Month: May 2012

It may well be that the presidential election in France holds little interest for the self-absorbed American public. It is, however, of immense importance to all the people of the Western world, for the ousting of Sarkozy by Francois Hollande marks a turning point that will set the right-wing, capitalist, establishments shuddering.

Like the Egyptians of the ‘Arab Spring’, the French people have become the first to raise the cry, “Enough is enough!”, and kick their far right ‘President of Bling’ to the touchline.

Hollande is a true Socialist. He promises to be a rarity among politicians: a man more concerned with the needs of the people than the lining of his own bank account. Sarkozy, like so many of today’s politicians, sold out his country to US corporations, and his own ego.

The new French president rides a motor scooter and has returned to his home in the 15th Arondissment of Paris, at least for now, saying he intends to stay there, rather than the overly grand, official, presidential residence at the Elysee Palace.

Hollande has promised to withdraw French troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2012; reduce the share of nuclear power in France from 75% to 50%; raise the level of income tax to 75% for those earning over a million euros, and recruit 60,000 new teachers.

We must wait and see how he fulfills these, and other promises. But of more importance is the symbolic victory of the French people, who have made the first move in taking back their country from the right-wing establishment who milked it, and most of the Western world, for far too long.

Not just in France will those who sleep on the most luxurious mattresses, beneath sheets of finest silk, above soft, deep-piled carpets, do so a little less easily tonight.

How long is a roll of wallpaper?

As one who owned a professional painting and decorating business in the UK for a number of years, I can tell you the answer. It’s thirty-three feet, or 10.05 meters. It always was thirty-three feet, or 10.05 meters, and there’s no reason not to believe it always will be.

If you think I might be wrong, please check out the links at the foot of this page.^[1][2]

It’s important that a roll of wallpaper be thirty-three feet, or 10.05 meters, because that allows for at least three drops per roll on most walls, even if the pattern drop is 20 – 24 inches.

If a roll of wallpaper was, say, sixteen and a half feet long, and the pattern drop was twenty inches, even on an eight foot high wall only one drop of paper could be utilized, leaving a near useless length of around seven feet.

One drop to a roll! Ridiculous! No-one could entertain that. The waste would make it economically unviable.

On this side of the Atlantic, Americans agree. Thirty-three feet, or 10.05 meters, is the right length for a roll of wallpaper.

Well, actually two rolls of wallpaper – in one roll.

A roll of American wallpaper is sixteen and a half feet long (I kid you not!). But as sixteen and a half feet is useless for wallpapering, US wallpaper manufacturers combine one roll into two rolls, but on one roll, if you get my drift?

Don’t worry if you don’t. I didn’t for quite some time. The whole idea is so ridiculous the human brain doesn’t handle it well – until, you realize the reason why US wallpaper manufacturers have devised this convoluted system.

They charge twice as much. They sell a single roll of thirty-three feet as a ‘double’ roll, and charge you double for it. I guess that’s why it’s called a ‘double’ roll! Of course, they’d like you to believe you’re getting twice as much on your roll, but you’re not. Thirty-three feet has been an industry standard for wallpaper rolls for forty-odd years, to my knowledge.

Recently, I purchased eight rolls of wallpaper. The website of the Sherwin-Williams Company advertised the paper at “$22.49 a roll”. They also stated, “This wallpaper is packaged in two rolls. It is priced in single rolls.”

I ordered eight rolls, expecting to receive four packages of two rolls, shrink-wrapped together, each thirty-three feet long. What I received was four individual rolls thirty-three feet long – only half as much paper as I’d expected and needed, each costing, not $22.49 but $44.98. The label informed me these individual rolls were ‘double’ rolls of paper.

To proceed with my decorating I would have to purchase double the amount of paper I’d received, at double the price. Nearly $360.00 for eight rolls of wallpaper.

No wonder they call them ‘double’ rolls. This is an obvious case of ‘double-dealing’.

To perpetrate such a scam in the United Kingdom would never be tolerated.

But then, I guess that’s what marks the difference between the evil Socialism, and Capitalism.

^{[1] “Wallpapers Direct (UK)”}

^{[2] “Ask.com}

Postscript: Since writing this article, I’ve priced a similar wallpaper in the UK. It works out substantially cheaper to purchase in the UK and have it shipped, than to buy one’s wallpaper on High Street, USA.