Roland Dürre
Monday June 27th, 2011

E-Mail 'What To Write?' To A Friend

Email a copy of 'What To Write?' to a friend

* Required Field

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

E-Mail Image Verification

Loading ... Loading ...

1 Kommentar zu “What To Write?”

  1. Chris Wood (Sunday July 3rd, 2011)

    I find enough to write about nonsense in papers. I am not talking about Bild, which is not worth wasting my time on. One still finds enough in SZ. This is my favourite paper, even if it reports too little cricket and bridge. Of course there is enough nonsense on TV and radio too, but that is too ephemeral to encourage written response.

    My first example is the taxation proposal of a certain ex constitutional judge. What an idiot! He speaks and writes about a flat 25% tax on everything. This rightly disqualifies his idea. When one listens or reads further, one learns that he does not really mean it. He wants some income to be tax free, and then some to be taxed only partly. Thus, the total taxation is 0% for low incomes and approaches 25% asymptotically for high incomes.
    Similarly he agrees with higher taxation for damaging activities, that tend e.g. to ruin the climate, or to kill innocents on roads (alcohol). He mentions smoking that increases medical costs, apparently not realising how much it saves in pension payments. Any poor person paying no taxes will read no further after seeing the initial “25%” statement. If our amateur politician is so bad at selling his idea, it casts (fully justified) doubts on his proposals.

    I skip over a piece about the Kundus whitewash. It says what it needs to.

    Then comes a piece about Strauss-Kahn. This is Ok until the last sentence, which refers to “the bad old days, when in case of doubt, the man was believed”. What has improved? Have we abandoned the principle of “in dubio pro reo”? Do we now toss a coin to decide whom to believe? No we still try to find grounds to believe one or the other, and then give the accused the benefit of remaining doubt.

    Getting down to more important matters, I found an interesting article about the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club in Wimbledon. It seems that when tennis started there, the first tennis champion predicted that tennis would not become popular. (Was it the same when the Austria Wien cricket and football club started playing football)? He saw cricket as the sport of the future.
    The writer then remarks: “at least cricket in contrast to croquet is still played”. “Still played” is an understatement. Cricket is enormously popular, particularly in India and Pakistan. It is also played in Afghanistan, Holland, Zimbabwe and even Germany. Like football it has profited greatly from TV, where zooming enables viewers to see how the ball swerves in the air and spins off the pitch. See
    But mainly I want to point out that croquet is still played, even (increasingly) in Germany. I am not just referring to the croquet played by my family in the garden when we lived in Solln. See
    My brother Philip and I played at university. He was better than I at both cricket and croquet. Now we have given up cricket, but Philip still plays croquet well in Kenilworth.

Kommentar verfassen