Category Archives: Mysteries

Mysteries of the world, or things I don’t understand and never will

Foot shooting

Grumpy’s father had a litany of expressions with which he would precede some view of life or the world. One favourite started “what I don’t understand, and never will”… This expression came to mind recently when Grumpy was contemplating the tendency of government ministers to make pronouncements that were self-evidently hostages to (inevitable) fortune. The part that Grumpy doesn’t understand and never will is that any possible benefit from the proclamation was totally opaque; there was no rational reason to having taken the risk.

Grumpy got more than halfway through his rather mundane career before he learned the value of ‘shutting up’ in a business environment. People generally don’t like silence and they feel a strong compulsion to fill it by saying – well, something.

This is greatly amplified in politicians. Firstly, they tend to like to be the one talking and not listening (see Trump here as a perfect example); messages need to be got across. Secondly, they try to generate ‘soundbite’ or two, simple enough for even readers of the Daily Mail. Thirdly, they fear (quite wrongly) minimalism in communication will be equated with a vacancy of ideas by the electorate and press.

The issue is that normally they fall in to the trap of seeking to quantify the unquantifiable; of using numbers in their statements about outcomes when there is in fact not only huge uncertainty about same, but where they are mostly outwith their control.

David Cameron once made the rash statement that immigration would be limited to the “tens of thousands”. No doubt he had in his mind that 99,000 was within that limit and he had some leeway (wrong), but the opposition was no doubt sharpening their knives for anything remotely approaching that (‘tens’ is not ‘almost 100’). Although at least it should have been technically in his control, two factors did for him, namely the EU and lack of competent management.

However, Matt Hancock had absolutely no good reason for forecasting how many COVID tests would be done by what date ,or how many gowns would be delivered by when. There was a perfectly good and defensible “Sir Humphrey” statement that “an adequate number of tests / gowns would be available to prevent any shortages”. Instead he kept on quantifying that over which he had no control and each iteration of unknowable numbers was yet another target on his chest

Worse, it hard to imagine what drove Boris to declare all would be normal by Christmas. It’s a pure case wanting to hear himself say something positive, filling a silent gap, and looking for a soundbite.

The outcome is pretty near inevitable. It is extremely likely that things will not only not be back to normal at Christmas, they may be worse than the current state by virtue of winter flu. He must surely realise that this adds up to bad headlines and a ‘PM’s Question Time’ thrashing.

Why do they do it ? The impulse to shoot oneself in the foot like this is something that Grumpy doesn’t understand and never will.

High UK death rates

Coronavirus has (as at 12.04.20) infected some 1,784,300 people round the world, and killed some 108,900 of them; a mortality rate of about 6%. What requires some explanation is why mortality rates have been so much higher in the UK than in other countries.

In Portugal, Canada, Austria, Germany, and South Korea, for example, rates are significantly lower. A German contracting coronavirus has a 1 in 45 chance of dying, whereas in the UK it is more than 1 in 8 – more than 5 times the rate in Germany (see footnote for numbers)

These are pretty terrifying odds, and even more so when the distribution of mortality with age is factored in. The above are averages for all ages; so for those of Grumpy’s age, the statistics are far worse, and pushed it to the level more often associated with more ostensibly malign infections.

This disparity may be due to differences in levels of preparedness, better funded and equipped health facilities in the countries with lower rates, age distribution of the population, or the timing and nature of the political decisions taken as the scale of the pandemic unfolded.

Postmortems don’t help the corpse, and “if only we had …” conclusions are pointless. What is essential is that the reason for the disparities are determined, and (to use the hackneyed expression so beloved of politicians before they do precisely nothing) “lessons learned”. This time, however, the economic rubble left in the broken businesses of voters might just be the catalyst for a more meaningful review of ‘rare event’ planning.

