For the Fall 2025 issue of PAH!, we asked students to write their own 800-word "Modest Proposals" in the vein of Jonathan Swift's famous essay, offering satirical solutions to problems facing today's world — as you can see, they rose to the occasion! Congratulations to the authors of the top two, Aiden Knight and Abigail Plopper; we welcome submissions from all students for this winter's creative writing contest!
. . . . .
by Aiden Watson Knight
We need to face the stone-cold facts. Humans are becoming less and less efficient, and this is a serious problem. Slowly, we are all becoming more lazy and less productive, leading to less drive to do work. Eventually, we will all simply go to sleep one day and wake up without a drive to do any work at all, leading to the destruction of society. When most people think of a world-ending apocalypse, they think of zombies, aliens, nuclear war, or sentient robots. They never think that the world might end due to our own incompetence. But how do we fix this seemingly inevitable end to humanity? How do we save ourselves from our slothful desires? I have forged a modest proposal to answer this grave question.
In 2024, there were multiple surveys run pertaining to human efficiency. In one of them, 48% of the employees surveyed reported that they were only being productive in their jobs less than 25% of the time. 18% also reported being productive less than 50% of the time. In another similar survey, more than 50% of employees reported that they were being "relatively unproductive" at their jobs (Borja). Obviously, the efficiency of humans has already fallen so far that society is starting to be affected. Why do you think so many live in poverty today? It is because of the lack of people working, which is in turn caused by the lack of engagement. In another similar survey, 82% of employees reported that happiness and engagement drive productivity (Borja). So obviously, people are not engaged enough to work. How do we fix this, you ask? We simply lower the minimum wage and the income earned by employees. That's right, we lower the payment, not increase it. For too long, people have grown lazy and unproductive due to the lack of need to work hard in order to survive. As the saying goes, "Hard times make strong men, strong men make easy times, easy times make weak men, weak men make hard times." We are currently in a hard time, and it is time to make society strong again. The cut in payment will force employees to work harder to earn more money so they can survive, supplying the engagement. The employees will also be happy that they made enough money to survive until the next paycheck, providing happiness. The extra money that is saved from this cut will go to the company that is earning that money so that it may grow in power and wealth, all the while keeping its employees engaged and hard-working for their survival.
"But won't these employees be exhausted after working so hard for so little money?" Thankfully, I have already thought ahead of this problem. Similar to my solution on engagement, instead of providing designated rest days, we will reduce resting time for our employees. This may seem like it will not fix our exhaustion problem, but over time, these employees will grow so accustomed to working like this that they will be able to rest while doing their job simultaneously! To make up for the short time period in which these employees will not yet be trained enough to perform their jobs while sleeping, I suggest that we mandate all employees in every company to consume at least five Monster Mega Energy drinks per day. These energy drinks are similar to regular Monster Energy drinks, but they are significantly larger and contain 240 mg of caffeine instead of the normal 160 mg. If the employees show symptoms of caffeine withdrawal, then the clear solution should be to give them more caffeine, as caffeine withdrawals are caused by a sudden stop in the consumption of caffeine. As a bonus, caffeine has been shown to enhance dopamine production in the brain, meaning that our employees will be happier, even if they don't want to be (Solinas)! Very soon, we will be producing super-employees who will be the most productive humans ever.
Finally, I need to address one last concern that has been expressed and, thankfully, has been solved. Upon hearing my proposal, many people brought up the problem that eventually employees will complain and protest these new cuts and requirements, and these protests could very possibly get violent. My counterargument is a simple one: they won't. Or, not exactly that they won't, more like they won't be able to. I am taking inspiration from our ancestors who ran the corporations of the late 19th century and early 20th century. These amazing corporations were able to grow so large, so powerful, and so successful that they managed to grow influence over the government itself! How admirable is that? But how did they do it? The answer lies in the multitude of people needing work. At the time, there were so many Chinese immigrants and recently freed African Americans that most of them would agree to extremely low pay in extremely dangerous conditions. Whenever an employee complained, they were fired and replaced easily because of the number of people who needed jobs. I am entirely sure that today, if an employee or group of employees were to cause problems, there would be plenty of jobless citizens willing to take their place to earn more money. As I have said before, we are making it so that these people are working to survive, not to live a comfortable life. The conditions they will work by will be "abide or be let go."
Ultimately, it is obvious what we must do if we are to avoid doom by our own hands. We absolutely must cut as much money as we can from employee payments without these employees dying of poverty. They themselves said they must be motivated to work, and what is more motivational than the threat of being thrown out of your house and home because you could not work hard enough? This, paired with the excess working times and caffeine dosages,will build the most efficient breed of human possible, and the threat of being fired will keep them in check. If you care about keeping our society and humanity safe and protected, please join the fight to implement my proposal.
