Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Sandwich on May 07, 2003, 04:29:11 am
-
Yeowch!
[q]A young teenage girl was about to finish her first year of college.
She considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat and her father was a rather staunch Republican.
One day she was challenging her father on his beliefs and his opposition to programs like welfare. He stopped her and asked her how she was doing in school. She answered that she had a 4.0 GPA but it was really tough. She had to study all the time, never had time to go out and party and often went sleepless because of all the studying. She didn't have time for a boyfriend and didn't really have many college friends because of her studying.
He then asked how her friend Mary, who was attending the same college, was doing. She replied that she was barely getting by. She had a 2.0 GPA, never studied, was very popular on campus and was at parties all the time. She often wouldn't show up for classes because she was hung over.
He then asked his daughter why she didn't go to the Dean's office and ask why she couldn't take 1.0 off her 4.0 and give it to her friend who only had a 2.0. That way they would both have a 3.0 GPA.
The daughter fired back and said "That wouldn't be fair, I worked really hard for mine and my friend has done nothing".
The father smiled and said: "Welcome to the Republican Party".[/q]
-
Pfff. If her father was a true Republican be would have had Mary killed and bribed the school into giving his daughter a 4.0 without her doing any work.
-
Wouldn't it make more sense to say the girl was a socialist or communist? Not sure a democrat necessarily cares about complete equality.
-
riiiight :rolleyes:
-
This only proves that her father is a conservative republican, because of his views of democrats and himself :ha:
NEXT! :o
-
Pfff.
First, Democrats are the slimy bastards who are just as evil and powermongering as Republicans, but put on a populist face, while the Republicans nowadays have the balls to be openly neofascistic and dare anyone to point it up. You're thinking commies.
Second, no proper commie gives a **** about grades. They're an illusion, an arbitrary, useless mark made by a bureaucratic system in order to trick stupid people into following the illusion of some higher award, and any proper communist would recognize that they are actually necessary or, indeed, real. They're quite a lot like money in that sense, though the analogy doesn't extend to the context of this anecdote.
Third, you don't find it a little childish to draw a parallel from, say, a working-class guy who has a daybreak-to-midnight job killing himself at the factory drawing minimum wage to feed his half-dozen kids to some dumb chick who parties all day and then complains about grades? She doesn't obviously care, she's the good commie. She's learned the important lesson, that you only work for rewards that are real, and slaving away just because you're "supposed to" isn't reason good enough. But there are poor people who do need money. Quite a ****ing lot of them. You don't ****ing well party all night if you're starving to death, or dying of tuberculosis because your house is just a few walls and a plywood roof and you can't afford proper medical care. You'd damn well work if you could, because the alternative is a gruesome, painful death.
Oh, yes, they're all so ****ing lazy, rather have a lifespan of 40 years the last 20 of which are a living hell than get some goddamn cushy desk job pulling five or six ****ing figures a year.
Jesus, you damned rich kids don't get out much, do you?
-
I should tell Tommy Sherridan to sign up to HLP. He'd jump right into this.
-
dont make me laugh.
I'll be a bit stereotypical here, but just to get my point across..
Who are Republicans? Rich white people. How did they get rich? By the blood and sweat of others, dating back over 200 years. What do they claim to admire? Hard work and reponsibility. What do they lack? Hard work and responisbility.
If we all started our lives with equal opportunities, equal wealth, education, environment etc etc, then you'de have a point. But we dont.
I think The whole Reublican/Democrat/Communist/Socialist etc etc distincion is stupid. I do what I think is right. If in that case that is acting in a socialist manner, fine. If at some point I look upon a situation in a Republican manner, fine.
__________
A simple question: Speaking from a purely moral perspective, is it fair that some people in this world live in mansions and drive Ferraris, while some work 18 hours a day to barely be able to feed their family?
I happen to live in a rich part of town, and I am constantly disgusted by the people. Some people get a Lexus for their 18th birthday, and some get a 5$ pair of jeans, cause their old ones are 10 years old.
Is it fair that some members of thre human race live in splendour beyond any real need, while some starve to death?
