If Feminists didn't have Double Standards.....

.... they would not have standards at all.  As with all leftists. Leftists don't have principles. How can they when "there is no such thing as right and wrong"?

All they have is postures, pretend-principles that can be changed as easily as one changes one's shirt.

This is an annual observation whenever it is 'Grant'-seeking time by all the wimmin's groups. If there were no taxpayer-paid jobs for feminists they would barely find work at all.

But so much do Governments rely on the votes of women that laws are passed continually to favour wimmin at the expense of even other women who do work hard and prove themselves capable. And it is forced upon business too.

Just think for a moment about the ludicrous factoid that hold that women are paid only 77c in the $. If it were true would not business only hire 'empowered' wimmin and fire all the men? It would save them 23% of their wages bill. Talk about 'productivity gain'.

But the Government continues the lie and continues to browbeat business into hiring high-paid wimmin.  It seems the demand for Boardroom seats is increasing and businesses are capitulating.

Bucko at Orphans for Liberty came into the bar for a refreshing brew and had a lot to say about the news of Lloyds bank.

http://www.4liberty.org.uk/2014/02/08/i-am-woman-hear-me-wimper/ 

I am woman, hear me wimper!

Lloyds bank plan to bring more females into their boardrooms by ensuring at least 40% of their top 8000 positions are held by women by the year 2020. 

A massive leap for gender equality, is it not. 

Reader, it is not. 

This move simply demonstrates the farce that feminism, equal rights and equal opportunities have become.

"Our aim is to lead the way in the banking industry, as well as to become the first FTSE company to fully reflect the diversity of our customers in the management of our group." 

People from every walk of life are likely to hold accounts or have loans and mortgages through Lloyds bank. In order to reflect the diversity of their customers, they don’t intend to employ pensioners, schoolchildren, plumbers, publicans, Somalian immigrants, chavs, jobseekers and latex fetishists.  

All they intend to do is bump a few more women up to executive positions. 

Lloyds boardrooms will soon be made up largely of males who worked their way to the top, a few females who did the same and a bunch of token women who are there to fill a quota. 

Does that fill you with confidence when trusting them with your money?  

As Anna Raccoon says, the bigwigs in any boardroom are not there because they do all their work with the end of their penis.  

The gender, creed, colour etc, of an employee matters not. It’s only the ability to do the job that should see somebody employed in a particular position. 

Oh, and the desire. You may have the makings of a perfectly good solicitor, doctor or hedge fund manager, but if you don’t fancy working fifteen hour days to get there, you may as well not bother. 

Which brings me back to women. We hear a constant bleating for ‘equality’, yet equality exists already, in a full measure. Real feminists fought hard for equality and they won. There’s no more gender bias, glass ceilings or pay gaps. Equality exists here and now. 

But let’s be honest, it’s not equality that these women want, it’s a leg up. 



The Man gives the woman a leg-up. None for him of course.

They’re not asking to be treated equally in the work place.  

They don’t want their CVs to have a fair hearing or their qualifications and experience to be recognised, because that already happens. T 

hey want an easy route into a cushy job with none of the effort and dedication their male counterparts are required to show. 

That’s why we only hear bleating about women in boardrooms. How good would it be to be able to secure a high paying job in a cushy office with a secretary, based on your female status alone? Why do we never hear feminist types bleating about the lack of women in civil engineering? 

Ok, they may occasionally pine for women in the nicer spots like architectural or management, but they wouldn’t dream of kicking up a stink about the lack of female tipper truck drivers.  

They don’t care that the people operating heavy machinery like graders and earth movers are predominantly men. Jobs like these are well paid and highly sought after by the men who can do them. They’re also outdoors, often in bad weather and quite dirty. 

You can’t operate a cement mixer in high heels and a pant suit.  

Your make-up would be gone in 60 seconds, also. 

I am empowered !! I am not a fish !

Jobs are available to all. Employers are looking for ability. The reason there are so few women in boardrooms or female HGV drivers is that most women do not want to follow that kind of career path, or do but won’t put in the effort required. 

And it’s those who won’t put in the effort that cry discrimination. 

They want the job, the status and the benefits but will not recognise what must be done to get them.  

These women that get the promotions into the boardrooms of Lloyds bank based on womb alone, will not revel in how lucky they have been and do their best to do the job well.  

They will demand child friendly hours so they can do the school run.  

They will go home whenever their child bumps it’s head or has a cough and they will damn well demand a year off on maternity whenever they want another one. 

And it doesn’t stop there.  

DON'T LOOK !!!!

They won’t put in the hours their male colleagues do and they will miss large chunks of training and experience when they are away from work raising children, but as soon as they get passed over for promotion to a male colleague, there will be holy hell to pay. 

