Back in the late medieval era, when I was senior partner of a busy general practice, we employed a new practice manager and one day she came to me saying:
"There are some bills to pay. Shall I leave them until I get final demands?
I replied:
"No, let's pay them now."
She seemed puzzled, one reason why she didn't last long with us. I like my bills to be paid promptly (don't you? Doesn't everyone?) and the other side of that coin is to pay your own bills on time. A rule which doesn't appear to mean much to the senior managers at Tesco, who for years delayed paying for as long as possible, sometimes bringing their creditors to the verge of bankruptcy. Their tardiness, according to a report published yesterday, amounted to hundreds of millions of pounds, and was a deliberate policy. Unfortunately there is no way of punishing their immoral behaviour, so essentially they have got away with it, and a simple "sorry" will close out the story. My verdict: a disgrace.
A QUESTION OF NEUTRALITY
Apparently Israel's premier Netenyahu was up in arms yesterday over the UN's Secretary General slamming Israel's persisting in building settlements in the occupied territories on the West Bank.
"The UN should remain neutral!" he bleated. But for me the UN should NOT remain neutral when it sees an obvious injustice being perpetrated by a powerful nation over a weaker one. It didn't remain neutral, for instance, over the issue of apartheid in South Africa, after the dawn of the 1980s at least. Of course, Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan did adopt a neutral attitude, on the grounds of furthering trade, to their everlasting shame.
What if the UN was extant during WWII, and it condemned the holocaust. Would the Nazis have complained bitterly about its lack of neutrality then? Of course the UN didn't exist at the time, though the Catholic church did, and of course as we now know they knew what was going on, and remained tight lipped, to their everlasting shame.
What the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians has been likened to apartheid by no lesser figure than Desmond Tutu. There is no neutral position on apartheid, or the holocaust, or the subjugation of the Palestinian people. They're all morally wrong, and we should all speak out whenever we see a moral crime going on under our noses.
Wednesday, 27 January 2016
Wednesday, 20 January 2016
One time, two times, three times a lady
Doesn't quite have the same ring, does it?
When was the last time you heard someone use the word "thrice"? The answer, I suspect, is never. The word is now confined to novels of the 19th century. Nobody ever uses the word in conversation today, and as my wife observed in her dealings with her students, the word "twice" is going the same way. All the young folk now say "two times", and I was wondering when the same thing is going to happen to "once".
The English language is evolving in real time as it has always done, and it's no good old farts like me complaining- it's as much use as trying to hold back the tide.
A dear friend of mine gets very exercised when he hears the word "unique" misused; indeed, he gets so worked up about it steam comes screaming from his ears whenever he does. The word stands alone, he argues, meaning the "only one" and cannot therefore be qualified by words like "very", "totally" etc. It's like "top". You can't be very top, or quite top, just top. But he's trying to hold back the tide too. The word unique now no longer means unique, but only "very unusual", at least in everyday speech, and he's going to have to get used to it if he is not to have a cardy over it. Other examples include the word "dice" for a single die (who ever says that any more?) and the confusion between the terms "less" and "fewer". It won't be long before the words are interchangeable, whatever Fowler's Modern English Usage might have to say about it.
So let's go with the flow, rather than face a losing battle against the march of history. Language has always been about communication, and that is the real point here. TTFN!
When was the last time you heard someone use the word "thrice"? The answer, I suspect, is never. The word is now confined to novels of the 19th century. Nobody ever uses the word in conversation today, and as my wife observed in her dealings with her students, the word "twice" is going the same way. All the young folk now say "two times", and I was wondering when the same thing is going to happen to "once".
The English language is evolving in real time as it has always done, and it's no good old farts like me complaining- it's as much use as trying to hold back the tide.