Answer that question, and then ask yourself what political affiliation you belong to.
-
In other countries we do tend to have other political parties that cover a greater range of the political spectrum. In Canada we've got plenty of politican parties ranging from the Canadian Alliance mega right wingers to the NDP left wing socialist party with Liberals somewhere in the center and the PC's just to the right.
I don't have a good count on all the parties in England but Labour, Liberal, and Torries seem to be in there somewhere (seeing as the Canadian system is somewhat based on the English system).
The whole Americna Republican / Democrat debate is meaningless....as I see it, you've got conservative Democrats and more conservative Republicans :)
So you Americans out there, go get some real political parties and come back later :D :D :D
The grades / welfare thing is an interesting comparison. The problem is that if the comparison is to be made, then maybe we should compair high class and low class with high achievement and academic probation (i.e. needing assistance in studying). The girl who is partying is making a tradeoff...she could easily attain high GPA's, not necessarily so for a person on welfare or the student that is struggling.
-
*Puts "Hiring Revolutionaries" sign on the lawn of the White House*
:p
-
Why do I see this thread getting very large very fast?
-
No, it won't. It'll be closed by tomorrow morning.
-
Skepticism about the transparently nonexistent divide between the Democratic and Republican party these days is one thing (the Democrats used to be better liars), but if you're imagining that communists and socialists are at all like Democrats or Republicans, you've been woefully undereducated, son. Sure, there are a few "socialists" who cynically manipulate the cause as sort of a neofascist trip- the sort of "revolutionaries" who, if they ever won through, would turn right around and line up every other left-winger against the wall. They're total bastards, but they're the minority by far. Go do some research, and I don't mean the kind that involves asking your government-subsidized ninth grade teacher or something.
-
Originally posted by IceFire
The girl who is partying is making a tradeoff...she could easily attain high GPA's, not necessarily so for a person on welfare or the student that is struggling.
I knew I could count on you to sum things up. :p I think that's the point whoever wrote this is trying to get across - if those people on welfare actually tried, the could reap the benefits of their labor, too.
Now before everyone starts bashing me, lemme put in a disclaimer: I'm quite in the dark when it comes to American politics and social things most of the time; I just like throwing these things out here to see what the rabid wolves do to 'em. ;)
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
I think that's the point whoever wrote this is trying to get across - if those people on welfare actually tried, the could reap the benefits of their labor, too.
Then you assume that it's easy to get the "4.0" in life, which it always isn't
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
I knew I could count on you to sum things up. :p I think that's the point whoever wrote this is trying to get across - if those people on welfare actually tried, the could reap the benefits of their labor, too.
so all those people in Africa, Asia and even in the UK, US, Canada etc that are starving..well they're just lazy right? If they got of their asses, they will do just as well as anyone in the US, and will soon own 2 cars and 3 TVS? right?
no offence, but how naive are you?
-
Scottish Elections (Devolved Parliament) (http://www.scottishelections.co.uk/)
Politics isn't always black and white.
Or Green and Blue in scotland's case. :nervous:
EDIT:
For my area:
[q]LAMONT, Johann
Lab, Glasgow Pollock
***
Grim feminist whose office wall is decorated with the framed testicles of opponents. Takes everything seriously, including herself.[/q] :shaking:
-
Originally posted by Rictor
A simple question: Speaking from a purely moral perspective, is it fair that some people in this world live in mansions and drive Ferraris, while some work 18 hours a day to barely be able to feed their family?
I happen to live in a rich part of town, and I am constantly disgusted by the people. Some people get a Lexus for their 18th birthday, and some get a 5$ pair of jeans, cause their old ones are 10 years old.
Is it fair that some members of thre human race live in splendour beyond any real need, while some starve to death?
Answer that question, and then ask yourself what political affiliation you belong to.
This is where practicality and idealogy fight in me. Practical Kamikaze says that yes, it's fair. His world would be a police state, killing and eating all the useless people. Keeping poverty out by slaying those who are poor and useless, or if they can work, making them work.
Idealogical Kamikaze says "of course not" and likes equality in material means. He prefers a communistic, utopian society.
the more important question imo is... practicality or idealogy?
