Wages, Salary, Inflation & Devaluation

Salary is a fixed, consistent amount of pay, (usually annual), regardless of hours worked, often featuring benefits and no overtime pay

. Wages are paid based on an hourly rate, fluctuating with hours worked, often including overtime, and common in retail or manufacturing roles.

 In simple terms professional roles tend to be salaried while manual roles are waged.

Inflation is a rise in domestic prices, reducing purchasing power, while devaluation is a fall in a currency's value relative to foreign currencies. It's often triggered by market forces or deliberate policy, making exports cheaper and imports costlier. High inflation typically leads to currency devaluation

. Generally inflation erodes what money buys inside a country, whereas devaluation weakens money's worth against other countries' money. Both are deeply linked as high inflation usually causes devaluation, and devaluation itself can fuel more inflation.

So far so good, although anything to do with mathematics isn't my forte.

This leads me into thinking about the people striking because their current wage or salary is less than in previous years in real terms. UK doctors' pay claims, led by the BMA, focus on restoring wages eroded by inflation, with recent actions pushing for significant uplifts. For example doctors argue pay has fallen significantly, (over 20% in real terms for some), since 2008. This is called pay erosion & they want pay restored to 2008 levels. You can find current pay levels for all doctors on the internet, so I won't give them here. 

My point is that this position seems to be completely untenable to me. Money & commodities fluctuate according to circustances. I imagine that doctors are not alone in being able to say that what they earn today is not worth what they earned in 2008. All employed people are subject to the same market forces. In any year pay increases will depend on what those forces are & how much money is in the kitty. Especially for so called public employees, teachers or the police for example.

What also seems untenable to me is that we have expectations that wages or salary will increase every year. Not only does that depend on a countries wealth, it also depends on how well people do their job & their productivity. It is well known that the UK, as a nation, is way behind in productivity. The UK's labour productivity consistently lags behind the US, Germany, and France, with output per hour worked significantly lower, around 20-40% below the US and 20% below major EU economies. This is largely due to underinvestment in capital and skills, slower growth since the financial crisis, and weaker competition/technology adoption in key sectors like retail and finance.

Finally, I think our whole wage / salary structure is completely unbalanced & rooted in class structure & history. As with so many areas in the UK, we need a complete overhaul & re-balancing to a fairer system. The gap between the "haves & have nots" is not working for us in the 21st century. As a lifelong liberal socialist I do think that withdrawl of labour is a right, but surely not for everyone. Surely there are occupations that are so vital to health, well being & the economy that there should be another mechanism? Possibly, given that so many of our organisations depend on goodwill to operate, working to rule would be far better. 

We need to end this cycle of disruption & get our act together. Especially as we are now into the age of technology & AI which will change things drastically.

 

 

 

 

 

Think Before you Speak

Basically, pause to consider what you are going to say & avoid impulsive, emotional & regrettable comment. Whatever we say will be open to misinterpretation & misunderstanding. We all interpret comment differently. 

Humans communicate through body language, facial expression and language itself. Within spoken language there is nuance - the actual words used, the tone of voice, the speed of delivery, (pauses are important)...The listener has to decode what is being said & how it is said. It is a skill, because the listeners preconceptions & emotions colour how they hear & respond to what is said.There is uncertainty in verbal communication which can cause problems.

We all need to be careful about what we say & how we say it, whether it is written or spoken. We do need to engage our brains & try not to respond emotionally. I have posted before about how what we write can be easily misunderstood. Perceptions vary.

All of this is true for everyone, but immensely more important for people in the public eye & vital for people in power. So when we have politicians who say exactly what they think, without accurate information, or care for the impact they may have, I am very concerned. Politicians supposedly have access to information & briefings that we do not have. They have a multitude of so called "special advisors". They employ researchers. They have access to any & all of the information they need to make considered decisions in the interests of their electorate.

That means that what they say should be true, accurate, intelligent & pertinent.They should be allowed to say "I don't know" or I will find out". They should be given time to enquire & reflect. Then they should speak & we should be able to rely on the veracity of what they say.

