Cookie Notice

However, this blog is a US service and this site uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and analyze traffic. Your IP address and user-agent are shared with Google along with performance and security metrics to ensure quality of service, generate usage statistics, and to detect and address abuse.

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

A transparent con?

It would be nice to spend more time sea fishing instead of working. It would be nicer to do it on a really top-class boat, say a £400k Lochin. It would be brilliant if the State picked up the fuel, maintenance and moorings bill as well, and say £60k a year for me. Fantasy? It seems not. What I should be doing is making a funding case to my local government 'regeneration' body. The downside is that I'd have to take half a dozen jobless obese teenagers out once a week and teach them about the benefits of eating fish and the importance of marine stewardship. Apart from say £0.5m capital costs, I'd touch you all for only about £180k a year for the next 10 years. Then I'd retire. I may even make an offer for the boat - after all, it will have been maintained 'with no expense spared' as the brokers blurb will claim.

Damn. It seems some beggar in Hull has already thought of this.

1 comment:

Nick von Mises said...

"All the participants went on to get full-time jobs or places in education and training schemes."

I'm guessing mostly the latter.

Is there any end to the old wannabe-economist problem of only looking at what's directly in front of your nose (kids in schemes) rather than the unseen or farther range (what that money could've been spent on, or simply never stolen from the taxpayer to begin with)?