CountryCasesDeaths% deaths
Italy152,27119,46812.79
UK78,9919,87512.50
Belgium28,0183,34611.94
Netherlands24,4132,64310.83
Spain161,85216,48010.18
Sweden10,1518878.74
Switzerland25,1071,0364.13
USA525,55920,3043.86
Ireland8,9283203.58
Portugal15,9874702.94
Canada23,1956482.79
Austria13,7993372.44
Germany123,8782,7362.21
S Korea10,4802112.01
Israel10,7431010.94
World17843311089626.10

Paperless fallacies

Virtually every organisation that is required to provide a consumer with a statement of events (bank, credit card provider, utilities, etc.) have persuaded / coerced customers into going ‘paperless’. Rather than having to routinely open multiple envelopes and then file the documents somewhere, the beguiling argument is that they can all be left in the cloud, ready for access anywhere and anytime on mobile devices or a desktop.

The consumer is easily seduced by this myth, but there is a flaw in the inherent assumptions. If, for whatever reason, the account is terminated (changing a credit card for example) , then access to such documents is summarily denied.

In some cases, this may not be material, but in others it may well be more serious. For example, if the documents were required for tax returns, the inability to satisfy the authorities without evidence may be problematic (and expensive), even if the data could be replicated. The more stressing case is following a death when access to key data are denied pending probate.

There is only one logical approach to deal with this situation. This is that each month, or whenever, the relevant documents have to be downloaded and then filed (albeit electronically) in some structure locally. This rather defeats the purported ‘paperless’ benefits. Rather than a bill or statement arriving without an action on the part of the recipient, paperless documents require to be proactively managed by some diary mechanism to prompt download. It is an active, rather than passive, process.

Grumpy’s take on this is simple. The alternative is to opt out of paperless documents, and require the organisation to post them. When they arrive, they can be slipped into some tray or box waiting some possible future need to refer to them. This is entirely in accord with Grumpy’s management philosophy, which is “never do today that which can be delayed until a later date, because it may not need to be done at all.”

If this is less hassle than the electronic download process (which it is), why go paperless?

There is also the satisfaction that the duplicity of British Gas (or whoever) selling a cost saving move for them as a benefit for the consumer can be simply negated.

WAP mysteries

Wet ass pussy ….

Grumpy has a look at the Daily Mail in the morning’s whilst eating his muesli, largely to cheer himself up for the coming day with their amusing reporting.

The news is interleaved with articles on female ‘celebs’ of the E list variety, who ‘flaunt’, ‘put on display’ and ‘showcase’ their ‘ample assets’ (normally which their clothing ‘struggles to contain’), ‘peachy posteriors’, ‘taught abs’, ‘underboobs’ (what?) or ‘baby bumps’. Grumpy finds it faintly amusing that when the pictures include a ‘topless’ shot, it is anything but; every possible trace of a nipple in all the acres of flesh – clearly intended to titillate – is carefully obscured. It made Grumpy wonder why the nipple had made the transition from a Sun Page 3 staple to gross pornogrpahy,

Anyway, Grumpy was surprised to read that a woman named Megan Thee Stallion has just been named by Time Magazine as one the top 100 most influential people in the world. She is a rapper and writer; lyrics range over to taking “some five star dick” to her latest masterpiece which is a celebration the apparently extreme lubrication of her vagina (“get a bucket and mop, that’s some wet ass pussy” she implores the “nigga” indulging in intimacy with her). Why a hint of nipple is considered somehow more offensive than a blow by blow (pun intended) description of the mechanics of this woman’s coital activities is opaque. Grumpy finds it illustrating and indicative of the times that she gets ranked in this way amongst all the astounding influencers on planet Earth.

There is also an interesting comparison between the US and the UK in attitudes to song content here. As described elsewhere in this blog, a memorial stone to the alleged dog of Dam Buster commander Guy Gibson, called (as a matter of historical record) “Nigger” was changed because it was deemed offensive. Yet in the US this word dominates award winning ‘songs’ by females to describe the male protagonists in their sexploits. Note that any 12 year old can buy a CD or download this material.

In comparison,it would appear that the mere glimpse of a bit of areola – or heaven forbid, a nipple – needs to be blacked out if shown in other than back-street magazines. Meanwhile in Europe, bare breasts were de rigueur even in family newspapers a few decades ago and sunbathing topless is today not seen as a pornographic activity.