Women used to want gender equality before it existed and they made sure they got it through any means necessary. We have it now though. A woman can be whoever she wants to be and do anything she wants to do. 

The trouble is, they’re just not up to the task.  

Men have been doing what it takes to succeed since time immortal,    

usually carrying a wife and a couple of kids along the way.  

Boardrooms need ladies' bike racks.

Women can and do accomplish anything that a man can do in the same environment, when they take the trouble to work at it, but women have rarely been in the position where they need to take the trouble. 

Many women do take the trouble and those are the ones who succeed without whining about glass ceilings.  

Many more are simply too lazy to make the effort, yet in modern times they have come to believe that they should be something more in the workplace than they are, and when they fail to become that something more, they blame it on male bias and demand that something should be done. 

I DEMAND a High Powered Job !! Just LOOK at my qualifications.

That something comes in the form of equality laws and quotas.  

If a woman wants to do a high powered job but only do it between the hours of nine and five, we create a law about child friendly hours.  

If a woman wants to make it into a cushy position at the top, but lacks the skills and qualifications (and is unwilling to gain them), we make a law about gender bias and introduce quotas.  

If a woman wants to take a year out to have a child but still get paid a wage, we create a law about maternity leave. 

“You don’t think raising a child is work?” 

Frankly, no.  

I think raising a child is a lifestyle choice that you should finance on your own dime. 

Which is another area of complaint. Women get paid less than men. Across the whole of society, average wages for women are lower than those of men, yet women through choice, don’t work across the whole of society. 

Women as a rule, tend to avoid the dirty, smelly, manual, outdoor jobs that pay decent wages because of the conditions.  

We want our own path... and a man to clear it for us.

Men take on these jobs and reap the financial benefits.  

Women take on the clean, indoor jobs in nice offices, with cups of tea and sandwiches for lunch, then they moan that they are not being paid as much as a bloke who comes home from work covered in shit at the end of every day.  

Pay gap! Discrimination! 

In spite of all the changes to equality of the sexes over the years, women have too great a tradition of dependence to consider dropping it.

They have made some concessions to changing times and conditions, but only the bare minimum. While some women have fought tooth and nail to be recognised on a equal footing, others want all the rights and privileges without the necessary effort. They pretend that gender bias is still an issue and it’s that issue that’s holding them back.  

And we get laws. 

And not just a few laws. These women are so incapable of playing on the level field they want, that we need a whole raft of rules and regulations to enable them to do it. 

Sexual harassment laws were originally conceived to deal with a boss groping a secretary. They’ve now become so broad as to include telling jokes.  

Are women so meek and sensitive that they need the state to enact laws to protect them from jokes?  

Even looking at a woman in the workplace can land you with a hefty compensation bill. Inappropriate looks are now considered sexual harassment. 

Women don’t like to be looked at by men. Or do they? 

Take the high heel shoe. What’s that all about? High heels are not worn for comfort, they’re worn for looks. No male would wear cripplingly uncomfortable footwear just to look good, so why do women do it if they don’t like men looking at them? 

L’Oreal is multi million pound industry, simply because women like to look good for the opposite sex. Why would a woman spend an hour applying expensive make-up, wear a revealing hemline and don a pair of three inch heels, only to complain that they are being objectified by men? 

And when the lippy, the mini and the stilettos have done their job and the woman has secured her man and married him, why can she then walk away from that marriage with almost everything the man has spent his life working for? 

I wonder if the women who fought for the right to vote would have imagined where this was going.  

I believe they fought for genuine equality. Somewhere along the way, the idea of equality has been warped. It has become the belief that women should be able to have everything they wish, but the men must get them there. 

Is that any different from the 1950's when women stayed at home to look after the kids and cook the tea? Back then, everything they had was bought and paid for by their men. What do these women have when they take their shiny new jobs in the boardroom at Lloyds bank?  

Who bought and paid for them? 

Wanna Date with me, m'dear?

Women. Equality is here. You can do what you want. You can be who you want. Nothing is stopping you. 

But you should have to work for the nice things in life, just like the men do.

I poured him a long drink.

To hear more from Bucko, pull you seat up here.....

http://www.4liberty.org.uk/author/bucko/

..... and I will pour one or two more for you as well.

A Hope for some Change.

Hope and Change. Now where did we hear that recently? It is still around but one is getting in shorter and shorter supply while the other gathers pace. Here is Oz there are glimmers of both.

The State Government in my small Island part of the Nation is up for grabs and many a sticky hand is up and groping the citizenry. The Elections this month may well oust the current socialist, green and feminist wreckers and replace them with wishy-washy 'Liberals'. (Not the American use of the word though).