A dear friend of mine gets very exercised when he hears the word "unique" misused; indeed, he gets so worked up about it steam comes screaming from his ears whenever he does. The word stands alone, he argues, meaning the "only one" and cannot therefore be qualified by words like "very", "totally" etc. It's like "top". You can't be very top, or quite top, just top. But he's trying to hold back the tide too. The word unique now no longer means unique, but only "very unusual", at least in everyday speech, and he's going to have to get used to it if he is not to have a cardy over it. Other examples include the word "dice" for a single die (who ever says that any more?) and the confusion between the terms "less" and "fewer". It won't be long before the words are interchangeable, whatever Fowler's Modern English Usage might have to say about it.
So let's go with the flow, rather than face a losing battle against the march of history. Language has always been about communication, and that is the real point here. TTFN!
Monday, 18 January 2016
It's official: it's 1/99
Back in the 60s a group of socialist actors, led by the playwright John McGrath, gave itself the name "The Seven Eighty Four Theatre Company". The name was based on the way wealth was apportioned in Britain at the time, ie 7% of the population owned 84% of the wealth. I happened to run into John McGrath in the early 80s and he told me the figure was then more like 4/91.
Today OXFAM announced that, world wide, that figure is now 1/99. Even more amazingly, just 62 individuals control more wealth than the poorest 3.5 billion people on Earth. These individuals, mainly Russians, Arabs, Chinese and Americans (and a smattering from elsewhere) are the real world leaders. They control what happens in the world, while the rest of us lick the crumbs from their tables. For example, the mighty Port Talbot steel works, once the biggest in Europe, has had to lay off 700 of its workforce because of the massive dumping of steel by the Chinese, at knock-down prices, on the markets, meaning it is now almost impossible to turn a profit in the steel making industry. My first thought about that, considering the price of other "hards" as they call metals in the stock market, have also plummeted, perhaps now they'll stop stealing copper wiring, pealing the lead off church roofs and melting down much loved sculptures from parks.
Over the weekend Jeremy Corbyn suggested companies should be prevented from paying dividends to their shareholders until they pay all their workers at least the living wage. Naturally it was attacked as a piece of naked communism by the Daily Mail et al, but actually it seems eminently sensible to, well, anyone currently languishing on the lower minimum wage. Those shareholders aren't going to give up a percentage point or two of their unearned profits without a fight. So be it.
A few years ago someone put forward the idea of a "Robin Hood" tax of 0.7% on all transactions in the City. As trillions of pounds wash through the Square Mile every day, even this tiny percentage would generate billions, hopefully to be used to alleviate world poverty and generally make it a more equitable place to live in. Of course the idea was trashed and has little chance of coming about in my lifetime. Meanwhile, the 62 "super-oligarchs" go on getting richer, at your expense and mine, and all we can do is watch. Capitalism works, for them and the 1%. For the rest of the world, it sucks.
Today OXFAM announced that, world wide, that figure is now 1/99. Even more amazingly, just 62 individuals control more wealth than the poorest 3.5 billion people on Earth. These individuals, mainly Russians, Arabs, Chinese and Americans (and a smattering from elsewhere) are the real world leaders. They control what happens in the world, while the rest of us lick the crumbs from their tables. For example, the mighty Port Talbot steel works, once the biggest in Europe, has had to lay off 700 of its workforce because of the massive dumping of steel by the Chinese, at knock-down prices, on the markets, meaning it is now almost impossible to turn a profit in the steel making industry. My first thought about that, considering the price of other "hards" as they call metals in the stock market, have also plummeted, perhaps now they'll stop stealing copper wiring, pealing the lead off church roofs and melting down much loved sculptures from parks.
Over the weekend Jeremy Corbyn suggested companies should be prevented from paying dividends to their shareholders until they pay all their workers at least the living wage. Naturally it was attacked as a piece of naked communism by the Daily Mail et al, but actually it seems eminently sensible to, well, anyone currently languishing on the lower minimum wage. Those shareholders aren't going to give up a percentage point or two of their unearned profits without a fight. So be it.
A few years ago someone put forward the idea of a "Robin Hood" tax of 0.7% on all transactions in the City. As trillions of pounds wash through the Square Mile every day, even this tiny percentage would generate billions, hopefully to be used to alleviate world poverty and generally make it a more equitable place to live in. Of course the idea was trashed and has little chance of coming about in my lifetime. Meanwhile, the 62 "super-oligarchs" go on getting richer, at your expense and mine, and all we can do is watch. Capitalism works, for them and the 1%. For the rest of the world, it sucks.