-
The "conservative" and "liberal" terms don't mean anything when applies to politics; conservatives frequently want radical changes while liberals want to stifle liberties. :p
A simple question: Speaking from a purely moral perspective, is it fair that some people in this world live in mansions and drive Ferraris, while some work 18 hours a day to barely be able to feed their family?
I happen to live in a rich part of town, and I am constantly disgusted by the people. Some people get a Lexus for their 18th birthday, and some get a 5$ pair of jeans, cause their old ones are 10 years old.
Is it fair that some members of thre human race live in splendour beyond any real need, while some starve to death?
Of course it is! Compared to the plight of chairs, none of which have any chance of making a good living. :( Is that fair? huh? bad humans... :mad:
:D
Why do I see this thread getting very large very fast?
I don't really have time to write my usual essays at the moment; let us see if someone else fills in for me. :D
-
Originally posted by Rictor
so all those people in Africa, Asia and even in the UK, US, Canada etc that are starving..well they're just lazy right? If they got of their asses, they will do just as well as anyone in the US, and will soon own 2 cars and 3 TVS? right?
no offence, but how naive are you?
Do please read what he actually said. Sandwich was pointing out what he believed the POINT of the original article was...not his own stated viewpoint. So before you berate someone, understand their meaning critically.
My point was that this is where the fallacy of the entire original argument that Sandwich kindly posted for debate (and once again, not for the purpose of personal attacks). Sandwhich was agreeing with me for summing things up and getting across the point that there was something inherently wrong with the argument.
-
Second, no proper commie gives a **** about grades. They're an illusion, an arbitrary, useless mark made by a bureaucratic system in order to trick stupid people into following the illusion of some higher award, and any proper communist would recognize that they are actually necessary or, indeed, real. They're quite a lot like money in that sense, though the analogy doesn't extend to the context of this anecdote.
You gotta be joking... What la la land do you live in? OR do your grades suck that much? (High School they're a joke but in college).. Your grades show what you can do for the most part. It usually shows if you can handle the material and how much time you spent on it.
-
Unless your ultimate goal is to become one of those upper-middle class officeworkers making six figures, grades do not matter. They have no independent existence. Someone with even limited intelligence would recognize this, decide what they wanted out of life, and choose the appropriate approach. They are arbitrary valuations that may affect some very real things in your life, because those who have that arbitrary quality have deemed that it was the cause and hence propogated the concept of money/grades as an end in and of itself.
Awfully hostile, aren't we? Are you threatened by the concept of grades as arbitrary and not always desirable? Perhaps you should avoid these threads if such minor factoids upset you so much.
-
Unless your ultimate goal is to become one of those upper-middle class officeworkers making six figures...
Which is the case for most people, myself included. :D After all, you need money to stage communist revolutions. :D
-
Originally posted by Falcon X
You gotta be joking... What la la land do you live in? OR do your grades suck that much? (High School they're a joke but in college).. Your grades show what you can do for the most part. It usually shows if you can handle the material and how much time you spent on it.
Not really...it usually shows that you can conform to a specific set of grading standards required of you...either by the teacher, professor, or the school or institution.
Tests are contrived because its nice to put numbers on things rather than assign individual values to a person with specific traits and values. The nature of grades is the nature of statistical data and therefore the knowledge that contextual meaning is lost in favour of comparable numbers.
In the case of test scores, they tend to either show your straight memory skills (how well can you throw up what you have been fed) or they focus on how clever you are with language in which case you are marked by a biased marker (who HAS to be biased by their very nature) who will assign a value based on personal opinion.
No matter what, grades are arbitrarilly assigned at some stage of the game either in conception or in process. I'm not saying little Jonny in the corner who can't tell an apple from an orange is actual a child prodigy but I'm just telling you to open your eyes and see the system for what it is.
And yes its hard to grapple with because there infact doesn't seem to be a better system...so the point of recognizing it is meerly have your eyes opened.
