Southeastern rail replacement service: Sunday July 24th, 2011

Sidcup to Lewisham, railway  replacement service (yet again due to engineering work, clearly 3 years hasn’t been sufficient…). Southeastern rail have been granted the privilege of imposing inflation-busting rail-fare increases to offset costs for railway improvements and engineering works. Of course, in most other countries, or in typical free-market economies, this would be called routine maintenance and would be part of the cost of business. In Britain, railway privatisation apparently enables market monopolisation, greed-driven impunity with railway maintenance largely subsidised by the taxpayer. Yet I digress. Following on from a bone jarring 45 minute bus journey seemingly planned to target every sleeping policeman between Sidcup and Lewisham, we finally arrived at Lewisham, just in time to watch the connecting service pull away from the station as the already delayed passengers arrived at the platform. Fantastic! Having already been delayed with a 45 minute journey contrasting with the normal 15 minute journey time, I now had the opportunity to enjoy the ambience of the Lewisham station platform for an additional 20 minutes waiting for the next service.

Perhaps I’m being a bit whiny, but really. Would it have killed Southeastern rail to make a smidgen of effort to sync the services given that passengers were already being inconvenienced? Had the train delayed departure for 1 minute, all passengers would have enjoyed a seamless transition in their ongoing journey. As a result, a journey which takes 35 minutes was extended to over 90. Hardly the end of the world, but really! Thanks for nothing Southeastern.

School uniforms and selective denial

When Obama acted to revolutionise the American healthcare system, the British public were quick to recognise the benefits of the NHS; the national healthcare system. In the UK at least, the British public are fortunate to have a nationalised healthcare system that ensures healthcare remains a right rather than a privilege. At least for now although if Cameron gets his way, the NHS will rapidly be privatised making healthcare a privilege not a right, yet I digress. My focus for this post is on school uniforms in British schools. So while the British were quick to acknowledge the benefits of the British healthcare system and the faults with the US system, they remain surprisingly blind to the social apartheid imposed by school uniforms which is equally shaming, shocking and wholly indefensible. Whilst there may be valid arguments to impose uniform policies within academic environments, it would appear that few if any of these factored in the implementation of school uniform policy within the UK. After all, choice of uniform is not uniform across all schools within the country. Some uniforms, notably those which will be worn by students of state-funded schools, or let’s be honest, the poor kids, are often sold by large chain stores. As school uniforms are not the choice of clothing for children during leisure time, in essence, this strategy imposes a clothing tax onto the poor who more likely than not already face financial restriction on free income. In contrast, the selection of school uniforms chosen by other academic institutions may be available in more limited supply, with little market competition. A situation which may be acceptable for rich families, for whom cost of school uniforms is not a factor in where they deem their children will receive their education. And variation in school uniform nicely highlights class variation. Further highlighting class distinction which is merely a form of social oppression. 

However, for some, the cost of school uniforms is a deciding factor in the choice of institution selected for where their children will receive their education and the foundation for the rest of their lives. Clearly Britain has lost the ability to see the forest for the trees! The only crucial factor which should define the selection of institution for a child’s education should be the suitability of the academic on offer, never whether the parents can afford the additional burden of clothing their children in the arbitrary selection of school uniform. 

Either way, I think that school uniform policy in British schools needs a serious rethink. What is the intended effect, and is this being achieved by current policy? Absolutely not. School is for education, not enhancement of class-based subjugation.

Global impact from banking greed?

Whilst the media have been quick to focus on the lives lost in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, surprisingly little has been mentioned about the potential impact that the economic crisis will have on susceptible populations throughout the world; notably, the impact on global starvation. Around the world, many nations have been dependent upon foreign aid due to crop failure and problems with national infrastructure; problems which in many cases still reflect aftershocks from industrial revolution era colonisation. The situation in the horn of Africa is rapidly deteriorating; UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon has just asked donor nations to supply an additional $1.6 billion dollars in aid funding, but from who? So what happens when the givers no longer have money to give? How many westernised nations are now in danger of defaulting on their own debts? If entire countries are struggling to stave off a domino run of national bankruptcies then how can the required levels of international aid be maintained? And what happens if a country was to face a crisis during this time of global economic uncertainty? E.g. Somalia: a failed state according to the UN, which is now facing severe food crisis following years of drought and crop failure? The UN has failed them, the west can’t afford to help them, and millions face death by starvation.

And a large part of why only limited aid will be forthcoming is due to the greed and incompetence of global bankers and a flawed economic system. The entire stock market system is based on speculation, which is in essence, calculated gambling. So those with money play with the lives and livelihoods of those without in a game of calculated greed and wealth generation. Even more shaming is the fact that not only is the incompetence of global bankers and stock markets responsible for the economic meltdown, but now banks and financial institutions appear to have resumed the irresponsible practices and behaviours responsible for precipitating this collapse in the first place seemingly oblivious to the suffering their behaviours will cause. So while banking practices and bankers bonuses remain as inflated as ever, the cost of reparation is borne by the bulk of the population who neither benefitted from the years of plenty nor have the reserves to withstand the increased financial burden they now find themselves faced with. And in the UK at least, the public find themselves led by a weak and cowardly government intent on denial which steadfastly refuses to impose austerity measures with equanimity.

So how long until the global bubble truly collapses? If the rich western European nations are barely staving off economic default, how can unstable failed states weather the tough times, and how many lives will be lost as a result of the incompetent and pure greed based behaviour of global bankers? Far more I predict, than will be lost from global conflict. Crimes against humanity indeed; high time the bankers face accountability for their actions I say!

Windows7 starter

I feel a bit of a whiner griping about this, yet I can't quite let it go...If the French government are concerned insidious advertising by/for Facebook and Twitter, I feel much the same about the insidious Microsoft advertising of the Windows 7 desktop in the starter edition. It would appear that Microsoft has decided to offer a discounted version of Windows to netbook manufacturers. However, one option which is lost in the stripped down functionality is the option to personalise the desktop. But don't fret as they have thoughtfully selected one for you. One which enforces reverence to the Microsoft logo! So although Microsoft are already obscenely rich, they impose reverence to the Microsoft logo for the poor who purchase a basic computer. You can of course upgrade the Windows functionality, but at a price which would likely almost equal the cost of the Netbook! Somewhat suspicious that after having been fined for imposing internet explorer onto the masses, they have now decided to impose the Windows icon by default onto all purchasers of Netbooks. I have to say that it seems like a petulant ploy in response to the fine they received.
Could they not have simply selected a pleasant landscape image instead? I loved the green field of dreams; hate the Windows logo. I know I can't be the only one!