A contributor to the London Times reports today that one of the two key ideas taught at the school of military intelligence (yes, I know!) was that 'Locks stop only honest people'. That should be 'honest or incompetent people'.
Another contributor reports the delight of a seasoned criminal at the idea of ID cards. What a bonanza for the professional criminal and well funded terrorist!
But never mind, nanny will feel so much better if she's got a new card to show that nice policeman.
Tuesday, May 31, 2005
Friday, May 27, 2005
Alice in GordonLand
I can immediately think of a lot of things a pretty, bespectacled girl called Alice might be good for. I like the name. It has nice associations. One of the things includes writing articles in girls’ magazines. But when Alice writes in a respected national newspaper about improvements in the bureaucracy of tax returns, whilst admitting she can’t handle complicated things like that, well my patience runs thin.
My patience is runny these days.
Well Alice admits she isn’t good at tax, or even at sums, because when she wanted to pay a nanny she worked out Nanny took home to the nursery 3p for every pound Alice had to earn to pay for her.
Now she knows she’s not good at sums because that can’t be right, can it? And of course it isn’t. But it got me thinking. How much does Mean Gordon take from us? The simplest measure is the Tax Take as a percentage of National Income. This is usually quoted at about 37% currently, rising to over 40% shortly now that we’ve re-elected the little ray of sunshine to No 11. But this doesn’t really tell the important story. The story of motivation.
Little Alice, remember, isn’t only pretty, she also writes quite prettily (despite having no idea what she’s talking about, or perhaps because of it, I can’t say), and nowadays these attributes mean she makes a very good income thank you.
So I got thinking about an illustration. Something that Alice might be able to understand. Imagine then, mighty Alice, that you do proper work; dig coal out of the ground, say, then sell it to people to cook with. Something your mother set up before she handed the company on to you. Being equally muscular and industrious and experienced and worldly and dusty (gotcha - you’d never catch Alice dusty, but this is fantasy, remember) Alice makes a decent living at this. Suppose then that she takes a moment to decide whether or not to do a little late digging one night, to dig out another £100 worth of coal, retail value. How much is the government’s tax take on that? How much of that money would be Alice’s to spend?
Alice would get £33.87. That’s how much. Out of the £100 the old age pensioner pays her for that coal Gordon Brown would take home £66.13 through VAT, Income Tax, National Insurance, excise duty, community charge and all the other excuses he has for stealing from her. Tax might average 40% across the whole economy but because Alice is making a marginal decision at the top of the tax scale (and that’s not far off the ground) on this lump of coal it works out that Gordon gets £66.13 if all taxes are taken into account.
And what does Alice get for all the £66.13s Gordon takes? Very little indeed if she is typical of a moderately high earner. The roads she uses, her rubbish collection and a notional police presence. That and a simplified tax return of course.
So after the flush of community spirit has worn off and her back and lungs ache from years of bone crunching effort, she decides to pack in early.
That’s what’s called the enterprise economy.
My patience is runny these days.
Well Alice admits she isn’t good at tax, or even at sums, because when she wanted to pay a nanny she worked out Nanny took home to the nursery 3p for every pound Alice had to earn to pay for her.
Now she knows she’s not good at sums because that can’t be right, can it? And of course it isn’t. But it got me thinking. How much does Mean Gordon take from us? The simplest measure is the Tax Take as a percentage of National Income. This is usually quoted at about 37% currently, rising to over 40% shortly now that we’ve re-elected the little ray of sunshine to No 11. But this doesn’t really tell the important story. The story of motivation.
Little Alice, remember, isn’t only pretty, she also writes quite prettily (despite having no idea what she’s talking about, or perhaps because of it, I can’t say), and nowadays these attributes mean she makes a very good income thank you.
So I got thinking about an illustration. Something that Alice might be able to understand. Imagine then, mighty Alice, that you do proper work; dig coal out of the ground, say, then sell it to people to cook with. Something your mother set up before she handed the company on to you. Being equally muscular and industrious and experienced and worldly and dusty (gotcha - you’d never catch Alice dusty, but this is fantasy, remember) Alice makes a decent living at this. Suppose then that she takes a moment to decide whether or not to do a little late digging one night, to dig out another £100 worth of coal, retail value. How much is the government’s tax take on that? How much of that money would be Alice’s to spend?
Alice would get £33.87. That’s how much. Out of the £100 the old age pensioner pays her for that coal Gordon Brown would take home £66.13 through VAT, Income Tax, National Insurance, excise duty, community charge and all the other excuses he has for stealing from her. Tax might average 40% across the whole economy but because Alice is making a marginal decision at the top of the tax scale (and that’s not far off the ground) on this lump of coal it works out that Gordon gets £66.13 if all taxes are taken into account.
And what does Alice get for all the £66.13s Gordon takes? Very little indeed if she is typical of a moderately high earner. The roads she uses, her rubbish collection and a notional police presence. That and a simplified tax return of course.
