Skip to main content

NYT's Taking Aim at Public Workers

A response to the NYT's Taking Aim at Public Workers

Income inequality is a large part of why American's are worse off when compared to the rest of the developed world (read the The Spirit Level), and that is largely driven by low taxes on wealth and low unionism. Although not entirely a solution, a unionized workforce would fare much better, but it seems the attack on public sector employees is a ploy to drive the wedge down deeper, to divide the less affluent from their money. In a short-sghted way it would reduce costs, but then again, only by beggaring thy neighbor. We would still have the same problems as before, or large deficits, gross income inequality, poorer healthcare, lower educational attainment, and a generally less good quality of life. Rather than reducing public sector employees, we should be trying to increase unionism and decrease income inequality.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Global Warming and Methane Reduction

I was an ovolactovegetarian for several years in my twenties, in the late 1980's, but the lack of convenient food sources, social pressure, and mild athletic anemia, pushed me to adopt more meat-oriented diet. Also, being an insulin-dependent diabetic, eating low-fat, low-carbohydrate protein sources reduced my need for injections. Over time, I have returned to vegetarianism, although my reasons are grounded in self-interest and concern for the environment. My energy consumption is relatively low, as I live in a major city and very selectively use automobiles for transportation. Lately though, I have been reminded that domesticated animals are large contributors to global warming (methane creation) and inefficient protein producers (4 to 16 pounds of grain to produce one pound of meat). Additionally, vegetarianism, and related calorie reduction, are associated with increased longevity. Both have pushed my back to vegetarianism. Regardless of the history, vegetarianism is a better c...

Thoughts on Ageism

Let's see, I'm 46, fairly-fit (certified as personal trainer), intelligent (720 GMAT), youthful (look younger, dress well, tech literate), and vibrant, and I do fear aging. My biggest concern is the loss of intellect that accompanies age. I haven't had cosmetic surgery, but I am not averse to it. Thoughts: Caring about one's appearance is not ageist, and I imagine it is more often the anxiety of someone that is youthful and attractive. Personally, ageist comments have come from 20-somethings, not older people or managers. According to a study, management typically has a higher regard for older workers, in terms of productivity, as well as with people skills, although managers also think younger workers can be more analytical. On an intellectual level, older people tend to be neurologically slower, although the top few percent will increase their IQ up until the early 40's. After that, there is a typical, slowing and loss of intellect.

Living With Aphantasia, the Inability to Make Mental Images

Recently, reading EurekAlert releases, I came across two findings, the first of which I found odd since I assumed the scientific professions required more visualization, not less, while the second conformed to expectations, so did not find surprising: - People with low or no visual imagery are more likely to work in scientific and mathematical industries than creative sectors, according to new research. (Title: Aphantasia clears the way for a scientific career path, UNIVERSITY OF EXETER) - People with low or no visual imagery are more likely to work in scientific and mathematical industries than creative sectors, according to new research. (Title: Aphantasia clears the way for a scientific career path, UNIVERSITY OF EXETER) Contrary to the idea that aphantasia is a hindrance, one study subject "found as a scientific leader that aphantasia helps greatly to assimilate complex information into new ideas and approaches. By understanding concepts vs fact memorization I could lead compl...