A great article on why Pay Transparency really works:
“Huet-Vaughn concedes he has no idea why this happened. But he has a great theory: We don’t care as much about the amount we make as long as we know we’re not being taken advantage of. And not knowing what other people earn is, de facto, a breeding ground for doubt.”
Well, this feeling might actually kick in only after a certain ceiling has been penetrated but this is a great insight, nevertheless.
Things are relatively simple.
Vaccines work for whole populations, not necessarily for individuals. In order to make them acceptable those who market them try (or at least should try) to make them as good as possible.
For a rational (but callous) individual the best thing to do is to make sure that he is the only one not vaccinated: he cannot catch the disease since nobody can have it yet suffers no possible side effects from being inoculated.
If enough people opt out then the whole effort would have been in vain. The immunity obtained by vaccination isn’t as strong as the one one gets after surviving the disease so if enough people get the disease because they haven’t been vaccinated at all then older people, those who have been vaccinated first, start to fall ill.
From this point on nobody would vaccinate anymore their children – because it’s useless, right? – while the right thing to do would be to get a second vaccine, a rappel.
What’s getting on my nerves is the fact that sometimes we trust ‘scientists’/’technicians’ with our lives (for instance when we get aboard airplanes) yet other times we develop all kind of wild theories (about vaccines, for instance).
Of course we need to be extremely careful, both when choosing an airline or a pharmaceutical company, but to refuse altogether to fly or to vaccinate your children…
Amandoi, atat clientul cat si ‘restauratorul’ sunt vinovati de ‘lacomie’. Uita ca ‘banul’ si mancarea sunt doar unelte. Primul masoara cat de eficienta este activitatea noastra iar a doua ne tine in viata.
Din pacate le-am transformat pe amandoua in ‘obiective strategice’.
Si iar imi aduc aminte de bunica-mea care ma intreba “ce crezi tu, noi oamenii mancam ca sa traim sau traim ca sa mancam?”
Iar daca uitam ca scopul primordial al activitatii noastre (actul de a manca este inclus aici) este in realitate “supravietuirea” (atat cea fizica, individuala, cat si cea ‘sociala’ – adica a mediului social si economic care ne face posibila existenta fizica) vom sfarsi prin a da faliment/muri de foame sau din cauza obezitatii. Ca sa nu mai vorbim despre faptul ca asta se va intampla in mijlocul unei gropi de gunoi.
Excellent post.
Obama failed to fulfill, by far, both the promises he made when he run for president AND the hopes/illusions nurtured by those who voted for him but holding him accountant for all the misery that befell on the regular Joe is a little too much.
This kind of mistakes is very costly. Those who forget that the daily actions of each and everyone of us aggregate into our common destiny tend to believe that we might change our fortune simply by changing the leader.
History has proven, time and again, that we’ll keep making the same mistake until we’ll eventually understand what went wrong. And start doing ourselves what needs to be done instead of looking up to somebody above us to direct our actions.
Some believe innocence is lost when becoming sexually active.
Some others understand, mostly the hard way, that being innocent means not being able to discern crooks from trustworthy people and that sometimes this condition cannot be cured.
Not that simple…
Those who have understood something from studying history already know that eventually people will learn to avoid repeating the same mistakes… or else…
It is true that new mistakes appear all the time!
Pe timp si pe experienta lucrului facut asa cum trebuie:
Cica ‘barbatii sunt de pe Marte iar femeile de pe Venus’ dar daca tot s-au hotarat sa traiasca impreuna pe Pamant de ce nu se adapteaza oare noilor conditii?
nicichiarasa 