Unfortunately this is not the case with so many people in power today. To have someone in a very powerful position who has no relationship with truth or a moral compass is extremely dangerous. There will always be people who follow whoever speaks loudest & has presence, charisma or wealth. There will always be people who follow the herd & don't enquire into the truth. There will always be people who think their own self interest is more important than anyone else's. History has proved that time after time.

Eventually all regimes end. That is no consolation to the people who have paid the price for mismanagement & corruption. Sadly if you get rid of one dictator there is usually another waiting in the wings who could be even worse. 

We are at a crossroads worldwide. We cannot afford to let the dictators win. We all need to think & use our collective power.

 

The Psychology of Dictatorship

Pathological Narcissm - inflated sense of self, superiority, and entitlement, requiring excessive admiration, with power serving as a psychological "prosthesis" for inner fragility.

Psychopathy - callousness, lack of remorse, manipulativeness, impulsivity, and emotional shallowness

Need for Power - authority shores up inner insecurity and compensates for vulnerability.

Deep Seated Insecurity / Poor Self Esteem  

Lack of Empathy 

Vindictiveness & Manipulation - can be charming and skilled at exploiting human psychology, using propaganda, lies, and inflammatory language to destabilize populations and foster dependency.

Persecution & Paranoia - behavior becomes more malevolent as they consolidate power and eliminate perceived threats. 

Nationalism - the nation becomes an extension of the self; increasing national power serves to strengthen personal power.

Control - creating or exaggerating threats (enemies or minorities) to unify followers and justify oppressive measures, fostering dependence.

These traits often develop from a mix of genetic predispositions and early life experiences, with psychopathic traits sometimes encouraged in certain societal contexts, becoming disastrous when combined with absolute power. Dictators do not rule through fear and violence alone; they also rely on the psychology of their followers. Psychological processes such as obedience, conformity, and fear allow citizens to adopt the leader's ideology. The use of propaganda, media control, and the creation of "enemies" (often minority groups) helps to unify the population and cement allegiance through a shared sense of threat.

I have to admit that the above is the result of research, not just my own understanding of the subject. I couldn't have put it as concisely. I can make a list of current leaders who fit the picture very precisely. I am sure you can too, unless you are a follower of one of the leaders I am thinking of. In which case you will not be able to see what I see.

The fact that we currently have so many leaders in so many different parts of the world who fit this description is both deeply worrying & bodes ill for the future of our world as we know it. We are becoming habituated to serious instability in our politics & decision making. We are in danger of thinking that we cannot control the onward march of these leaders. 

We need to wake up, accept the truth of the situation & do something to stop them. Or we will be marching into a future for my grandchildren that I do not want to contemplate. Being passive & appeasing will not work. That's how 2 world wars started. 

Change & Belief

Politicians say we need change. The public certainly seem to want change. Buddhists believe that change is inevitable & we need to accept that & adapt to new circumstances. Change is very difficult to manage & deliver though.

Personal change should be under our control, but it is very hard to achieve. It necessarily involves putting aside the patterns of thinking & behaviour we have developed over many years, which are imprinted in our brain. It demands a sense of purpose & strong will to persevere. First we have to accept that we may have been misguided or wrong, then we have to modify beliefs & behaviour. 

Change on a societal or global level seems an exceptionally difficult thing to achieve. There are not only millions of individuals involved, but also countries. There are 195 countries in the world, comprising 193 United Nations (UN) member states and 2 non-member observer states (Vatican City/Holy See and Palestine). However, the exact number can vary slightly (up to 200+) depending on recognition of states like Taiwan or Kosovo. That represents huge variation in culture, ambition, attitude & development. Achieving consensus on what to change & how is seemigly impossible. 