Monday, 11 January 2016
RIP Saint David
There has been a tremendous outpouring of grief today at the passing of David Bowie. One friend likened his influence to that of Andy Warhol, though in my view Bowie's impact on world culture has been even greater. "Why didn't they knight him?" my friend asked. Why indeed. Paul McCartney, Tom Jones, Elton John, Mick Jagger. If they were in a room right now they would all have to agree that Bowie's achievements are as great, or even greater, than any of them. My friend continued: "I mean, they even gave one to Lenny Henry!"
When the news hit me this morning, my birthday, it was a like a physical blow. I have been reeling all day and even as I write I am still feeling numb. Much will be written about Bowie in the next few days, so I shall suffice with my own Bowie story.
It was 1979, and I had just watched the TV premier of Ashes to Ashes on TOTP. The impact was seismic. We all knew Major Tom from 11 years ago, but had nearly forgotten him in the maelstrom of Bowie's career in the intervening period. Now here he was again, still up, out there, far above the moon. And now,
Ashes, to ashes, fun to funky
We know major Tom's a junkie
And that video, the strange colour effects, Steve Strange doing his very strange thing. It was all too much. I ran out of the house to a dear friend's flat nearby and hit the bell. She opened the door in a flash.
"Did you see it?" I asked
"Oh my God yes!" she replied, and we grabbed each other and held on for a long time. There are few moments like that in the history of pop music. And so fitting it should be David Bowie who created it.
When the news hit me this morning, my birthday, it was a like a physical blow. I have been reeling all day and even as I write I am still feeling numb. Much will be written about Bowie in the next few days, so I shall suffice with my own Bowie story.
It was 1979, and I had just watched the TV premier of Ashes to Ashes on TOTP. The impact was seismic. We all knew Major Tom from 11 years ago, but had nearly forgotten him in the maelstrom of Bowie's career in the intervening period. Now here he was again, still up, out there, far above the moon. And now,
Ashes, to ashes, fun to funky
We know major Tom's a junkie
And that video, the strange colour effects, Steve Strange doing his very strange thing. It was all too much. I ran out of the house to a dear friend's flat nearby and hit the bell. She opened the door in a flash.
"Did you see it?" I asked
"Oh my God yes!" she replied, and we grabbed each other and held on for a long time. There are few moments like that in the history of pop music. And so fitting it should be David Bowie who created it.
Friday, 8 January 2016
New drinking guidelines: we're all screwed
Most of us, anyway. Me definitely. Although I drink barely 20 units a week, I have not hitherto established an AFD, or alcohol free day ( I am about to instate one: Sunday), but I'm still over the limit. Jeez! Apparently men and women are now restricted to a mere 14 units per week, with three AFDs recommended.
Naturally this is a bit of a head-fuck for me, who, when I was a practising GP used to recommend a much more generous allowance. What happened to the traditional belief that moderate drinking actually conferred a longer life expectancy than being teetotal? Now it seems the only group this applies to is women over 55, and even they should drink no more than 5 units per week in order to gain the benefit.
I think a little common sense needs to be inserted into this argument. Let us examine the advice that has been offered about the use of aspirin as a "primary preventive" against the risk of heart attack and stroke. The term "primary preventive" refers to people who have no particular risk factors flagged up already, like an actual history of those events. Advice on this subject given to GPs for them to pass on to their patients has changed no less than six times in the last 40 years. FYI, the very latest advice is that the risk of catastrophic haemorrhage does outweigh its benefits, but watch this space. That advice could change tomorrow.
Where does that leave us vis a vis alcohol? Will these latest guidelines be subject to review as more research comes in? I wouldn't be surprised. To me this new advice is unnecessarily draconian. Yes, excessive alcohol intake is associated with an increased cancer risk, although as we all know, the other problems that alcoholism causes, not just to the drinker but to their families and society as a whole is far more significant. But is moderate alcohol intake that injurious to our health? I just can't accept it. Not yet.
