It's obvious (to a cynic like me) that the story is simply a filler in between more important (and more true) stories coming along. I base this assumption on the fact that the news can use it numerous times over a decade.
What strikes me is that none of this information they give is very useful. It's not like you can see whether any trends are forming from a sample of reports over, say, 10 years because every report has different variables.
Some of them are based in London, some for the entirety of the UK. Some reports are based on paying for private education, some on state. Some are based on two full-time working parents, some are based on a single working parent.
What good is that?
Newspapers aren't the most reliable source for figures at the best of times, but the findings of these reports could make the difference between whether a couple decides to have a baby or not.
Which is why, from the perspective of someone who has a primary school grasp of maths and can therefore see a world population catastrophe on the horizon, these reports are vital to the cause!
Next time you meet anyone who is likely to get pregnant accidentally (you know who I mean), or is stupid enough to think that by reproducing they will raise an asset to society, you should use these articles and their "findings" to discourage them.
Call it "indirect proximity carbon offsetting".
If you talk to them a year later and they haven't reproduced "because of the cost" then you can fly away on holiday guilt free for at least another year! It's a win-win-win.
- The environment is happy there isn't another person pumping carbon dioxide into the air for approximately 72 years.
- The mother is happy she can still go out and get wrecked mid-week.
- And most importantly, you're happy because you've got an exotic holiday to look forward to.
No comments:
Post a Comment