Hi, I'm back again.
We had nice weather on Sylt, then I enjoyed fine weather in Berlin, and now I am back again in Bavaria. No complaint, but 33° C every day is a bit trying - I most often stay indoors, and walk or go to the fitness studio only early in the morning or evening.
My bloodpressure and blood sugar are low - that's why I want to get upset and that is easy:
I read that the German chancellor Olaf Scholz uses our taxpayers' money to try to make him look better - (I think he doesn't need a hairdresser :-)
40.000 Euro per year! Only for make-up artists! (1 Euro = 0,85 British pounds or 0,59 Australian dollars, or 1,09 American dollars)
Just to give you the opportunity to compare:
a woman who works 40 hours a week as a saleswoman in Germany will have at the end of a year's work "30.172 Euro" (averaged, and gross). So she will have to work a little bit longer to earn the money he spends for -- for WHAT??? How does he look without that service?
But compared to our foreign ministress (female politicians nowadays insist on being called that) Olaf Scholz spends "peanuts". (Though one has to add 510.000 Euros for photographs of him, also paid with our money).
She, Annalena Baerbock (yes, the one whose plane twice shed all the kerosine, each time 80 tons! into the sea!) needs 136.500 Euros per year for make-up artists and cosmetics. From us.
One person is better looking and doesn't need so much of our money: Christian Lindner, minister of finance, he only needs 650 Euros - and that only for photos. (No, I haven't lost a few zeros).
PS: Above you see a photograph I took in Ansbach, a beautiful little town. It is the mirrored outside of a café - a distorting or fun house mirror.
I prefer the word distorting for what I wrote above - I cannot see the fun, sorry.
You know that normally I do not discuss politics, and I am not envious. But this, I think, in times of high inflation, is immoral, in bad taste, and scandalous.
More fun next time - promised!
Welcome back. It seems it doesn't matter what you say or stand for, so long as you look good, or at least think you do.
ReplyDeleteThank you, dear Tasker - for a moment I thought you were speaking of me, hahaha. But it is true: the content is often not that important nowadays than the appearance.
DeleteIf I were a Minister, I would comb my own hair before leaving home and put on my own .makeup. That way, if there is a tv camera waiting to do an interview,
ReplyDeleteVery clever, dear Helen! I think the make-up artists often are coming to their homes.
Deleteonly lipstick would be necessary ... For approximately 23 cents?
ReplyDeleteThat is what I think too. I see no way to make our German chancellor more beautiful (and being beautiful is not his task) - a little powder on the nose - that's it.
DeleteAs you probably know we are deep into election season. I have been complaining about the millions of dollars spent on campaigns. I understand that there are expenses but millions of dollars? Couldn't that money be put to better use? And there is my rant for the day.
ReplyDeleteI agree, Emma - there are so many ways to spend the money for a better purpose. In a campaign - so I thought - the Americans give their money voluntarily - but here, the taxpayers don't - the politicians just grab it.
DeleteIt never occurred to me a politician would need a make up artist. I guess John Edwards (a scum bag American politician) had one, but I never considered him a serious candidate and so all his shenanigans were paid for by donations.
ReplyDeleteIt never occurred to me either, Joanne. I don't want a model, I want a sensible and intelligent and moral person as politician. ("Dream on!")
DeleteInteresting what Wkipedia writes about John Edwards. Looking nice doesn't imply being nice :-)
Sadly it appears that when some people reach the top of their tree, be it politics, entertainment, or business, morality flies out the window. They think that can do whatever they want without any contraints.
ReplyDeleteTrue, dear Rosemary - we see many examples. When I look over the centuries, I think it might have been always so - but we weren't informed in so many details. It is good to know - though sometimes I feel helpless.
ReplyDeleteDear Britta - you are right it has always been the case. I am currently watching a series about rise and fall of the Collosseum in Rome. The programme gives graphic insights into the realities that were ancient Rome. It is a horrific tale of brutality and dehumanisation at the hands of the Emperors and those in the higher ranks of society - for the entertainment of the masses.
ReplyDeleteDear Rosemary, thank you - and my apologies for answering so late - I unpack, and pack again (tomorrow the whole family - first time for the triplets! - go to Berlin for a few days).
DeletePeople change over time their costumes - but not very much their ways. I am an optimist - but not in that subject.
Late to the party, I'm afraid, but I'm shocked to the back teeth, dear Britta!! These sums are utterly baffling and I've evidently been living under a rock forever as I didn't know that politicians employ rockstar-style entourages. It seems appropriate to me to roll my eyes over vain celebrities and such paying $$ of their own money to look "perfect" and jet about with lackies fussing over their wayward cowlicks and eyebrows and wrinkles and blemishes, but taxpayers paying the same for mere elected politicians? Unbelievable. Do we want Hollywood-esque mannequins to represent us? Pay for it yourself, I say, and that will focus the mind on economy. Anyways, if a pollie appears live on the telly, the studio takes care of the hair and makeup.
ReplyDeleteDear Pip, I was so shocked, too!
ReplyDeleteI agree with every item you say - and when I look at the persons I see no great improvement (honestly).
And the focus on "beauty" is so wrong - as you say: I want them to show that economy is important - but they show us (as with those huge governmental cars - we should bicycle!) that, as a German proverb say, "They preach water, while drinking wine." People here are very angry (or in resignation) - both no good attitudes.