Wow. So Michigan, once the very epitome of a union-controlled state, has kicked ass with a new law:
This week the Michigan House of Representatives took up a measure to put an end to a rule called the “prevailing wage,” a requirement that forces all construction projects initiated by state government to pay workers the same wage union members make even if the workers hired for said projects are not members of a union, MLive.com reported.
The measure passed, but how it became law is extremely impressive:
The petition submitted to the House could have been allowed to become a ballot measure, and likely that is what Protect Michigan Taxpayers expected to become of their petition. However, the state legislature always has the option to submit a petition straight to the state house and that is what the Michigan Senate did when they heard the petition and then voted 23-14 to enact its provisions. That prompted the Michigan House to take up the idea and they passed it as well, 56-53.
Indeed, since the petition met the required number of signatures to be considered and since both houses of the legislature voted to approve it, this repeal doesn’t even have to go to the Governor’s desk for a signature. It will now simply be put into service.
Hence, Michigan’s prevailing wage rule is a dead letter.
Hubba hubba. Now go and read the rest of the article, which argues quite persuasively against the concept of federal employee unions.
…when it comes to coffee:
Every day seems to deliver a new story about caffeine. One day it’s good for you, the next it’s to be avoided.
But a recent large scale study suggests not only do coffee and caffeine give us an ‘energy boost’, they also benefit our health.
The British Medical Journal published an umbrella review that showed the health benefits of caffeine and coffee far outweighed the risks.
The optimum health benefits of caffeine come from about 3-4 cups a day.
I know, I know… yer not gonna cut your coffee intake in half, no matter what the scientists say.
For the record, I drink Krispy Kreme “Smooth” blend coffee from K-cups. (yeah, go ahead and call it sacrilege: according to the coffee fanatics, I should grow my own beans, roast them myself, and grind only the freshest ones for my coffee needs. The only problem with that rigmarole is I wouldn’t have time left in the day to do anything else. I don’t distill my own single malt Scotch; why should I do the same for my coffee?)
Then again, no doubt some doctors would take issue with my other approach:
…but they’re just a bunch of old spoilsports.
According to reports, BritPrince Harry will be living with his new Hollywood wife in a tiny village in the Cotswolds area of Oxfordshire, out in the west of Britishland — and from personal experience, I can attest to the place’s extraordinary beauty. There is a silver lining to his cloud (the cloud being his bossy, oh-so modern and trendy spouse): his “local” will be the Falkland Arms, and a pretty place it is too…
Alert Readers will notice the presence of Britain’s best brewery on the sign, which means that Harry, a renowned drinker in his youth, will be able to drink pints of Wadworth 6X… assuming his health-Nazi wife allows him to ever visit the place, that is.
From Britishland comes this excellent news:
The University of Buckingham will become the first UK university to launch a ‘drug-free’ policy, where students will have to sign a contract promising not to take drugs on campus.
The move has been introduced in the wake of findings by The Sunday Times that reveal a 42% rise in the number of those being disciplined for drug use compared to 2015, among 116 universities.
Writing in the same paper, Sir Anthony Seldon, the University’s vice-chancellor, said that if students persisted in taking drugs, they would be expelled.
I await the same news from an American university, but I won’t hold my breath.
As an aside: back when I was looking at studying at an overseas university, U of Buckingham caught my eye because of their excellent academic standards and reliance on a truly “classical” education. Now I wish I had gone there… and let’s be honest: could one expect anything less from a university which Margaret Thatcher helped found?
This is one of those years when I get to wish my Christian and Jewish Readers well over their respective holidays, in a single post.
Happy Easter and Chag Pesach Sameach to you all, from this most tolerant atheist.
May you all see many, many more.
I’ve always been skeptical about health warnings on canned foods, especially as I’m somewhat familiar with the canning process (which basically renders food bacteria-free). Now my suspicions have been justified by SCIENTISTS:
Microbiologist Richard Page, of Alliance Technical Laboratories, looked for a host of nasties, including the potentially deadly bacteria E.coli, salmonella, listeria and Clostridium perfringens, as well as for yeasts and moulds, which affect food quality but aren’t necessarily unsafe to eat.
Then food technologist Brian Smith, of Booth Smith Food Technology, analysed the results — and reached a very surprising conclusion.
There’s a reason canning has been a popular way of preserving food for the best part of two centuries. Canned food is subjected to a very high heat process to kill bacteria, and once sealed the contents are effectively sterile.
Sterilisation means heating to very high temperatures, killing all microbes. In 1974, tins of food from the wreck of a U.S. steamboat that sank in 1865 were tested. There had been a deterioration in appearance and vitamin content, but scientists found they were safe to eat.
“All of the best before dates you are looking at would absolutely not be for bacterial risk. The reasoning behind them would be due to quality,’ says Richard Page. “It may be the manufacturer knows that after a certain period of time there is a certain degradation in the taste or the flavour, colour or smell.”
Or it might just be because they want to sell more pineapple chunks.
Meanwhile, Brian Smith says food manufacturers do give “quite a margin of error” when setting best before dates — in some cases as much as 50 per cent.
So while “use by” dates should always be adhered to, “best before” is more an indicator of quality than a health alarm bell.
I remember eating some of my Y2K canned goods nearly ten years later, and none — I mean not one — tasted any differently than if I’d bought them the same day. Ditto some of my SHTF Grab ‘N Go supplies, just a couple years back. Most of the warning dates are just in case some guy eats 30-year-old corned beef hash he found in Nana’s pantry, and keels over — but even then, while the fats in the food might have caused the taste to deteriorate, the health risk is close to zero.
Read the article for all the details. And now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to the kitchen to make me some food:
Nom nom nom…