In Brussels during the past weeks, there was a noticeable decrease in commercial activity. Shops had less customers than I remember is usual when end of the year festivities are approaching. There were no queues outside the Primark shop on Rue Neuve.

In Paris, the media reported a sharp drop in sales and economic activity, with hotels facing unexpected losses on operations.

Airports too were less crowded. Yet at Strasbourg airport for instance, you spent more time than usual going through new border controls run by staff who have lost the habit of checking passports.

In France and Belgium, businesses are claiming compensation for their ongoing losses.

A consequence of terrorism – one which is rarely mentioned – is that beyond the increase in public expenditure that comes in its wake, the private sector experiences significant economic damage.

The masterminds of terrorism are fully aware of this.

***

Print media

I do not know what the commercial strategy underpinning the move is, but I doubt whether it makes sense. After all, as far as I know, newspapers are hardly flourishing in the face of competition from the social media.

For quite some time now, dailies and the weekend press have been supplying us with magazines stuffed with pictures and stories, but mostly adverts. I guess that not all readers appreciated them, but at least they were “free”.

Now, a practice has developed by which with some magazine or other that a paper publishes, it increases the price of the issue, presumably to cover the cost of the additional publication being distributed.

I happen to be one of those readers who just wish to read the newspaper, and refuse to pay a higher price for it in order to cover a publication I do not wish to get. I followed this rule even when “The Times” and “The Malta Independent” adopted both of them on the same day, this price measure which I think, shows disrespect towards their readers.

***

Social policy or charity?

The fundraising campaigns organized at this time of year provoke some reflection regarding the kind of society we prefer to live in.

Is it one where the well being of those among us who need support and help has to depend on the generosity of others?

Or is it a society in which the collectivity takes care to implement an effective social policy to cover in full the needs of those whose life is burdened with some disadvantage?

In other words, are we satisfied that Dar tal-Providenza for instance does not only have to take care of persons with special needs, but must also organize fundraising to carry on with its work?

Or do we prefer that this institution receives public funds, financed from our taxes, in order to run all its operations?

Personally I prefer the second option. I always found people though who argued that this is not possible and that you must never write off voluntary contributions and “charity”.

I agree with the last point.

But perhaps, voluntary contributions and charity should take the form of time deducted by people from their day to day activities? For monetary donations have also become a way by which individually we absolve ourselves from all other responsibilities towards the rest.