This curious juxtaposition of attitudes to matters sexual is shown throughout both countries however. In the UK, the aforementioned Daily Mail rejoices in photographing drunken women at horse racing showing their knickers for pure titillation of male observers, whilst MP Stella Creasy’s Upskirting Bill would potentially earn the photographer 2 years in jail for taking the snap.

It’s a mystery.

Twisted logic

Another Feminist has entered the battle – one assumes from a self publicity angle rather than ideological purposes – to make a London men’s club – the Garrick – accept women as members. This is Oxford PPE graduate Emily Bendel who has formed a lingerie company, and is being hailed as an example of the thrusting (is that he right word?) confidence of young female entrepreneurs. [Grumpy cannot help but comment that on-line lingerie merchandising is not exactly innovative as a business concept.]

In spite of her Oxford education and presumably lots of upper echelon contacts, Emily had no idea that men only clubs existed, or so she told the Daily Mail. Her attack on the Garrick seems to be driven by a philosophical feminist motive rather than any wish to actually join the Club. Her feminist credentials are underlined by her approach that seductive lingerie is not bought by women to be seductive, but for their own self-actualisation and the pleasure of (presumably) looking in themselves in the mirror. The ‘Social Responsibility’ page on the website states that ‘The Future is Female. ‘

She is seemingly one of the “my peep hole bras and crotchless panties have nothing to do with sex or titillating men” feminists. Oddly, she started off selling vibrators for Anne Summers, although this maybe underlines the ‘self love’ take on her frillies. However, her philosophy (in her own words) for the company is “to redefine sensuality. We design for spirited women that buy lingerie to please themselves and we have pioneered the ‘underwear as outerwear’ trend”. In common with most corporate mission statements this is essentially syntax without semantics, and the juxtaposition of the words doesn’t actually convey any understandable meaning about the company goals.

{Frankly, Grumpy wasn’t aware that the current trend was for him to put his M+S underwear on the outside of his jeans, but he probably moves in the wrong circles.]

However, to the point Grumpy wishes to make. Emily’s ignorance of men only clubs presumably extends to a lack of knowledge of a fast growing sector in London – women only clubs, of which an abundance can be found by a simple Google search. Their existence underlines the conundrum feminists like Emily today have to face; how to harass the gander with needing to having to do the same for the goose.

Normally the answer is to simply take the view that geese and gander don’t have to follow the same rules. Gender equality is a weapon against men but women (delicate flowers that they are) are excused. It’s the Stella Creasy MP school of logic where men will be jailed for misogyny but women are free to practise misandry at will. Similarly, check out Durham University’s student president – presumably elected to represent all students – who publicly declared that she was a ‘misandrist till I die’ as an example of this asymmetric breed.

Nevertheless, Grumpy wishes good luck to Ms Bendell with her lawsuit, but at the same time, for the sake of rationality, equality and one for the boys, he hopes the Judge consigns it to the waste bin of other ‘stunt’ actions.

More information :

The Bluebella website has the normal corporate dung about climate change on its “Social Responsibility” page, and the purely tokenist actions taken to salve their consciences for being in one the the major sectors contributing to warming, ecological damage and third world poverty – see link

See Grumpy’s justification for the ‘tokenist’ comment above here

.. and on Stella Creasy here

On the asymmetry of of female reactions to male ‘voyeurism’ vs the actions of women to deliberately titillate see here and here

Pointless climate actions

Rarely a day goes by without reading of some new UK initiative with regard to climate change. Sadly (as pointed out in several posts here) the vast majority are pointless, and often dumb, tokenism. Worse, there often seems to be a conflation with plastic pollution, when forces here often actually conflict.

What is now many years ago, right wing conservative politicians would rant against extreme left wing (normally in London) councils about their lack of financial probity, but, as with climate issues, the targets of their invective were generally wrong. They would, for example, call out a council for employing a poet (yes, those were the days ..) as trashing ratepayers money, but the reality is that in the scope of their total expenditure it was not a material matter. It was the wrong argument.

