Interesting Links for 16-04-2012

[andrewducker]

• 51% of people in favour of making everyone's tax returns public. 60% want charities excluded from tax limits.
  (tags: transparentsociety charity tax )
• The UK government's war on internet freedom
  (tags: censorship surveillance internet uk )
• Goverment wasting money on ludicious pseudo-psychology "positive thinking" courses for jobseekers.
  Could it be worth, perhaps, training them in actual skills and CV writing instead?
  (tags: EpicFail uk welfare )
• First gene linked to intelligence found (worth 1.3 IQ, so not that big a change.)
  (tags: genetics intelligence )
• Canada's newest coin has a glow-in-the-dark dinosaur on it. Good enough reason to move?
  (tags: canada money awesome )
• Using non-Newtonian fluids to fill potholes
  (tags: engineering fluid roads )

Comments

[miss_s_b]

Given that there's so few job available, perhaps those sent on the positive thinking courses have already DONE all the other courses, and of course they have to be forced to do SOMETHING pointless to fill their time...

[naath.livejournal.com]

Gotta move to Canada!

Canadian coins

[doubtingmichael.livejournal.com]

"Her Majesty does not glow in the dark."

...
"Your Majesty?"
"Yes, secretary? What is it?"
"It's the Canadians, ma'm. They want to put out a new coin, with your face on it."
"One should hope they did put one's face on it! That's a rule. What's the problem?"
"They want it to glow. Is that acceptable?"
"Glow! What do they mean?"
"Your face would glow in the dark."
"What, like a traffic light?"
"More like a dinosaur, ma'm."
"I didn't think dinosaurs glowed in the dark. One could ask Philip - one thinks he may have shot a few in his younger days."
"The dinosaur on the coin will glow, ma'm."
"Then the answer's no. One will not have the people of Canada confused between one's royal self and a dinosaur."
"Indeed. One is a relic of a long past age with almost no brain, and the other is..."
"You're fired!"

Re: Canadian coins

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

ROFL!

[bohemiancoast.livejournal.com]

I bet the vast majority of those 51% don't submit a tax return.

[andrewducker]

I assume that it would (as in the Nordic countries) include automatic tax returns.

[bohemiancoast.livejournal.com]

Also -- "The reverse side features a portrait of Queen Elizabeth. Her Majesty does not glow in the dark."

Tempting though this coin is, if the Queen's portrait had also featured a glow-in-the-dark skeleton, that would have made the coin an *essential collectible* for me. They should make a note for next time.

[calum]

I may have to get me one of those coins when I visit Canada.

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

"Goverment wasting money on ludicious pseudo-psychology "positive thinking" courses for jobseekers."

There's some truth in the idea: people who do better in life, in addition to having greater opportunities, typically do better because they EXPECTED to do better -- because they applied without embarrassment for highly prestigious positions, because they subconsciously modelled themselves on successful people, etc, etc.

But also, it seems unspeakable to force people to believe scientific lies in order to look for work. I mean, maybe I'm too wedded to scientific purity, but it just seems so petty to say "ok, now believe this pack of lies and if you can't, you don't eat". Today, lies about psychology, tomorrow, lies about public policy, next tuesday, outright indoctrination?

And I'm constantly amazed at how oblivious people can be about a recession. There's an economic slump. Suddenly more people are out of work.

Hypothesis A: everyone suddenly got lazier, and the employers said "hm, this crop of candidates sucks, I won't hire anyone at all, I'll wait until they pull their socks up".

Hypothesis B: there are fewer jobs because all the businesses are cutting back.

I don't see how even a five-year-old could think A is more likely than B. I think the number of people who successfully apply for jobs that the employer never intended to offer is tiny. (I mean, that WILL happen in some industries, where a software engineering house doesn't hire people for specific jobs, but hires as many people as it can. But there's no point thinking positive unless they're already qualified to do the job but aren't hired because they're too negative.)

So however good people are at applying for jobs, it'll only shuffle round which people have the jobs. If more people are going to work, they need MORE JOBS. More training or more starting up their own businesses would also help. But if the stupid positive thinking worked, would the employer make up a TOTALLY NEW job for this applicant? Really? Or would they simply get the job at the expense of someone else?

In retrospect, that was a stupid rhetorical question. Presumably people at the job centre genuinely want to help, but don't have the power to do anything other than try to help people get existing jobs. And the government has to push people SOMEHOW, and if people taking themselves off benefits, and having no choice but throwing themselves on the mercy of relatives/friends/charities (or simply starving) is the only option, well, that's the one they'll take...