Robert Jenrick defected from the Tories to Reform yesterday, making the 16th conservative to change allegiance. Notable among them were Nadim Zahawi & Nadine Dorries. On the surface it could be seen as a matter of conscience, a genuine change of mind. Or, if you are of the cynical frame of mind that I have, it could be "rats leaving a sinking ship". I am left thinking that the change of party is more about personal interest & ambition than genuine belief in Nigel Farage & Reform. 

How are we the public to trust politicians who "blow with the wind" rather than doing what is genuinely best for the future of the UK? Our country has been hugely damaged by 14 years of tory rule. All of our systems are at breaking point because of tory mismanagemnet, privatisation, cost cutting & lack of oversight. Not to mention the corruption & "jobs for the boys". 

There does need to be substantial change in the UK. We need to "put our house in order". Currently I'm not convinced that Kier Starmer & the labour party are the ones to do it. While I do believe that if new information / evidence comes forward, politicians need to be able to change their minds. I do not believe that lack of preparation & evidence based decision making is acceptable. It only results in vacillation & that is not a good look.

In order to achieve real change for the better we will all have to pay a price in the short term. We need politicians with the balls to take us down that road willingly & honestly.

  

Respect

I grew up in a world where respect was expected. I don't think there was a concept of earning respect. As a child & a teenager I was expected to respect my parents, teachers & adults in general, regardless of whether they were worthy of that respect. You didn't interrupt, you certainly didn't answer back or have views of your own about situations. You "knew your place" in the hierarchy & it was very low down. As a child you were "seen & not heard".

I'm glad to say that has changed. In some ways for the better, we do expect people to earn respect. But also there is the growing trend for a complete lack of respect for people & concepts that seem to me to be necessary for the smooth running of society.

In part that is because what seemed black & white is now several shades of grey. The world we live in is highly complex. For example respecting the borders of sovereign countries. 

Take the USA invasion of Venezuela - Maduro did not win his countries election, so was an illegitimate president. In 2021 the ICC opened an investigation into what was happening in Venezuela. Does that give the US the right to capture Venezuelan ships, bomb Caracas & extract Maduro to the US? I am unpersuaded. I think this is simply Trumps transactional, deal making, bullying, personality. In simple terms he wants to control the oil production & minerals, notably bauxite, coal, gold, iron ore. The state controled most of the country's vast mineral reserves, Trump wants that control & the cash that goes with it.

He has no respect for the rule of international law only Trumps law. The Monroe Doctrine of 1823 is now the Donroe Doctrine. He is open about aspirations in Greenland, Columbia, Iran, Mexico & Cuba. The chances are that the aftermath of this will follow the pattern of the history of American intervention abroad, as warned by the International Crisis Group & the New York Times in October. The fall of Maduro could lead to violence and instability, the prospect of violent chaos as armed factions competed for power.

If Trump succeeds & is not openly challenged the flood gates open for Netenyahu, Putin & Xi Jinping to do even more than they already have. They have shown no respect for sovereign boundaries, human life & infrastructure. Trump is not the only leader with delusions of grandeur, avarice & power. At the moment politics & politicians simply do not know how to deal with these "leaders"  

We have to return to a world where there is respect for people, culture, boundaries, resources & the world we live in. If we don't we are simply self destructing. 

 

Caring

Do we know how to care for eachother? Is our world envied health service really capable of caring for the sick & disabled?  I ask this while understanding all of the complex parameters of the questions - time, money, people available - skilled & willing, equipment, drugs....

The reason I ask is because I am old enough to remember what the NHS used to provide & what my generation understood to be reponsibility & duty of care. Also because I have just been quite ill for 10 days & had to navigate todays NHS.

However I phrase this it will probably annoy & upset people. But, although I think there have been huge improvements in technology & medication, I think things have changed at a personal level to an unacceptable degree. While I think that medics care, there are limits to what they can do & they have accepted things that shouldn't be accepted in terms of patient care. 

I have had a nasty viral chest infection which turned into bacterial Bronchitis. It started on the 29th December. By the 5th January I had felt really ill for 4 days, was coughing continuously, extremely congested, very breathless, aching all over & exhausted. I went through the online system to try to get an appointment. I am able to do that, many of my age aren't. I got a phone triage from the surgery, although I could barely talk. I was told to come into the surgery.

