I do feel for those spending hugely on education while chances of recovery is a burden on their future, in my opinion their future well-being is not only for personal gains but should benefit all in a society.
Therefore I support the old(er) way where society would enable people to study, it's for a common future were we all benefit.
It obviously does require higher taxes to be levied on those that do put their good education to use.
If the company were to break even they don't pay taxes, they make a profit it should be taxable at the local rates.
Should be, but these guys are exporting both the profits and the tax liabilities.
I mentioned the reason in another post, it's that damned Great Vowel Shift what makes English stand out among European languages.
English usually retains the original spelling but the pronunciation has become an adventure
But have issues with your statement re. the impediment of communication by loosening orthographical standards.
You are probably aware law is one of the 'sciences' that needs a very accurate description in writing and it is in many languages exactly in law we see the recurring use of otherwise obsolete words and terminology.
Having discussed this phenomena with some legal scholars I do believe they have little choice in the matter, a word stands for a historical meaning and it would be dangerous if not outright irresponsible to use different terminology without including an addendum with transcriptions.
Then there is the use of Latin rooted words, phonetic spelling can drastically change or even inverse their meaning and without an authorised transcription this would become a legal nightmare.
At the moment I'm surrounded by people who a single generation ago were doing poorly but are now among the leaders in our industry, all it took them is to shake off a negative view of themselves and their origin, industry couldn't care less were you came from, they want to know were you are today and going tomorrow.
Ignoring nor denying will fix the problem for these subcultures.
Contrary to many other European languages for phonetic reasons they decided to change out the Latin leading C to a (greek) K but also felt the need to retain the Latin 'a' that's in German plural phonetically an 'e' by adding an Umlaut: ä.
It's this partial wish to retain compatibility with original Latin and Greek words and the slightly different phonetics to Latin and Greek that is so difficult to incorporate into Germanic languages.
English is a whole different matter, the English phonetics changed drastically from their Germanic roots during/ due to 'The Great Vowel Shift'. Strange enough the spelling remained basically Germanic but the pronunciation is nothing like it used to be.
This vowel shift is even more pronounced in American, the (a?) reason they have great difficulty in comprehensively speaking European languages, including Church-Latin.
So the results of the suggestion to allow phonetic spelling depends greatly on the alphabet used, Germanic, Latin, UK-English or US-English are some of the options.
I live in such a country and visit similar countries, everywhere medicine is available and accessible to who needs it and at much less cost than the US system ever can or will offer.
In the parts of Europe that have socialised medicine there are wishes and complaints, grass is always greener on the other side of the fence, but no-one would want to go the US way where general and affordable health care is *still* only a dream for the poor and middle classes.
Lastly, don't compare developing countries with the developed, I am talking about places like The Netherlands, the UK, Belgium, Germany, France, Austria, the Scandinavian countries, together good fer a few hundred million people.
Even in places like Poland, Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece you'd be better off than in the US.
Oh and why not compare the statistics about corruption with the availability of good socialised medicine, there seems to be a connection...
Where I am registered and pay and the many countries I visit all have in common that the people (society) has demands that require financing.
It could be a simple road or it could be national defence but it'll cost money to make.
That's where tax money comes in but also leaves again, people and corporations get paid to fix these things, it's not money lost, it's money circulated.
Multi-national companies like Apple employ expensive specialist that will use and abuse any hole they find in the various tax laws to weasel out of them and go for the lowest range.
The end result of which is local roads and defence don't get the money it needs, money isn't circulated in the local economies but a very restricted few Apple shareholders, probably in a far away country, do make insane amounts of profit.
And the common people get a tax increase to make up.
At the same time it is a well integrated system.
The biggest problems running a KDE desktop surface when you try to run something developed for Gnome and even then it's generally limited to badly resized icons that don't fit in with your chosen theme.
I remember the times when Gnome apps on a Gnome desktop(!) wouldn't share the clipboard and such, regularly I feel Gnome has hardly moved from such and I quickly return to KDE.
Another Plus for KDE is their developers are approachable and willing to discuss user's wishes.
Sure you end up with a system full of right-click menu's and configuration options but a casual user doesn't need to use them.
He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion