Categories
Current Affairs

The main reason why Coronavirus cases are going up in the UK

We, as the general public, are inherently selfish. If we don’t have symptoms, we don’t see the point in applying restrictions in our daily lives, be it wearing face coverings, distancing or otherwise.

This is why from May – August 2020, the percentage of people who have developed symptoms and actually self-isolated is a paltry 18%. It was 50% in April which was low, and has fallen, yes fallen, since.

This inherent selfishness of society at large means that the only way to force adherence to any large enough degree, you have to affect people’s pockets. If it doesn’t affect your pocket, nothing is going to change.

Once we get out of this pandemic, and we will get out (we have to!) as a society look at how we have promoted this selfishness culture over decades and dig deep to consider whether we want to continue this ‘me, me, me’, or a little wider, ‘my family only, screw the rest of you’ society we currently live in. Or whether we should instead pivot, re-engage the compassion in all of our hearts and work to build a society that we can all be proud of.

Categories
Current Affairs

The aftermath of the UK riots

A shameful state of affairs for London and the UK as what started off as protesting at the shooting of a local, turned into mass rioting throughout the country.

The first day of rioting seemed to have almost a just cause, though the particulars of the case are still being analysed.  It appears that Mark Duggan, a 29-year old local, was shot with a single bullet by police after the minicab he was travelling was stopped by armed officers.  The second day saw the riots spread and kids as young as 11 were smashing shops and looting.

I had largely ignored it until day 3 hit and there were growing reports everywhere that more and more teenagers were out on the streets terrorising local people, the elderly and helping themselves to gadgets and gizmos as others smashed in shops to get in.

In these economic times, I can almost see and understand why the looting happens especially by those who have the opportunity to do so, but when you hear reports of a woman being stopped in her car, dragged out by the hair before her car was torched, that is harder to swallow.  Add to that the 3 kids killed in Birmingham, 2 pensioners in hospital and countless others injured in the blitz and I can almost hear my blood boiling.

Late on day 3, I was even tempted to jump in the car and head down to Ealing to knock a few heads together.  It was the unbelievable shortage of police on the streets that led to this.  Just 1600 police I think I heard reported on the BBC.  And that was to protect Croydon, Tottenham, Clapham and Ealing as well as other areas.

On top of all that, most of the cabinet was on holiday as was the Mayor of London.  Fair enough, Parliament is in recess so take your breaks, but when riots break out on day 2, surely these ‘leaders’ should have been on their way back or at least setting up face-to-face meetings via video conferencing links – we have the tech in Government to do this right?  Why then, would David Cameron, our PM, call for a Cobra meeting at 9am on Tuesday morning (after day 3 of riots)?  Isn’t Cobra an emergency committee?  On top of that, at 6pm on day 3, the deputy PM, Nick Clegg is on LBC radio taking part in a public Q&A session somewhere in central London – couldn’t he have chaired Cobra as the deputy that same evening?

After Cobra, the PM triples the police numbers on the streets of London in anticipation of more riots.  Guess what?  London stays quiet.  I read a tweet saying this was probably because the looters are at home watching telly on their new 40-inch plasmas!  Another reason for a tamer night in London was that Londoners were out on the streets to protect their shops, businesses, homes as well as each other.  The authorities would welcome this wouldn’t they?  Nope.  Instead the Assistant Commissioner of the Met says they are hampering police efforts and labels them all as vigilantes.  Hardly helpful.  What would you have us do, Mr ‘I’m-only-in-charge-cos-my-bosses-cosied-up-to-Murdoch’?  We waited for 3 days for the Police to show up, they never did.  Insurance won’t cover these riots and I’d rather not end up visiting friends and family in hospital thanks.  I will defend my property.  I will defend my friends and family.  Period.  And against all comers.

Don’t get me wrong.  EDL marchers on the streets / boozers actively taunting looters is not helping anyone, but to put the Sikhs of Southall and the Turks who fought off looters on Day 3 in the same camp is not just wrong, but irresponsible.

The Police have done an excellent job in these tense times, but they were stretched to breaking point.  The PM is to blame for not authorising a larger Police presence early enough and hence forcing the hands of locals to defend their stuff and loved ones themselves.  That is not vigilantism, that is heroic.

Some of the more popular videos from the riots:

Brave Hackney Woman Against London Rioters

London Riots. The BBC will never replay this

London Riots: Scum steal from injured boy

Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Current Affairs

Tax avoiding rich

I’m fed up of hearing about all this nonsense about the rich being amoral by avoiding paying their appropriate amount of tax.  It stinks of jealousy and narrow mindedness that probably keeps the people making those comments where they are in economic terms.

