@Tony
Ejja ghidli f’wicci pulcinell. Ahna l-hodor? Ara veru ma tafux tisthu. Intkom demmkom velenu dejjem kien u hareg f’dak li ktibt jew ahjar ippruvajt tikteb. Ghax mhux kapaci taslu tridu tkissru lil min hu kapaci. Sa hemm jasal mohhkom. Jien naghti permess lil Daphne tghidlek min jien u x’hin trid ejja sibni jew ibghat lil xi hadd. Pulcinell.

Not as much as Joseph Muscat.

Din magenb il-“.” hux? Jista’ jkun. Maltastar ghandhom ukoll problema fis-CPU li jikteb random rubbish wahdu. Nahseb ghandhom jinvestigaw. Jista’ jkun xi quantum chromodynamic effect.

Hawnhekk, per ezempju, l-ittri “A”, “I” u “D” sparixxew bhall-qattusa ta’ Schrödinger:

http://maltastar.com/pages/r1/ms10dart.asp?a=7954

@GPA. The price depended not just on the variety and choice of suppliers but the technology and the demand consumer demand back then. What you have bought an HDTV or LCD for 500 euros back then? Or an iphone? No. You would have had to big an extra large telecell which looked more like a soldier’s radio. Technology moves according to demand and competition you know. So a point goes to Pn for that competition is good. Unfortunately we still have a monopoly here. And with a monopoly you get the dictatorial attitude, they set the price and you have no choice but to buy or do without.

Today’s average wage is not the minimum wage, Mark, as Daphne explained. And today’s minimum wage is higher than that of Portugal’s and most of the EU’s new member states.

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20080821/local/maltese-wages-12th-lowest-in-eu

You’re a bit mixed up about the Grundig TV set. First you imply that it was so costly because of its supposed superior quality, then you say that it was good to liberalize the economy, suggesting that its price was related to the economics of the time. Make up your mind, please.

Then you’re right Daphne, I would never want this country to go back to those times, however Pn needs to be taught a lesson so they will probably lose the next election unless they can do miracles, they seem to be starting to move again lately and I’m glad all the criticism they got (including mine) are having the desired effects. They should never forget the people or else the people will forget them. Every now and then it seems a party needs to be taught a lesson by voting it out and bringing them back to reality. Power corrupts and people get big headed. It’s human nature. However do not despair I think once they get their act together they will take over once again after 5 years on the sidelines.

@GPA
The average textile factory worker used to earn Lm30 a week. Now the minimum is how much lm60? so it doubles right? While the price of basic necessities triples and gdp is six-fold bigger. Can you spot the difference?

[Daphne – I’m going to have to butt in here, Mark. The thing you don’t seem to know is that BACK THEN ALMOST EVERYONE WAS ON THE MINIMUM WAGE BECAUSE IT WAS THE NORM AND NOT THE EXCEPTION. Now, those who are on the minimum wage are just those doing labourer’s jobs or waitering or the like. Now, do you get it? THERE ARE MANY MORE JOB OPPORTUNITIES NOW AND BACK THEN THERE WAS ZILCH – ZILCH FOR THE MINIMUM WAGE.]

Regarding the lm500 grundig. Guess what we have a grundig downstairs and it still works after 25 years. Nowadays you get a cheap unbranded Tv made in China or Singapore which will only last you a year or two. So you get what you pay for. However I’ll be fair, liberalizing the market was a good move.

Mark C, why don’t you back up your claims with statistics? “Pathetic few euros” won’t do. Do your maths, too.

I know Daphne already mentioned this before, but it seems some repetition won’t do any harm. Wages were a pittance when compared to today’s while commodities were much more expensive. The average textile factory worker used to earn Lm30 a week. A TV set cost nearly Lm500 and you needed to be on the minister’s good books to get it. You would have had to save all your salary for 17 weeks to buy a single TV set. That’s the “Worker’s Movement” for you.

Also, you seem incapable of interpreting what a rising GDP means: that the country is generating more money, Mark. The government’s revenues increase. The same government has more money to spend. Do you seriously believe that the Nationalists could have sustained this kind of infrastructural over-haul, which started over 20 years ago and is still going on, with the money Labour saved up prior to 1987?

Ghandu l-istess problema li ghandhom tal-Maltastar li wehlitilhom il-‘?’