Dear God I’d love this job

Internal Job Opening

Vacancy Notice –
Contractual agent, FG III

This is to inform you that the Greens/EFA group in the European Parliament is looking for a full-time replacement for the position of ECON adviser (fixed-term contractual agent contract, function group III – Contract until 31/12/2019).

Indicative starting date: 1st of February 2018

Agreed, we’d have to be informing the Greens about economics starting with Peter has two apples, John wants one and has some money but still.

27 comments on “Dear God I’d love this job

  1. Destroy Peter’s apples if he grew them with modern fertilisers. Then John can give his money to the African’s and the state can educate him on how to grow his own organic apples using his own waste.

    Being that he was a hack on a left wing newspaper he’ll screw this up and blame his failure on Fatcher the evil bitch (even though she last had control a million years ago).

    Once everyone is back to the stone age, the Green’s will have to find something else to meddle in.

  2. Tim

    seriously … apply for it.

    I saw Howard Marks live some years ago – by far the best part of the evening was the bit about when he applied to be the UK Government’s drugs czar. The letters that went back and forth were excellent.

  3. Its simple – kill John and steal his money. Then confiscate the apples and force Peter to work in the fields. Then let the apples rot in a warehouse somewhere.

  4. Go for it.. You do have the ability like in today’s thunderer to frame questions in terms of trade-offs and choices and pooh pooh the obfiscators. So long as greens make the calls on the trade-offs and choices there’s no reason why not to hire you for the econ knowledge.

  5. OT

    Tim,

    Have you commented on the FCC’s net neutrality decision anywhere? It would have been ideal for Forbes. My mate who’s a strategist at one of the MNOs will be happy if it’s replicated here.

  6. It says ‘Internal Job Opening’? Only Economists with a grasp of Lucas’s Harvey’s Bristle Cream need apply.

  7. BiND: The net neutrality thing is interesting. I haven’t been able to gather enough information to make a conclusion myself. It looks too close to being the equivalent of the Royal Mail having first class, second class, printed paper, and parcel post. Yer pays different tarriffs for different services, and it gets too close to my go-to argument about Internet control: if you’re arguing for X for the Internet, you’re a hypocrite if you’re not also demanding the same for the post and telephone.

  8. Tim, were you not a member of the Green Party once? Or (one of) its predecessors? {*snigger*}

    If so, spare your blushes and apply!!!

  9. “Net neutrality” was just two years old. We go back to where we were in the recent past.

    You can buy higher grade service for a higher price. What the market will bear. How horrible, the Left says.

  10. If you held a gun to the heads of of all the retards hyperventilating about ‘net neutrality’ and asked them to define it, there’d be an awful lot of grey matter and bone flecks on the wall before you found someone who knew the answer. It would be a very instructive exercise and a great act of political hygiene though, so I’m not ruling it out on those grounds alone.

    What the Internet in the US needs to advance it beyond its current Third World status is a hefty kick in the balls from the FTC, not the FCC. That would mean saying no to Comcast and Time Warner’s bagmen, and possibly breaking up the Obama-fellating Goodle and Facebook, so there’s scant chance of that.

  11. The whole Net Neutrality thing seems to largely revolve around lefties absolutely flipping their shit about some arcane bandwith allocation rules that have been in place since…. erm…. 2015.

    I know they have extremely short memories, but really, the Internet worked just fine pre-2015 without the sky being on fire and it raining burning sulphur into pools of molten lava.

  12. JGH,

    The issue with NN in the US is slightly different to here, in the US it goes back to when cable was franchised.

    The original cable companies were small and city based and in return for their very expensive investment rolling out cable they were granted monopolies. From what I can gather these were granted in perpetuity, but even if the weren’t the cost of roll out makes them a de facto monopoly. (When I did business planning for rolling out cable or fibre for phone we worked on an average of around £75 per meter plus £250 per connection). Over the years there has been consolidation and the cable companies are now massive and moved in to content.

    The cable companies became the natural ISPs because they could deliver high speed from the start so dial up and ADSL never took off as they did here, giving them another monopoly.

    A couple of years ago Comcast started to throttle Netflix complaining that all their data was forcing them to invest in more infrastructure. This is a common complaint everywhere, especially with mobile companies rolling out 4G.

    Obviously Netflix, and other content providers such as Faceache and YouTube called foul and it didn’t help Comcast’s case that they owned Hulu.

    In the middle of this are consumers who have nowhere else to go for their high speed Internet, so it became a regulatory issue. Obama’s administration ruled in favour of content providers (who the cynics point out were big donors to the Dems and Obama) and hence NN.

    This only became an issue relatively recently because the technology to allow what is called deep packet inspection to identify types of traffic and selectively throttle is now widely available.

    To be fair to ISPs, it is very expensive installing the extra bandwidth needed to support the ever increasing bandwidth hungry content, which is the argument over here. The MNOs in particular are aggrieved because it’s forcing the roll out of 4G and even 5G faster than they would like as their not getting a good return on their legacy investments. The MNOs also claim that this means we’re all having to pay for a small number of super users. (When I was at UK Broadband we found that 1% of users consumed about 90% of traffic at the Internet boundary, but that was 10 years ago so it will have changed)

    My own view is that here we have enough competition in the ISP market so it’s reasonable to let them compete on offering content packages ie you can have guaranteed Netflix for £x price or take your chances for a lower price. I don’t think ISPs should be allowed to deliberately throttle traffic, but they should be allowed to create super highways for preferred traffic. I don’t see that working in the US, hence the question to Tim.

  13. Yes, but difficult to see how to get someone to invest.

    The most likely competition is wireless and I know at least one MNO here here has plans to fibre up,streets and use 5G for access. It might be the same in the US.

  14. 4G has been the solution in Switzerland to breaking the Swisscom / cable TV Internet mono/duopoly (depending on whether you are serviced by cable.

    I am super happy with 4G internet, to be honest.

    And it’s the result of Swisscom over-egging it with last mile charges for piggybacking ISP’s, so one of the mobile providers said “stuff this” and started promoting 4G modems for home use, completely undercutting Swisscom (but not overcoming *much* of the inertia that means that a lot of consumers refuse to even find out about alternatives to Swisscom).

  15. 4G isn’t the long term solution for fixed line substitution on a large scale. If all your neighbours get it you’ll start to see problems if you all like watching Netflix etc.

  16. Of course, what Comcast would like it to be able to double dip – their customers pay for Internet access (to Netflix amongst others) but they also want to charge Netflix for the same bandwidth.

    They can of course get away with pissing off their customers with poor access to Netflix because they have nowhere else to go (monopoly in local area).

  17. Google is installing fiber – Google Fiber – in some larger markets. It’s a start to chipping away the ISP monopolies.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.