Skip to main content

No wonder they can't believe it's not butter!

A LEAF (Linking Environment And Farming) survey has provided what is possibly the most depressing news of the year, aside from any imminent release of an album by Simon Cowell's "Little Fix (sic)" X-Factory (sic) winners.

The headline is that 2% of 16-23 year-olds surveyed thought that butter comes from chickens, while a further 24% actually hadn't a clue. 10% didn't know that milk came from cows, while 15 thought it came from pigs. 23% were unaware that eggs come from chickens, while a further 12% think they come from wheat, maize or oats.

Now, while all the respondents no doubt know that a Blackberry comes from the Carphone Warehouse, this crass ignorance defies belief, and is unbelievably embarrassing. One would think that in this day and age, regardless of one's level of education, the origins of milk and eggs would be universally known.

It's not surprising though.

Standards of English and comprehension continue to slip, while companies like Edexel continue to operate as totally dysfunctional parasites, sponging off taxpayers' money providing a less than sub-standard service. And the saddest part is that the government with its ridiculous outsourcing policies - outsourcing taxpayers' money to the reprehensively incapable - lets them away with it as their Chief Executives continue their upward spiral into the Sunday Times Top 500 Rich List on the back of absolutely inferior quality and service. With, no doubt, an Honour from Her Majesty thrown in.

And this professional inferiority continues beyond schooling.  When the graduates, irrespective of whether they know the origins of milk or eggs, are faced with the appalling advertisements placed by recruitment consultants, operating on behalf of the totally dysfunctional HR industry, it doesn’t get any better. Yes, the recruitment consultants are all working for “leading” or “global” players, all with incalculable turnover, yet offering barely less than a parsimonious remunerations. However, the quality of the diction and grammar is barely on the lighter side of dreadful.

Confusion reigns between “it’s” and “its”. Their “client” seem to be totally confused as to whether it should be a possessive singular client or a possessive plural client, often appearing as “my client are”. And spelling is often atrocious, despite it being easier than ever to automatically spell check a document.

People appear to be too busy-busy to get the basics right.

It’s no wonder the kids don’t know where milk or eggs come from. And no, you can't buy them  from the Carphone Warehouse.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The "Win a Million" free scratch card newspaper inserts

One of those three-panel "Win a Million" scratchcards fell out of my newspaper this morning. Not a major or in anyway newsworthy event in itself, but I must admit my surprise. I didn't think anyone bothered with them anymore, or, to be a little more technical, I didn't think anyone was taken in by them anymore. Firstly, it actually is printed on the bottom of each panel that "Every card has a set of 3 matching symbols, 2 matching symbols and no matching symbols". Right, so you are going to 'win', half-win and not win respectively. Then, while the prize list is somewhat impressive with 1x£1m, 1x£100k, 2x£20k, 3x£10k and other things like holidays, tablet PC's city breaks all the way down to 1000 "faux" fashion watches, 1000 salon  makeovers and 1000xVIP Thames cruises. Now should I be stupid enough to spend the £1.53 a minute for the 6 minute phone call to claim my prize (that's almost a tenner, for those of you without cal

Chancellor's letter of apology to Bob Diamond of Barclays

Thanks to my contacts at the new News International business "Phonetaps'R'Us", I was exclusively sent a copy of a letter sent to the Chief Executive of Barclays Bank, Bob Diamond, from the Chancellor yesterday. "Dear Bob Trusting you and yours are well. Listen mate. Sorry the F inancially S tupid A sses wrote to your bank yesterday to demand £290million as a fine. It's nothing personal, and just because your bank head office people are a bunch of dishonest, thieving bastards, I thought there was no reason to carry on that way and fine you. I made this clear to the FSA yesterday as soon as I heard the news. I told them that the taxpayer would have been more than happy to bail you out. And also. Look mate. Sorry you've had to give up your bonus this year. It must have come as quite a shock, and was a wonderful thing for you to volunteer to do. I only hope you've put something by from the £17million you received last year. No doubt the bank pay

"Q". My name is Bond. Oh. not THAT Q.

I was sent a story today by a friend who knows my feelings on the subject - that is, about one of the consummately greatest of all British activities, namely, queuing. It seems some Danish Professor or other has come up with the theory that those who queue the longest should actually be served the last. He claims it makes purchasing something altogether more efficient and smooth through the idea of 'contra-queuing' (whatever the devil that may mean). 'Serve the people at the back of the queue first', he says, with profound wisdom. Altogether very professorial, albeit demonstrating a somewhat keen lack of understanding of the purchasing psyche. The Nobel Prize-chasing Prof suggests that if, for example, a popular entertainment act was to announce a tour, with tickets going on sale at 11am one morning, using the theory of 'contra-queuing', no one will want to be first to buy said tickets. So no one will turn up 14 months in advance and venues will