I heard something on the radio yesterday that made me fume. A politician (it may have been Big Kev) was talking about domestic violence. "X number of people suffer domestic violence every year. This costs the economy x amount of money." (my emphasis)

WHY is it necessary to assign a financial cost? Shouldn't it be self-evident that people getting hurt is a bad thing, and that we ought to do whatever we can to stop it? Have we really been so blinded by the fetishisation of economics that human pain needs a monetary value before we can acknowledge it? Why does that have to be the main argument for trying to do something to stop it?

My husband, who trained as an accountant, has pointed out that, because whatever solution the government proposes will cost money, they feel the need to highlight that not fixing it will also cost money. I concede the argument, but reluctantly.

And at least they are doing something. Which is good.

Meanwhile, the temperature outside is zero!! No wonder I couldn't get out of bed this morning. (Note for readers outside Melbourne -- for Melbourne, this is really, really cold.)


  1. but hasn't it turned into a crisp beautiful day?

  2. A glorious day, indeed, which I celebrated by trying out our new neighborhood cafe.