By lex, on February 14th, 2007
Which it might be an post-solstice echo of consumerist culture foisted on unsuspecting masses of sheeple by a ruthlessly bottom line-driven consortium of jewellers, greeting card manufacturers and chocolateers, but there’s also a chance that it isn’t – a possibility that the wise man ignores at his peril while performing risk/reward calculus.
Which in our case meant three single red roses (each with a spray of baby’s breath), three greeting cards and one little trifling jewel box with an itty-bitty necklace in it.
Because while your correspondent might be struggling with his algebra three decades after high school, when it comes to risk/reward calculus he is both current and proficient.
Update: To be filed under the “that’d be strange if it was possible” heading (and as though we didn’t have enough to concern ourselves with, what with prices going up) the UK Telegraph is putting out that all of us flower-buying wage slaves are also bad for the environment:*
The Valentine’s Day bouquet–the gift that every woman in Britain will be waiting for next week–has become the latest bête noire among environmental campaigners.
Latest Government figures show that the flowers that make up the average bunch have flown 33,800 miles to reach Britain. . . .
Environmentalists warned that “flower miles” could have serious implications on climate change in terms of carbon dioxide emissions from aeroplanes.
Which they ought to figure out a more efficient way to get flowers to Britain, considering that the entire world is only 24,901 miles in circumferance, meaning that no two points in the world could be more than 12,500 miles away from each other as a crow flies since crows – being stupid birds – habitually avoid using mileage-reducing great circle routes. Like flower-carrying airliners do.
* 07-26-2018 Links Gone; no replacements found – Ed.