for the CBI (Confederation of British Industry – the voice of the employers) giving us, on tv, their views on University Education? They are quite straight-forward……tuition fees should go up, student loans should be subject to interest, and there should be fewer and smaller financial grants for students.
It always gets under my skin when I hear the middle aged, be they politicians or captains of industry, urging that heavier financial burdens should be placed on students’ shoulders, or even that the existing ones should be maintained. Those who are themselves graduates, know perfectly well that when they were students there were no tuition fees and there were generous though means-tested maintenance grants for those who needed them.
‘Pull the ladder away Jack ….I’ve reached the top!’ seems to be their motto!
There were, of course, a lot fewer university students in their day, so the burden of their tuition and maintenance was more easily coped with. I think that reduction of the number of these students might help provide a solution. The suggestion that fifty percent of school leavers should go to University has always seems to me to absurd.
Why, I wonder, is intellectual attainment treated so very differently from its physical counterpart? No one expects half of us, or very many people at all, to merit training to Olympic or international standards, in any athletic or team sport. Only the very best of the best need apply, and nobody thinks that that is unreasonable. To suggest anything similar for university selection would be to invite denunciations of blatant elitism! It really is possible to have a satisfying and well-rewarded career, and to live a happy and fulfilled life, without being able to write B.A or B.Sc. after your name. Nor, believe me, need those who can’t feel inferior.
Did you know that, every year for the past five years, no less than twenty-two students out of every one hundred selected, have ‘dropped out’ of University without ever completing their courses, despite millions of pounds having been spent by the government in attempts to retain them? These were students who should clearly never have been selected. How much money might have been saved, and how much bitter disappointment and despair might have been avoided, had their unsuitability been spotted during the selection process! Preventing the selection of potential drop-outs would subtract a worth-while sum from the total University Budget.
This is surely one avenue that should be explored before we start discouraging the applications of possibly brilliant students by burdening them with an even larger burden of debt.
An Indian Summer
We are experiencing an Indian Summer as I type these words. Whether it will still be with us when in a few days, I post them onto my blog, remains to be seen.
I had always imagined that the expression had been brought to England by returning Sahibs and Memsahibs, not to mention common squaddies, from the Indian subcontinent. Some years ago though, visiting friends from rural New York State assured my wife and I that it had American, and more sinister, origins.
Early settlers in New England had built wooden defensive stockades round their settlements, cut down the trees and cleared the undergrowth for a few hundred yards from the stockades.
Warm sunny days in late September and early October brought heavy morning mists over the forests of North America. Native Indians, tomahawks and scalping knives at the ready, could creep under cover of the mist right up to the stockade…and be up and over it before the alarm could be raised. In those days it wasn’t a case of ‘Don’t throw away the sun cream and the eye shades’, but ‘make sure your musket is ready’ when there was an Indian Summer……….. or should we perhaps now, in the interests of political correctness, rename it ‘A Native American Summer’?
Why, I wonder, is intellectual attainment treated so very differently from its physical counterpart? No one expects half of us, or very many people at all, to merit training to Olympic or international standards, in any athletic or team sport. Only the very best of the best need apply, and nobody thinks that that is unreasonable. To suggest anything similar for university selection would be to invite denunciations of blatant elitism! It really is possible to have a satisfying and well-rewarded career, and to live a happy and fulfilled life, without being able to write B.A or B.Sc. after your name. Nor, believe me, need those who can’t feel inferior.
Did you know that, every year for the past five years, no less than twenty-two students out of every one hundred selected, have ‘dropped out’ of University without ever completing their courses, despite millions of pounds having been spent by the government in attempts to retain them? These were students who should clearly never have been selected. How much money might have been saved, and how much bitter disappointment and despair might have been avoided, had their unsuitability been spotted during the selection process! Preventing the selection of potential drop-outs would subtract a worth-while sum from the total University Budget.
This is surely one avenue that should be explored before we start discouraging the applications of possibly brilliant students by burdening them with an even larger burden of debt.
An Indian Summer
We are experiencing an Indian Summer as I type these words. Whether it will still be with us when in a few days, I post them onto my blog, remains to be seen.
I had always imagined that the expression had been brought to England by returning Sahibs and Memsahibs, not to mention common squaddies, from the Indian subcontinent. Some years ago though, visiting friends from rural New York State assured my wife and I that it had American, and more sinister, origins.
Early settlers in New England had built wooden defensive stockades round their settlements, cut down the trees and cleared the undergrowth for a few hundred yards from the stockades.
Warm sunny days in late September and early October brought heavy morning mists over the forests of North America. Native Indians, tomahawks and scalping knives at the ready, could creep under cover of the mist right up to the stockade…and be up and over it before the alarm could be raised. In those days it wasn’t a case of ‘Don’t throw away the sun cream and the eye shades’, but ‘make sure your musket is ready’ when there was an Indian Summer……….. or should we perhaps now, in the interests of political correctness, rename it ‘A Native American Summer’?
1 comment:
Breitling Bentley
is a blazon of watch which has been advised to clothing the requirements of pilots. Different styles of Bentley Motors
are aswell accessible in the market. The Bentley Motors T
cover the Hercules. Navitimer Watches
is accepted for its outstanding durability.
Post a Comment