It's been a rather long time. Fortunately I still remember how to copy and paste links - obviously a difficult skill to master. I'm listing points by dot points instead of numbers now - sorry Dewey, it's time for a change.
Some interesting stuff I read/stumbled across the past week, and some cool things to think about.
- Welcome to the new cash economy - in urban China, cash has increasingly become obsolete in favour of electronic payments:
“...China is systematically and rapidly doing away with paper money and coins.
Just as startling is how quickly the transition has happened. Only three years ago there would be no question at all, because everyone was still using cash.
Even the buskers were apparently ahead of me. Enterprising musicians playing on the streets of a number of Chinese cities have put up boards with QR codes so that passers-by can simply transfer them tips directly.
- Something that's got the criminology community rather excited: a new study bolstering the "lead crime hypothesis." Apparently higher exposure to lead = higher tendency to commit crime. This sounds very promising, and if causation can be thoroughly established, what implications does this have, in terms of policy, for how we address crime and criminal offenders? Definitely something to keep an eye on - I'll keep you all updated.
- An interesting perspective on the minimum wage debate: when Maine (U.S) tried to lift the minimum wage, restaurant workers actually protested it. If you're not familiar with the ins and outs of the minimum wage debate, the general perception is that minimum wage is said to be mostly beneficial for restaurant workers:
But in Maine, servers actively campaigned to overturn the results of a November referendum raising servers’ hourly wages from $3.75 in 2016 to $12 by 2024, saying it would cause customers to tip less and actually reduce their take-home income.
- A (surprisingly) great article about why it matters that Melania Trump wore Dior in Paris last week. Some great and very eloquent discussion about historical perceptions of fashion in France and how that influences political and cultural discourse. Not one for the econophiles though.
- And finally, to conclude, something to warm the hearts of any free market liberals, an article about Ford's "super smellers":
Car designers are increasingly competing to deliver the perfect car scent in each market. For Ford Motor Company, smell is a crucial aspect of delivering high quality vehicles to customers.
Every year Ford runs an application process to select its team of super smellers in China. Would-be testers can come from any department within the company and are asked to judge material samples in 16 jars. They are judged on their smelling ability and consistency, but must also meet other requirements to qualify for a spot on the prestigious panel.
“You can’t smoke or have allergies and sinus issues,” says Mike Feng, a Ford smell tester for four years. “Wearing perfume, leather jackets or nail polish is also not allowed, and you shouldn’t use strongly scented shampoo to ensure your senses aren’t compromised.”
Ford’s super smellers must requalify annually to maintain their position on the panel and must be available to attend regular odor tests throughout the year. A small group of six panelists form the smell jury for each test and an average of their scores is given to each material sample.
Everything used in a Ford vehicle – like seat fabric, plastics or carpet – is odor tested.It's pretty awesome how much time, effort, and minute details goes into small aspects; and all in the name of competition and innovation.
Also, Adam Smith really knew what he was talking about - specialisation of labour is pretty cool.
 |
| Another photo of a super smeller - not associated with Ford. |
No comments :
Post a Comment