Meanwhile the Federal change of Government last year is starting to see change and that does give some hope. The socialist  'identity' politics thrust is under fire. We may be seeing a small reversal happening.

Not that it will be noticeable for a while. In its first term the only thing a Conservative Government can hope to do is slow the downhill slide and douse the flames of the pants on fire.

Reversal of direction may take more time.

Much needs to be done to restore the sort of freedoms we became familiar with 20 years ago before 'Human Rights' became the slogan.

Oz built a 'Human Rights' empire which reflected the dominant lefty memes, and the most recent appointment of a Conservative to its body of socialist and feminist lackies caused an outcry.

Of course, many would say that Oz needs a Human Rights Body. They would be the 'Progressives'. And we all like progress, don't we?

But.....Sinclair Davidson, in the bar representing the Catellaxy crowd did a fine look around and reported:...

More evidence the AHRC is of the left and for the left? Just look at how the Australian Human Rights Commission is described and defended.

Here is Richard Cooke making the concession at The Monthly:
    Whatever the merits of his appointment, it’s an ace piece of industrial strength trolling by George Brandis, parachuting a culture warrior right behind enemy lines like that.

Here is Mark Fletcher at SBS:
     The Australian Human Rights Commission is an ideological organisation established specifically to meet a particular policy goal. Namely, we want to ensure that minorities have the best possible chance to have their voices included in public discussion. We want to make sure that the mainstream — either willfully or (far more commonly) out of ignorance and disinterest — don’t trample on people who can’t fight back on equal terms.

The notion that all Australians should have equal human rights and equal protections under the rule of law is simply foreign to progressive thought.

But wait, there's more to consider....
 

The Human Rights gravy train - 

A lot of highly paid women. 

The Human Rights Commission annual report report for 2013 is here.  On page 150 we get to see the staffing profile – 143 employees (of whom only 38 are male) – and the salary rank those individuals earn. More than half of the Commission are on salaries above $72,900.  

That is well above the median income for Australia.  

Over 90 per cent of the Human Rights Commission employees earn above the median wage. 

So the top nine employees are the SES Band levels and the Statutory Office holders. Between them they earn $2.3 million (basic salary) out of a total salary and wages budget of $12.3 million.  

So 6.3 per cent of the employees take out 18.65 per cent of the total salary budget. 

And they still have the nerve to talk about the 'Pay Gap'.  !!

And do not hold your breath waiting for a demand to have a 40% quota for men, either. 26% already poses an 'unsafe workplace' for high-flying wimmin.

All that Testosterone !! Heck, they may even raise 'Rights for Men' !

(That's a Tavern joke. There is NO Hope for that)

"No 77c in the $ for meeeeee"

What else can we say about the salary and conditions of this organisation?  

Employee Benefits (salary + super + on costs and the like) came to $16,384,000. The federal government pumped in $17,979,000.  

So 91 per cent of all government expenditure earmarked for the AHRC is spent on salaries and wages and super (plus odds and ends).  

And predominantly FEMALE salaries, at that, and ongoing benefits, including superannuation (which will continue for the next 50 years or more).

Another $6.9 million came from the sales of services and operating a sub-lease (Really?).  

So I reckon they have some $8.5 million to provide whatever it is that the AHRC actually does. 

I don’t want to comment on the value of that $8.5 million (except to suggest that it is probably less than $8.5 million) but even in an accounting sense we the taxpayer are paying some $16 million in salaries to get $8.5 million of human rights programs.

 
Christian Kerr was in the bar and had a LOT to say though.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/culture-wars-flare-as-brandis-rewrites-the-rights-agenda/story-e6frgd0x-1226820998181# 

Culture wars flare as Brandis rewrites the rights agenda 

ATTORNEY-General George Brandis is out to remake human rights by reshaping the human rights bureaucracy and by reminding us of the origins of the concept in the enlightenment and in classical liberal philosophy. 

He is constructing a philosophical argument to justify his political plans. They have two prongs. 

Brandis is out to lash the Left, to claim the mantle of the defenders of human rights for the Liberal Party - his own small-l liberals in particular.  

Brandis brandishes the Liberal Brand.

Last week Brandis  - above - (said that) the members of the Human Rights Commission due to retire this year may not be replaced, floating a consolidation of the current eight positions:  

the President, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner,  

the Age Discrimination Commissioner,  

the Children's Commissioner,  

the Disability Discrimination Commissioner,  

the Race Discrimination Commissioner,  

the Sex Discrimination Commissioner  

and the latest commissioner, "Freedom Commissioner" Tim Wilson. 

Then, he indicated that this could be dealt with by the Coalition's commission of audit of government. 

Now, Brandis has gone further in fleshing out his plans, telling Inquirer he is developing a package of proposals to be released in the first half of the year. 

He is coy about the detail of what they may contain - but firm and forward on the thinking behind them. 

"When was the last time in this country that there's been so much constructive debate about human rights than since the announcement of Tim Wilson," Brandis tells Inquirer. 

"As Tim Wilson said last week, human rights are the basis of classical liberalism and this government means to remind people that the human rights they enjoy are because of the values of classic liberalism, a political philosophy that has always been resisted by those on the left." 

Wilson to add a different thrust.

Brandis foreshadows that the debate will "evolve and expand", a clear hint that his package will be designed to carry public opinion. 

What is driving the moves? 

The government is smarting at this week's announcement by the commission's president, Gillian Triggs, that she will conduct an inquiry into the state of asylum-seeker children in detention. The last of these was held during the Howard years. 

Triggs sitting pretty on her Fat salary.

A clearly angry Brandis tells Inquirer that the Howard government had released children from detention and was "well on the way to solving the problem" of asylum-seekers now. 

The number of children in detention in the Howard years peaked at 842 in September 2001. It reached a high of almost 2000 last July, two months before the federal election. 

It is now estimated that there are about 1028 children in asylum detention in Australia and Nauru. 

"The only government that didn't suffer a Human Rights Commission inquiry into children in detention is the government that created the problem," he says. 

But the inquiry is only a mosquito bite. There are far deeper-reaching forces at work; forces that explain the mixture of politics and philosophy Brandis is putting forward. 

If the government chooses to condense the commission, it can immediately point to events under the Rudd and Gillard governments. 

The last full-time Human Rights Commissioner was appointed by the Howard government in 2005. After 2009, the position was occupied part-time by the then president, Catherine Branston, until the term ended. 

When Wilson formally steps into the role in 10 days' time, the position will have sat vacant since August 2012, a total of nearly 20 months. 

Brandis can argue that Labor neglected broad-based concepts of human rights in favour of identity politics - and this is the launching point for the philosophical attack on both the opposition and the commission and the philosophical justification for changes he aims to make. 

What the Lefties like.

In section 5.2 of the Human Rights Commission's December 2012 submission to the Senate legal and constitutional affairs committee's inquiry into the draft of the Gillard government's controversial - and ultimately scrapped - Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill, the commission stated: "The commission welcomes the continuation in the bill, consistent with the commission's recommendations, of the existing specialist commissioner positions.  

The commission does not oppose the removal of the Human Rights Commissioner position." 

This is the clincher for the government and critics of the commission such as the Institute of Public Affairs. 

They see this as proof the commission cares little for the rights of individuals but is a $25 million-plus a year taxpayer-funded tool for proponents of identity politics to advance left-leaning causes through allegations of discrimination. 

Triggs tells Inquirer: "The commission did not oppose the removal of the human rights commissioner position simply because it had been performed by the president of the Australian Human Rights Commission - both by my predecessor, Catherine Branson QC, and myself. In relation to these two positions, the commission had in recent years adopted the view that there was congruence in the Australian Human Rights Commission president taking on the role of human rights commissioner. 

"From a purely resourcing perspective, we had found that the president's role could effectively accommodate the functions of this position as well. Additionally, the same act of parliament, the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986, provided for the creation of both positions, whereas, at the time, the creation of the other individual commissioner positions were each either provided for or relied upon by separate individual acts." 

Triggs warns a consolidation of commissioners would stretch both time and resources. "It would mean that the commissioner who would now have to take on a second commissioner role would be stretched over two, or more, positions," she says.  

"In their current single-commissioner areas, commissioners work hard over often very long hours. To have to perform more than one commissioner role will necessarily mean they can achieve less in each area and risks one area becoming subsidiary to the other. We know these tensions exist because the commissioner positions have been consolidated in the past." 

She says her staff are already acting at "absolute capacity", adding "while we will endeavour to do as much as we possibly can with the resources we are given, less funding means less resources, which means we simply will not be able to do as much work or address as many areas as we would like." Triggs continues: "Each year the number of complaints we receive continues to increase. We fear a reduction in funding would also adversely impact on our ability to deliver this service as well as we currently do." 

In other words, 'Give us More Taxpayers Money so we can employ more women to interfere with more people'.

Hugh de Krester, executive director of the Human Rights Law Centre, warns: "Any review must be genuinely focused on strengthening the commission and must be on the basis there will be no weakening of its mandate, independence and resources." 

But a former commissioner, Sev Ozdowski, says there is room to consolidate positions. 