So after the flush of community spirit has worn off and her back and lungs ache from years of bone crunching effort, she decides to pack in early.
That’s what’s called the enterprise economy.
Wednesday, May 25, 2005
Feminist Bigots
Take a look, if you will, at Jonathan Gornall’s article on Oona King in Monday’s London Times, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,170-1620810,00.html.
We learn that Oona King (ex MP) stereotypes men at work as ‘slimy bum-pinchers’ and that she claimed in the Daily Mirror that George Galloway MP had sexually harassed her. A claim she was forced to withdraw and for which, after legal writs flew, she paid damages and legal costs and had to apologise publicly.
This is that same woman who has refused to name the MEP she claims offered her £10,000 for sex some years ago, a fact she hadn’t mentioned in the intervening 13 years. So we don’t know if this MEP was the same person she accused of being an ‘average mediocre white man who couldn’t do the job’? No question of stereotyping bigotry there, then.
On King’s last accusation JG says ‘lets not even go into the questionable nature of that ‘white man’ comment. Why not JG? Is it because, if you did, you’d never get anything published ever again by the feminist controlled media?
But if you are Sue Tibballs of the Fawcett Society you can accuse parliament of suffering from PMS – by which she means being Pale Male and Stale – in the Times letters page with nary a qualm.
ROTFL chaps, as least until the revolution.
At which point neither woman’s names should be forgotten.
We learn that Oona King (ex MP) stereotypes men at work as ‘slimy bum-pinchers’ and that she claimed in the Daily Mirror that George Galloway MP had sexually harassed her. A claim she was forced to withdraw and for which, after legal writs flew, she paid damages and legal costs and had to apologise publicly.
This is that same woman who has refused to name the MEP she claims offered her £10,000 for sex some years ago, a fact she hadn’t mentioned in the intervening 13 years. So we don’t know if this MEP was the same person she accused of being an ‘average mediocre white man who couldn’t do the job’? No question of stereotyping bigotry there, then.
On King’s last accusation JG says ‘lets not even go into the questionable nature of that ‘white man’ comment. Why not JG? Is it because, if you did, you’d never get anything published ever again by the feminist controlled media?
But if you are Sue Tibballs of the Fawcett Society you can accuse parliament of suffering from PMS – by which she means being Pale Male and Stale – in the Times letters page with nary a qualm.
ROTFL chaps, as least until the revolution.
At which point neither woman’s names should be forgotten.
Monday, May 23, 2005
Rape is....
…complicated. A simple issue wouldn’t need to be so misrepresented, would it?
Take the production, "Rape is..." for example (http://www.cambridgedocumentaryfilms.org).
30% of the film’s discussion guide is about prostitution and the sex trade.
Not ‘prostitution and rape’ but ‘prostitution and the sex trade’. So what is the link to rape you ask? Well, the guide makes only two links:
1. Vednita Carter’s “perspective” we are told “is that prostitution and rape are profoundly related. She thinks prostitution contributes to a climate in which rape is tolerated”.
2. “In Nevada, where prostitution has been legalized, the rape rates are the 4th highest in the country”.
We are offered nothing more in support of Vednita’s contention than anecdotes. She has worked with lots of prostitutes. We also gather that she was a prostitute herself once, forced into it by being driven to distant bars and given no money to get home, apparently. Would you trust someone who told you that story, and nothing else, to be a reliable source of behavioural science theory? You would? You are over 16 aren’t you? I know a really great bar we could go to, it’s only a few minutes drive from here.
But hold on, what’s going on in Nevada? That looks like evidence, doesn’t it? Well no, probably not.
For starters three other states, where prostitution is illegal, have a higher rate of rape. That needs an explanation, but gets none.
Prostitution has always been legal in Nevada, not in all counties all the time but in many counties most of the time. Now the rate of forcible rape in Nevada was very similar to that in the rest of the USA until 1970. Within 5 years it then rose to over 70% more than the USA average. While the average in the USA in 1975 was 26.3 forcible rapes per 100,000 of the population, in Nevada it had become 47.1 (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs). Since 1975 this rate has fallen 10% in Nevada to 42.7 in 2002 while overall in the USA on average it has risen by 25% to 33.0.
Nevada’s other violent crime rate rose by 67% in the 5 years between 1970 and 1975. So it isn’t hard to see that something else went on over these 5 years. Who knows what it is? But it is clear that the idea that a straightforward link between prostitution and rape is established by these two factlets, an idea the film makers appear to want us to adopt, is plainly absurd. In truth the only connection most could draw from this guide is that the film makers think they are appealing to some seriously gullible people.
Rape is… complicated, if you look at it from all sides. Simplistic workshops that misrepresent the facts will be as likely to make the problem worse than better. Rape won’t be resolved until we start being rational and objective and truthful about sex and start treating the problem with a mindset free from political correctness in order to give it the depth of objective enquiry it deserves.
