character building TV viewing

brown high rise building

High-rise buildings need the best materials to stay safe. Photo by Aleksandar Pasaric on Pexels.com

Last night’s Endeavour on ITV was very enjoyable. It dealt with the danger of police and council official corruption and showed the dangers police officers face each day fighting corruption.

A whole tower block collapsed because corrupt council officials allowed a builder to use inferiod concrete.

The attempts to bribe police to overlook it went to an extreme length and ended in people getting shot.

I just love a police officer who fights corruption.

The later ‘Law and Order UK’ again dealt with the difficulty of prosecuting a drug smuggling drug dealer and get the evidence needed. A man made a girl believe that he loved her and made her swallow 70 condoms filled with drugs, which killed her when one of them burst.

There was however no direct hard evidence to link the drug dealer to the mule.

But then CPS was able to prosecute him for tax fraud as he laundered the money through the accounts of his dead wife and didn’t pay tax on millions of pounds of income. That only got him a 2 year sentence but it destroyed his way of life.

I have never gotten involved in anything to do with drugs and I would strongly encourage all my  readers to stay well clear of them. The film showed the danger young people are in when they get sucked in by exploiting drug dealers who make them believe that they are loved if they only carry the drugs in their stomach.

It is a nightmare for any parent to see teenage children getting involved with partners who do not have their best interest at heart but then also realising that the children themselves are no longer interest in seeking advice from the parent. It seems to be an emotional problem that is very hard to solve in today’s free society, whereby parents cannot force their growing teenagers to do more than attend compulsory school lessons.

A lot of the morals are shown in older productions, which unfortunately do not have current technology present and often include smoking and a lot of alcohol.

 

Easing the burden

67.000 claims under the Job Retention scheme were made by employers within the first 30 minutes of the website going live reports the BBC.

Whilst this government furiously refused to pay workers benefits within an acceptable time-frame, they now get what they are due under the job retention scheme.

Only difference is, they are no longer benefit recipients but employed or self-employed instead.

This whole problem hinges on the fact that we cannot control nature and that viruses creep up out of nowhere. Yet doctors made no effort whatsover to analyse or test for viruses in the last decades.

Of course, its easy to see that the government tried to drive people into jobs and what has resulted is that more people than ever sit at home doing nothing.

What the government needs is that those weirdos and missfits who currently advise it, should step down and allow for some more sensible people to take over, people who have the nation’s long-term health in more than one sense at heart.

What they need to do is to introduce tests of viability for every policy someone proposes and thinks they can get it accepted simply because they belong to the right circles.

Being employed, self-employed or part of a productive society is always better than lingering around without proper tasks, which are keeping communities safe, yet, the problem of breakdown prevention is not being addressed proprely.

We always hear excuses like

  • worldwide economic breakdown
  • worldwide pendemic.

I think that either can be prevented through proper policy control. The free market economy prevents that. The whole system of a free market economy is merely set up to keep people in employment as an easy measure to keep people in a context of socially acceptable activity.  There is little scope for systematic disease control. They assume it too expensive for a doctor to get a testing kit out once a patient complains about a viral infection.

Only when the virus becomes too bad to heal and people die, do we get little but complete shut-down.

 

TUC – neutrality

  • Thought poverty
  • Unilateralism
  • Compartmentalisation

The three ingredients to conflict and distraction.

I don’t just look at what I want to see and don’t just read what I want to hear. I get myself a selection of books from major influencers and compare their thoughts.

Presently it’s

  • Greta Thunberg
  • Donald Trump
  • Mike Berners-Lee

I must confess I only bought the Berners-Lee book because the name reminds me of Tim Berners-Lee, the founder of the Internet and I thought, that everybody with the name of Berners-Lee must know what they are talking about.

Greta, a girl with Aspergers, she is a definite proof of thought poverty and unilateralism and so is Donald Trump. Though because Donald Trump is on the powerful side of life, what he says is good and what Greta says is dangerous.

The clash of ideologies here is not much different from all other clashes in the history of man. For example when Britain invaded the colonies and all those invading repressed the natives. Though now we know that the natives had and still have important knowledge and methology. Probably more knowledge in some stuff than our newly taught engieners and scientists have.

That brings me to compartmentalisation. Nowadays everybody has to specialise fairly early on in life. So a guy like Boris Johnson wouldn’t understand what climate change is all about. He is just a happy go lucky chap who wants to make things happening and with a good sense of humour in a smiling way.

Donald Trump – I am still not through the first book of his – has only profit margins at heart. Very dangerously though, he wants to separate the Social Security budget from the rest of the financial world. He hardly ever talks about standard of living and security of housing, he talks about saving and interest rates.

It’s clear that if you are in power, whatever you say is good. From your point of view, you are the money maker, the law maker and the standard bearer of all things great and small.

Of course radicalisaton of strategy only works for those in power. Those against become criminals in any event.

Now comes Mike Berners-Lee as the go-between Great Thunberg and Donald Trump, the man who also pleases Boris Johnson’s desire to widen the British Empire and international trade relations of Britain with the rest of the world. Mike simply declares that the amount of carbon produced by transport is nothing compared with natural carbons produced by animals and rice production or fermentation for example.

There are now so many statistics available on earth warming and what percentage of what produces most dangerous carbons, that the mind literally boggles.

But if energy production produces 70% of damaging carbons then it doesn’t really matter if that is through transport or animal farming or fermentation. It is just including everything that uses energy.

Unfortunately those at the top are unable to just analyse and change tac, the politicians have to please the sponsors of parties and those sponsors are the ones who run business and those are the makers of our world today.

Perhaps we need to look at another way of shifting power to those who are not dependant on any financial support from business leaders. We need neutral observers and decision makers.

Cleopatra’s needle

Disability adjusted life-year for drug use disorders

 

Again I am enraged by the new Home Office proposals to pick on the easy victims of drug addiction and present an artificial solution to a big problem. The government picks on the easy victims of the vile drug trade, the benefit recipients, who have fallen addicted to drugs, but who, in my view make the minority of drug users. I feel that it’s more likely the richer addicts that make the bulk of the drug trade and not the benefit recipients. I read this on the BBC today.  

I want to see statistics, a break down on how wealthy drug abusers are and where they live instead of having the easy option, blanket approach that seeks to punish those that are the easiest to punish, namely the benefit recipients. Incidentally I asked for a breakdown of drug-dealing crime figures to ascertain how much dealing takes place from flats as opposed to the streets, there are no such figures available.  

The drug trade is a billion pound illegal industry that is fed by those rich addicts, the wealthy users and not by those at the bottom of the heap of our society. That again shows that our government OK’s it, if you are rich enough to pay then its OK to use the drugs and only if you are not rich enough and live on state handouts, you are to be punished. That exactly acknowledges my fear that society OK’s drug use as long as you earn enough to pay for it and those high earners are in often public and prominent positions and admired by fans and the media. It stinks to the sky and in the gutter, that approach, that I think is not fit for a British government to be taken.  

It’s not only the Conservatives to are taking that easy option, its all governments regardless of political colour. Think, think again, think harder, you people at the top.  

There are increasing drug addicts coming forward who are already in employment, not to mention those celebs who are frequently shown in the media as on the drug trail. As a society we have to stick together and condemn all types of drug user and not just those who are on state handouts.  

In my view this is the proof how corrupt British society these days has become, you can do wrong as long as you can pay for it but those who live on the state have to obey to the law, when it is clear, in my view, that the majority of drugs come into this country because the rich addicts can pay for it and not because a few benefit recipients use drugs, because for those few, the trade would not exist.

Blog Stats

  • 53,838 hits