The title of this week's blog is a derivation of Francis Wheen's book Strange Days Indeed: The Golden Age of Paranoia in which he reflects on the peculiar and sometimes inexplicable events of the 1970s.
I wonder in another 30 years whether period we are living through will be looked at similarly?
However, a potential problem for conspiracy theorists is that hardly a day goes by without another exposure of underhand, or worse, corrupt goings-on in institutions we are supposed to revere.
For those interested in such things, Private Eye is always a good place to discover questionable practice by leaders of 'UK PLC'
What's utterly depressing in the majority of accounts of organisational wrongdoing is that the motivation of those involved is usually hubris coupled with outright greed.
And when future generations look back on this period I wonder what they will make of the fact that in less than the time that it takes for a child to go through primary school there is now what seems to be seems almost a collective desire to simply forget the things that got us into the mess that caused global financial crisis; over-reliance on speculation associated with property development.
To be fair, many voices are being raised expressing concern that our economic recovery is not as robust as it might be.
Close examination of recent economic data demonstrates that an unhealthy reliance is being placed in consumer spending.
This may be by people who, having experienced years of austerity resulting from, at best, wages that are stagnant or increasing below the rate of inflation, are having a 'blow out' to make themselves feel better.
One sad aspect is that people are willing to spend money from personal savings - which let's face it offer woeful rates - rather than on investment in their pensions.
This may be why property speculation appears so appealing.
If decent rates of return on savings are not an option - and property speculation does - then it is hardly surprising that people will be lured into 'bricks and mortar'.
It's worth recalling that back in the 1980s under Margaret Thatcher we were promised a share-owning revolution through the selling off of state-owned utilities.
Whilst individuals undoubtedly bought the shares that were made available, they also sold them off rapidly to make the quick gains available shortly after flotation; Royal Mail shows that this tendency continues.
Ultimately all the major utility companies are now owned by investors who, in many cases, are overseas-based and whose primary interest is short-term.
What is really needed is a society in which we all invest our savings in the organisations we work for in such a way as to create long-term value from which all stakeholders benefit.
The likes of the John Lewis Partnership is a wonderful paragon of what a share-owning democracy really looks like.
And not for the first time I would suggest that we should look to Germany to see what can be created in a society in which there is a more genuine sense of workers and management collaborating in a way that is much less frequently found in this country.
But let's take a reality check.
Despite everything we were told about the urgent need to reform banks there seems to be a lot of foot-dragging and excuses about how difficult it is to create change.
We keep being told how critical it is to ensure that the City of London remains in the 'big league' though as one sage I heard a few years ago described it, it is resonant with Wimbledon in that though Brits take part, it is the overseas players who ultimately win. That stated, I sincerely hope last year's win by Andy Murray was the first of many Wimbledon titles.
The 'London' effect is currently being examined in the two-part BBC Two programme Mind the Gap: London v the Rest .
Presenter Evan Davis tells us things that we all probably know here in the Midlands. Whilst everyone is still struggling to cope with the effects of the financial crash, London has already recovered and, moreover, continues to power ahead of the rest of the UK by its ability to attract international investment.
In order to maintain its success, London needs to procure workers who, though they are usually paid more than would be the case here in Birmingham, cannot afford to live there and commute daily instead.
This vast migration can be seen early every morning at stations serving London.
One commentator in The Telegraph recently drew parallels with the property crash in Tokyo in the late 1980s and wondered whether the frenzied increases being experienced in London will result in a similar conclusion.
Alarmingly, London generates a fifth of Britain's GDP.
The key question that has been asked in recent years is how more of the investment that London manages to garner can be secured for cities elsewhere such as here in Birmingham?
Birmingham is the traditional home of manufacturing which creates real value as opposed to the notional increases in asset prices traded in the City of London.
Many argue that this area can return to former glory through investment in the high-value engineering expertise and innovation will replicate the success enjoyed by Birmingham-based Jaguar Land Rover.
And as a way of facilitating this dream there is a belief by some, including Greater Birmingham and Solihull Local Enterprise Partnership Chair Andy Street, that renaming part of the West Midlands 'Greater Birmingham' should be considered. This area would include Birmingham Wolverhampton, Dudley, Sandwell, Walsall and Solihull.
But let's return to the reality of the 'here and now'.
It is widely accepted that we have a productivity problem; we produce no more in real terms that was the case before the financial crash.
That unemployment has not risen more dramatically is perhaps something to be grateful though those still in who and who struggle to make ends meet will possibly argue otherwise.
In order to survive companies have simply not invested in the sort of new equipment that is standard in the high-tech engineering companies found in Germany's Mittelstand.
Late week we are informed that The Financial Times has analysed models produced by the Office for Budget Responsibility of public finance and which suggest that because of the lack of growth in industries such as manufacturing and static productivity, the deficit is forecast to be £20 billion more than planned.
This will mean that austerity will have to continue until the end of the decade at least.
What is equally worrying - if not plain bizarre - is that despite the incredible achievements of this region in recent years such as exports up 30% in the last two years compared to 2% nationally and a trade surplus with China, we have an impending crisis with engineering skills.
We are not training sufficient replacements for those engineers who are due to retire.
We are told that HS2 is essential for the future prosperity of Birmingham and the surrounding region; something I am not against though I think there is a danger that we will simply become an extension of London and trade will go south instead of north as its advocates argue will be the result of building this rail line.
However, what we really need is urgent investment in training of the next generation of engineers who will produce the innovation and wealth that will pay for HS2 and maintain public services that we currently take for granted.
In 2004 Anthony Sampson wrote his seminal text, Who Runs This Place?: The Anatomy of Britain in the 21st Century in which he examined the real basis of power and influence.
Apparently, one reason for our government not intervening in Ukraine is the concern about trade links with Russia.
Additionally, cynics suggest, there is a fear about the huge amounts of money invested in this country, particularly in London, by Russian Oligarchs who might be upset by any trade sanctions we might carry out as a consequence of intervention in Crimea.
All that can be said is that these are interesting times indeed!
