Prove that Government Targets are false.

It seemed to me that there is something wrong with GTs (Government Targets) especially those set on things over which the government has no control e.g. traffic, polution and global warming.

Even if you *have* control there is no guarantee e.g. I decided to set myself a GT to loose some weight. I weighed myself everyday for a month and there was no difference.

What could be wrong? Maybe Canute was right after all? Targets don't work.

I telphoned scientists here at the Anglian Regional Space Effort and was given this simple proof: a reductio ad absurdum:

"The government could set a GT to reduce their methane emissions by

25% by 2010 and also they could set a different GT to reduce their methane by 37% by 2010. Now here is the clever bit: both GTs are equally valid *but* both cannot be true at the same time! QED."

They went on to comment that "Parkinson's Law (a subset of the second law of thermodynamics) actually predicts an absolute *increase* of parliamentary CH4 of approximately 5.7% per year."


Reply to
Loading thread data ...

Of course not. Wether the weight is loose or tight, it still weighs the same.

Your spelling, for one.

Reply to

Which government?

Reply to
Boris Mohar

The reason for the increase of parliamentary CH4 is due to the fact that those old farts are becoming older farts.

Reply to
Robert Baer

The other trick those BOF's used is to set the timeframe of the utterly unrealistic target so far in the future (like 2050) that they can guarantee to have been out of office for some period. Then when the "target" is missed, it was the fault of some other party.

Regards Ian

Reply to

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.