Works Cited
Borja, Carlo. "Workplace Productivity Statistics: What You Need to Know." Time Doctor, 2024,
https://www.timedoctor.com/blog/workplace-productivity-statistics/.
Solinas, Marcello, et al. "The Role of Dopamine in the Mechanisms of Action of
Antidepressants." Pharmacological Research, vol. 46, no. 2, 2002, pp. 109-118. PubMed Central,
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6758129/.
. . . . .
by Abigail Plopper
Anger. Frustration. Impatience. Alone, these are simple emotions. Combined and unleashed through an object it is manslaughter. I think all agree that aggressive horn-honking, traffic jams, slow drivers, getting cut off, or being tailgated incites impatience and frustration. This frustration leads to anger then anger to rage. Cars speed up, horns honk back, rude hand-gestures are exchanged, and violence occurs. Only one label for this despicable behavior comes to mind: Road-rage.
But do not fear more than necessary. I shall now humbly offer my modest proposal concerning the problem of “Road-rage.” Clearly, the answer lies not in the human attitude, but in the modeling of the vehicles. After all, what causes the destruction? Mere humans cannot crash into others with the same ruinous effects as vehicles. By manufacturing the car with certain measures according to my scheme, human rage will successfully be checked upon the road.
First, we must address the danger of aggressive honking. The sole reason for honking comes from anger at another’s unsatisfactory driving methods. In some uses it is a protective, justified action, but in others a honk is only used to express endless rage. I propose car companies replace the irritating blast of a vehicle’s honk to an unexpected, animal noise excluding cats and dogs. A duck quack, chicken cluck, or pig snort does not sound like an anger-inducing beep but as a rather humorous noise that no one in their right mind would repeat. Just as high-frequency noises vex the listener, a car’s annoying beep only builds further irritation in fellow drivers; a different noise will produce a different reaction altogether. (However, so as to prevent confusion, companies may not use a bark or meow as the honk noise since cats and dogs most frequent the streets.)
Second, we must notice the prevalent lack of activated blinkers before turning. A driver has one job concerning safety: communicate with other drivers! Yet, as seen by my brief proposal on honking, this communication takes place in overabundance or not at all. Many unknowingly fall into the trap of forgetting their blinkers or disregarding them completely. Even I (as a student driver) forgot to use my blinker on occasion. Imagine a car in front of another turning suddenly without warning. The innocent car behind was still driving at full speed. Yes, you can see the unimaginable horror of this situation. I propose that car companies include a special blinker feature that prevents a car from a full turn unless a blinker is activated. As a safety measure, the feature will not prevent a car from swerving away from objects in the road or turn the car itself. However, this feature will build a satisfactory habit of communication in drivers, for without a blinker they cannot turn to the necessary street. At first my scheme may seem to increase road-rage as drivers “forget” their blinker and miss their turn. I humbly suggest that the strength of good habits will outweigh the detriments of zero communication.
Third, we must examine the trouble of tailgating, a most heinous act of inconsideration on the tailgater’s part. According to my sources, tailgating occurs when one drives unnecessarily close to the car in front of them. Obviously, this poses a danger to the drivers surrounding them, for if one was to suddenly break or merge lanes a crash would follow. When one is being tailgated, the driver is tempted to speed up to dangerous motion, brake suddenly, or turn quickly to throw off the tailgater. I propose that car companies insert long, stiff airbags on the outside of a car that activate in the front once a certain distance is narrowed between two cars. I would call this scheme somewhat of a social distancing act. The airbags will be stiff enough and long enough to prevent sagging bags, damage to the car in front, and closer distances. Not only will the airbags prevent tailgating literally, but it will create a marker of shame around the said tailgating car. I am sure you all agree that large airbags inflated around a car is an undesirable look.
I would even suggest finding a means to drive backwards. If the driver does not know where they are going, they have no need to be impatient. Or, to restrain the “weavers” on the freeway, cars can only change lanes a limited amount of times. But I get ahead of myself. I fear you are already overwhelmed with the new manufacturing possibilities. By changing the honk noise to animal sounds, designing a new blinker feature, and adding airbags to the front bumper of a car, I believe that road rage will decrease significantly. I shall gladly be the first buyer of this new model of shining safety. Undoubtedly, these cars shall be the new rage of this generation.
Creative writing submissions were curated by Sebastian Weinkopf, a senior from Southern California currently taking AP Government and Politics with Mr. Munson. He enjoys jiujitsu, reading, running, and controversy.