We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Klein argues, we need to break free of market fundamentalism and implement long-term planning, strict regulation of business, more taxation, more government spending and reversals of privatization to return key infrastructure to public control.
Science does not prove anything in strict terms. Science merely provides a disciplined process by which the most probable explanation (theory) of a set of observations at a defined scale and within defined bounds can be determined. But a scientist must always be open to new evidence that forces the rethinking of the theory.
The BA has almost always been a screening technique rather than advanced skills. The theory being that the college graduate had, by the nature of the their classes, learned to order their thoughts and ferret out knowledge from original sources. As such, the college graduate had more potential beyond the immediate job than their non-college counterpart. It was, and still is, playing the odds by employers although the signal of the college degree is growing weaker.
There was one bit of the article that I had myself noted but had never seen explicitly described; "“The phenomenon of upcredentialing is particularly strong" where the people who manage the talent pool have degrees themselves, particularly with H.R.-department-let hiring processes.
But I think the answer to the question is here:
You can't legally have a general aptitude or intelligence test for employment screening. But you can often plausibly have some credential as a requirement for the post, with that credential serving as a proxy. You end up with a much higher rate of type 1 errors than type 2 errors, but with a big enough applicant pool why would you care?
As we know from history those nations that "implement[ed] long-term planning, strict regulation of business, more taxation, more government spending and reversals of privatization to return key infrastructure to public control" were paragons of environmental stewardship. Those nations developed alternatives to coal and wood for heating and cooking. They made machinery, vehicles and appliances both more energy efficient and safer to operate. As well as less of an impact on the environment.
You have to matriculate at an "elite" college for a lot of years to become that ignorant of economics, history, science and technology.
Now, having observed this, let us turn back to the question of whether a college degree is representative of advanced skills or a screening technique.
I submit that at the NYTimes the college degree is a screen to ensure their employees have the "right" opinions. Which they then use in writing in the NY Times, which is itself used as a screening technique by the monied, but low class, readers of the NY Times.
"implement long-term planning, strict regulation of business, more taxation, more government spending and reversals of privatization to return key infrastructure to public control."
So how is the Warmist solution any different from what Marx advocated? More to the point since they now are not even hiding their agenda why doso many still support this fraud? Well, the answer is too easy, those supporting the fraud are intentionally and happily supporting the Marxist/socialist agenda. This isn't about global warming and never has been. It is about power and politics.
of course appreciate your web site but you should check the spelling with numerous of your respective threads apparel coupon. A few of possibilities rife using punctuational challenges i to find them really problematic to express to the simple truth on the other hand I most certainly will undoubtedly revisit once more.