Really? Is that appropriate. I'm nearly 81 with several chronic conditions including heart failure & a pacemaker. I live alone. Fortunately my lovely daughter, who is a teacher & started term that day, was able to take me. But the triage person thought it was fine for me to get a taxi. I waited for quite a while in the crowded waiting room. I was the only person wearing a mask so that I wouldn't pass the infection on. I saw someone who wasn't a GP, but I don't know what qualifications she had. She prescribed anti biotics.

Not to mince words, a very nasty chest infection, at my age, with my medical conditions needs to be taken seriously. 

So, again fortunately, my daughter was able to take me home, picking up the meds on the way.  I know, only too well how fortunate I am.

Then on the 7th I got up & was coughing up blood. I think I had actually started the day before, but thought it was bacterial phlegm. But on the 7th it was very obvious. I have to say I was worried. I've never had that before. So I phoned the surgery & managed to explain to reception. A doctor phoned me & asked me to come to the surgery again. Quite honestly I was amazed. I told him I felt too ill to do that & he said he would send a paramedic.

The paramedic came about 1pm & did the obs. I have no idea whether he reported back to the GP. I certainly haven't had any follow up from the GP. 

I know that GP's have a big workload. I know there aren't enough of them. But I do wonder if my experience has anything to do with the new contracts they agreed a few years back that made them in charge of the finances & changed their work patterns, especially out of hours duties. The GMC has definitely become more militant & doctors seem to be far more willing to strike, despite the impact on patient care. 

Fortunately I am capable & independent & have family nearby& good friends. But this has been a very difficult time & I am still feeling quite unwell. I accept that many patients have access to information about illness & care. I accept that they need to take reponsibility for their own health & welfare. 

 

But I am left with the feeling that the NHS has had a care bypass. They are tolerating things that should not be tolerated. We all, patients & medics, need to put this right & make the politicians listen.

 

 

Mother & Child

Mother and child iconography has evolved from ancient, symbolic representations of divinity and fertility—such as Isis and Horus—to the idealized, formal "Madonna and Child" in early Christian art. The earliest images go back almost 10 millenia to civilisations like Catalhoyuk, Uruk & Eridu.

 

The best known iconography is the virgin & child. This has arguably led to the expectations we have of what a mother should be. More & more we have contradictory expectations of motherhood today. We are ambivalent, possibly in part due to the "womens lib" movement. Today's women have to juggle various social roles, being an independent woman, a partner, a mother and a worker. There is an inherent tension in womens devotion to their children & their need for self fulfillment. There is also the constant necessity for women to go out to work & earn. 

There is also the equality dimension between men & women, which has improved, but is by no means widespread. Women disproportionately handle unpaid care work and part-time roles. Significant gender pay gaps persist, particularly for part-time workers, and workplace inequality remains a long-term issue. In late 2024, 71.8% of women aged 16+ were in employment. Women are predominantly employed in the health and social work sector (76% of workers are women), education (76% of teachers), and wholesale and retail. This is a waste of talent & skills. Women are capable of far more, but are still unable to access better jobs because of the demands of childcare & the patriarchy which still exists.

How do we change this? For a start we need to value mother/parent hood & childrearing far more. We also need to ensure that the childrearing is more equally shared by both parents, whatever sex they are. Some men are far more involved now, but there is still a higher expectation on women to put themselves last & be more caring. 

Until we recognise that a child needs both male & female carers & role models we will be failing our children. Girls need role models of how to be a woman & how to relate to men. Boys need role models of how to be a man & relate to women. It isn't rocket science & the role models don't necessarily have to be the biological parents. 

Parenting is a skill that needs to be learnt. Currently it's a skill that many parents don't feel that they know enough about. They need support, encouragement & knowledge. Well brought up, balanced children are our future. We ignore that & we will pay a societal price.