'Executions, democracy and right-sizing the housing crisis' – Peter Rhodes
In the Land of the Free, one may have a free choice on being executed. In South Carolina, convicted murderer Richard Moore, due to die on Friday, has been told he can choose between lethal injection, firing squad or electric chair. Tricky one.
But in a country where people linger on Death Row for decades (Moore's crime was committed in 1999), maybe one extra humane pause could be agreed. In Blackadder Goes Forth (BBC) Captain Edmund Blackadder is sentenced to be shot at dawn on the order: “Ready, aim, fire!” He asks if the commander of the firing squad could leave a pause between the words aim and fire – a pause of perhaps 30 or 40 years. It's worth a try . . .
Meanwhile, is the great American public fed up yet with its ludicrous procedure for electing a new president? This, of all polls, is surely the one that should be solved by a simple majority. Instead, it is decided state-by-state using a variety of voting systems, which means the winner can be elected with a minority of the national vote, with everything hanging on the results in a handful of “swing” states.
When it's a simple nationwide poll, ordinary people see the power of their democracy and respond accordingly. Whatever you think of the results, the 2014 Yes/No Scottish independence poll and the 2016 Remain/Leave Brexit referendum showed democracy at its simplest - and best.
Listen out for a new and sinister term in the housing debate: right-sizing. It is the belief that if a house has more bedrooms than occupants, then it is under-occupied. A report by Barclays suggests there is scope for persuading 3.8 million households to move out, freeing up millions of bigger properties for larger families. The report accepts that for personal and emotional reasons some folk may not want to right-size and suggests “strong, targeted incentives,” may be required.
I like to think that no politician would support this sort of social engineering, but who knows? In the meantime, can we see the houses of Barclays' top 100 executives? What sort of “strong, targeted incentives” could winkle them out of their eight-bedroom mansions?