Good, better, best

~~~

We know what `better` is.

It is whatever is top of your priority pyramid.

What could a `better life` be~?

We will throw in … food, shelter, basic safety … what else would make it `better`~?

~~~

Is it possible that a better-educated person leads a `fuller` life~?

(this being linked to above, where living a `fuller life` could be high on the priority pyramid)

The question could be put … something like –
Is `ignorance is bliss` possibly `better` than `knowing of so-much, that life becomes painful`.

Or, turned-around … Could the `pain` that comes with `knowledge` lead to a `fuller life` that is `better` than an ignorant life~?

~~~

Modern Media. Mainstream Media. Mass Media.

The `references` that are included are `easy` (re-referencing of other `common` media) but I guess they give a-bit-of-a-buzz, but are they `quality buzzes` like I get from classical references in books like Middlemarch, or Ulysses~?
When one gets a good classical reference, one gets a real-big-up the old-ego … don’t you know~!

~~~

Bit of a baby-boom-year in China.
When they be older, do you think there will be jobs for them~?

When they be grown, will all this be settled down to normal~?

~~~

~~~

Words

~~~

Branko Milanovic
Why 20th century tools cannot be used to address 21st century income inequality?

What to do with labor? There, in a rich and well-educated society, the issue is not just to make education more accessible to those who did not have a chance to study (although that too is obviously important) but to equalize the returns to education between equally educated people. Significant source of wage inequality is not any longer the difference in the years of schooling (as it was in the past), but the difference in wages (for the same number of years of education) based either on the perceived or actual difference in school qualities. The way to reduce this inequality is to equalize the quality of schools. This, in the US, and increasingly in Europe as well, implies improvement in the quality of public schools (a point argued by Bernie Sanders in the recent US election). This can be achieved only by large investments in improved public education and by withdrawals of numerous advantages (including tax-free status) enjoyed by private universities that command huge financial endowments. Without the leveling of the playing field between private and public schools, a mere increase in the number of years of schooling or the ability of a rare child of lower middle class status to attend elite colleges (that increasingly serve only the rich), will not reduce inequality in labor incomes.

The question – `What to do with labor~?`
The Answer – `Education`.

This is of-course right … but, I can’t see it being right as Branko states it.

~~~

NYT
2 of a Farmer’s 3 Children Overdosed. What of the Third — and the Land?

This is another piece, like the one from a couple-of-days-ago.

What I am trying to point-out, is that without `hope` people will fall-apart.

~~~

~~~

Education is `programming`.

When is it better to program-the-people with `propaganda` `shit` and `lies`?

People are, to a great extent, `their programming`.

Surely that is the 21st. century tool that needs to be used~?

~~~

People are now being `programmed` to believe that if they learn their school-programming really well … they will do really well in `life`.

People are now being programmed to believe that if they don’t do well at school … life will shit on them.

Question – What percent of people can `do well at school`?

~~~

~~~

Which is/was better~?

~~~

It is hard to write this, because I know as soon as I go `too far` you will `just stop listening`.

~~~

Let’s go back to the Ford Focus. What is it~?

Is it a `Ford Focus`?

In what way is it a `Ford Focus`?

~~~

I’ll stop there.

If you `engaged` with those questions (you `stopped` for a second) (that is, voices-in-your-head came with `answers`) then that is what I would call `listening`.

If you `just read on` with no voices coming-up with `answers`. Then you are the sort that is `deaf` to what I would have said (and, is probably deaf to what most people say, most of the time).

~~~

I put it down to television, but don’t care if that is not in the slightest bit right … that, I `listen` to most everything everyone says (in voice, or print, or what).

But, I find that many people struggle to listen to anything much.

~~~

All of this is very easy to misunderstand.

If someone was telling me what a Ford Focus was … I would listen `quietly` (as in – no (very few) `voices`)

But, like above, if asked a question … voices arise in answer.

~~~

The above, is meant to serve as an opening for asking you what is at the top of your `pyramid of important shit`?

For some (most) it will be `la famiglia`.
Then perhaps `work`.
`Football team`.
`Church`.
`Ford Focus`.
`Getting laid / stoned / elected / … ? …`

~~~

Life leads each-one-of-us to a different pyramidical form.

~~~

I have only listened to the first two minutes thirty nine of this … at-which-point I said to myself that it was not for me.

When the voices start shouting … I think it is best to stop.

~~~

Which is/was better … the `old way` or the `new way`.

Hello … Hello … follow-up question — Why~?

~~~

This is a nigger sitting on a white-folk’s bus (South Africa)

This is an old 747

~~~

Botchalism

~~~

The Institute on Religion and Public Life
AMERICAN CARNAGE

The director of a Midwestern state’s mental health programs emailed a chart called “‘Watch What You Call Me’: The Changing Language of Addiction and Mental Illness,” compiled by the Boston University doctor Richard Saltz. It is a document so Orwellian that one’s first reaction is to suspect it is a parody, or some kind of “fake news” dreamed up on a cynical website. We are not supposed to say “drug abuse”; use “substance use disorder” instead. To say that an addict’s urine sample is “clean” is to use “words that wound”; better to say he had a “negative drug test.” “Binge drinking” is out—“heavy alcohol use” is what you should say. Bizarrely, “attempted suicide” is deemed unacceptable; we need to call it an “unsuccessful suicide.” These terms are periphrastic and antiscientific. Imprecision is their goal. Some of them (like the concept of a “successful suicide”) are downright insane. This habit of euphemism and propaganda is not merely widespread. It is official. In January 2017, less than two weeks before the end of the last presidential administration, drug office head Michael Botticelli issued a memo called “Changing the Language of Addiction,” a similarly fussy list of officially approved euphemisms.

Too much capital~!!

~~~

Bloomberg
RBS Poised to Jettison Unprofitable Clients, Sell Loan Books

The U.K. government-owned lender may divest commercial real estate loans in chunks of 300 million pounds ($365 million) to 400 million pounds to help reach its target to reduce risk-weighted assets by 20 billion pounds, Alison Rose, head of commercial and private banking, said in an interview. The bank will also reduce lending facilities for some clients.

“We’re sizing the capital appropriately for making the right returns,” Rose said. For some customers “that’s going to be really difficult; in which case we’ll make the tough decision that we’re not going to deploy the capital. They have multiple banks, so they can get their capital from them.”

“You can see different banks having to make different choices around their capital footprint,” Rose said. Capital is “a scarce resource that’s expensive for banks. You’ve got to deploy it in way that drives value for customers and shareholders.”

“The returns now for those clients maybe look terrible because there’s too much capital,” Rose said. There’s a “number of clients where we’re just not making returns so we’ll mutually exit. They’re sophisticated and it’s a very pragmatic business conversation.”

~~~

~~~