Archive for June, 2009

Ponzi

Monday, June 29th, 2009

A Ponzi scheme, as run by good ole boy Bernie Madoff (pronounced made off, as in with the money), is one where “investors” are encouraged to buy shares in the scheme with a promise of a good return. There is no investment at the end of the day, the money goes into a big pot from which the scheme organisers help themselves.

New investors’ money is then used to pay dividends on the original investors’ money.

Early investors are delighted because they get the return they were promised, which means that new investors are easy to get.

Eventually, however, the money runs out, as there are no new investors.


A government pension scheme is one where civil servants are enticed into the job by the prospect of a gold-plated pension at the end of service. There is no investment at the end of the day, the money goes into a big pot from which the scheme organisers help themselves.

New employees’ money is then used to pay out on the original employees’ pensions.

Early employees are delighted because they get the pension they were promised, which means that new employees are easy to get.

Eventually, however, the money runs out, as there are so many employees now on pensions that it is impossible to employ enough new ones to pay for them.


Bernard Madoff knew what he was doing, got away with it for not quite long enough to ensure his death before he was found out, and will go to jail for several offences including money laundering, fraud etc.


The government knew what they were doing, got away with it for not quite long enough to be unseated in the next general election, and will now get pensions for life plus cash handouts for losing government and their seats.

Conclusion: life is fair? I think a good jury would get Madoff off the hook.

My Manifesto - Education

Tuesday, June 23rd, 2009

The first in a series of manifesto items for the rootcause party (which doesn’t actually exist, but should).

EDUCATION

The three R’s would come back, immediately. Reading, wRiting and aRithmetic.

Anyone, that means anyone, declaring that it is not important to be literate and numerate will be discarded. If this person happens to be in a position of authority he should be immediately sacked and given ten years of roundabout-planting duty outside primary schools.

Any other form of education starts once the three R’s have been mastered. There is no point educating people in what comparative religions are, or what they are for, nor training them to be anything beginning with ps or ph, nor indeed anything else, until they have a grasp of the principles from which all of these other things will start to come.

Streaming, the mechanism whereby people of differing abilities are separated, will be brought back. There is a fundamental reason for this: all people are not born equal. The expression is “all people are born equal in the sight of God” and God doesn’t care whether they can read, write, add up or even walk in a straight line, if at all. But education, correct me please if I’m wrong, is the tool which prepares one for what lies ahead, which is life. Life is not free unless you are a bird, fish or animal of any kind, wild or domesticated. Humans don’t naturally co-exist as a philanthropic society, they vie. They argue. They aspire. All are not equal because, if they were, they would all be CEO’s of banks and all earn ten million pounds per year. People who can’t do the three R’s will not get very far up the ladder which one must climb to get to the CEO’s luxurious office on the top floor.

However, nature proves not to be capricious, it seems. In my humble job up the middle of the pecking order I meet people from the top and the bottom alike (mainly in the smoking shelter, thanks to Bliar). The ones at the top are often struggling, often scared, often pole turtles (see pole turtle picture below if you are not familiar with the term), and some are quite unhappy. The same applies to the people at the bottom. So in effect they are the same, apart from the fact that some of the people at the bottom could do the jobs of those at the top, but not vice-versa.

A typical Pole Turtle

A typical Pole Turtle

Education should not try to protect the weak. If it does, it is merely raising the level of pride thus increasing the depth of an inevitable fall.

I remember being very upset when (much) younger; I had made a circuit board for a radio control for a model boat. The chap who kindly supervised me, a next-door neighbour called Max, said to me upon first inspection of my finished article “I see art is not your strong point.” He then did it again, as it was pretty much beyond repair. Art is not my strong point, although I subsequently qualified as an electronic engineer.

My point is this: had Max said “Wow! Fantastic, lovely job.” I would probably have taken him at his word, sunk the boat, and become a really bad artist (which I am). So: teachers, governments, people, anyone with ears; reality. It hurts, but nowhere near as much as falling from the dizzy height to which you’re elevating your victims.

Not everyone should, or wants to, go on to further education. It is counter-productive in the wrong circumstances. It does not teach you how to live on your own, and do your washing, and manage on a budget. Living on your own, doing your washing and managing on a budget teaches that, and does not need to be interspersed with teaching and exams.

Educate to ability. Educate to aspirations, as long as those aspirations are achieveable. If you or little Johnny want to be doctors, then be doctors, if you can cope with a lot of hard work, sleepless nights, pressure, watching people die while you look on helplessly. If you or little Johnny are what we used to call ESN (I don’t know the PC term for it so ESN it is), then you won’t be doctors, but then nor will you aspire to be.

I know tree surgeons who make more money than real surgeons, have a lot more fun, have very little stress and can still function after a night on the tiles. They are still saddened when a patient dies though.

Lastly, I moot this: no formal education has ever prepared me to recognise an opportunity when I see one. It should be a subject on its own. Perhaps they do that now, and if so I would love to know.

Please feel free to call me a rightist/leftist/racist/nazi/pinko or whatever, it doesn’t bother me much and I just love a good argument.

The passing of the book

Tuesday, June 16th, 2009

I notice today from the Bee Bee Sea webby neurons that the humble book is to be phased out by Mr Arnold Shwarznegger, rubbish actor and governor of California (search for BBC A Textbook love affair)

I agree with this. I understand it too, because everything anyone could ever want is available on the interweb now.