That error is being repeated in spades on the environment, and climate policy makers and pressure groups need to get real. The UK does not generate 98.8% of global emissions. The US, China and India alone collectively generate more than 50%, so just like the poet, expending effort on saving 10% of 1.2% which are UK emissions will not stop the oceans from boiling. Unless and until the aforementioned three become wedded to significant and prompt action, activities here will remain what they are i.e. pointless tokens by self- satisfied and smug people.

To show the scope of this problem, in recent weeks, Trump has turned his attention to ‘windmills’; “the energy is unreliable and terrible” (twitter) / “the noise causes cancer ” (speech, December 2019). We can set aside his bizarre statements at rallies, however, and look to actions. The EPA has been steadily rolling back on environmental protections implemented by Obama such as restrictions on coal fired power generation (June 2019), so Trump can get support from Wyoming miners. Screw the world, get elected for term 2.

China’s emissions, of course, are significantly impacted by the Western world exporting its own emissions by importing manufactured goods from China. Also, the UK is now the biggest net importer of CO2 emissions in the G7, through imports of foreign goods.

So enough of the token, back-slapping but pointless exercises. No more talk of dates to achieve something which are patent nonsense, as they are simply don’t impact at all on the global picture. There is an English (or should it be British) trait that somehow ‘we must do our bit’. This feels comforting and self-righteous, but is an intellectually bankrupt approach – the only way to counter global warming from a UK perspective is to support the facilitation of global agreements which the big three will subscribe to… and right now that looks a long way off.

Huawei leak – the US ?

Grumpy has heard rumours that the leak from the National Security Council that the UK government was to use Chinese company Huawei within the planned 5G phone infrastructure, originated from the Americans. They of course have the whole of the parliamentary estate bugged, and when they discovered the technology for a 5G roll out might be of Chinese origin from Huawei, they were concerned and upset.

Firstly, it meant that US manufacturers would miss out, and Trump was determined that that should not happen, both to protect his business buddies, but also because it was bad optics.

More importantly however, by getting US technology implemented for 5G, it would mean that (a) they could hold the UK to ransom and (b) it would be even easier to spy on the UK government, companies and citizens.

Trump thus authorised the leak, knowing that Huawei would be binned in panic and under pressure, and some poor cabinet minister or civil servant would get the axe, because even if the powers that be knew the US bugged the National Security Council, they couldn’t possibly admit it, and therefore a scapegoat would be needed.

This is fake news. I’m puzzled as to how the Department of Media Culture and Sport will, under its announced plans, be able to detect it and effect its removal. What law might Grumpy break? For him to be guilty, it would have to be proved that it was false, which in objective terms might be difficult. They say it’s false, Grumpy asserts it’s correct, and would use the “they would say that, wouldn’t they” (to quote Mandy Rice-Davies – qv, youngsters) defence.

Chilean hamburger mystery

Grumpy was recently in Santiago, Chile, and noticing the familiar golden arches close by, decided to have a lunchtime snack. He gave his usual a order of a hamburger, medium fries and zumo de naranja, only to be met with a blank stare with regard to the first named item. Mustering up his best holiday Spanish accent, he tried “hamburguesa”, but again this was followed by blank stares.

The server asked Grumpy in broken English to describe the item. Glancing at the sign above the counter to verify it was indeed a Macdonald’s, this was attempted, but finally it was mutually agreed this was useless from the barrier of language communications and the lack of recognition of the dish by the server.

How could this be? Grumpy has ordered hamburgers in Macs from Scarborough to Shanghai, Bergen to Boston, Bangkok to Talin and a myriad of other far flung locations, and never once has the server even paused.

Returning to his lodgings, the web was duly checked, and the headline pictures show the result. On the left is what appears on the Chilean Mac web site as an apology for a hamburger, and to the right is the item served elsewhere to the world’s other 7 billion inhabitants. No filling. No wonder Grumpy’s description of ingredients other than the meat patty drew blank looks.

A mystery indeed.

Footnote: Grumpy did determine later (following a repeat of this at another branch) that they did not even sell hamburgers sans filling. What ? How can it be a Macdonald’s ?? The world is getting too confusing.