NONSENSE AND NOSTALGIA

This was written yesterday but not posted till today.  

The United States Senate is going through the charade of questioning prospective secretaries of the various government departments put forward by Donald Trump. The choices he has made have been all over the news and have attracted a variety of opinion, most of which has pointed out the ineptitude of the various choices either through their disturbing right wing rhetoric, ineptitude or lack of relevant experience. All have a singular devotion to Mr Trump despite their claims of political impartiality and adherence to the constitution and the rule of law. I say charade because the current make-up of the Senate contains a majority of Republican Party representatives, most of whom are equally devoted to Mr Trump.

 

The scrutiny and style of questions put to the various candidates is nothing other than congratulations and leading questions extoling their supposed virtues. Indeed the Chairman of the Committee invariably introduces into ‘evidence’, without exceptions, positive letters of recommendation and backing for the respective candidates.  There are apparently no letters making any adverse comment. Equally no witnesses in opposition appear to come before the committee. So, despite the obvious caveats normally associated with Senate enquiries, the various candidates will be approved and Trump will have all his sycophants sitting at his table licking and brownnosing galore. The manner in which the Republican party cosies up to these so called secretaries of defence and attorneys general is sickening. The evasive answers and non-answers to question from opposition senators is breath-taking as is the scorn and arrogance displayed in the candidates replies. Never, in the history of the United States, have presidential choices for heads of cabinet posts been so low and lacking in character. It is a gathering of gangsters who have no regard for anyone but themselves in the shadow of their godfather.

 

That the United States Government should stoop so low as to choosing officials no better than mobsters and racketeers is the undoing of America. The convicted felon will have his way and there appears to be nothing that can be done about it. I would not be surprised in the long run if the United States applies to become a member of the Russian Federation under Putin, given Mr Trumps admiration of the man. The way Putin rang the changes at their last meeting through cajoling flattery was masterful, and will no doubt continue in the same vein.

 

Enough of that. Moving on to more fun things. Many things are getting far more expensive throughout the world. I can recall that in 1960 a cup of coffee at Ships Coffee Shop in Westwood cost 10 cents with just about unlimited refills. In addition there was of small jug of single cream on the table (along with other condiments including maple syrup and raspberry jam). Coffee went up to 20 cents in the 70’s. Herewith part of a sample menu:

There was a film called Diner released in 1982 written and directed by Barry Levinson about a group of friends in 1959 who frequent a Diner in Baltimore called Fell’s Point Diner. The depiction in the film is very much like my own time at UCLA in Westwood and meeting up with friends in Ships.  The film starred Steve Guttenberg, Daniel Stern, Mickey Rourke, Kevin Bacon, Timothy Daly and Ellen Barkin. They were all in their when the film was made. It’s worth a look if only for nostalgia. The film starts two minutes in to video:

As to the Ships menu, it should be noted that a top sirloin steak served with a baked potato sour cream and chives between 5pm and 9pm seems like a good deal at $2.85, but it would be the equivalent of $23.18 today, so not so very great since one can get a 6oz sirloin steak and eggs at Norms Restaurant in Inglewood, California for $17.99. 

So much for nostalgia. One forgets the salaries on offer. In Billy Wilder's film, The Apartment (released in 1960) in the opening monologue, Jack Lemon's character, C.C. Baxter, mentions that he receives take home pay of $94.70 per week, which today is the equivalent of $1,009.72 per week or £827.64. That is roughly equivalent to a yearly salary of £56,000.00 a year before tax. Not too shabby for a young single man in his 30's. He also paid less than one week's salary for one month's rent or about $200 a week (£163) for an apartment in New York City. He claims to live in the West 60's just half a block from Central Park. At today's rents he would have to pay at least  5 times that much for a one bedroom apartment in the same location. So there were things that were better value for money, like  rent generally, which would mean that a person on £56K per annum could not afford to live in Manhattan or indeed central London unless they shared. 

 

Perhaps sharing is altogether better for social interaction? Hard to say. A couple with a double income might manage it. It would appear that the current economic climate favours the couple, both working with fairly decent incomes. The single person clearly has more difficulty. This is even reflected in package holiday costs were there is usually a single person supplement. One has to say however, that the hours and work intensity required to earn those salaries means that there is less time to associate socially other than an after work drink with co-workers. Not necessarily the ideal way to pair up if one is seeking to have a partner. Hence the internet match making sites offering a variety of like-minded people to put themselves up to social interaction across the web. There have been successes but there have also been rather serious problems arising.

 

Economics and communications have clearly changed society in quite dramatic ways. It’s tough out there and it seems to be getting tougher. So back to nostalgia.