He points out that he held the roles of both human rights commissioner and disability discrimination commissioner during his term at the commission last decade, while his colleague Pru Goward carried out the roles of both age and sex discrimination commissioner. 

He also adds that the children's commissioner has little to do, saying most issues in that area are matters for the states. 

"You don't need to have a huge number of commissioners," he says. 

Ozdowski is concerned that anti-discrimination issues trump human rights matters at the commission and says he believes Brandis "really needs to put human rights on the national agenda". 

"What is has happened over the years is all the equity issues and inquiries into anti-discrimination issues became the sole focus of the commission and civil liberties were totally neglected," he said. 

"Partly it's a problem of the legislation. We don't have a bill of rights in Australia and if you look at the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights it's only appended to the Commission Act, but there is no implementing legislation." 

These are matters Senate deputy leader Brandis has thought long and hard about. The right moves could reshape the human rights bureaucracy and our concepts of human rights. 

Success would be a huge victory in the culture war. 

And the honours would go not just to the Liberal Party, but the conquering general himself: Brandis.

As I said, we can hope. But we need to drink deep cups of Patience too.  The Tavern has a good cellar. Full.

The Top 1%

Quite quiet in the Tavern, what with the Winter Olympics and all going on. But here it is sunny and hot all day and much of the nights so we have been counting our blessings and taking the rap.

We are in the 'Lucky Country' as Oz is oft' called (despite it originally being a sarcastic call) and life is pretty good. The Lefties are on the run; the ABC is on the ropes; the Unions are coming under scrutiny at last; an ex-PM is wetting her knickers awaiting a paddy wagon; the carbon tax is no more; and even the hordes of 'boat people' are seeing the lights around the inside of the lifeboat that is towing them back to where they come from.

Meanwile we are still stuck with hypocrits who rally against the 'Top 1%' while ignoring the fact that they themselves ARE they whom they condemn.

You need an annual income of $34,000 a year to be in the richest 1% of the world, according to World Bank economist Branko Milanovic’s 2010 book The Haves and the Have-Nots.

 

To be in the top half of the globe you need to earn just $1,225 a year.

 

For the top 20%, it’s $5,000 per year.

 

Enter the top 10% with $12,000 a year.

 

To be included in the top 0.1% requires an annual income of $70,000.

 

America’s poorest are some of the world’s richest.

And that's just America. Those people are not even as well off as Australians. By this reckoning even those on the dole in Oz are well within the top 10%.

Er...., No you ain't

And what a lot we Ozzies spend on our athletes; the leisure class that happily plays sport on the taxpayer dollar. We expect them to win 'Gold, Gold, Gold'. Woe betide any coming back with a silver or a bronze. Losers !

Not that we can expect many Gold medals. They quality of our youthful athletes so far has been woeful, although the whoops and the 'yeahs' are in full cry and some of the smiles are nice to look at.

Er.... what's that other coloured stuff inside?

And the medals themselves may not be as golden as one thinks. Most western banks have sold off all their gold 50 times over and China has been importing over 100 tons of the stuff every month for the past several years. It would not be too prudent to x-ray the medals or drill a hole in a few when (if ) any come home. They may well be mainly tungsten with a shiney surface. All that glitters ain't.... you know the rest.

'Allo, 'allo, 'allo. Q'elle avons nous ici?

http://www.prospectingjournal.com/fake-gold-detected-the-tungsten-gold-bar032612/ 

‘Fake’ Gold Detected: The Tungsten Gold Bar

March 26, 2012 by prospecting journal  

COMMENTARY-ProspectingJournal.com-   It isn’t everyday that the word tungsten is used synonymously with gold. This week, a 1,000-gram ‘fake’ gold bar was found in the United Kingdom. Upon realizing discrepancies in the weight of the bar of gold, further tests revealed that the bar had been drilled out and filled with tungsten.  

In effect the bar was valued at much lower than what was initially thought, and had the trick gone unnoticed, the counterfeiter would have pocketed a substantial amount of profit. 

Somewhat surprisingly, this isn’t the first time we are learning about gold counterfeiting. In October 2009, bankers in Hong Kong discovered gold bars from the US that were filled with Tungsten, with similar instances also occurring in Ethiopia and South Africa.  

In almost every documented situation Tungsten is commonly chosen as a substitute. It is a material substantially cheaper than gold but shares the exact same density, to the third decimal. This makes it the ideal material for counterfeiting.

President Putin has spend 56 BILLION bucks on the Winter Olympics, and not unexpectedly lined the pockets of quite a few of his now-supporters with gold. Heck, he has to find economies somewhere.

But back to the blessings.