Understanding a complex issue rather than simply demonising men might also mean that we find ways to reduce the impact of rape. But maybe some influential people don’t really want that to happen at all.
Take the production, "Rape is..." for example (http://www.cambridgedocumentaryfilms.org).
30% of the film’s discussion guide is about prostitution and the sex trade.
Not ‘prostitution and rape’ but ‘prostitution and the sex trade’. So what is the link to rape you ask? Well, the guide makes only two links:
1. Vednita Carter’s “perspective” we are told “is that prostitution and rape are profoundly related. She thinks prostitution contributes to a climate in which rape is tolerated”.
2. “In Nevada, where prostitution has been legalized, the rape rates are the 4th highest in the country”.
We are offered nothing more in support of Vednita’s contention than anecdotes. She has worked with lots of prostitutes. We also gather that she was a prostitute herself once, forced into it by being driven to distant bars and given no money to get home, apparently. Would you trust someone who told you that story, and nothing else, to be a reliable source of behavioural science theory? You would? You are over 16 aren’t you? I know a really great bar we could go to, it’s only a few minutes drive from here.
But hold on, what’s going on in Nevada? That looks like evidence, doesn’t it? Well no, probably not.
For starters three other states, where prostitution is illegal, have a higher rate of rape. That needs an explanation, but gets none.
Prostitution has always been legal in Nevada, not in all counties all the time but in many counties most of the time. Now the rate of forcible rape in Nevada was very similar to that in the rest of the USA until 1970. Within 5 years it then rose to over 70% more than the USA average. While the average in the USA in 1975 was 26.3 forcible rapes per 100,000 of the population, in Nevada it had become 47.1 (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs). Since 1975 this rate has fallen 10% in Nevada to 42.7 in 2002 while overall in the USA on average it has risen by 25% to 33.0.
Nevada’s other violent crime rate rose by 67% in the 5 years between 1970 and 1975. So it isn’t hard to see that something else went on over these 5 years. Who knows what it is? But it is clear that the idea that a straightforward link between prostitution and rape is established by these two factlets, an idea the film makers appear to want us to adopt, is plainly absurd. In truth the only connection most could draw from this guide is that the film makers think they are appealing to some seriously gullible people.
Rape is… complicated, if you look at it from all sides. Simplistic workshops that misrepresent the facts will be as likely to make the problem worse than better. Rape won’t be resolved until we start being rational and objective and truthful about sex and start treating the problem with a mindset free from political correctness in order to give it the depth of objective enquiry it deserves.
Understanding a complex issue rather than simply demonising men might also mean that we find ways to reduce the impact of rape. But maybe some influential people don’t really want that to happen at all.
Sunday, May 22, 2005
A chicken or an omelette?
The front of a Christian Aid pamphlet asks "Would you give Judith a chicken or an omelette?". From her picture Judith is, at most, 11 years old. We are told she lives in the Congo. If you haven't seen the pamphlet, and even if you have, think about the question for a moment. Decide your answer.
Did you come up with 'neither' or, maybe, 'what she really needs is a culture that is capable of nourishing the congolese in ways that are appropriate to their environment'? The answer isn't a chicken. In fact no-one has any no idea what the practical answer is. We have not a smidgeon of a jot of a Mus Minutoides of an inkling. To imagine that we have is to demonstrate an Argentinosaurus of a conceit. To pretend that carrying on 'doing something' is better than doing nothing when we know that it makes things worse is selfish conscience salving.
Would you give Judith a Sony Memory Stick or an Amazon voucher?
Did you come up with 'neither' or, maybe, 'what she really needs is a culture that is capable of nourishing the congolese in ways that are appropriate to their environment'? The answer isn't a chicken. In fact no-one has any no idea what the practical answer is. We have not a smidgeon of a jot of a Mus Minutoides of an inkling. To imagine that we have is to demonstrate an Argentinosaurus of a conceit. To pretend that carrying on 'doing something' is better than doing nothing when we know that it makes things worse is selfish conscience salving.
Would you give Judith a Sony Memory Stick or an Amazon voucher?
Equality?
"HALF of all girls born in Britain this year, and many of their brothers, will live to see the 22nd century." http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,2770-1621874,00.html
Where is the uproar about men's health and longevity?
Child rapist weds victim: "Fualaau was only 12 at the time. Letourneau was arrested in 1997.... a night of [rape] that “didn’t stop".... and, after six months in jail, was freed on probation..." http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-1622518,00.html
Where is the uproar about unequal treatment?
Where is the uproar about men's health and longevity?
Child rapist weds victim: "Fualaau was only 12 at the time. Letourneau was arrested in 1997.... a night of [rape] that “didn’t stop".... and, after six months in jail, was freed on probation..." http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-1622518,00.html
Where is the uproar about unequal treatment?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)