Before anyone calls for my head, including HMRC or equivalent bodies in other parts of the world, let me be clear that I totally condemn tax evasion which is illegal.   Tax avoidance on the other hand is a perfectly legal technique to reduce the tax an individual or company are liable to pay.

There is some merit to wishing that everyone pays the same proportion of tax regardless of income levels and I also see merit in that proportion rising the more you bring in (with a reasonable upper limit of course).  However, it is hardly amoral for the rich or indeed anyone, to want to pay less using methods that are in line with the law and guidelines of the country from where that income is derived.

Not many people could claim that they actually want to pay tax, and I’m sure that a high percentage of those that do would be being less than honest with themselves.

If a rich person such as Sir Philip Green is paying less tax by living in Monaco and having his businesses in his wife’s name then good for him.  If this is ‘wrong’ then we should be shouting at the Revenue for allowing such rules to exist in the first place, not at those smart enough to be taking advantage of them.

Let me turn this thing on its head (excuse the pun which you’ll understand in a moment).  There exists a law in the UK from way back when, that putting a stamp with the Queen’s head on it upside down is counted as treason* and as such, punishable by the full force of the law.  This is an actual active law in the United Kingdom.  Would any sane, rational and reasonable person also insist that anyone caught doing this should be sentenced to life imprisonment?

*I know there is some contention as to whether this law is actually real or not. But for the purposes of that paragraph, it doesn’t really matter.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Current Affairs

Bloody unions

Why the hell are unions allowed to exist in the UK today?  To be fair today’s teacher’s strike is something I know nothing about – I haven’t really kept upto date with it but the tube unions and railway people striking over their disapproval with a lesser percentage salary increase then they think they deserve.

That’s utter nonsense.  Its not about them deserving anything.  Its about the state of the economy and management taking a tough decision.  In fact, management should be able to decide (within reason) about pay packets, working conditions (within the remits of the law), other benefits using their own judgement and not be held to ransom by some media-obsessed yobo who determines his own self-importance and seems to be bullying his members into agreeing with him.

The only benefit for unions that I can see is to effectively stop ruthless employers taking advantage of their staff and treating them unfairly.  The law exists for any unlawful acts, and the freedom of the press should regulate the unfairness.  I say “should” as I do accept that this may not always happen but equally the current situation is unsustainable and deeply imbalanced on the other side.  In the last paragraph I bracketed the words “within reason” and it is these words in themselves that are the issue.  Unions will always insist that if left to their own devices and without the protection afforded to staff by union membership, management would abuse their power and unfairly harm staff interests.  This may have some truth to it, but the current power unions seem to wield is not right, fair or justified.

It has to change.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Current Affairs

Defending Your Home Should be a Human Right

This bloody nonsense in the British legal system that leaves it to lawyers and judges to decide whether you have used “reasonable force” to fend off burglars who have entered your home illegally really gets my blood boiling.

Ever since the Tony Martin case in 1999, this debate has raged on but hardly any measurable change has come into force despite overwhelming public support for clarity, sanity and fairness.  And some people say the UK is democratic?  This topic is one area of life where totalitarian regimes probably get it right.  If someone enters your home with an intention to cause harm to you, your family or even your property, then you have every right to defend yourself using whatever force you decide.

In my book, any invading burglar has given up any claim to the relevant sections of their human rights by abusing my family and my human rights to privacy and feeling safe in our own home.  Any civilised law that puts the rights of an invading party over the rights of the defending party is ridiculous and as citizens, we should oppose this interpretation of our law completely and without equivocation.

Hearing on the radio this evening that a middle-aged man in London was jailed for 18 months sometime this decade because he was judged to have used disproportionate force on one of two men who had broken into his house while he was in it, annoyed the hell out of me.  Then I learned more as he spoke that made me get more and more mad:

  • The two men were armed with knives and crowbars
  • His wife gave birth to their first son 2 days prior
  • Both his wife and 2-year old baby were at home
  • The man used no weapons in defending his home despite being slashed by one of the knife-wielding burglars during a struggle

This is 2011.  This is Britain.  This is a country that claims moral superiority in the world for its highly regarded domestic laws and civil communities.  Then how can such a ridiculous verdict be given here?  One of the armed men was put in a wheelchair for life by this new dad – that was the primary reason behind the verdict given to imprison him.  I say the burglar got away lightly.  This dad missed the first one and a half years of his son’s life, wasn’t able to hold him, play with him – because two idiots decided to help themselves to his property, and putting his family in potential harms way at the same time.

There is no no situation where you should be considering the safety of your attackers ahead of the safety of your family.   I hope Cameron’s latest attempts to bring this issue back to the forefront of political and public debate ensures that common sense and common decency prevails.

Enhanced by Zemanta