The Motley Fool shows just how well off we are. Well, Americans. The Australians are even better off. We have the Tavern.

http://www.aei-ideas.org/2014/02/carpe-century-50-reasons-were-living-through-the-greatest-period-in-world-history/

‘Carpe century’: 50 reasons we’re living through the greatest period in world history

Mark J. Perry | February 3, 2014, 9:28 am

Morgan Housel at The Motley Fool lists the 50 reasons we’re living through the greatest period in world history and here are 25 of my favorites: 

1. U.S. life expectancy at birth was 39 years in 1800, 49 years in 1900, 68 years in 1950, and 79 years today. The average newborn today can expect to live an entire generation longer than his great-grandparents could. 

2. In 1949, Popular Mechanics magazine made the bold prediction that someday a computer could weigh less than 1 ton. I wrote this sentence on an iPad that weighs 0.73 pounds. 

3. The average American now retires at age 62. One hundred years ago, the average American died at age 51. Enjoy your golden years — your ancestors didn’t get any of them. 

4. Despite a surge in airline travel, there were half as many fatal plane accidents in 2012 than there were in 1960, according to the Aviation Safety Network. 

5. People worry that the U.S. economy will end up stagnant like Japan’s. Next time you hear that, remember that unemployment in Japan hasn’t been above 5.6% in the past 25 years, its government corruption ranking has consistently improved, incomes per capita adjusted for purchasing power have grown at a decent rate, and life expectancy has risen by nearly five years. I can think of worse scenarios. 

6. Two percent of American homes had electricity in 1900. J.P Morgan (the man) was one of the first to install electricity in his home, and it required a private power plant on his property. Even by 1950, close to 30% of American homes didn’t have electricity. It wasn’t until the 1970s that virtually all homes were powered. Adjusted for wage growth, electricity cost more than 10 times as much in 1900 as it does today, according to professor Julian Simon. 

7. According to the Federal Reserve, the number of lifetime years spent in leisure — retirement plus time off during your working years — rose from 11 years in 1870 to 35 years by 1990. Given the rise in life expectancy, it’s probably close to 40 years today. Which is amazing: The average American spends nearly half his life in leisure. If you had told this to the average American 100 years ago, that person would have considered you wealthy beyond imagination. 

8. Median household income adjusted for inflation was around $25,000 per year during the 1950s. It’s nearly double that amount today. We have false nostalgia about the prosperity of the 1950s because our definition of what counts as “middle class” has been inflated — see the 34% rise in the size of the median American home in just the past 25 years. If you dig into how the average “prosperous” American family lived in the 1950s, I think you’ll find a standard of living we’d call “poverty” today. 

9. According to the Census Bureau, only one in 10 American homes had air conditioning in 1960. That rose to 49% in 1973, and 89% today — the 11% that don’t are mostly in cold climates. Simple improvements like this have changed our lives in immeasurable ways. 

10. Almost no homes had a refrigerator in 1900, according to Frederick Lewis Allan’s The Big Change, let alone a car. Today they sell cars with refrigerators in them. 

11. Adjusted for overall inflation, the cost of an average round-trip airline ticket fell 50% from 1978 to 2011, according to Airlines for America. 

12. According to the Census Bureau, the average new home now has more bathrooms than occupants. 

13. According to the Census Bureau, in 1900 there was one housing unit for every five Americans. Today, there’s one for every three. In 1910 the average home had 1.13 occupants per room. By 1997 it was down to 0.42 occupants per room. 

14. Relative to hourly wages, the cost of an average new car has fallen fourfold since 1915, according to professor Julian Simon. 

15. Google Maps is free. If you think about this for a few moments, it’s really astounding. It’s probably the single most useful piece of software ever invented, and it’s free for anyone to use. 

16. The average American work week has declined from 66 hours in 1850, to 51 hours in 1909, to 34.8 today, according to the Federal Reserve. Enjoy your weekend. 

17. Incomes have grown so much faster than food prices that the average American household now spends less than half as much of its income on food as it did in the 1950s. Relative to wages, the price of food has declined more than 90% since the 19th century, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

18. As of March 2013, there were 8.99 million millionaire households in the U.S., according to the Spectrum Group. Put them together and they would make the largest city in the country, and the 18th largest city in the world, just behind Tokyo. We talk a lot about wealth concentration in the United States, but it’s not just the very top that has done well. 

19. In 1900, 44% of all American jobs were in farming. Today, around 2% are. We’ve become so efficient at the basic need of feeding ourselves that nearly half the population can now work on other stuff. 

20. U.S. oil production in September was the highest it’s been since 1989, and growth shows no sign of slowing. We produced 57% more oil in America in September 2013 than we did in September 2007. The International Energy Agency projects that America will be the world’s largest oil producer as soon as 2015.