Naturally this is a bit of a head-fuck for me, who, when I was a practising GP used to recommend a much more generous allowance. What happened to the traditional belief that moderate drinking actually conferred a longer life expectancy than being teetotal? Now it seems the only group this applies to is women over 55, and even they should drink no more than 5 units per week in order to gain the benefit.
I think a little common sense needs to be inserted into this argument. Let us examine the advice that has been offered about the use of aspirin as a "primary preventive" against the risk of heart attack and stroke. The term "primary preventive" refers to people who have no particular risk factors flagged up already, like an actual history of those events. Advice on this subject given to GPs for them to pass on to their patients has changed no less than six times in the last 40 years. FYI, the very latest advice is that the risk of catastrophic haemorrhage does outweigh its benefits, but watch this space. That advice could change tomorrow.
Where does that leave us vis a vis alcohol? Will these latest guidelines be subject to review as more research comes in? I wouldn't be surprised. To me this new advice is unnecessarily draconian. Yes, excessive alcohol intake is associated with an increased cancer risk, although as we all know, the other problems that alcoholism causes, not just to the drinker but to their families and society as a whole is far more significant. But is moderate alcohol intake that injurious to our health? I just can't accept it. Not yet.
Wednesday, 6 January 2016
Obama: a voice crying in the wilderness
President Obama is now officially a "lame duck president", having barely a year left to serve in office. This is often a fallow period for US presidents, but Obama has departed from the usual protocol and taken the gun issue to his heart in a way never seen before. In a very moving speech yesterday, he reminded Americans, and the world, that there are 30,000 gun related deaths every year in their nation, and that no other "advanced" country suffers anything like this level of homicidal violence.
As an ex-lawyer he obviously has extensive knowledge of the Constitution and its various amendments. He pointed out that the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech, but not the right to shout "Fire!" in a crowded theatre, in order to protect the innocent; also that privacy is protected, but no one minds going through a metal detector at an airport, for precisely the same reason.
But when he proposes to increase background checks prior to purchasing a gun, to protect the innocent, a very minor step really, suddenly the gun lobby starts shouting about encroachment on freedom. At present you can buy weapons at gun shows without any checks at all, and the same situation obtains when a gun is bought over the internet.
I doubt if Obama's efforts will have any effect on restricting the amount of guns circulating in America. The political right and the very powerful gun lobby (financed, of course, by the gun manufacturers) will make sure any bill is stillborn. But I sure admire him for trying...
As an ex-lawyer he obviously has extensive knowledge of the Constitution and its various amendments. He pointed out that the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech, but not the right to shout "Fire!" in a crowded theatre, in order to protect the innocent; also that privacy is protected, but no one minds going through a metal detector at an airport, for precisely the same reason.
But when he proposes to increase background checks prior to purchasing a gun, to protect the innocent, a very minor step really, suddenly the gun lobby starts shouting about encroachment on freedom. At present you can buy weapons at gun shows without any checks at all, and the same situation obtains when a gun is bought over the internet.
I doubt if Obama's efforts will have any effect on restricting the amount of guns circulating in America. The political right and the very powerful gun lobby (financed, of course, by the gun manufacturers) will make sure any bill is stillborn. But I sure admire him for trying...
Friday, 1 January 2016
The Janus view
In which I look back over the landscape of 2015 and take a squint at what lies ahead in 2016.
2015 can only be called the year of IS. Having occupied huge tracts of land in Iraq and Syria, including several lucrative oilfields, and receiving succour from wealthy men in Saudi Arabia and Qatar, they can almost legitimately be called a state, though not one most people would live in by choice.The shock wave from their advance, combined with the attacks on his own people by Syria's Assad has resulted in the greatest movement of people since the end of World War II. We see the effects of this right here in Cardiff, which has been designated a "dispersal" centre for Wales, and which is now 20% Muslim. The impact is most noticeable in City Road, which is almost 70% non-indigenous. On the upside, most of these are hard working, cheerful folk who simply want to make a decent living, which has resulted in a blossoming of ethnic restaurants, which are enjoyed by as many white people as people from abroad. Cardiff has been a cosmopolitan city for more than 100 years, and we are very good at assimilating new arrivals from foreign parts.
