22 December 2009

Old = Bad?



It seems that anything that is not current and up to date is viewed as somehow inferior to the latest version of whatever the thing is. The consumer culture is probably responsible for this, and while being a good thing for our economy, it's a bad state of mind for the public to be in.

Cars are a fine example of this. Modern, current range cars are deemed superior to older ones simply due to their age, when in reality, there are plenty of terrible cars made today (there always have been, actually) and there are still plenty of good, old cars that far superior to some current range ones.

The same goes for clothes. I can see the attraction in fitting in with the crowd, being inconspicuous - but what if it means sticking with the current dress sense, which could make you look ridiculous? I just can't see the point in this. Stick with a fashion that you enjoy and that suits your purposes - i.e keeping you warm and keeping certain areas of you private.

I'd much rather stick to a design that I'm sure works rather than change everything I own every month in order to blend in. I'll drive a good car, regardless of its age and I'll wear clothes I like to wear, regardless of whether they are up to date or not.

Too many people just drift along with everybody else and lack the courage just to be themselves. This isn't a good thing at all. If people stuck to what they enjoyed and what they were good at, mankind may have achieved a lot more than it currently has done.

We need more pioneers, not sheep.

Certainly, in the technological spectrum, older equipment is usually inferior in its functions and practicality to newer equipment. Due to the fact that we live in the age of technology, this rule is also applied to everything. Cars, clothes, fashions - even people, to an extent.

Things used to be made to last, not to be replaced with a newer technology or newer style every month. Functionality has been replaced by style, and I can't see this changing any time soon.

This begs the question: do we still think about what we're doing and buying? I'd like to be able to say yes, but when everybody seems to automatically buy the latest thing, simply because it is new, I don't think I can.

I pride myself in the fact that my mobile phone is 4 years old, and has never been replaced since. This is for the simple reason that it still works as well as it did the day I bought it. The camera doesn't matter, because it's a phone - I have a proper camera for taking pictures.

All that matters about my phone is that it is usable for its basic function - to take and receive calls and text messages. I probably won't be replacing it any time soon, and I urge you to adopt the same attitude - after all, what happened to the common sense of replacing something when it broke?

All the shit that they're putting on phones now you simply don't need, and there is no point in paying £200 for a phone when you already have one, even if it does mean you get the latest 'app' or phone technology that you'd never actually need.

It's a waste of money.


19 December 2009

Winter Driving



You'd think that after having around 90 previous years of snow and cars in this country, people would know how to drive when it gets a bit chilly. Yet, strangely - they don't.

To give them credit, some people do prepare their cars for winter and fit winter tyres and top up oil levels etc. but the vast majority of us do nothing. Is it any wonder such chaos is caused when the roads are covered with snow and ice?

I think this is partly down to the attitude that most people have towards cars. Motoring used to be a thing of pleasure; a thing that only people who enjoyed driving would take part in. But ever since cars became the #1 method of transport in the known world, the joy has diminished and people simply see them as very small trains.

If people on the whole were more interested in driving and their own cars, I think the problem of winter driving would not be nearly as severe as it is now. Most people are hopeless drivers in the snow, who get stuck and require rescuing.

If only they had prepared their cars for the winter and knew how to drive in the snow, they would be much better off as a result.

You don't even need a 4x4 to drive safely on a snowy road. Experience and knowledge is the key. It's incredibly frustrating that the same thing happens every year: complete hopelessness in the face of extreme weather. It's a wonder that the country still runs itself when it snows.

It also makes no sense whatsoever that there is nothing in the driving test that prepares people for a time of the year that will happen - every year - when driving conditions become very challenging.

So here's what I propose: on every driving test and in one lesson, there will be a section involving snow/ice road driving. Little test roads should be built that can be artificially frozen and snowed on. It makes total sense.

As a result, if it was a section of the driving test, the whole country would be much safer in winter and hopefully people would be aware of the risks of winter driving. They might even prepare every winter for these conditions.

It's a mystery that such an obvious solution hasn't been implemented yet.


6 December 2009

The NHS


The other day while out and about, I managed to inflict a head wound upon myself. It was pretty deep and bleeding quite a lot, so after a bit of persuasion by my friends we went back into school and got it checked out by some clerks.

What followed was a series of conversations between me, my dad (over the phone) and the clerks at reception, and in the end I was sent to the unofficial sixth form common room to wait until I could be taken to the minor injuries place. I didn't particularly care at this point, I'd never made much of a fuss over injuries, but a senior staffer saw me and due to the fact that Ofsted were in that day, wanted me out of there. Yeah, it would have looked a bit bad if students were walking around with gaping head wounds, I understand.

So one of the clerks drove me to the minor injuries centre run by the NHS in the local town. We entered the waiting room, I gave the receptionist my details (strangely my religion was asked, to which I replied 'atheist' which was received very strangely: everyone seemed very shocked) and we sat down. I was promised that we would be moved to the top of the waiting list, but in the end I had to wait two and a half hours to be patched up. Yeah, with a bleeding head. So much for being a priority.

So you'd expect me to be critical of the NHS after this little episode. But I'm not. I think it's great that medical treatment is free in this country. Now, it's a bit different for me because a lot of people would have made a lot more fuss if they were in my situation with a bleeding head wound, but to me it is just a trivial matter.

All in all, I'd stupidly injured myself and been fixed for free. That's all that counts really, as long as the competence of the NHS staff doesn't interfere with the way the wound heals, and it didn't, so there is no reason to complain. Yes, the NHS needs to improve, it is certainly not without its faults, but I much prefer this system to one where I would have to pay every time I injured myself.

When you examine the situation in this country, the distribution of tax money, it really makes you wonder. We have millions of pounds being given to people who are simply too lazy to work or are exploiting the benefits system by becoming pregnant at an early age. This money would be better spent if it was directed to the National Health Service, it's as simple as that. They are under-staffed and underpaid, and they simply need more money which the government is busy handing out to those who simply do not need it.

Overall though, the NHS is doing fine. Exceptionally well for a free organisation. So my message is this; do not be so quick to criticise an institution that is neglected by the government and is free of charge to the masses; they're doing a bloody good job.