21. The average American car got 13 miles per gallon in 1975, and more than 26 miles per gallon in 2013, according to the Energy Protection Agency. This has an effect identical to cutting the cost of gasoline in half. 

22. Annual inflation in the United States hasn’t been above 10% since 1981 and has been below 5% in 77% of years over the past seven decades. When you consider all the hatred directed toward the Federal Reserve, this is astounding. 

23. According to AT&T archives and the Dallas Fed, a three-minute phone call from New York to San Francisco cost $341 in 1915, and $12.66 in 1960, adjusted for inflation. Today, Republic Wireless offers unlimited talk, text, and data for $5 a month. 

24. You need an annual income of $34,000 a year to be in the richest 1% of the world, according to World Bank economist Branko Milanovic’s 2010 book The Haves and the Have-Nots. To be in the top half of the globe you need to earn just $1,225 a year. For the top 20%, it’s $5,000 per year. Enter the top 10% with $12,000 a year. To be included in the top 0.1% requires an annual income of $70,000. America’s poorest are some of the world’s richest. 

25. Only 4% of humans get to live in America. Odds are you’re one of them. We’ve got it made. Be thankful.

Drink up. Count yourselves lucky. And the next time you see a bunch of molly-coddled, long-haired unwashed louts protesting about the Top !%, remind them will you.

Hounds and Harps

What a week in the Tavern. Overflowing pipes needing plumbers; flashes from plugs needing electricians; even trolls and the usual internet bully-bodies spilling over into other houses in the village. And all the while Moira rehearsing out the back, waiting for her big evening.

At least she is one Mensa lady who tries hard to bring pleasure and intellect. Some other lady mensans play the stupid role and of course hardly any do the plumbing. Mention that and the roof will need repair from the hail of stones with 'misogynist' scrawled on them in crayon that crash down.

Some play the gender card rather than use their brains.

It is as true for Mensa as any section of society that the moment a feminist harpy walks into the room or sits at the Table, she will be vicious and try to Dominate. Fortunately a good 30% of women are not feminist harpies. Some might say more.

Moira Grayland is a friend of the Tavern Keeper - that is, me - and a member of Mensa. A very smart woman with a gift for music. Not a feminist nor a harpy. But a fine Harpist.

Moira, who joined Mensa in San Francisco in the early '90's, sings and accompanies herself on the pedal harp. She sings in French, Italian, German, Latin, Spanish, Scottish and Irish Gaelic, and numerous native dialects. An award-winning Gaelic singer with a nearly five octave range, she specializes in the folk songs of Britain and Ireland.

When she was four, her mother noticed that Moira had perfect pitch, and could sing back any tune on the first hearing, whether an aria or a Gaelic folksong. She began memorizing folksongs at the age of six, and had amassed an enormous repertoire by her teens. From records and books, she taught herself to sing in Gaelic, and developed a passion for the harp. She played the harp in restaurants professionally for ten years.

Moira started memorizing operas in all languages at the age of ten, with Mozart’s “Die Zauberflöte.” She began formal vocal training at the unusually early age of fourteen. She joined the Renaissance Faire at the age of nine. She sang and played the harp, led hundreds of parades, and directed Shakespeare plays and Irish dance shows.

She earned a Bachelor of Music Performance degree from the University of Redlands, and did postgraduate work in Reno, Nevada. While in Reno, she taught both harp and singing, and directed the Celtic Youth Chorus.

Many singers have studied another instrument, but very few singers accompany themselves on the concert harp; fewer still would even attempt to sing opera while doing so. As a result, Moira’s talents have been in constant demand ever since she became a professional performer.

You can listen to many of her musical performances at.....

http://soundcloud.com/moira-greyland
http://www.punchbowl.com/vendors/ca-california/el-sobrante/2089438/opera-and-harp-by-moira-greyland

 

 

You can look up Moira on You Tube. Her videos seem to be difficult to get onto blogger so you will have to go to YT yourselves.  Here are some to go to.

Oro Mo Bhaidin.wmv

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylfbnoYds48

Maid On The Shore

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_c-8uSZlGU
 

A Maid That's Deep In Love

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5HubPkzjos

John Anderson My Jo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nK6uutM2As

 

Paint It Black

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IccI1DNuFAw

 

O Holy Night

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwUOcjhPuqc

 

Moira says:

 

Here is a description of the songs in my album "Avalon's Daughter:" a tribute to my mother, Arthurian author Marion Zimmer Bradley, famous for her bestselling book "The Mists of Avalon."

