The delta-V at which I am approaching death has increased because I was crammed into an aluminum tube with two hundred sneezing strangers who unburdened their diseases upon me, and whom I shall meet again tomorrow morning. Now I am worried I will become fat. As I convalesce, here are some links.
Brit director Richard Curtis kills children to save them
I’m not sure what city is the Hollywood of England, but whatever its name, the folks that infest it carry on with the same kind of shenanigans that the self-righteous of Tinseltown do. One of its inhabitants, the director Richard Curtis, creator of the gruesome Love Actually and treacly Four Weddings and a Funereal, thought it would be great fun to kill some kids who were not sufficiently concerned with global warming.
On film, that is. He thought that having a teacher explode some school kids who did not do their greenhouse gas homework was funny.
Exploding children has consequences. For one, the debris of the explodants, if we can call them that, must be accounted for. The video is a splatter fest.
Bypassing a “degree” better for waller
An entry by Sarah Kaufman in the Washington Post: “Some say bypassing a higher education is smarter than paying for a degree.”
This, by now standard analysis, agrees with what we have been talking about: if all you are after is a “degree”—and not an education—just so that you can earn money, it often pays skip college altogether. I would have become an electrician myself.
E-“degree” does not mean elite “degrees”
Similarly, the Telegraph tells us that “Traditional university courses could become the preserve of an elite as growing numbers of students take on-line degrees, according to a report. ”
They use the word elite like it’s a bad thing.
The people who are taking “e-degrees” are behaving rationally. Just as the previous story tells us, most go go college merely to secure a “degree”, which they know they must have if they want a job from a company that requires a “degree”, as most now do. Since a “degree” isn’t always consonant with an education, they may as will point and click for it.
Everybody should work for the government
Another Telegraph story: “Myth of the underpaid public sector worker.” Here’s the good news:
The Office for National Statistics found that full-time public sector staff earned an average of Â£74 a week more than those in the private sector. Once employer pension contributions were included, the gap rose to Â£136, illustrating the generous pay-and-perks deals enjoyed by local and central government workers.
If only we could get more people working for the government, then incomes would rise, the poverty level would drop, prosperity would reign. Simple mathematics proves that (economic) paradise must then arrive the very day all worked for the government.
At least, the government should pay everybody
Our theme today, unintentionally, is England, where somebody had an incredible idea to prevent tax cheats. Have the “private” sector become wards of the state!
The “private” companies would turn their payroll over the government, who would then dole out just the right amount—and no more—to the People.
What would go wrong?