Here is some useful information, so that when schoolchildren and even researchers google (yes, it’s a verb) for something they will find it here.

1. A shark is not a fish.
2. A woman has one more chromosome than a man, and it is the “Y” chromosome.
3. The hare has exactly the same DNA as a human making it indistinguishable from us (apart from the extra two legs).
4. Llamas are used to herd sheep because they are capable of independent thought, unlike sheep.
5. The wolf is the only wild animal with an opposable thumb.

There. All conveniently stored in one small space, useful not only for ‘A’ level study but also for compiling pub quizzes. In the olden days, Messrs Monty Python had a spoof book of lies, written by the Hackenthorpe brothers and allegedly published by Slater-Nazi, as I seem to remember dimly. The interweb seems to have gleaned some of its information therefrom, especially in the environs of Wikipedia.

I suspect that if the web site used by the students and researchers was run and written by people who know at least something about their subject, that would be fine. But that would be, to all intents and purposes, a book, wouldn’t it? Maybe not a paper book, handsomely bound, but a source of information.

Instead of sitting comfortably and perusing the book, the student could sit up straight, strain his eyes, burn his thighs, get Repetitive Strain Injury whilst scrolling his mouse wheel, and a whole schoolful of students could then in a single evening  consume about the same power as a jumbo jet flying from London to New York.

Excellent plan, Mr Shwarznegger.

But, as usual, I have a better one. Below the line down there, copy the text until the line even further down there then, using your favourite text editor, such as Notepad, paste it in. Repeat on separate pages for each test then print it, and you will have created your own book.


Eleven-plus exam, some years ago:

In the following word pairs, one letter can be moved from the first word to the second word leaving two different words. The letters must not be otherwise arranged and both new words must be real words.

SCARF : RAIL

GUILT : POND

BLIND : SAY


English Language ‘O’ Level paper, 2008:

In the following word pairs, one letter can be moved from the first word to the second word leaving two different words. The letters must not be otherwise arranged and both new words must be real words.

SCARF : RAIL

GUILT : POND

BLIND : SAY


If any English teachers would like to use any of this material they are more than welcome.

Beware that any comments added to this post may not be ratified and as such it is advised that users of this material should do their own research to validate them, using such tools as Google and Wikipedia which can be found on the interweb and used freely.

Toller Porcorum, like Haddock

Monday, June 15th, 2009

There will be four (4) people in the whole of the world who have any idea of what the title means, and I’m not sure about at least three (3) of them.

Toller Porcorum is a mixture of Olde-Anglo-Saxon toller, meaning valley, and latin porcorum being the genitive (plural) of pig. According to the internet, so it must be true, the Toller is the old name of the river which flows through the village of Toller Porcorum, which has since been named the river Hooke, but my friend Rosalind Buttered-Crumpet informs me that it means “valley” and so “valley” it is.

So I spent the weekend in the valley of the pigs.

“Are there pigs?” I enquired.

“Not a one.” retorted Rosalind, authoritatively.

One does not argue with Rosalind.  An acclaimed (and bronzed, she told me not to omit) erstwhile writer of many things not limited to cordon-gendarme cookery, she knows. Had she not made the decision to spend time in the real world, in a Felicity Kendal stylee, she would be a rather good blog writer.

Anyway, we had spent some considerable time discussing the merits of the American (mis)use of words such as “leverage” as a verb, management-speak and its uselessness and, more importantly, the word “like” as a hesitation mark. Like, er, like, um, ah. And the general concensus is that it had close to zero value in any context apart from that of its original meaning, for instance when introducing a simile. But more than simile, it introduced a smile. And a conundrum, as you will see.

Sunday brought us to a publick house known as the Spyway, a smugglers pub in Askerswell. I can recommend this pub on a nice day as there is an ample garden with attractive water feature and, if you ask, you can get an ashtray too. Inside if wet is not so attractive an option as the bar is small. Cosy is a word which would also describe it adequately, but small is more accurate.

Into the second pint, mid-discussion into the colouring of the bee orchid (don’t ask), the young lady-in-waiting approached our table and interjected “Excuse me, did you order like haddock?”

Conversation stopped. “Like haddock? No, not us.”

She left, bearing what was presumably like haddock, to seek those who ordered it, leaving us to work out how “order like haddock” should be punctuated.

I have since tried going into the shop to order some Marlboro, like haddock. It is not easy, you have to mouth the words in a haddocky way, as haddock (so far as I can gather) can not, or will not, speak. You can’t point like a haddock, as haddock’s extremities are designed for navigating the salty depths, not for pointing. It is like being paralysed in a foreign country whose language you know not wot. Of. I assume that you can’t order like haddock, you can only really order like a human.

I have tried Joe’s Fish Restaurant. “Have you anything like Haddock?” I asked. Apparently there is nothing like haddock, although obviously cod would be more like haddock than, say, cottage pie. So I assume that there is nothing that, technically, is like haddock, and conclude that the young lady must have meant “Did you order, like, er, um, haddock?”

My message to young (and old, alike) is this:

“Like”. It is a versatile word, being a noun, verb, adjective, preposition, conjunction, adverb, even a verbal auxiliary and not least a suffix, in the case of haddock-like.

It is not a substitute for er, em, like, arrrgh.

And my message to those lovely people who explain from positions of apparent authority that it doesn’t matter if we spell properly, use our native language properly, and pick up junk American langauge faster than we can build a new McDonalds is this:

Yes, it bloody well does. Like.