 

"Guinevere's Song: words and music by Moira Greyland. Guinevere longs for Lancelot, despite her married state. This is the first original song I ever wrote; it began as a tribute to characters in Mother’s historical novel "The Mists Of Avalon," but the story ended up being a little closer to any number of other Arthurian tales."

 

Pretty Girl Milking A Cow :Traditional Irish
My mother was an accomplished singer in her time, and even gave folk concerts when I was very young. Although I never heard her performing this one, she would have loved the soaring vocal line. The original is Irish Gaelic “Calin Deas Cruithin na mBo.”

 

Rothesay Bay :Traditional Scottish
One of my mother's favorite singers was the legendary Jean Redpath. We both loved this beautiful, sad ballad of acceptance amid tragedy and loss.

 

Brochan Lom :Traditional Scottish
Another Jean Redpath song; in the Celtic style known as "Port a' bheul" which means "mouth music:" to sing when dancers wish to dance and there are no instruments.

 

The Bonny Boy :Traditional ScottishMy mother sang this song to me when I was little. There are at least five versions floating around under a few different titles, all with the same story and general features. I picked the lyrics I liked best and the tune I liked best, and this arrangement is the result.

 

The Spinning Wheel :Traditional Irish
My mother sang this to me, and I believe she learned it from one of our favorite singers; Mary O'Hara. I have added another traditional verse which is rarely sung.

 

She Moved Through The Fair :Traditional Irish
This song has undergone an unusual transformation; it was originally called "Our Wedding Day” and it was about a woman who jilted her fiancé. Modern singers omit the first and last verses, and by changing "my true love" into "my dead love" the song has become a ghost story.

 

Birnie Bouzle : Traditional Scottish
Scottish music is known for dotted rhythms and beautiful melodies, and this little gem is no exception. If I had to explain what "lilting" was, I would probably think of this song. One feature of Scottish music is the “Burden” a chorus that comes first.As before, instead of providing a glossary, I have provided an alternate version with singable, understandable English text for audiences that might prefer it: I find this song takes longer to explain than to sing!

 

Danny Boy “Londonderry Air” :Lyrics by Frederick Weatherly, 1910.My mother studied opera for years, and passed that torch on to me, along with strong musical tastes. She would often remind me that "Handel would have traded everything he had ever written if he could have claimed authorship of the Londonderry Air."

 

Lament for Eoin Ruadh O'Neill ; Turloch O’Carolan :
My mother felt that she had played the harp in some distant past life, and was always astonished when she took up my harp and didn't remember how. Perhaps part of the joys of Heaven include being able to play the harp without having to learn! The original title was “Cumha Eoghain Ruadh Ui Neill.” It is usually translated as “Lament for Owen Roe O’Neill.” Eoghain, Eoin, or Ian is the Gaelic name meaning John. This title could be fully translated “Lament for Red John, Son of Neill.” When “Ruadh” (red) or “Ban” (white) are included with a name, it refers to the hair of the one named.

 

Leezie Lindsay: Traditional Scottish
There are two sets of verses for this song; in the usual one, Leezie Lindsay agrees to marry Lord Ronald MacDonald upon learning his name. In this version, adapted by the Corries, Lord Argyle is more romantic, and only alludes to his wealth. Of course, trying to sing a romantic song about “Ronald MacDonald” in America....

 

Óró Mo Bháidín (Hey, ho my little boat): Traditional Irish
This was one of Mother's favorite songs, although she never learned the words. She would walk around the house singing it with any old nonsense syllables, and this drove me nuts. I studied Gaelic in my teens so I could learn to sing both Scots and Irish Gaelic music properly. Odd way to inspire one’s daughter, eh what?

A Maid That's Deep In Love : Traditional English  This song was on the first phonograph record I ever heard; "Cruel Sister" by Pentangle. Jacqui McShee sang this song, and hooked me on traditional music forever. 

Black Is The Color : Traditional Appalachian song with a Scottish origin, tune collected by Cecil Sharp with lyrics by John Jacob Niles. Another of Mother's favorite singers, (and mine) was the legendary Joan Baez. Mother used to sing her songs, including this one and “Silver Dagger” all over the house.  

Sunrise Over Stonehenge: words and music Moira Greyland
This song was inspired by my mother's description of Glastonbury, and other sites she visited while researching "The Mists Of Avalon."
 moira@moiragreyland.com

The sounds from the rehearsal rooms bode well for the Concert tonight (at last) in the music room. Being as we are being blessed with particularly fine weather here we will be opening the music room and the restaurant onto the Patio to make space for the huge crowds.

Some Mensa feminists are not invited ! We shall offer a prayer for them instead.

I will be very busy behind the bar !!


Pax.