I got annoyed on Linkedin, on the other hand my declaration was appropriate, valid and correct.
Appropriate because I started out by implying I was annoyed.
Secondly the acronyms MIEAust and CP.Eng are meaningless twaddle to the population at large, and they would decide meaning based on experience and interaction with those using. Builders simply use a large number of expletives to describe engineers. I avoided those expletives as they don't fit well with the acronyms, though would fit nicely with FIEAust.
As I recollect Engineers Australia spent around 5 years (it could have been less, just seemed like forever) dreaming up CP.Eng to improve status, as MIEAust had lost status as a reliable indicator of competence. But as I say this post nominal detritus is meaningless twaddle and the public will adapt to express their feelings. So any derogatory word starting with "M" is a good starting point. Mindless Imbecile puts two letters to use, and so on we can go.
Engineers Australia seems to like publishing the value of projects. Consultancy 1 has a $2 billion contract, consultancy 2 has a $1 billion contract: therefore could conclude that consultant 2 is more efficient. No sorry consultant 1 is the better consultant because they are getting more for less.
As for professional, you can dig up all the ancient mythology about ethics of monks that you desire, but as far as modern usage goes a professional does something for money (irrespective of ethics or competence). The flim flam man can make profit without making good on their promise to supply. You do not have to be technically competent to make a profit, you do not have to provide quality to make a profit. Profiteers seek short term gain.
As for capitalists, well they can be good or bad. Apparently there are no real capitalists left. Those calling themselves capitalists aren't, they don't have any capital, they are using other people's money and largely ripping everybody off.
If the primary motivation for seeking legislation, is to be granted a monopoly of trade, is so that can hold the population to ransom, because believe deserve higher income, that somehow the whole of society owes you, even though you have contributed zilch, then basically you are a profiteer.
Thus M=moron and CP=Capitalist Profiteer are appropriate descriptors of a professional cult which is focused on the wrong objective. A professional cult which does not deserve any respect.
{NB: It should be noted that a large portion of the membership of Engineers Australia has held for a long time that, it should introduce legislation to grant the membership a monopoly over work. This is not to protect the public welfare. No! It is contrary to that, it is so that they can increase fees, hold the population to ransom, because they believe their fees are too low, and that the community owes them something. Except these people are not the people who gave us modern civilisation. These are not the people who discovered scientific approach to designing technology. These are not the people with the imagination and ingenuity to invent new technologies, nor are the people with the technical competence to properly design established technologies for specific purposes. These are just arrogant graduates with a degree, and trite experience gained under the supervision of persons with equally trite experience. To gain significant experience then Australia needed to, and needs to sustain significant work on significant projects. If someone cannot put the required effort into say the design of a connection on a small residential structure, should they be permitted to design multistorey buildings or bridges? Should they be permitted to supervise people who are designing multistorey buildings, now that such projects are increasing in number? Hopefully your answer is no! No! NO!}
Related Posts
Appropriate because I started out by implying I was annoyed.
Secondly the acronyms MIEAust and CP.Eng are meaningless twaddle to the population at large, and they would decide meaning based on experience and interaction with those using. Builders simply use a large number of expletives to describe engineers. I avoided those expletives as they don't fit well with the acronyms, though would fit nicely with FIEAust.
As I recollect Engineers Australia spent around 5 years (it could have been less, just seemed like forever) dreaming up CP.Eng to improve status, as MIEAust had lost status as a reliable indicator of competence. But as I say this post nominal detritus is meaningless twaddle and the public will adapt to express their feelings. So any derogatory word starting with "M" is a good starting point. Mindless Imbecile puts two letters to use, and so on we can go.
Engineers Australia seems to like publishing the value of projects. Consultancy 1 has a $2 billion contract, consultancy 2 has a $1 billion contract: therefore could conclude that consultant 2 is more efficient. No sorry consultant 1 is the better consultant because they are getting more for less.
As for professional, you can dig up all the ancient mythology about ethics of monks that you desire, but as far as modern usage goes a professional does something for money (irrespective of ethics or competence). The flim flam man can make profit without making good on their promise to supply. You do not have to be technically competent to make a profit, you do not have to provide quality to make a profit. Profiteers seek short term gain.
As for capitalists, well they can be good or bad. Apparently there are no real capitalists left. Those calling themselves capitalists aren't, they don't have any capital, they are using other people's money and largely ripping everybody off.
If the primary motivation for seeking legislation, is to be granted a monopoly of trade, is so that can hold the population to ransom, because believe deserve higher income, that somehow the whole of society owes you, even though you have contributed zilch, then basically you are a profiteer.
Thus M=moron and CP=Capitalist Profiteer are appropriate descriptors of a professional cult which is focused on the wrong objective. A professional cult which does not deserve any respect.
{NB: It should be noted that a large portion of the membership of Engineers Australia has held for a long time that, it should introduce legislation to grant the membership a monopoly over work. This is not to protect the public welfare. No! It is contrary to that, it is so that they can increase fees, hold the population to ransom, because they believe their fees are too low, and that the community owes them something. Except these people are not the people who gave us modern civilisation. These are not the people who discovered scientific approach to designing technology. These are not the people with the imagination and ingenuity to invent new technologies, nor are the people with the technical competence to properly design established technologies for specific purposes. These are just arrogant graduates with a degree, and trite experience gained under the supervision of persons with equally trite experience. To gain significant experience then Australia needed to, and needs to sustain significant work on significant projects. If someone cannot put the required effort into say the design of a connection on a small residential structure, should they be permitted to design multistorey buildings or bridges? Should they be permitted to supervise people who are designing multistorey buildings, now that such projects are increasing in number? Hopefully your answer is no! No! NO!}
Related Posts
Revisions:
[14/02/2019] : Original