Red or blue pill. Your choice :D
-
Originally posted by CP5670
Which is the case for most people, myself included. :D After all, you need money to stage communist revolutions. :D
Money? I heard you can get an AK for one goat in parts of Africa.:p
There are no consertives and liberals any more. There are moderates and slightly-less-moderate moderates. The only difference between Republicans and Democrats are who owns them. (big business and labor unions, respectively)
-
I think that grades are important for making money but a poor indicator of intelligence nontheless, but that is rather because the methods for obtaining those grades are all very badly designed. If the tests, curricula, etc. were completely revamped, the grades could become a much better scale of capability in whatever areas, but in their current state they are quite anemic. :p
Money? I heard you can get an AK for one goat in parts of Africa.
There are no consertives and liberals any more. There are moderates and slightly-less-moderate moderates. The only difference between Republicans and Democrats are who owns them. (big business and labor unions, respectively)
The goat costs money too, though, and you will need a couple hundred thousands of them. :D But I quite agree with the party stuff. :yes:
-
Originally posted by IceFire
Do please read what he actually said. Sandwich was pointing out what he believed the POINT of the original article was...not his own stated viewpoint. So before you berate someone, understand their meaning critically.
My point was that this is where the fallacy of the entire original argument that Sandwich kindly posted for debate (and once again, not for the purpose of personal attacks). Sandwhich was agreeing with me for summing things up and getting across the point that there was something inherently wrong with the argument.
Have I mentioned I love this boy - even if he can't spell my name properly? :p :lol:
And I'm not sure how valid the point of the article under discussion is across different nations, governed by different governments with different methods of everything. So let's try and keep the comparisons within a single nation - US to US, Iraq to Iraq, Holland to Holland, m'kay? :nod:
-
Grades determine whether you're fit for a society-loving, rule-abiding, capitalist-slaved role in the world (i.e. most office workers, in fact most anybody who works for somebody and has deadlines and stuff like that).
If you're not, you're thrown in the pile of misfits not meant to work in the society (society being the corporate world) and die off by Mr. Corporation (note the "meant")
Basically just agree with CP an' IceFire on school stuff, Falcon you're right on that school material shows time spent and how you handled the material. But does it matter if you spend time handling a pile of notes you took (hardly worthwhile information for the most part) and spit it onto paper? I'd think not. I haven't heard of a single genius who advanced humanity through staring at stacks of test notes. Have you? :p (anyone do a lil' study into this? Did godel, pythagoras, turing, gauss... any of them actually do that?)
-
Actually, there are high-school and college dropouts on every plane of society. There's a bias towards poverty, but it's not a rule, and a talented, legitimately intelligent person can blow off school and get a job based on his/her skills alone, if they really would rather go the hard way. Conversely, it's not rare to see BAs and Masters picking through dumpsters.
-
I rode the litle buss...
-
well, einstien was a high-school dropout....
intelligence and social aptitude arn't really affected by grades and such... what high school, college, etc gives you are skills, to get yourself a job - whether you're happy in the job or having all your hopes and dreams thrown into a dark pit of dispair is a moot point:p even the most intelligent people on earth can be out done by people who don't know everything....
there's a saying.."the first step to wisdom is admitting that you don't know everything"
there's a difference between a intelligent person and a 'smart' person...
and intelligent person may have all the highest grades in all the subjects they apply themselves to and yet they don't really know how to apply thier skills to a high degree(like styrke said, it's not rare to see BAs and Masters picking through garbage) it's more likely they'll probably end up working at mcdonald's for the rest of eternity paying off thier student loans:p
smart people... know how to use thier skills and apply them in real life....
an intelligent (A - grade student) person once picked a fight with me a long time ago.... and let's just say that wasn't the smart thing to do:devil:
even the most intelligent people are capable of the most aborrant stupidity.... they're only human after all..but some of them see themselves above the rest of us and that's thier stupidity...:nod:
it's all a fine line... i'm sure that this will get numerous holes poked through it.;)
i'm not afraid to admit when i'm wrong or that i don't know everything.....
-
Originally posted by Turnsky
there's a difference between a intelligent person and a 'smart' person...
I prefer to use the word "wise", as without explanation, "smart" can easily be mistaken by people for "intelligent". :)