Saturday, June 18, 2005
Potentially Kinetic
A conversation at the bar yesterday brought it to my attention that:
- Ken Livingston is now taking the making the state responsible for parenting, by the tried and tested reward/punishment routine. BBC Story here. It's a good idea, parents are happy, kids are happy, and hopefully taxpayers can afford it. Child discipline over the last few years has begun to turn to the state, and so it makes sense for the state to start rewarding Good Kids.
- Under-achieving. There is always someone out there who you believe in more than they believe in themselves. And as a result, you consider them to be all potential and no kinetic. Is it better to be potential or kinetic? I'm a neurotic mouth, overtly social and reasonably insecure. If I dropped the insecurities, I would be able to do so much more - but would I stop being me? Is the reason Morrison is not a stock trader on £50m/annum simply because he isn't? Is the reason Campbell is not a Senior Accountant somewhere simply because he isn't? I think the change has to be gradual to be lasting and valid. Patience is not a virtue rarely seen in youth - and as I still claw on to the remaining shreds of my twenties, I still maintain the right to impatience.
I met a bloke from my old school last night, that I didn't know at the time I was at school. This was because he is 5 years younger than me. It was particularly irritating to hear him spend an hour going through a list of names of people that "I MUST KNOW!!!", knowing full well that anyone he mentioned I would not know, and wouldn't be bothered to know anyway. I tried explaining that at school, I was a retarded athletically and academically, which meant I was unaccepted in the only two streams going, hence I did not know that some bloke in my year is now playing rugby for England, and given my complete indifference towards sport, this is not unusual. In fact, I am surprised I managed to remmeber this today.
