The Vaguaries of Internet Shopping
I do a lot of Internet shopping, but today I’ve given up. I need to buy some pH Test strips, because I’d like to test the pH of my mouth. Two web sites wanted all my details in a profile, before they checked me out. There was also no box to check to stop spam. Compare this yesterday, when I bought the book, all the Public Catalogue Foundation wanted was an address, an e-mail address and credit card details. Perhaps this is why I buy my books on Amazon and my clothes at M & S, as they do it without fuss.
Internet shops should be simple and efficient. Many aren’t!
In the end I found what I wanted on valuemed.co.uk.
Messages That I Like
One of the members of the UK-Coeliac Yahoo Group has told me that my typing seems to be getting better.
I like that! Thanks!
A Gamble Too Far
Jim Gamble’s resignation from CEOP is probably sad, but according to this report, his resignation is about power and being independent.
We need more protection for the vulnerable in society when they use the Internet, the telephone or even receive mail. Children, are just possibly the most important of several groups, who need protection from all sorts of low life.
When I had the boiler room crooks targeting me, I got no help from the police. On the other hand, I was strong enough to fight them and win, but many other widows and pensioners, would not have the knowledge or the fortitude to fight. But the crooks are still phoning according to my Truecall monitor, so they never give up. And that is why we need more protection!
So perhaps one of the benfits of merging CEOP into a proposed National Crime Agency would be that their systems could be broadened to protect the other vulnerable groups. I suspect that the determination behind the evil people plaguing me, is very little different to those targeting children.
Revolt of the Mothers
George Osbourne’s proposals for cutting child benefit to high earners does not appear to have gone down well with those who will be affected. But his other proposal to limit the amount of benefit to a particular family to £500 a week seems to have been well received by the same high earners.
They can’t have it both ways!
But you have to look at the statistics here! Women are now having their children later, often after or midway through a good career. So perhaps, Osbourne’s apparent child benefit robbery will have a classic Newtonian reaction and mothers will wait until they get the finances right before having their children. I know we didn’t do that in the 1970s, but then, child benefit in those days was very insignificant compared to what it is now!
As to the benefit limit of £500 per family, this will have some beneficial effects. Most of these high benefits are paid in the form of housing benefit in areas, where rental property is expensive. Landlords will not let their properties stand empty, so we might see rents fall in another classic Newtonian reaction.
The Anonymous Widower 