Saturday, May 12, 2012
He asked the mathematician, "What exactly is two plus two equal to?".
"Four", said the mathematician, without hesitation.
"Are you sure?", he said.
"Absolutely", said the mathematician.
"All the time?", asked the man.
"All the time", reassured the mathematician.
The man went away feeling happy with the answer he had heard.
However, as the days passed he began to think more deeply about the mathematician's answer and maybe it would be a good idea to get a second opinion, just to be sure.
He knew accountants dealt with numbers so surely an accountant would know the answer to his question so he went down the high street until he spotted an accountant's office.
He asked the accountant, "What exactly is two plus two equal to?".
"Well, round about four", said the accountant.
"Are you sure?", he said.
"Well, more or less", said the accountant, "but anything between three point six and four point four is near enough".
"All the time?", asked the man.
"Well, sometimes it might be a bit less or more than that but most of the time between three point six and four point four".
This was not the answer he had hoped for, which troubled him a little. After pondering over it he thought it might be good idea to see a lawyer.
He asked the lawyer, "What exactly is two plus two equal to?".
The lawyer sat up and looked around the room. He walked quietly to the door, opened it sharply and then looked out down the corridor. After he closed and turned the key in the door he stepped over to the window and pulled the curtains closed. Then he returned to his chair, put his hands together, smiled and asked, "What exactly would you like it to equal?".
Monday, April 30, 2012
half-trained half-wits, otherwise known as security staff, guarding the place. How much has been spent, sorry, invested in keeping the Olympics safe will no doubt emerge in time when we have to start paying the bill, but the private security companies, whose pockets the money has been invested in, are all smiling.
Not to be outdone by the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games we are now going in for super-duper security to fend off these pesky terrorists, murderers, rapists, kidnappers, thieves, protesters and other ne’er-do-wells. If you cast your mind back a few years you may recall the measures the Chinese government was taking to ensure its event was kept safe – surface to air missiles, Peoples Navy patrolling the seas and more soldiers deployed than America had sent to Iraq – much of which was duly ridiculed and laughed at. Of course, nothing like that could possibly happen here in the liberal west where we have democracy, freedom and no big brother government keeping us in constant state of fear of any invisible enemy.
Just exactly how many suicide bombers, gun men or nail bomb throwers can be shot down with an HVM system I really don’t know but aren’t these weapons for use against jet airfcraft – and how many gangsters/terrorists/thugs own warplanes?
However, on the advice of an ‘expert’ [who I guess must now be laughing his socks off at our gullibility] the British Army are now in the process of mounting surface to air missile batteries around the Olympic park. Personally I would have thought the worst and most likely threat would be from hooligans and drunken yobboes but maybe I’m just out of touch with reality.
Cross-posted in wordpress Mad dogs and Englishmen
Monday, August 11, 2008
If you think fairy stories are just harmlessly entertaining tales which are ideal for teaching children good wholesome moral values take a look at this posting on the mental floss website. Here are the summaries of a few medieval fairy tales with their original plots and endings. Some are quite well-known in their modern format, such as 'Cinderella' and 'Snow White', and others are less well known, but what they all have in common is that these are the original stories which abound with murder, treachery, incest, cannibalism, torture and, this is bad news for those who like a neat and tidy ending, there are very few 'and they all lived happily ever after' conclusions.
Click here and enjoy, but don't read them to your kids.
Monday, April 21, 2008
What the author is saying, in effect, is that it is more important to preserve Prime Minister Gordon Brown's reputation, save face and avoid a climb-down than it is to look after some of the poorest people of our country. Thank you, Ms Ashley.
Brown must have done one of two things when he frigged his 2007 budget, either he was fully aware of what he was doing, in which case, contrary to what he has been telling us, he is a callous, calculating liar who cares nothing for those at the bottom of the social heap, or he made a mistake, in which case, contrary to what the spin merchants have tried to tell us, he is an inept and bungling halfwit, there is no plausible third explanation. Either way it is a lose-lose outcome for him. But his sins don't stop there. First of all he denied that there were any losers as a result of his budget saying that everyone was compensated in some way by other measures of the package, when that wouldn't wash he said that the problem was exaggerated. He has now reached a point, along with his Darling mouthpiece, at which he admits that something may be wrong but insists it is too late to do anything about it. I suspect, will now resort to some heavy-handed bullying, behind conveniently closed doors, to 'persuade' each of the dissenters to quieten down.
If the motion put forward by Frank Field wins this could be the end of Prime Minister Gordon Brown, he has tied himself too closely with this matter to escape, and if that happens, so be it. If this causes problems for the government, tough - that's life.
Right now 5.4. million people are going to be worse off for the next year unless something is done about it soon. Promises, such as we have heard from Alistair Darling, of looking into the matter at some unspecified future date, and maybe taking undefined action in future budgets is not good enough. Waiting a year for something that might, or might not happen, simply to save face for someone else, no matter who it is, is morally unjust and not acceptable.