What of the future? Will the bombing of IS diminish their power, and will we see more attacks on the West in reprisal? Unfortunately, the answers are no and yes respectively. If, on the other hand we can starve them out economically, somehow prevent them selling their oil, somehow persuade the fundamentalist Arab states to stop supporting them, then we might actually get somewhere.
At home, having seen the Tories pull back from their fundamentalist doctrines of supporting the rich and screwing the poor, we must remain on our guard lest they try out their grand plans once again. And then there is the threat, often from the same people, to pull us out of the EU, that flawed behemoth that nonetheless is our only route to the maintenance of our prosperity. The battle will heat up this year as we prepare for the big vote next year. I believe we will vote to stay in, just as the Scots pulled back from the brink in 2014, but it will be bloody struggle.
For me, my first major reading project is to come to grips with James Joyce's famous magnum opus, Finnegans Wake. Regarded by many as unreadable, there is, however, a consensus that holds it up as one of the greatest books ever written, even if much of it appears to be written in an impenetrable code. To assist me in my great task are two books: Lots of Fun at Finnegans Wake, by Finn Fordham, and Annotations, by Duncan McHugh, which hopefully will illuminate my way. I have allowed up to two months to read, first the Finn Fordham book and then, with Annotations by my side and Joyce's great 628 page text (all editions have exactly 628 pages) on my lap I shall make my way through what is promised to be a "Universal Revelation". I can hardly wait to get started!
Wish me luck...
2015 can only be called the year of IS. Having occupied huge tracts of land in Iraq and Syria, including several lucrative oilfields, and receiving succour from wealthy men in Saudi Arabia and Qatar, they can almost legitimately be called a state, though not one most people would live in by choice.The shock wave from their advance, combined with the attacks on his own people by Syria's Assad has resulted in the greatest movement of people since the end of World War II. We see the effects of this right here in Cardiff, which has been designated a "dispersal" centre for Wales, and which is now 20% Muslim. The impact is most noticeable in City Road, which is almost 70% non-indigenous. On the upside, most of these are hard working, cheerful folk who simply want to make a decent living, which has resulted in a blossoming of ethnic restaurants, which are enjoyed by as many white people as people from abroad. Cardiff has been a cosmopolitan city for more than 100 years, and we are very good at assimilating new arrivals from foreign parts.
What of the future? Will the bombing of IS diminish their power, and will we see more attacks on the West in reprisal? Unfortunately, the answers are no and yes respectively. If, on the other hand we can starve them out economically, somehow prevent them selling their oil, somehow persuade the fundamentalist Arab states to stop supporting them, then we might actually get somewhere.
At home, having seen the Tories pull back from their fundamentalist doctrines of supporting the rich and screwing the poor, we must remain on our guard lest they try out their grand plans once again. And then there is the threat, often from the same people, to pull us out of the EU, that flawed behemoth that nonetheless is our only route to the maintenance of our prosperity. The battle will heat up this year as we prepare for the big vote next year. I believe we will vote to stay in, just as the Scots pulled back from the brink in 2014, but it will be bloody struggle.
For me, my first major reading project is to come to grips with James Joyce's famous magnum opus, Finnegans Wake. Regarded by many as unreadable, there is, however, a consensus that holds it up as one of the greatest books ever written, even if much of it appears to be written in an impenetrable code. To assist me in my great task are two books: Lots of Fun at Finnegans Wake, by Finn Fordham, and Annotations, by Duncan McHugh, which hopefully will illuminate my way. I have allowed up to two months to read, first the Finn Fordham book and then, with Annotations by my side and Joyce's great 628 page text (all editions have exactly 628 pages) on my lap I shall make my way through what is promised to be a "Universal Revelation". I can hardly wait to get started!
Wish me luck...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)